Rumours and facts
Members of this, and other branches, have been asking me in recent weeks if it is true that our National Chair, Tom Rendon, applied for a job as an ACO in the London CRC.
It is true
An assessment centre took place at Mitre House for ACO posts in the CRC on the eve of the Special General Meeting in Birmingham at which it was announced that the union would be taking further strike action.
I am informed that our National Chair has written a letter to all NEC Representatives which seeks to explain his decision to apply for this post. I am also informed that the recipients have been asked not to forward or otherwise distribute this letter but, if they have any concerns or questions, they are advised to either contact the National Chair directly or their link Officer or Official.
Members who have sought my advice about appealing against their assignment, usually to the CRC with a view to being re-assigned to the NPS, will know that I have told them to be careful what they wish for as there are pros and cons on both sides.
I am in no doubt that all members of this branch wherever they have been assigned are as skilled and professional as each other and despair at the false dichotomy thrown up by this insidious sifting process.
Members will also know that the London CRC is full of vacancies and anyone who has been assigned to the NPS and wishes to transfer to the CRC can still do so.
Any members who are considering asking for re-assignment, or are considering applying for any of the vacancies currently being advertised, are welcome to seek my advice at any time.
Pat Waterman
Chair
Greater London Branch NAPO
It's incredibly sad that during probation's darkest hour we have to waste time discussing Napo's internal politics at the top, but it seems we don't really have any alternative. As well as venting their anger, frustrations, thoughts and concerns, pretty regularly commentators on this blog say things like this:-
Perhaps NAPO HQ might let us know what the legal advice is regarding the legality of the way in which the split has been done so we can make our own minds up. Given that we seem to be left on our own to deal with these battles it would help to know what the ground looks like in terms of employment law.
so why can’t NAPO or Unison approach Thompsons? It shouldn’t have to be union members that think of these things!?
What do the unions know about this and if they don't know why don't they as we have been asking for help for long enough. Come on unions help us out here!
It is worth looking at. However, one of the benefits we are supposed to get from paying our subs to NAPO is legal representation on employment matters, when in fact local branch officers (myself included) have been left to muddle through as best we can. NAPO advice along the lines of "well it is complicated" does not help.
These comments were left yesterday, but similar turn up most days. Probation is a relatively small community and the blog has evolved into a space for discussion, comment and support during a period of extreme crisis. I'm very proud of the way it has developed and embraced all manner of disparate views, in a generally tolerant and understanding discussion with the shared aim of defeating TR. So what could possibly be wrong with that?
Unfortunately it has come to my attention that Napo at the top are not in fact reading this blog. I know this because I'm led to believe that in the email sent by the National Chair to all members of the NEC, and referred to above, the blog was effectively rubbished.
I have no idea why at this key moment in our future such a view has been taken because I rather naively thought the fight was with TR and we all had a shared aim in that regard. I think the time has come to hear exactly what Napo's view is of this forum and say whether they are reading what colleagues, clients and ordinary members of the public are saying all over the country about probation and TR.
As I have said many times before, I don't like knocking Napo for no good reason and I want any comment to be constructive, but this is surely all too serious to let a few ruffled ego's at the top get in the way?
As I have said many times before, I don't like knocking Napo for no good reason and I want any comment to be constructive, but this is surely all too serious to let a few ruffled ego's at the top get in the way?
The members of any democratic organisation need to constantly remember that it is run by people appointed by the processes of the organisation that are ultimately in the control of the majority, though those processes need to be used within the rules.
ReplyDeleteFor example it is within the power of members of Napo to instigate the convention of a General Meeting of ALL members. At such a meeting it is within the power of members to set the policy of the union.
But with Napo, it should not need to come to that for the national policy, between general meetings is set by the National Executive Committee, due to meet at the end of April, I do not know the exact date. Those members of the NEC are appointed by the branches and can be briefed to ascertain certain information by a branch - branches can have special meetings called by members, branches can pass motions to be decided at the NEC.
Full members can be involved more than just as complainers.
What puzzles me is that Pat Waterman who is the Chairperson of the biggest branch in Napo and probably the nearest thing Napo has at the moment to a strong and principled leader who is regularly reported on here going to bat for Napo members in London is it seems not being informed about things by Napo HQ and having to rely on informants to keep her up to speed. I cannot imagine Napo HQ would welcome members knowing the truth about what they ey are up to. It seems they haven't learned from recent events and carry on treating their members and it seems their own Chairs with contempt. If I am reading this right then NEC Representatives were told not to share the contents of a letter with their own branch Chairs or officers. Surely this is completely undemocratic and how the heck can members complain about something when this kind of censorship and gagging is taking place. It is blatant hypocrisy. I say well done Pat for taking what I think might be a brave stand against some iffy goings on at Napo HQ Thank goodness someone is.
