Omnishambles Update 50

First, a very public exchange of tetchy letters between Pat Waterman and Heather Munro:-

Everything is just fine (so I am told) 

Since the end of last year myself and the branch Vice Chairs (David Masterson and Patricia Johnson) have been meeting on a weekly basis with the Senior Management Team of LPT to share information and discuss the measures they were implementing to ensure the success of Chris Grayling’s TR plans. The meetings have always consisted of the trade unions posing lots of questions for which there were rarely any answers. The fruits (such as they are) of our labours can be found on London-i and in the minutes of these meetings. Suffice to say that there remain many unanswered questions as we begin the last but one day of LPT. 

We were assured that these meetings would continue to the end and duly showed up for the last meeting this Tuesday. The only member of SMT to come was Everton Bryan who is due to leave at the end of the week to take up a post with a charity. 

In place of our Chief Executive was Peter Costello, the Transforming Rehabilitation Programme Lead and CRC Change Manager, who said he was there to respond on her behalf to the letter I had sent on Friday 23^rd May (and distributed to members the same day). 

• He categorically refuted my suggestion that LPT was in any way “behind” and told me that all the targets for change set by the MOJ have been met.

• He told me recruitment processes were in place to ensure that any problems occasioned by staff shortages would be solved.

• He told me that the Case Transfer Process would be completed as planned by 5p.m. on Wednesday 28^th May.

• He challenged most of the assertions I had made in my letter and informed me that overall the task of splitting LPT in two had been successfully completed.

• He also told me that I could expect a written reply to my letter from the Chief Executive but, judging from the content of her last blog posting on London-i, I am not holding my breath.

I told Peter Costello, in no uncertain terms, that nothing he was saying accorded with the reality currently being experienced by my members. I asked for this to be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. 

I also read out the following statement: 

In my opinion the Senior Management Team of London Probation Trust should be ashamed of themselves. In their haste to appease their political masters they have neglected their duties as an employer. 

My letter to our Chief Executive, dated 23^rd May 2014, highlighted a number of areas of concern and asked that representations be made to senior NOMS management to halt the split of staff scheduled to take place on 1^st June 2014. But the message from Caroline Corby (Chair of the Board of London Probation Trust) issued to all staff today gives no indication that the concerns raised in my letter have even been considered. 

In seeking to meet the deadline imposed by the Ministry of Justice, particularly with regard to the Case Transfer Process, the Senior Management Team have failed to consider the impact that this would have on their staff. I have numerous examples where cases have been recorded as having been transferred when in fact they continue to be supervised by the same officer who is now being required to do additional work. The situation in many offices is chaotic with staff being deemed responsible for clients they have had no contact with and on whom they have incomplete information. 

The instruction to ensure that the case transfer process is completed by 5pm tomorrow takes no account of the reality of the situation faced by the staff. There has, in my opinion, been a dereliction of the duty of care on the part of the Chief Executive and her team in their attempts to achieve the splitting of London Probation Trust by the end of the month. 

The minutes of the penultimate meeting of this group on 20^th May 2014  record that there remain a significant number of unanswered questions. I have no expectation that they will all be answered today at this the final meeting of the group. Of particular concern must be the inability of London Probation Trust to share with us its contingency plans following the five day shut down of computer systems tomorrow. 

In my view there has been too much emphasis on wishing retiring and departing members of staff well in their future endeavours and too little concern for the well being of the staff who remain. I am extremely disappointed. 

We shall now be seeking to ensure that appropriate consultative mechanisms are put in place in both the new organisations to enable your branch officers to continue to try and protect the interests of all members to the best of our ability. 

We shall also be continuing to campaign against the government’s plans to privatise the probation service and will  be doing all we can to thwart them. 

The NEC endorsed a plan for mass leafleting on the last working day of the trusts and leaflets should have arrived at all your offices. 

The Branch Officers will be handing out these leaflets outside the MOJ in Petty France at 1 o’clock tomorrow. We hope to gain some media attention by doing so. Feel free to come along and join us. 

LPT may be closing down but GLB NAPO will be continuing to represent its members. 

Pat Waterman 
Branch Chair

Further to my e-mail to all members yesterday entitled: Everything is just fine (so I am told) I received a response to my original letter from our Chief Executive Heather Munro which I reproduce in its entirety below. Members may wish to reflect if this parting missive from her is an accurate reflection of their current reality. 

Dear Pat 

I am in receipt of your letter of 22nd May, copies of which you claim to have copied to all the Members of Parliament within the Greater London area and to the Permanent Secretary. The letter carries little weight as it is written on the basis of factually inaccurate information and is misleading. I believe that by doing so you may have brought the service into disrepute and raised anxiety among your members unnecessarily. 

