Thursday 13 March 2014

Some Questions for Napo

I'm becoming even more confused and irritated at the dense fog of misinformation, accusation, claim and counter claim that has descended upon us recently, and particularly since the recent House of Lords debate. Questions like this on the Napo forum need answering:-

The following is from the Offender Rehabilitation Bill debate on 11th March 2014. Please can NAPO clarify its accuracy and meaning ASAP.

"It is difficult to understand why there is apparently—so the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, says—discontent among the staff, because a deal has been negotiated with the unions. We have been undertaking negotiations with probation trade unions and the employers’ representatives over a national agreement for staff transfer that will protect the terms and conditions of staff transferring to the CRCs or the NPS. Probation trade unions and the Probation Association, which represents trusts, ratified the national agreement on staff transfer on 29 January 2014. Trade unions have also withdrawn all local trade disputes.

The national agreement offers a very good deal for existing staff, and demonstrates our commitment to fairness by going much further than we are legally required to do. Staff will transfer to the new probation structures with their existing terms and conditions in place. The additional protections set out within the agreement include a guarantee of employment in the new probation structures from 1 June 2014, no compulsory redundancies for a period of seven months following share sale and an enhanced voluntary redundancy period of up to 67.5 weeks. Alongside our negotiations, the programme has put in place a dedicated consultative forum for effective engagement with trade unions and employers’ representatives. We will continue to engage closely with trade unions and employers throughout the transition to the new probation structure."


I know I'm not the only one who wants some clear and unambiguous answers from Napo HQ because my email inbox is registering an above average amount of discontent, together with copies of documents of one kind or another. Like this that was sent to bidders some time ago:- 

Dear

National Collective Bargaining, Terms and Conditions and Pensions in Community Rehabilitation Companies

Napo, UNISON and GMB/SCOOP, the three recognised Probation trade unions, are writing to all 31 potential bidders for the community rehabilitation companies (CRCs) which the Ministry of Justice plan to sell later this year via a share-sale. Please accept this letter as an introduction to the unions which will be operating in the CRCs post share-sale, as well as an overview of our agenda for the future.

Trade union membership has remained at a high level in the Probation Service for many years, and we have a skilled trade union activist base among the workforce. We have also developed, over time, a social partnership approach to employee and industrial relations with the probation employers, and Ministry of Justice, which has successfully delivered a stable industrial climate within the Service. 



We are pleased that the recent agreements reached at the Probation Service National Negotiating Council (NNC) and Standing Committee for Chief Officer Grades on ‘Staff Transfer and Protections’ provide us with the means to take this successful industrial relations model into the CRCs.

We would like to draw your attention to the following collective bargaining provisions which will be a requirement on each CRC (both pre- and post-share sale):

  • Continued recognition of the three Probation trade unions
  • National Collective Bargaining to govern the pay, terms and conditions of all CRC staff, including new starters
  • Existing national collective agreements on pay and conditions to apply to all staff, e.g. job evaluation, pay grades, premium pay etc.
  • Maintenance of existing funding levels for national and local facility time for trade union representatives 
Each CRC will depend on the commitment and skills of the workforce, which will transfer from relevant Probation Trusts, to deliver on its contractual obligations to the Ministry of Justice. The current pay and conditions package, enjoyed by those Probation staff who willtransfer into the CRCs, has been one of the most important factors in delivering such a committed and high-skill workforce.

With this in mind, and in light of the above collective bargaining provisions, to which CRC owners will be bound, we make the fairly obvious point, that in putting your bid(s) together you will want to price labour costs on the basis that new starters to your CRC workforce (s) will be given pay and conditions that reflect existing national collective agreements. You will have been made aware of the current terms and conditions package for probation staff through your own due diligence work. You will not be surprised to know that we are not prepared to countenance a two-tier workforce emerging in the CRCs, and will vigorously oppose any attempt by the eventual owners of CRCs to drive down pay and conditions on the contracts.

Although the collective agreements are silent on the matter, we also put you on notice that we will oppose a two-tier workforce in relation to pension provision and will expect all CRCs to offer the Local Government Pension Scheme to new starters, as well as the transferred workforce. We advise you to price your bid(s) accordingly.