ReplyDeleteIt is shocking that Napo National Chair Tim Rendon applied for a directors job in a Community Rehabilitation Company, which Napo are against. This is wrong on all levels. Unless Napo HQ is now supporting private CRC's, Tim Rendon gets my vote of no confidence and should step down.
ReplyDeleteAt least we now know why Napo/Tim Rendon has fought little against TR - because he wanted a top job after the sell off (no different from what chief officers have done), which I suspect is the same reason for walking us blindly into the probation institute. There are other questions for Napo to answer.
1. Would the £140,000 Napo HQ paid to ex Napo General Secretary Jonathan Ledger have been better off used to fight probation privatisation?
2. What is the cost of Napo retaining ex Napo Assistant General Secretary Harry Fletcher as a consultant in the anti-privatisation campaign, and how has this been an effective use of funds?
3. We do not need or want the government funded Probation Institue where Napo Chair Tim Rendon is a director. Will Napo (as a union) listen to its members and withdraw its support the Probation Institute?
4. There is dysfunctionality of leadership at the top of Napo, and what might Napo's emergency action plan against probation privatisation consist of?
Isn't the Chair duty bound to the members? Aren't those paying for TR (i.e Tom Rendon, not the other TR!) entitled to know what's going on? Its reminjscent of the secrecy surrounding previous Gen Sec Benny Hill's past antics. I don't see myself as a complainer so much as an angry member who expects a decent service from an expensive union. And there's been little evidence of late... Napo, Hq, put down your egos, listen to the membership and start facing facts. Otherwise as Andrew Hatton suggests, someone might just invoke a calamitous motion which you'll claim you never saw coming. Then there'll be tears before bedtime. The membership need your help as a union, not the glory seeking act of a single individual wishing to make a name for themselves. And I suspect that whilst allegedly bad-mouthing this blogsite, much of the recent progress has been inspired by members' posts to this blogsite.
ReplyDeleteWakken up an' giv yersen a shek, napo.
A message to NAPO HQ we pay your wages start listening and acting or you are likely to see members leaving in droves
ReplyDeleteThis is a disgrace to be honest. He had no business applying for that post at this time. It makes a total mockery of every thing we are supposed to be campaigning against. We are against t r because we don't believe in justice for profit. Our chair applies for a senior management job in one of those entities which will be justice for profit. Someone..please tell him to go away.
ReplyDeleteExactly who does NAPO think they are. It is disgraceful and frankly unacceptable that the National Chair has written a letter to all NEC Representatives and asked them not to share the letter. I can't believe I'm hearing this. Absolutely shocking.
ReplyDeleteThen to indicate that they have "rubbished" this blog in that same letter, might suggest how they are not pleased with listening to feedback. This blog has helped to keep me upto date with information. It has helped me to understand the complexities of the issues and provide me with balance and a way forward, allowing me to make my own decision and reach my own conclusions. I strongly resent the idea that someone at NAPO HQ can advise me what I should and should not do.
This blog is the only space where Napo members can speak freely as the Napo's non-discussion Forum censors anything too critical at the National Chairs orders. I heard on the grapevine that Napo may well be seeking legal advice about how to close down this blog, gag Jim Brown, or try to expose the Anonymous commentators because I understand the letter mentioned that this blog had launched some kind of personal attack on the National Chair that would be an offence under the Equalities Act 2010. They probably feel that attack is the best form of defence and are no doubt prepared to spend members money on shutting them up more readily than letting them speak out. Shame they didnt attack the Justice Secretary's plans a bit more vigorously when they were distracted with other matter. Trouble at the top table.
ReplyDeleteI bloody hope not!! Napo have more important things to be seeking legal advice on. What about constructive dismissal Napo? And while we're at it, what about it UNISON? Help your members or you will have none left!
DeleteI think any careful scrutiny of what I've said on this blog will show that I fully support the National Chair in having to deal with the very difficult task of guiding and directing the paid staff. I have referred to a 'dysfunctionality' of leadership at the top.
DeleteDespite my support for the National Chair at this critical time, I'm aware that many readers and commentators disagree. I have no problem with differing views and just hope people carry on expressing them carefully and with consideration. Feelings are naturally running high, but I know contributors can be forthright without causing gratuitous offence.