It is recognised that as with any major change programme, the Transforming Rehabilitation programme carries risks. In carrying out the instructions of the Ministry of Justice, the Trust has done what it can to minimise these for the benefit of staff and the public. As Chief Executive I have taken my responsibilities very seriously and ensured that the Board and staff have been kept informed of progress. Staff have given positive feedback on the openness of the Trust's communications. Indeed we have had weekly meetings with the Trade Unions and shared information with you willingly. 

You are incorrect in your belief that LPT is "significantly behind other trusts". The LPT project team has met all the MoJ timescales and has been rated green in relation to these for each month since the project’s inception. You have raised staffing as an issue and in particular Probation Officer grades in the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC). Overall the total number of vacancies is the same as we have experienced in London Probation Trust over the last 12 months and there has been no increase arising from Transforming Rehabilitation. 

Vacancies mainly sit with the CRC because of the rules that were applied to staff sifting, giving the opportunity to express a preference as a key factor. The Trust has continued to fill these vacancies with agency Probation Officers and many of these are now applying for permanent positions in the CRC. 

In order to meet staff preferences for organisation and location, where 
appropriate, movement between CRC and NPS has been allowed. Furthermore, several staff members have taken the opportunity for career advancement and gained promotion as a result of the changes, which has also increased the need for staff movement. These moves will be limited after 31st May 2014. 

The case transfer process has been a challenging part of this programme and the Trust has worked hard to minimise the risks. We have worked closely with the Metropolitan Police and other partners, have liaised with staff of all grades to get the best process possible and have briefed staff about what will be involved. The case transfer process is largely on track. It was not expected that all offenders would have been transferred by the 31st May, as those cases identified as "critical" have a longer time period and it is not expected that these to be transferred until the end of June. 

Concerns about ICT have been raised with the MoJ who have been working closely with all Trusts to manage a very complex change. The Trust is awaiting clarification from MoJ in relation to a number of workarounds in Delius. Most of the concerns you have raised at our weekly meetings have already been logged by the Trust with the MoJ. 

There has been no rise in sickness absence rates and although you indicate the figures are not accurate, the Trust has put in place measures to ensure they are accurate, including a requirement that Assistant Chiefs personally sign off each month the figures for their staff group. I am therefore confident that there has been no increase in the rates. 

The equalities data you refer to is a helpful analysis of what has happened to the staffing profiles as a result of the staff split. On some aspects, either one of the new organisations better reflects the demographics of the communities they will serve. The analysis provides a guide to the new organisations in understanding what issues they may need to focus on and address. 

The MoJ has conducted system readiness tests on all Trusts and London has been visited and documentation provided. There has been no indication from the MoJ that they are concerned about the progress made in London and indeed, we have been praised for the work we have done to minimise risk. 

Clearly you have significant concerns about the aims, purpose and cost of the programme, but as a public sector body it is the Trust’s responsibility to deliver the programme as designed. Where possible, as I have already indicated, the Trust has taken steps to minimise the risks to staff and the public. 

I note the reference to the Risk Register. Your written request was specifically made for 'LPT's Staff Transfer Risk Register' and in response you were advised you that there is no register or document of this description. However, in order to meet your request, information about concerns that had been identified as part of the staff transfer process as at the end of March 2014 were given to you. 

I have been disappointed with the level of engagement from NAPO locally, which I believe could have been achieved despite the NAPO stance on the overall programme. I do not believe you have served your members well and your personal agenda has got in the way of your duty to staff. 

Please confirm with me that you will send a copy of this letter to your members in order that they may be aware of the facts. I am sending a copy to the MoJ for it to be available to any London MPs who may have concerns arising from your own letter. 

Yours sincerely
 
Heather Munro 
Chief Executive 

The following has recently appeared on the Clinks TR website:- 

Clinks Newsflash | TR legal support update

Transforming Rehabilitation
Legal Support Update

New resource: a checklist for Boards

As part of our ongoing legal support to organisations thinking of subcontracting under TR, Clinks and our partners Russell-Cooke Solicitors have produced a checklist of issues that the management team and Boards of organisations may want to consider before entering into subcontracting arrangements using the Industry Standard Partnering Agreement (ISPA).

Click here to download 'Subcontracting under TR: a checklist for Boards'

An update from the Ministry of Justice

The deadline for Tier 1 bidders to submit bids to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has been changed from 16th June to 30th June. The release of the final version of the Industry Standard Partnering Agreement has also been delayed, and it is now estimated that this will be released at the end of May. MoJ has also released an updated list of bidders by Contract Package Area (CPA), and have added in new bidders by area, but have not taken out the ones that we understand have withdrawn from the process.

Click here to see the updated list of Tier 1 bidders by CPA

What next for Tier 2s and 3s?