All parties to the above national collective agreements (NOMS, Probation Association and the Trade Unions) signed up to them in full knowledge that the requirement to continue national collective bargaining and decent pay and conditions for all CRC staff would have pricing implications for CRC bidders. We do not need to remind you of the disastrous effect on staff morale and service delivery that would inevitably result from creating a two-tier CRC workforce over pay, conditions and pensions.

We don’t know yet whether we will have any relationship with you in the future, but we would welcome a meeting with you to discuss your response to our letter before you submit your final bid for whatever CRC contract(s) you wish to enter into.

Yours sincerely 


Ian Lawrence                          Ben Priestley                           David Walton
       
            General Secretary                  National Officer                      National Secretary
            Napo                                       UNISON                                 GMB/SCOOP

Please reply to the following address:

Probation Unions, UNISON Centre, 130 Euston Road, London, NW1 2AY

The membership are getting extremely restless, as evidenced by this email, a copy of which was passed to me recently:-

Ian, Tom, 

We have read parts of the House of Commons Hansard note for the Lord's reading of the Offender Rehabilitation Bill. We note Lord Faulks' querying the comments from Lord Ponsonby that staff are very discontented. Lord Faulks cited amongst other things - the regular meetings with the Trade Unions, the withdrawal of the local dispute, the signing off of terms and conditions. We wonder how it can be that Lords have gained the impression that NAPO members are happy? Who has told them this?

 
We note Michael Spurrs comments to Margaret Hodge at the Public Accounts Committee. It seems that he told her that the Unions had agreed to the staff transfer process. This is not our understanding of events. Please can you clarify? If what Michael Spurr has said is incorrect do you intend challenging him on this, or letting Margaret Hodge know? Is there a minute you can produce to prove this is not the case, that NAPO did not agree to the process?

 
It would seem that NAPO's involvement in setting up the Probation Institute is being heralded by the MoJ as NAPO agreeing to TR. How did this state of affairs come about? Clearly being involved in and endorsing the PI has weakened NAPOs position overall. How do you intend to rectify this? 


The rhetoric coming from Chivalry Road and how we are presented elsewhere do not match up. If we are being aggressively 'spun against' why is there no sustained 'counter spin' out there? 


As a Branch we are deeply concerned that all the rhetoric from and to interested parties suggests a staffing group that are compliant and happy with the proposed changes, and willing to support the TR process.This is absolutely not the case, and we are asking that NAPO HQ gives this very clear message to Ministers and the MoJ, and also gives an assurance to its Members that this is being done. 


Thank you 


Then there's this sent today to all Napo members. I'm not at all sure filling in a bloody questionnaire is at the top of anyone's priority list at the moment to be quite frank though:-


Napo is forwarding this survey of members views on the marketisation and privatisation of the Probation Service with our endorsement. The link to the survey is immediately below followed by an explanatory note from its designers.
TR Survey
  
This questionnaire seeks to explore the views of probation workers about government intentions to marketise and part-privatise the service’s functions, as outlined in Transforming Rehabilitation . This proposed the creation of ‘Community Rehabilitation Companies’ (CRCs) which will in due course be subject to marketisation and privatisation and a new National Probation Service, which will be part of the civil service.

We are interested in the views of probation workers about these proposals and would be grateful if you would complete the following questionnaire. There are both open and closed questions. For the former, there are ‘text boxes’ that should give sufficient room for you to write as much as you would like.
The questionnaire is anonymous - you are not asked for any personal details that would enable you to be identified, only some basic demographic information.
The questionnaire should not take you more than 20 minutes to complete. PLEASE NOTE: you are able to save your responses and return to the questionnaire later. However, to do this you must use the same computer and web browser each time you access the questionnaire. This is also dependent upon certain cookies being enabled on your computer, so we would advise completing it in one go. The questionnaire is open until 30th April 2014.