Sorry but if NAPO spends my money which I have paid into seeking legal advise regarding this blog instead of doing what it is supposed to be doing fighting the fight with TR. Not only will I resign form NAPO but I will make it my political mission to make sure that every member of NAPO that I come across or anyone who is thinking about joining NAPO, is deter away from NAPO.
DeleteThis blog is THE ONLY reason I am still a member of Napo. It has kept me informed, motivated Napo to improve its communication with members, made me consider opinions other than my own. Without it I would have given up on Napo a long time ago. With it I feel there is still hope for change at Napo HQ. Sort yourselves out Napo and quick. As I'm writing a small part of me hopes the concerns about the blog, and the secrecy behind the letter is because they are concerned we are giving MOJ a heads up on their km master plan. But then I always have been a bit of a dreamer!!
ReplyDelete"This blog is THE ONLY reason I am still a member of Napo."- well said. There has been times when I wanted to toss in the towel and leave but listening to other people enabled me to appreciate that others out there think alike. NAPO attempt to censorship this blog and control it's content will be the last straw.
DeleteDamn right. At the moment the only things keeping me in Napo are the ongoing industrial action, which I do believe in, and the passion and dedication of local activists like Pat Waterman, who thoroughly put the national organisation to shame.
DeleteI left NAPO a long time ago after feeling very let down. It seems NAPO, just like all those corrupt companies we have been discussing here, has forgotten where its money comes from. I am not surprised about what has come to light. I would describe it as taking a pecuniary advantage by deception.
ReplyDeleteIt's truly incredible and I cannot believe what I am reading. Rather then concentrating their fight on fighting TR. They are critical of Jim Brown and his blog, why because they don't want to hear anyone saying anything about them. Sorry but I don't pay my subs to be treated like a child and I don't pay subs so that NAPO can do whatever it thinks it wants to do without being held to account. We know very well what's gone in the past with JL and now here we are on another reckless act by a leadership who has lost all sense of direction and focus. Very very sad.
ReplyDeleteWhat the membership now needs is a new leadership who is only interested in fighting the fight against TR, nothing more and nothing less.
They rubbish this blog because it's always one step ahead. They will continue to read it because it's the voices of members. It is frustrating for any leadership who cannot control the conversation or get the deference they think they deserve. Naturally they don't take kindly to having their principles, decision-making and judgements subject to questions and analysis. They can't plant the questions that I once witnessed at an AGM.
ReplyDeleteNo, they cannot stage manage this blog. There may be the odd bit of axe grinding, but overall arguments made here stack up and stand on good evidence. There is no clique controlling and sifting, saying you need a motion to ask that or a channel to go through to get that answered. This blog does have a member-led feel and that's why I like to read the raw data of members' working lives. Those who are employed by the membership should remember that these days subscriptions come with strings attached.
I agree with your comments. They have lost my respect. I thought the leadership was about it's membership. It would seem to me that it more about the leadership and their sense of power and their own self interest to retaining their status.
DeleteThe NEC, as well as being the executive of the union, is also the employer of the officers. It is appropriate that they do not deal with what are essentially HR matters in public anymore than a Trust would. Such issues are dealt with in closed session and members are allowed to express their opinions freely within those sessions. For me, as a Branch Chair, I find it interesting that, with all of the issues being presented and debated on here, NONE of the 40 odd NEC reps has broken ranks and whistle-blown. Even the Ledger issue would have been managed by the NEC in this manner and I suspect, but do not know, that a pay off of £140k May, in the end, have been cheaper than the legal proceedings required to dismiss. Employers do this all the time; pay the problem to go away. The sum, whilst seemingly inflated, was probably written into his contract in the way it is with many businesses (this is all speculation on my part, I hasten to add)?
ReplyDeleteMoral judgements at what individuals should and should not do with reference to TR are wasted energy. Tom had as much right to apply for a post as anyone. We are all fighting it and colluding with it at the same time, all of us. The compromises are inevitable, given the circumstances. The only way to be beyond reproach is to resign from Probation which is EXACTLY what the bidders would want. Trade union activists gone and employees unable to fight from within. Keep focussed on the fight worth having and not on the peripheral issues.
Rob Palmer (East Anglia)
Thank you for that Rob. However, I do think the membership requires answers regarding the 40 odd NEC members to whom you refer to regarding JL issues. These were very serious matters in question and in any other organisation there would have been a full internal or independent enquiry/investigation into these matters. Why did the NEC members not take action on this to restore confidence in its membership.