Given the delay in the release of the final version of the ISPA, and recent indications from Tier 1s, it seems that Tier 1s are unlikely to enter into full agreements with organisations in their potential supply chain before the 30th June bid deadline. This may help take the pressure off organisations to negotiate detailed contracting arrangements with several different suppliers in their area, but it also raises questions about how much the supply chain will be 'locked into' the bids. Tier 1 bidders will be taking different approaches and we will be keen to see how the MoJ will ensure that any commitments to deliver through a diverse locally recognisable supply chain are maintained.

We are keen to hear about the arrangements that you are making with Tier 1s and what is being asked for in terms of agreements. Please let us know, even in general terms, through our TR Helpline. We can also provide advice and support on agreements through the Helpline if required. Confidentiality agreements should not prevent you from seeking legal advice but do let us know if this is an issue.

Contact the TR Helpline, 10am - 2pm, Monday - Friday, on 020 3637 0155

or email TRHelpline@clinks.org

TR Helpline extended until the end of June

Our TR Helpline provides information and advice about the TR subcontracting process. It also acts as a triage service and we can refer organisations to free bespoke legal advice through our regional legal partners. The Helpline will now continue until the 30th June to coincide with the Tier 1 bidding deadline.

Contact the TR Helpline, 10am - 2pm, Monday - Friday, on 020 3637 0155

I think the following left earlier this morning is worthy of re-publishing:-

I dedicate this short piece to the officers of the probation service I used to know and who changed my life forever. And I aim it squarely and unapologetically at the politicos and Whitehall wonks who want to "improve" the Probation Service and get "tough" on crime, but who have tangibly demonstrated their evidenced folly.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present you with the Probation Service of the 70s and 80s.

I joined the Probation Service (The Probation and After Care Service it was then-take note) and was in the job until 1998, when I moved on to a different vocation. I had done a student placement with an area office in '78 and felt compelled to join by the example of many older, astoundingly compassionate but extremely tough officers I met. (Some had fought in WW2, one had been a Battle of Britain Spitfire pilot). There were ex-cops, all sorts of people, from all walks of life. They were the opposite of macho, far too genuinely strong to waste their energies on such insecure posturing. Male and female, there were some formidable characters. 

One ex-submariner PO who was one of the kindest and most competent officers I have ever met had such a tough reputation with the local criminal fraternity that a parolee who missed a single appointment though oversleeping handed himself in to the police that very evening as he was so worried what his PO would do! All true.

We knew what it meant to get under the skin of our clients and help them to face their real fears. I recall a man with an appalling record of violence, glassing, knee-cappings etc crying like a baby in my office when we really got to the truth behind his rage. I know of many many serious serial offenders who we helped to stop offending through this kind of |down, dirty and dangerous" work. Get tough? Get real Mr Grayling.

We all had a proportion of our caseload classed as "VPAC". That's "Voluntary Prison After-Care". We were there for anyone who came out of prison, and did a lot of intensive and utterly knackering work resettling people. No extra resources, it got in the way of other things, but we were of a mindset that I now understand had more in common with the armed forces background of my older colleagues than any Whitehall wonk will ever understand. That 'we just do it' attitude is the same one we saw so poignantly illustrated during the Olympics security debacle, when the British Army, many just back from Afghanistan were detailed to cancel their leave and cover for G4S's risible cock-up. Its called "public service". You do it because it is right, and it needs doing, not because it is profitable, convenient, cheap or glamorous.

So all this vacuous verbiage and "airy persiflage" about the 12 month sentence cohort is so much redundant and historically ignorant claptrap. Truth is, we used to do it. They stopped us doing it. Now they are abolishing us because we aren't doing it. Even though we said we would. Got that? No, me neither...

All this just goes to show that Shakespeare's description of the wannabe wonk is so apt. The words of the villainous Iago in the opening scenes of Othello describe Grayling and his accolytes in a way I could never hope to improve upon:

"Mere prattle without practice
Is all his soldiership..."

Last month, The Guardian reported a quotation from an inmate at HMP Oakwood who said "It's a sh*t-hole staffed by kids who should be stacking shelves". Soon the CRC's I am convinced will increasingly see staff of a similarly inappropriate level of skill and experience filling the ranks. Well, Mr Grayling, who would you rather have dealing with the burglars, robbers and domestic violence perpetrators of our land-someone whose attitude and presence of mind was shaped fighting to the death for the freedoms we see you and your ilk eroding on a daily basis, or the kid from the Tesco trolley team...?

Now I know it's a close call, and call me "Mr Pickie" if you like, but on balance...

Finally, I know one shouldn't tempt fate, but a casual glance at the hit counter tells me that there is every possibility that this blog will record it's one millionth visitor today and possibly even as midnight approaches, the official ending of public probation. History has a habit of throwing up some very interesting coincidences. 

Thanks for reading and contributing everyone - I will be raising my glass tonight and warmly toasting you, one and all!