Dear All,
Vacancies
There is a lot wrong with the staff split and we are continuing to gather vital evidence from members, but this email focuses on the aftermath in terms of vacancies. Many Trusts are finding themselves in a position where they have left either the CRC or NPS side of probation under or overstaffed. One Trust had 3 expression of interest exercises because they couldn’t get the split right. This is why the unions did not agree to it at all. Please find below some illustration of the examples being sent in to the campaigns@napo.org.uk inbox- please keep them coming. There is some further advice for members, which follows towards the end of the email in bullet points.
According to the Government, Transforming Rehabilitation is meant to cut bureaucracy but the NPS has already advertised for 160 new jobs while the front line is being decimated. Colin Allars has stated that anyone, regardless of assignment to NPS or CRC is able to apply. However, some Trusts have “ring fenced” these to the NPS which is overstaffed.
“Having to apply for our own jobs” is another completely justified complaint. This is disgraceful. New practitioner jobs are being created either side of the dividing line. If a similar job to the one you are doing is created in the “other” organisation, staff are being barred from applying. Vacancies are appearing, disappearing and reappearing with different selection criteria or eligibility.
Recruitment and selection is governed by Employment Law and, from the examples we have seen, some Trusts are likely to be in serious breach. We have written to Napo’s solicitors to get a legal view. In the meantime, the inflation of the corporate side of the NPS concerns us and we will be raising it centrally with NOMS and the MoJ.
The basic principle is one of fair and equal access. No-one must seek to exclude you from applying for any job which is not covered by the narrow range of legal exemptions.
Advice about what you can do at a branch and individual level:
- If you have been personally and individually disadvantaged by any of these issues, we would advise you to raise a formal grievance and have a hearing. If the Trust fails to deal with the grievance, you have the option of taking the matter further and should seek advice from National Napo.
- If the issues are more Trust-wide, we would suggest that branch officers write to the Trust Chief, the NPS regional director and the CRC Chief Exec and advise them of the potential action of raising a formal dispute. Leave the door open to resolving the problem but set a timeframe. Set out the problem and, if you can, offer a solution which will depend on the nature of the issue. Set an expected response time- usually within 7 days.
TOM RENDON IAN LAWRENCE
National Chair General Secretary
Having been allocated to CRC after more than 20 years' experience as a PO, I'd like advice regarding compensation for having my professional role compromised by the sifting lottery, e.g. no more work with high risk cases, loss of the role of Officer of the Court, etc. I have approached my local branch (napo) but had no reply. The insult is aggravated by the noms and moj insistence that CRC will be the 'junior partner' in the split.
ReplyDeleteFor me, I think becoming a civil servent, official secrets act, and having to serve the state rather then society changes my employment conditions and descriptions so much I feel it's not a case of 'redeployment' but rather a case of re- employment. As such I think there may be many avenues of legal challange that could be examined and explored on just that basis alone.
DeleteAnon 0739 I put this in my grievance in February and copied Napo in both locally and nationally. So far no response from anyone (although local branch chair has no answers he is being supportive).
DeleteTotally agree with you, I've been in the service 30 years, assigned to CRC, keep making noises about the sifting process," experienced officer etc. but no one is listening. When given a briefing by our ACE, he made comments like things will be going "up to NPS" instead of saying across language used made me feel like I am worthless after all those years of commitment to the service I no longer count. Also I don't know if this has happened in other areas but Manchester City offices only have one black Probation Officer assigned surely this is also a legal issue under discrimination equality. Not representative of the communities we serve. I have brought this up in Union meetings and tried to get facts and figures which no one is rushing to give to me. It all stinks and needs to stop now.
DeleteExcuse my naivity but are there many Black POs in your Manchester City offices? Blunt and unconfortable truth is that if perceive there to be an injustice go through the correct channels and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT .With respect if you have time to write on an excellant blog you surely have time to put pen to paper......
DeleteSorry meant to say 2 officers, but not totally sure of the facts due to no one providing them.
DeleteI am doing something about it, I will be taking to my ACE, also requested correct figs from HQ, asked Union to take to their HQ. Yes prior to the sifting at least each office had a number of black officers. You are right something needs to be done, and I am merely pointing out yet another issue one that is written in the equality law, which can be fought in law not just feelings and views on what's going on. All I can see from these blogs is that everyone has something to say with very little action, at least I am trying.
DeleteApologies if I sounded flippant and harsh but the whole TR thing is so frustrating for us all. You sound like a good egg, keep up the good fight. Has your service got a BME support group or connections to NAAPS or ABPO, perhaps they could take up the issue. Sounds very strange if what you think is correct.... Trouble is folk are too scared to speak up so thats why your Diversity Officer ( if you have one in your area) orAPBO et al should be doing this .
DeleteThat's a very good point. Why hasn't Our unions noticed this key point.
ReplyDeleteI agree, it is a good point. Probation staff in the NPS will no longer be employed BY the government but FOR the government, and that surely must be more then just a transfer of terms and condition. Its a completely new job.
DeleteUnfortunately we assume that Napo is actually doing these things and following any lead but they will no doubt be gathering 'vital evidence' until the cows come home. There are other more important considerations such as keeping enough money in the pot to pay staff redundancies at Chivalry Road - a big priority as far as they are concerned and paying for the National Chair to travel to all those PI events or is London Probation Trust paying for him to do it.
DeleteGRRRRRRRRRR andmembers are paying fees for this ?!!**$%^
DeleteI sense the buffers are coming up fast whilst the wheels are very loose also; - http://www.napo2.org.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=617#p2906
ReplyDeleteKeep screaming - get ready to jump clear!
In our area the split has led to huge imbalance in case administrators being allocated to CRC. The prediction is that High Risk and Court work will be the first to come off the rails and that the interface between CRC, NPS and the payments system will be so confused that bidders will not understand what they are bidding for.
ReplyDeleteWe must, must remove any remaining good will to the TR process and show that we are against these plans. That does not involve NAPO,and should not include them. Grassroots action is the way forward. The example of the office walkout should be followed. Just a shame that chiefs and chairs don't have the same amount of courage.
BREAKING NEWS
ReplyDeleteJust heard that Napo Branches are encouraging their members to walk out when delegations from the preferred bidders arrive at short notice to look around probation offices.
Apparently there was a mass walkout at Rotherham Office by staff whether union membrs or not to show their disgust at whats happening. This is likely to be repeated at many probation offices as staff decide to take a break at the same time.
It sounds as if this is the kind of opportunity for direct action that Napo members have been waiting for and the response so far has been shock as the bidders are being told by the MoJ that the staff have accepted privatisation.
any news of Grayling's Tour?
ReplyDeleteHeard he visited DTV and Cumbria Thursday/Friday - both trusts have the same chief officer.