By completing the questionnaire, we will regard you as having given informed consent to participate. The results will be analysed with a view to publishing in an academic journal.
PLEASE NOTE: you may receive this questionnaire via Napo or your Probation Trust. Please complete it only once.
If you have any queries about the research, please feel free to contact either of us by email at:
Thanks in anticipation,
 
Martina Feilzer, Bangor University
John Deering, University of South Wales

41 comments:

  1. Are they on a different planet called ZOGG!!!!!
    A bloody questionnaire NOW?????? Have'nt they read your blog or done any background research? If they had, they wouldn't need to waste our time with a questionnaire! Probably to do with some student trying to gain a degree off the backs of the dying Probation Service dedicated staff!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree that there are conflicting messages coming out of NAPO HQ.
    Why do I feel 'sold down the line', absolutely demoralised, clinically depressed, and stressed? Already concerned about the train crash about to happen, and my future finances as sole provider for 2 children, trying to keep body and soul together (not to mention a roof over our heads), now being asked to strike and on top of this being put on a 'stage 1 notice' for sickness ( I was sick for one day too much!)................give me a break! All the rhetoric coming from NAPO just does not add up to what we hear has been told to MOJ.
    I don't know who to believe anymore and have lost trust with the union. This is from someone who is a fighter for human rights and has never shied away from industrial action as a last resort....................now, I just can't afford to stand on principle. I find myself in a similar situation to many of my Service Users............in debt, an uncertain future, with the possibility of becoming homeless...............probably from losing my job through depression, anxiety and stress.
    I have dedicated my working life to try and improve the lives of those less fortunate (and yes, reduce the need to reoffend), but as more eloquent writers have said before me, the training, the compassion, the professionalism in doing this work has been destroyed and disrespected throughout this awful omnishambles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for being brave enough to share how you feel. I feel exactly the same, you could be me. On two types of anti-depressants, on a Stage 1 notice, overwhelmed with depression, stress and anxiety for the future. If it wasn't for the actions of a very kind and generous friend, I would have lost my home already and I have had to cope with the bailiffs for the council tax. I couldn't cope with going in for the last two days and I don't know what will happen to me. I have finally made a decision though, I can't do this anymore. I thought I would hang on and wait for redundancy but I can't keep letting it take such a toll on my health. I'm looking for a new job, any job. As for the strike, I've been a political activist all my life. I also have never shied away from industrial action but I simply can't do it this time and that sense of guilt is adding to the unbearable stress. Keep talking about how you feel. You are not alone.

      Delete
    2. Yes thanks both for expressing what's happening to each of you and please, please stay in touch.

      Delete
    3. Probation workers (I think sadly not clerics - though Unison have a benevolent fund & I presume also the GMB) in such difficulty are strongly encouraged to seek support from Edridge Trust - that is why I pay in to it.

      Increasingly Trustees receive requests from those in work as well as trainees and retired folk or their families.

      http://www.edridgefund.org/apply.htm

      Delete
    4. Details of Unison Financial Assistance system

      https://www.unison.org.uk/upload/sharepoint/On%20line%20Catalogue/20066.pdf

      I expect SCOOP/GMB have something similar but I cannot find it.

      Edridge fund claims can be made by anyone who is eligible to be a member of Napo or is retired and would have been eligible or is a family member, including a bereaved family member

      I first supported Edridge when a colleague had an untimely death leaving children in urgent need, who had those needs met quickly without fuss. It is a fabulous organisation

      Delete
  3. As with Serco, so with TR, the unions are essentially powerless. Their letter to potential bidders is not going to frighten anyone. It will not stop wage deflation or a two tier workforce taking root. The fact that the unions will not 'counternance' something indicate the basic weakness of their position. Strength only comes through solidarity and strong leadership - like the RMT and the late Bob Crow. I did not understand the 'social partnership' stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Look, the unions have been subjected to the same tricks as the workforce, don't blame them blame Grayling, the Government, the Trust Boards and Senior Managment Teams ALL ARE RESPONSIBLE BUT NOT THE UNIONS.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Apparently the Bill has gone through to Royal Assent today......alas we have done our best , we have asked our leaders for help, we have asked our MP's , we have asked our Lords to save the Service we love and not enough of them were convinced that the TR will be rubbish.