DeleteI don't have an issue with Tom applying for a post. However, it is an issue when the Chair of NAPO decides that he wants to apply for CRC. Had he resigned from Chair and then applied, there's no issues. The fact is he didn't and the message this sends to the membership is extremely damaging, whether the NEC members want to accept this or remain in denial.
I struggle to grasp how you can apply the same comparison that we are all 'fighting it and colluding with it' between the Chair of NAPO and it's membership in the field. I don't know anyone who I have come across is intentionally colluding with TR. If people as you suggest are colluding with TR then maybe his might be because they have little faith in being protected against management instructions and little faith in NAPO to protect them. I doubt whether you can apply the same principle to the CHAIR of NAPO.
There wouldn't be any peripheral issues if the right kind if decisions were made which does not undermine the fight itself by its leadership.
I am sorry but that is a closed ranks response and not the case. I have no issue with any colleague applying for anything, we should all be respected to make free choices. However , he was elected to an important office. On the one hand he publicly criticised privateering on the other was applying for a job doing that. He represents us and our collective views.
DeleteI disagree with your comment Rob;I am NPS assigned I am colluding with TR and that is not out of choice, its out of knowing that if I don't, and refuse to do some work for the CRC I could be sacked. Where is NAPO in being able to protect me from having to do this? Withdrawing my "goodwill"? What a joke?
Deletevery well put Rob.
ReplyDeleteI agree-thank you Rob- the posts people apply for -or not-are a matter for them. I am more dismayed by the notion that NAPO is allegedly trying to close down this blog. As a union rep it has,until recently,been one of the main ways of staying in the loop about what is happening and having access to a range of views on TR,that has helped me reach my own conclusions. I find posting on the NAPO forum cumbersome (tried last and had to give up) and the suspicion from the moderators that if you say something even mildly critical of NAPO you are some sort of troll to be a bit annoying.
DeleteI am not sure the bidders and Min of J want us all to resign -so they can employ those cheaper and less given to argument-because they will need a core of skilled staff to get the thing off the ground. The privitisation of prisons has demonstrated that an inexperienced staff group is costly in the long run.
So NAPO HQ -please read this blog-if you talked to staff on the ground you would realsie that the views expressed here are not unrepresentative. If you believ they are you need to talk to your members a wee bit more.
I disagree. There is nothing laudable about allegedly holding ranks. Give me a whistle-blower any day. I also know ranks were not held together. I heard that three NEC reps were suspended for taking another view of the JL débâcle. I was also told by an NEC rep about the golden handshake. I don't agree that JL had to be paid off and that somehow that would be cheaper than dismissal for gross misconduct. As for a moral equivalence between being assigned to a CRC and actually seeking a senior management position in a CRC, I don't see it. And when it's the chair of the union applying who is simultaneously campaigning against profit-based companies in the justice sector, well, I fail to see how everyone is colluding in quite the same way. There is an element of choice to factor in.
DeleteTo cite the confidentiality of HR matters is not always a veto against disclosures. When it comes to senior managers of organisations the public interest of disclosure has to be balanced against confidentiality of the individual. So, I don't buy the notion that JL was necessarily deserving of the same protections as rank and file staff. But that's only one part of the critique of the Napo leadership. There is the industrial strategy, the legal challenge and the damn probation institute.
Absolutely beautifully put - Netnipper17 April 2014 12:53. That's what I was trying to say but you said it for me. Thanks mate.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IKYB8xw4aI&feature=youtube_gdata_player
DeleteThe Probation Institute, a centre of excellence for probation practice in England and Wales and a professional home for all those delivering probation and rehabilitative services, has been launched. Tom Rendon, Chair of the probation union Napo, and an Interim Director of the Institute, gives his speech.
Deletehttp://www.enfield-today.co.uk/News.cfm?id=13010
ReplyDeleteTHE new boss of the soon-to-be privatised probation service says that he is “excited” to be taking over the supervision of the lion’s share of offenders in the borough.
ReplyDeleteEarlier this month Douglas Charlton was named as the head of probation services for Enfield and Haringey within the new London Community Rehabilitation Company, which starts work on June 1.
Previously the assistant chief officer at the London Probation Trust for Barnet and Enfield, Mr Charlton has worked in the criminal justice sector for 11 years.
He told the Advertiser: “I am very excited about it all – there is great energy about the place. The changes have been agreed by ministers and we are confident people will be carefully managed as part of the new model.”
In June, the 35 probation trusts in England and Wales are being replaced with 21 community rehabilitation companies, which will be run by the private sector.
The new company will manage low and medium-risk offenders – the group most likely to reoffend – and focus on gangs, while the National Probation Service will supervise high-risk offenders.