    We have called and nobody has come!

    Sadly, we have only the two choices now stay and lump it , or go elsewhere.
    Those who stay will have little support whether in CRC or NPS - We have been broken and now is the time to suck it up and continue.
    I don't know what I will do , I like many need to run a household and I do not have the balls of the Miners in '84 to stand when all around are giving in.
    NAPO has failed in it's attempts too and so must also accept that calling a strike at this stage is futile. Perhaps the SGM should have been about scaling back the union as I fear many will jump ship or just jump.
    Like other contributors I am sad , I am annoyed and I am angry but now is the time to get on with it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This latest blog by Tanya Bassett Napo National Official - Campaigning http://t.co/5ql6k6xSzE which summarises Napo position may give you some further food for thought. I appreciate the financial loss but think about yr anger. Might it not be more rational/healthy to express that by strike action & communicating issues to public than by biting lip and getting on with it?

      Delete
    2. "Napo will now be concentrating on the next phase of the campaign".... Was there a first phase!!!! Have I missed something.
      http://t.co/5ql6k6xSzE
      ANARCHIST PO

      Delete
    3. "To do this effectively it is vital that Napo centrally gets information on just how the wheels are coming of the TR wagon. Please use the campaign email campaigns@napo.org.uk to tell us what is happening on the ground."

      Forgive me but this blog is feeding so much information about the TR omnishambles that any reader could sus where to look - consultants, mike maiden,bidders,costs,who is in who is out - Tania read the blog!!
      3/4 million hits is a damn sight more than the NAPO blog - the information is here , please , please , please NAPO stop been so bloody slow and get a grip ......it's on a plate and there is more to come just keep reading

      Delete
    4. http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=15101

      Watch from 16.53 - 16.59 M.Hodge is going for A4e - any bets on when they will pull out of TR.

      Delete
  6. The information regarding the questionnaire is interesting not least the bit that says 'PLEASE NOTE: you may receive this questionnaire via Napo or your Probation Trust'

    Before any questionnaire is allowed to go out on the Government Secure Internet (GSI) permissions from Chief Officers must be sought and it requires prior notification to the MoJ who can say no. The obvious body to approach to facilitate this having a chance of being accepted is the Probation Chiefs Association. It would not be much of logical jump to assume that discussions concerning this piece of work occurred at the Probation Institute between Napo and the PCA (have a little look at their website). Then one might indulge in a little speculation and wonder whether the Journal mentioned is a new journal being created by the institute or will Napo be giving the Probation Institute its journal? Just further food for thought...........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could the info be used for more sinister ends eg is there any chance the Universities concerned could be working alongside potential bidders?

      Delete
    2. During evidence gathering from academics by the Justice Committee it was suggested by one committee member that the Probation Institute might act as a conduit for government funding of research related to Transforming Rehabilitation and other justice matters. The suggestion did not meet with any opposition.

      Probation Institute Key Features

      'The Institute will be an independent, not-for-profit Company Limited by Guarantee, aiming to become a recognised centre of excellence on probation practice, applying rigorous standards to the assessment of research and other evidence and its implications for the delivery of services that protect the public and rehabilitate offenders.'

      'The Institute will develop appropriate relationships with a wide range of stakeholders, including academics, researchers and training organisations so that its work is evidence based, rigorous and objective; and, is seen as authoritative both by its membership, the wider criminal justice system and the public.'

      The bidders have their hands in many pies and are key contractors in many educational establishments. The Shadow State is growing by the day. It may be difficult to discover what bidders are involved in because even if they say they are willing to voluntarily cooperate with FOI requests the Cabinet Office may well block them as indicated in a recent article in The Telegraph.
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10692782/Margaret-Hodge-may-be-hunting-her-government-quarry-too-hard.html
      They are also experts in covering up wrongdoing in order to protect share prices.

      Delete
  7. I have not agreed to a change of terms and conditions, nor have I agreed to a change in role or responsibility. If I am no longer required to write court reports or manage high risk cases my employer will have made me redundant. It is that simple. I will be fighting this and if the union won't support me I will do it alone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your union agreed to the changes - that's what the framework agreement means.

      Delete
  8. Probation Officer13 March 2014 at 21:52

    Why has the Lords got the impression Napo members are content with TR?, why has Napo not clarified what has been said about Napo and Napo members in the Lords?, it because Napo has agreed TR processes?, if Napo is conceding every battle then why is Napo still claiming it can win the TR war?, are we left with nothing more than Napo gung-ho campaign spin?, when will the TR war be considered lost and Napo admit it has failed its members?, why is Unison not striking?, etc, etc.

    If the suggestions that Napo is working more earnestly to secure its own longevity rather than the longevity of the probation service in its current form are incorrect, then Napo would be wise to respond to the above, the confusion, the apathy, and explain in simple terms the decisions that have been made and exactly what is going on, particularly if the strike is to get the full support it would need. All at Napo HQ May want to start by pledging to also lose 1.5 days pay on 31st March - 1st April and donate it to the Edridge fund.

    Napo Forum: March 31st - 1st April Strike: What is the purpose?

    ReplyDelete
  9. NAPO have been discussing exit stratagies from day one. They haven't fohght for me and you, they've fought for their own existence.
    They wont be getting my subs anymore, not because they tried and failed; but because I'm not funding their personal agenda.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Drivel. I am appalled at the ignorance of these kinds of assertions regarding NAPO securing their own future instead of representing the needs of members and the lack of insight into the complex position NAPO have found themselves facing because of Grayling's recklessness. I keep hearing these 'what have NAPO done' comments and an equal number of 'I am not striking' comments. What can NAPO do if it's members are unwilling to back them up. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

      Delete
    2. We are trying to back them up but we need proper leadership. Members have been left alone to fight the caseload split instead of having a joined up approach.
      We are being told that the publicity campaign is more effective if it is local from local members but we have been given no advice on how to do this.
      Members are stressed, depressed, fed up and we are still fighting but we need clear guidance and leadership.
      You have 'moved on' to the next stage of the campaign asking for evidence of where TR is not working but we are still fighting the crap data used for staff split and the change of roles being imposed on us. Please listen to us and you will get our full support!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    3. Your BranchChair should be asking Napo HQ for support from the National Officer and/or National Official for your area.HQ in Chivalry Rd would pass on contact details

      Delete
    4. 'I am appalled at the ignorance of these kinds of assertions' - what a shame for you. I'm 'appalled' by people calling angry workers 'ignorant' because they're upset that they've been let down, misled and sold out by a disgusting Quisling union bureaucracy that has purposefully done NOTHING to fight TR, and NOTHING to safeguard it's members jobs and futures. The only concrete action taken has been a solitary meeting convened solely to ensure that the union bureaucracy itself survives the devastating changes that self-same union bureaucracy has signed off on, and the playing of a key role in establishing the fucking Probation Institute, the Jewel in the Crown of the TR agenda. And don't try to blame the workers/members. Just don't. Throughout the service I've seen livid anger at a grass roots level at every turn, but this self-serving union bureaucracy has offered only empty rhetoric and useless posturing while in truth steadfastly avoiding agitating for meaningful action. NAPOs leaders have effectively been partners in introducing TR. They have steered it through, and delivered us up to the bosses hog-tied. The NAPO leadership are a disgrace, and we will not forget...