“The sole aim for us is to cut reoffending,” said Mr Charlton.
“It’s going to be black and white in terms of success – either we reduce reoffending, or we do not.”
But opposition to the break-up of the probation service has been widespread, with Enfield Council passing a motion opposing the privatisation in January.
Christine Hamilton, cabinet member for community well-being and public health, said: “We currently have an excellent partnership with the police, the community safety team and the probation service around how we manage ex-offenders in the community.
“It will be difficult to maintain with private companies and a fragmented service. I wish Mr Charlton well in his new role, but I remain very concerned.”
As part of the changes, offenders who have been sentenced to 12 months or less in prison will now also be subject to a period of probation supervision, a move welcomed by the new boss.
Mr Charlton added: “It’s a real chance to try out some new things with this hard-to-reach group which has a high reoffending rate. We will be working very closely with our partners to make the new model work.”
The preferred bidder for the company will be announced in August and the new structure is expected to be up and running in November.
My clients might say he was 'crunked' or 'amped-up' on CRC With the right help and some reality therapy he'll pull through.
DeleteTypical corporate speak by a manager protecting his own back instead of being up front of the actual reality re. risk and consequences of TR for staff in his borough. He's so obviously thinking about his own career.
DeleteMy organisation was a potential Tier 2 / Tier 3 bidder for CRC work.
ReplyDeleteReading this site persuaded me not to be part of this process. It also gave me the information I required to go to my Board of Directors and say “don’t get involved” and we withdraw from the process.
Be critical of many things but not of this site.
I'm in exactly the same position. Have refused offers from a number of Primes to support their tenders as 'bid candy' and the information gleaned from this blog has given me much information to justify my decision to the Board. In fact, we intend to close the organisation rather than become involved in TR, with that decision being made both on 'business-case' and moral grounds.
DeleteWell done both of you. This CRC assigned Probation Officer appreciates your integrity.
DeleteIn reply to Rob Palmer, I don't think I'm doing exactly what the bidders want by resigning. It's a moral stand and not one I take lightly. I will continue to fight this TR omnishambles after June 1st and have offered to help collate all the examples of the wheels coming off for Napo in my unemployment. My partner is an academic and he is being threatened with three months of not being paid if he joins a UCU strike about pay and joins colleagues willing to give up their wages not to mark papers. We are all suffering and hit back in our own ways but I shudder at the idea that my moral principles and impending lack of potentially two incomes is going to help Grayling's project.
ReplyDeleteMy argument relates to ACTIVISTS leaving not just employees. A compliant workforce is what they wish for and replacing activists with new 'lightweight' would be in their interests.
DeleteRob Palmer
I can assure bloggers that the majority of NEC reps haven't got a clue about proceedings and how to hold the top table to account. The majority of reps are naieve and uninformed and do not take the time to research or have the confidence or bottle to challenge. The 3 reps were suspended for sharing information about ledgergate with their exec. The chair TR abused his power and called upon the nec to support him in his devious operations to remove the 2 reps from the nec by refusing to allow business to proceed. A corrupt investigation process followed which only served to remove them so the chair and general sec could continue to abuse their power. I do not support the way these 2 operate and they are not good for napo having continued to adopt the ledger style of leadership that controls and sensors what members know to enable them to operate decieptfully. If you want your NEC rep to perform as they should by holding the employer to account the branch needsto ensure the most suitable person Iis nominated, train them and have clear guidance on their role because when they get to the NEC they will be disempowered by the antics of the top table. Observing without challenging is collusion and allows the bullying to continue. When the chair was challenged recently on an unfair process for voting for a replacement vice chair hiscresponse was if you dont like it dont vote. Well Mr TR you dont get my vote so I fully support your move to the Greyling camp we dont need leaders like you to damage our union and undermine our values.
ReplyDeleteWhat is very clear to me is the way the current leadership is treating it's members with complete disregard to the people they are supposed to represent. The fact that they have indicated their displeasure towards this blog shows their arrogance and their hypocrisy.
DeleteI think there will be a time when we have to take a long look at NAPO and how we want it to be run. Having a place on the" Top Table" puts people too close to power and it looks like they in the end are corrupted. It happens too often to be something other than structural. We need to open out the union and democratise it; run it from the bottom by its membership. It needs to be made clear that joining a union is about participating, about learning and being involved and not sitting back and paying subs for others to do it. The way we have become involved in and on this excellent blog could be the start of giving power to the members and for the members to get involved. Our initial demand could be a place for NAPO on the Board of the new NPS and what is said on the Board and how it is decided comes from us, the membership, debating and voting on issues via "On probation blog". Things have got to change so lets become an open democratic participatory union.
ReplyDeletepapa
Sorry to stray off topic but more problems for Grayling appear to be brewing. A few hot sunny days?
DeleteI love the look of concern on Laura Bs face when shes trying to convince the reporter every thing is just fine.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-27070145
Staffing levels at jails in the West Midlands are in a "crisis" position, according to the Prison Officers' Association (POA).
DeleteThe trade union said staff were being asked to travel hundreds of miles to help fill staff shortages in the area.
In some cases, prison officers are travelling from as far as Northumberland, the POA said.
In a statement, the Ministry of Justice said staffing levels were within national guidelines and were "appropriate to run a safe and efficient prison".
The prison I work is dangerous I had someone refuse to leave the office we were in. I had nothing to do with the situation, he/she had been let down by others on something he/she felt to be important. I was just the bod in the room who took the flack.
ReplyDeleteAnger builds up and anyone can act as the innocent trigger, its a simple frustration aggression hypothesis' an hypothesis that's going to kill a member of staff. It's the same in prisons up and down the land ii's not safe Grayling will have blood on his hands soon.
Really??? We are turning on each other, really???
ReplyDeleteTom Rendon has the right to apply for any job he chooses but may have been ill advised to do so without discussing this with the union, in effect declaring an interest. Did that have to be the whole union membership? NO it did not.Did he declare an interest? We do not know, but perhaps he did. If so what is the bloody fuss?
I am struck by a simple thought, if the Judicial Review goes ahead NAPO moves from zeros to heroes, just saying......
Anonymous17 April 2014 20:24 - it's not a question of declaring an interest. With due respect you are missing the point. His decision to apply for CRC management whilst we are fighting TR is the issue. His failure to foresee how this is likely to be viewed by the wider membership is another failure, his decision making to shake hands with MOJ and enter into a parttnership in developing the probation institute is another failure. This does not instil confidence. Whether we go from zero to heroes that's beside the point.
DeleteI'm not turning on anyone. I just expect my union to be doing the right thing at the right time an for their focus to be on the task at hand. I know how long it takes to complete a good application form to get you an interview for a job. I would have preferred that time to be spent on fighting this battle to save our fine service. Judicial Review should have been done months ago. I can only assume NAPO HQ were waiting for the coffers to be refilled after giving our money to a sex pest.
DeleteHe asked people to go out on strike to fight against privatisation whilst actively seeking to become part of that private sector himself.
DeleteThat for me is hard to square, and it gives a clear indication as to his confidence of the impact on TR that strike action was going to have.
If JR is brought and proves to be successful, I'm affraid it still wont make him my hero.
Just to be clear, the chair of our union has taken a directorship with the MoJs TR spawned Probation Institute and he tried to get an executive role in the new Privatised Probation service, the introduction of which he was supposed to be campaigning against. While our livelihoods hang in the balance this man has taken us for fools, and placed all of our futures in jeopardy in order to secure his own. He needs to go. Now.
ReplyDeleteI think what really disheartens me is the description of the politicking and power play exhibited at the executive, manipulation of people.....all in the best interests of course. The payoff to keep people quiet was it seems only the beginning.........and of course they are reading this blog, no matter what they say in public or to each other.
ReplyDeleteAccording to his Twitter account @RendonTom is on leave to 29/04. There are a large number of calls on Twitter and elsewhere for his resignation from those who have previously supported him.
DeleteCan Napo's campaign be taken seriously with someone who appears to lack good judgement at the helm?
He applied for a job that basically involves implementing Graylings plans whilst at the time claiming to oppose these plans.
He says his application is a personal/private matter and that this blog is out to get him and he attempts to blame others and divert responsibility from his actions.
At the very least he needs to apologise to all members who came out on strike at his request.
Can someone who has made a serious error of judgement be trusted to represent others when he has so many other interests and 'personal' ambitions?
OK, he says it's a personal and private matter. But he has a public role too. So how does he square this?
DeleteNo apology will count at this stage. He needs to resign full stop. The damage which Tom has caused to the reputation of NAPO is not recoverable unless he resigns.
DeleteTom Rendon: Quote Unquote
Delete'Clients I have spoken to about privatisation (they asked me and I didn’t embellish) were visibly horrified about someone making a profit out of them.' (Napo Note 21, 25/3/14)
'After some uncertainty I was eventually assigned to the NPS. I don’t want to work in it and still attended my grievance hearing (not that the CRC would be any better). Concerns about the CRCs are well documented...' (Napo Note 21)
Of course they are reading the blog, in fact, I suspect more so now then before. What strikes me is the complete arrogance of NAPO leadership do whatever they want and when challenged they start to blame others.