      Simon Garden

      Delete
  10. Once our trust contracts expire and before we sign any new contracts, it is perfectly legal to take unilateral action. So we could walk out for a couple of weeks. Would need enough if us to do it though as if they sacked some people but not others, we could sue for unfair dismissal. If too few of us strike, they could afford to sack the few. They just couldn't afford to sack the many. It's well within my rights to take unilateral action and I've a bloody good mind to do it and to do it last week of may as first week June.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Who is Dame Ursula Brennan?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2159726/Goodbye-Ursula-Brennan-MoDs-permanent-secretary.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How permanent is a Permanent Secretary? In the case of Ursula Brennan at the MoD, the answer is twenty months. In a fortnight she clears her desk and goes back to the Ministry of Justice.
      She was appointed in November 2010; before that she was the MoD’s 2nd Permanent Secretary – for just twenty-four months. The announcement on the increasingly Orwellian MoD website says that 'during her time she has been a key driver in reforming and reshaping Defence so that the Department can continue to take on future challenges'.
      Let me put it another way: 'As 2nd Permanent Secretary she was one of the key diggers of the £38bn black hole in the Defence budget.'
      Her valedictory message to Ministry of Truth – I mean MoD – civil servants reads: 'I have been proud to lead the MoD as its Permanent Secretary and Accounting Officer through a period of remarkable change.'
      Let me suggest what that message ought to have been – in 'Oldspeak': 'I am deeply embarrassed at not having done my duty as Permanent Secretary in allowing Dr Liam Fox to have irregular contacts with Mr Adam Werrity, leading to the resignation of the Secretary of State, and I apologise to all those civil servants and servicemen who are being made redundant because of the shortcomings of the defence management board in allowing the department to go bankrupt.'

      But 'Oldspeak' would be unlikely to lead to a new job, would it not?
      The Defence Secretary, Philip Hammond, writes:
      'I congratulate Ursula Brennan on her appointment at the MOJ and wish her every success in the future. She has achieved a great deal in the MOD at a very challenging time and has provided excellent support to me and my predecessor.'


      Delete
  12. Goodbye Tony Benn. Authenticity personified.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Napo should cancel the strike. TR is now law, so there is no pressure to be applied to the Liberals who were really the only hope, though a forlorn one as coalition politics is machine politics – Clegg gets his free school meals and Grayling his TR.

    So what is the point of asking members to howl at the moon for one and a half days?

    TR is going to be the new reality. We read stories of distressed and depressed members. Napo's resources would be better used helping individual members to deal with immediate problems instead of going on about collective action and flogging a dead horse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ORB is not TR. TR is not ORB. They are different things.

      Delete
    2. You need to explain yourself - how are they different?

      Delete
  14. How to people expect Napo to have any clout if the majority of staff aren't prepared to stand up for themselves? The moj is aware that there is no collectivity so can railroad reform.people cant moan about napo and being upset if tbey dont strike ,you cant have the prevailing individualistic and apathetic attitude which ptevails and expect nasty things like getting privitised to happen!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We need to look at the facts of the situation and not get too idealistic about a non-existent solidarity. Strikes do not breed solidarity. If they did the the miner's strike would not have been fatally undermined by their 'comrades' who carried on working in Nottinghamshire.

      You have to say what another strike is likely to achieve. It cannot stop TR because that is now literally a done deal having been passed into law.

      Napo is not negotiating as it's already signed the framework agreement, so you can't argue that it's to bring the other side to the negotiating table.

      It is not about promoting apathy, it's about facing the realities and deciding on your best strategy. Is more striking going to make a difference to anything except take home pay?

      Delete
  15. So sad, today I attended TR training it really is so incomplete with so many issues not addressed. Feel distraught that we are replacing something so worthy with something so much less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What did the training include?

      Delete
  16. Latest blog from Napo Gen Secretary Ian Lawrence on Napo webpage www.napo.org.uk/about/napolog.cfm Note ref to challenge lies from HofL debate on Napo position

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A passing reference yes - but where is the chapter and verse? A press release perhaps? A clear statement? A letter to Lord Faulkes? It's just not good enough in my view.

      Delete
  17. Get real people the TR isn't law wake up and do some reading sheesh call yourselves intelligent professionals, if you want to fight this you need to be informed to be empowered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TR is law. Have a look at the legislation. Some snippets here:


      1 " Transforming Rehabilitation : A revolution in the way we manage o ffenders " Cm 8517 available at www.justice.gov.uk/consultations/

      · Extending rehabilitation to offenders released from short custodial sentences.

      · Competing delivery of rehabilitation services for the majority of offenders;

      · Paying providers of these services according to their results in reducing re-offending.

      · Putting in place a public sector probation service which is focussed on protecting the public and managing offenders who pose the highest risk of serious harm.