ReplyDelete"An assessment centre took place at Mitre House for ACO posts in the CRC on the eve of the Special General Meeting in Birmingham at which it was announced that the union would be taking further strike action".
ReplyDeleteCan you believe this. Absolutely incredible. Whilst NAPO was planning on announcing strike action against privatisation & break up of probation into CRC companies, our leader was attending an assessment centre for an executive post with the CRC. Now that has to be a joke and a stitch up. I have never seen or heard of anything so unbelievable that I can't see how this can be defended. He must now resign. His position has the leader of NAPO fighting privatisation is untenable.
If I'm also correct was it not at Birmingham when probation institute was further mentioned and there was NO opportunity given this to be debated or questioned raised.
Membership demands answers and not drip fed information bit by bit. They knew it was an issue hence the reason why the Chair felt it necessary to write a letter, and then to ask them to collude with him and not release the details. Sorry but this is getting too much for me.
Surely the best part is that he didn't get the job? Even with the madness going on he wasn't considered good enough!
ReplyDeleteAnd what if he had of got the job? What then?
DeleteFor all the reasons stated above Tom Rendon should resign. He is also simply not up to the job imo. He is a backroom operator who relies on factionalism to get influence. That's how he got the London NAPO chair's job in the first place. He was voted in by a clique who attended one particular meeting and who were never seen again. He then somehow managed to get the National Chair job on a job share basis....because it was convenient for him. How can we possibly have a President who applies for a job as an ACO (no less) in the set up that we are campaigning against. We are a laughing stock as a union. The self interest and personal ambition of Mr Rendon are all too clearly evident. He has not been open about his application either, when exposed he has sought to explain himself in a restricted circulation letter. Why.... aren't the grunts entitled to know then?
ReplyDeleteI hear on the grapevine that NAPO Execs. are not happy with Pat Waterman....possibly because she says what she thinks and exposes the factionalsim and intrigue. There may even be a bid for her job by an SPO in a London prison I've heard? You can see what happened to a good London chair in Bron Roberts happening all over again. I wonder who/what is behind it?
Pat Waterman says what she thinks to management to their faces. I remember going to one of those roadshows in which we were all asked to say positive things about the changes on a sheet of paper...you know the kind of crap I mean! To her credit Heather Munroe allowed Pat a slot to explain NAPO's position at the start of the 'show'. Needless to say Pat let rip and suffice it to say was not allowed back to contribute to the rest of the roadshows that day. You saw the best and the worst of Pat in one instance there. She calls a spade a spade and made management v uncomfortable of their gutless stance on TR but she didn't win any friends and can't really be seen as a negotiator! You pays your money and takes your choice.
Napo exec don't like anyone who challenges them. I know who I'd prefer on my side in a fight and let's face it we are in a fight.
DeleteMaybe it's the sorry way that NAPO have, and are behaving that is stopping UNISON from lending there support to the TR struggle?
DeleteMaybe there's a whole lot more that we should know but don't?
That's a very good point. I suspect there is more to it. The Chair of NAPO likes to keep secrets from the wider membership. We know there's a culture of this with our flippin so called disgraceful leaders.
DeleteWhilst I find this account of TR Napo Chair applying for ACE post in a CRC odd,compounded by the revelation of a letter to NEC reps I think we have bigger issues to focus on at present.Also its important to remind critics that he holds his post by fair election.Tom & Lisa won the election to stand as joint National Chairs in 2012 and then after Lisa stood down Tom stood for election again last summer this time on his own and he was voted in.He did not just walk into the role. If we as members are unhappy about his actions then we need to take concerns to Branch and from there to NEC. Incidentally cant see a "large number" of calls on Twitter for his resignation;if you search for @RendonTom you find appreciation & praise for his efforts.This blog(useful/stimulating as it is)cannot equate to representing majority of Napo member views.
DeleteOdd????....it's more than odd...it's outrageous. Oh by the way Lisa Robertson departed in disgrace as well. I also checked Tom's twitter page....not much there really.
DeletePraises for doing what exactly. Becoming one of the directors for probation institute? applying for an ACE post under CRC? writing secret letters to the NEC and asking them not to share with membership?
DeleteIm feel saddened to realise that you don't see any issue with this? I certainly do.
with regards to information on twitter, where have you been looking? there are many voices of opposition out there, but this depends on were you look.
In terms of bigger issues, how can we expect to fight TR when our corrupted leaders are interested in themselves. come on get real. The MOJ were laughing their heads off when they your Chair applied for the CRC. Now that says alot doesn't it.
I don't agree with Tom Rendon striking. If he was simply a colleague it would not have bothered me. But to be at the forefront of an union fighting against privitisation, then going on Panorama and saying how rubbish Serco is, then applying for ACO, really? Was he thinking straight when he applied for that role, did he not realise that this would annoy some union members?
DeleteIf he was interviewed how the hell would he have argued working in CRC organisation anyway, when he is fighting against privitisartion? If he had got the job would he have resigned from NAPO as chair? Sticky situation either way.
Whilst I do not agree with what he did. I don't think he should resign now and I don't agree with the witch hunt against him.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'witch hunt'. Is that how you label any opposing voices who highlight issues or concerns regarding the leadership. Would you prefer a passive membership who say nothing & just accept whatever the leadership decides. Is that the way we should run a union. I pay my subs and I expect my union to do it's job. If they are not upto the job they should resign.
Deletepersonally I don't thing NAPOs attempts of re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic is making an iota of difference and we are now up to our necks in it - time for drastic action. Some of the posters on here appear more clued up than Mr Rendon and imho he needs to ne replaced.
ReplyDeleteI think Tom got the job as chair fair and square because people were tired of the role of chair being used as a pre retirement course. I personally voted for Tom as national chair as I thought he was capable and honest. Therefore I cannot understand what is happening here and feel very disappointed. It is plain to see the national NAPO don't like Pat, I do and wonder why they undermine her at every turn. I don't understand what hold Harry Fletcher has over them to use our member subs to line his pockets or why we give massive pay-offs to people literally caught with their pants down. As the Chinese say when a fish goes off it starts to stink at the head- if there ar egood explantions for Tom's actions, for JL's windfall and HF's continued place in the sun I think we should be told about it.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest and fair, I think some of the decision making at the top table has been shambolic and ill judged. But also NAPO is a UNION thats never really had a big fight either. Maybe they're just out of their depth, and both the membership and the exec may need to recognise that if the battle against TR is to advance. Just a thought!
DeleteI agree with anon 13.28. We don't seem to know how to fight (maybe it's our roots that mitigate fighting - we lean towards seeing both sides of a debate, negotiating, conflict resolution, not all out war). By contrast look at the RMT, who have a very clear idea about how they approach an issue - case in point, announcement that underground ticket offices are to close has been followed in short order by the announcement of a 2 day and 3 day strike. We have so missed a trick on the strike issue. A proper strike - ie coming out for a week/2 weeks would have so put the willies up the national press especially over prisoners released in that period we would have massively improved our bargaining position. Maybe SCOOP and UNISON would then have joined us, if we'd looked like we had a bit of muscle.
DeleteDeb
I agree completely deb, I think if we had a full week or two weeks out say around Easter time when staffing is generally at its lowest point we could have made a massive punch at MOJ. It's a shame that our union NAPO have been fairly incompetent and useless to think strategically. Obviously they had better uses for their thinking time 'looking after their own interest' rather then it's membership on their mind.
DeleteBut really, how many staff would have come out for a week.
DeleteYes ur right my friend NAPO is doing a lot using its position to forward their own personal agenda at yours and mine expense. Now you might be ok with that, but I'm not. I don't pay my subs for someone else to make a personal benefit from me. I pay my subs and expect them to have the membership interest at hand ONLY. So my opposition to NAPO leadership is in your interest.
ReplyDeleteIf staff properly bought in to what it means to belong to a trade union (collective solidarity as opposed go what's in it for ME), if they saw clear transparent committed leadership at the top ( and not just a lot of shouty rhetoric), if members were led from the front (and I mean LED), then they would support any legal mandate to strike. Other societies still 'get it'. As my Polish colleague said ref the last strike 'Of course I am going to strike, my Union has called me out, so I'm striking'. Her financial circumstances were no different to any of the rest of us......
ReplyDeleteDeb
Well said Deb. If ur principles are sound ppl buy into this and follow. It's not about the financial cost, its about principles which you can't buy - something the leadership gas failed to consider.
DeleteThis is a very troubling thread and I am undecided where I stand on some of the the issues. However, if we are going to resort to personal abuse and potentially libel, don't hide behind Anonymous, Paticularly if you then decide to commnt on an 'anonymous' post with the name of the person you believe wrote the post.
ReplyDeleteRegards,
Mickey Poland