      · Ensuring the new system is responsive to local needs and integrates effectively with the other local partnerships and structures relevant to offenders.

      Delete
  18. Too many mixed messages from NAPO/unison etc. out flanked by grayling his narrative has prevailed. The messages those outside probation have heard have need louder, clearer, and consistent even though they are underpinned by lies, deceit and right wing political ideology. Grayling has annexed part of probation family to turn it into the NASTY PUNISHMENT SERVICE, arm of his Gestapo ministry. Napo and unison have failed to
    Protect the continuity of service for ALL probation staff
    Colluded in the forming of a probation institute which forms an integral part of TR
    Haven't the organisational capacity to challenge TR
    Focused on internal in fighting and setting up of PI rather than focus all of their limited resources on the fight against TR
    Haven't galvanised their memberships instead assisted with the split by agreeing the principle of staff split at national level and also NAPO changes its constitution
    There is more to add which I will leave to others to do. But I am so sad at what has been done to probation and totally disagree with TR in all it's pernicious forms, hopefully many more probation staff will reply to this post even if it is a one line to say - I as a probation worker disagree with TR...
    And yes another anonymous post because in the new NASTY PUNISHMENT SERVICE that I've been auto dumped in recrimination and nasty consequences will face those who openly criticise TR, no more guide assist befriend just quick summary justice on the back of worthless oral and fast FDRs. Ps got 4 job application in at moment outside of Probation and CJS hopefully one will come off and grayling will lose my 19 years of experience, commitment and dedication to public service

    ReplyDelete
  19. Until Napo members start feeling it is a 'we' and not a 'they' organisation many members will feel personally unrepresented and unprotected by it.

    An opportunity for members to resume control from the grass-roots was passed up at the SGM when, for example, there was no new policy - as far as has been reported - regarding the Probation Institute.

    As for the probation service(s) [always plural - though rarely spoken of in that way] becoming the 'NASTY PUNISHMENT SERVICE' - it was not under Grayling's time as its Secretary of State, but that began when Kenneth Clarke was Home Secretary in 1991 when the Criminal Justice Bill of that year was enacted that changed the legal basis of the probation order and simultaneously introduced early prison release without the need for application (ACR) - sadly too few of us realised and those (like me) who did went quiet {I am sorry}.

    The mood of the moment was then 'Just Deserts'.

    Also, and I do not know the timescale or precisely what legislation was involved, the local connection was gradually severed as Probation Committees stopped being controlled by the local Magistrates Court's Committees (except then, Inner London - which was always under the direct authority of the Home Secretary).

    I do not have a ready - made solution - we have been let down by successive governments particularly the Labour Governments from 1997, who were traitors, going back on what they had previously said they would do - reverse the existing privatisations in the CJS - they tried to convince us they understood the needs of community justice and the protection of the public - with the mantra - 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, and then they refused to even reconnect probation training with social work!

    So now, it is a case of taking collective action such as is being led by Napo to register disapproval of CJS policy - ALSO to alert Tania Bassett to EVERY flaw of TR as it is implemented - EMAIL: - campaigns@napo.org.uk - as she has requested: -

    http://naponewsonline.org/2014/03/13/disappointing-but-not-unexpected-result-as-or-bill-leaves-the-lords-but-the-fight-goes-on/

    Then additionally it is down to individual action - were I still working - I would put my own employment and integrity above the needs of the public and probation service clients, and would certainly by now be looking for alternative employment - doing anything that would lead to a job that had a chance of giving me the income I need. I certainly would not take any management position, including SPO in a CRC or NPS or NOMS - I understand there are PO vacancies - so were I an SPO - I would seek (at the minimum) to revert to being a PO - but, as I once did after thirteen years as a PO, I think I would simply refuse to work in any capacity as a probation officer – for a month, I was a casual driver, then a locum social worker for six months, before returning to be a probation officer for fourteen years until retirement.

    Hopefully if enough folk take such drastic action the Government will get the message and take probation professionals seriously, for the first time in a generation - but I would not bank on that, either!

    ReplyDelete