Bleak Futures Week 15

They better hurry up & offer VR. There is not a single person who I know who wants to stay, everyone is talking about getting the hell out.

*****
I feel sick to the stomach as I read that Sodexo statement:

"We had planned on the basis that the majority of exit would be on compulsory terms, seven months after contract commencement, i.e. 1st September 2015, as per the National Agreement."

Says it all - couldn't be more explicit if they tried - it was planned. The slash & burn, the seven month wait to move to compulsory redundancy, the fact it was written into the agreement. IT WAS PLANNED. So come on Napo, Unison, MoJ, NOMS whoever else sat around that table - OWN UP!!! Who got paid what to put together this travesty of an arrangement whereby "the majority of exit would be on compulsory terms, seven months after contract... as per the National Agreement."

*****
NAPO and Unison have many questions to answer - but I doubt the membership will attempt to hold either to account.

*****
One NAPO branch has lodged a dispute but where is NAPO as a whole? Surely this should be taken up as a whole? Just because some CRC areas have not announced redundancies or biometric machines yet does not mean it won't happen in future. If as a union we fail to back our Sodexo led colleagues, then we may as well stop paying our sub's.

*****
Don't think anyone is being critical of reps my friend, more about Napo HQ. Why is there not a coordinated, across board condemnation of Sodexo's actions? NAPO as a whole should be lodging dispute and every branch member should be supporting action. But we know neither will happen. PS I am not in a CRC led by Sodexo but doubt my shareholder will be much different.

*****
Can only speak for myself but I am definitely suffering from post transformation stress disorder and that it is no laughing matter.

*****
I have seen some details of the pay offer which is an oxymoron: no wonder IL was tight-lipped and no wonder all the rhetoric is now on the Pay Ice Age, which gets the unions off the hook. How much have union officials seen their salaries grow in the past five years?

*****

Ian lawrence is not fit for purpose yet he still receives 70k a year and has achieved very little for members. After Napo paid off the last GS for his alleged antics in office and the current GS decisions, or lack, resulted in the JR fiasco and subsequent costs, I'm wondering why we still pay our subs?

*****
As a long serving PO not had am increment for 20 years and no payrise for many a year so let's remember, you get to the top of the scale by sticking around for decades and it used to be referred to as retention, preventing experience evaporating into the ether! We've all been shat on, so let's be sensitive towards each individual in the organisation!

*****
I think it's pretty pathetic to focusing on who gets what from this pay offer. In the round, it's an insult to everyone and that's where the fire should be directed, not on differentials. But there will be no fire because the leadership has given up on pay and the membership moans and groans but there is no groundswell of anger that demands action.

The decline in pay reflects the gender balance and deprofessionalisation of the workforce. Wages will continue to fall until the market rate is reached. At present I am not aware of any recruitment shortages. The calibre of probation is changing and the days of being reasonably well-paid are over, unless you are a sycophant doing well for yourself.

*****
15 years qualified and earning less than some of my peers. Lack of pay progression affects my pension. I will be retiring in 6 years time and at this rate I still won't have reached the top of my pay scale on my retirement. We should not let the pay offer divide us further but fight for fair and equal pay for all.

*****
I love how people are still debating the latest pay offer and bemoaning where they are on the various scales. This time next year those scales won't exist. It won't matter.

*****
I agree: pay scales and increments won't matter. Pay is going to plummet and then we will see what collective effort the disparate and divided probation workforce is capable of.

*****
Just because we face the bleak future you point to, does not mean we should just accept this. I will fight till the end of all this and will be voting no to acceptance. I am well aware it will make little difference.

*****
Good to hear of a 'new and angry mood developing'. The sooner the better...

*****
Letters due out this week for colleagues in the at risk pool going to offices with options regarding VR etc. In our Office, sickness is up and colleagues aren't waiting for their letter, they've put in their notice already. Wonder who will do the work until they sort out the estates and IT? Temping agencies could get busy again very shortly.

*****
South Yorks, letters received today delivered by hand. Those in the oversubscribed pool under 55 got their voluntary redundancy figure, those over 55 offered early retirement, not both.

*****
I've got a little temper on me - it is something I'd do - stuff em I'll just quit - sometimes it's not always about the money. I just hope they don't work their notice.

*****
Well I don't get any money as I don't have enough service and unless you have worked there for ever the redundancy package or early retirement isn't worth waiting for. If you need a job then you can't afford to wait for someone to make a decision about your future.

*****
Sodexo's responses are entirely plausible. It all looks ok on paper but so much of it will not work in the community (i.e. without enforced sobriety and locks), with chaotic offenders and with the expected increases in caseload. The devil is very much in the detail.

*****
"those that need less resources like housing, out of hours interventions will automatically be selected for the closest to change group. Those with greater needs will form the furthest from change groups, and although more needy, will get no assistance."

Spot on. "Closeness to change" is just a new buzzword way of avoiding allegations of "creaming" and "parking". Which is not to say that we haven't always worked in different ways, depending on how motivated someone was, but at least there was an attempt to deliver to the minimum standard of the order as required by the court. These new ideas - particularly with the RARs - will remove all of that.

*****
Nick Hall talks about meeting staff, giving details, managing the change. It's all framed in the emotion-free language of mangerialism. There can be no acknowledgement, that after all the upheavals and anxieties of the split and the struggles to maintain business as usual, he will now take a chainsaw to his loyal, hardworking workforce. He may try and communicate, some empathy off the record, but he can't go 'on message' with this miserable betrayal. But he is only following orders – and that's how they do it – through being conscientious puppets for unscrupulous puppeteers.

*****
A solicitor has just successfully argued for a custodial sentence because due to his client currently being on remand, if he were to get a CO/SSO then he would not be eligible to the £46. Magistrates decided to sentence to 28 days custody saying the case was 'very interesting'. This is ridiculous - had he been given the CO/SSO he'd have still got exactly the same support as he will upon release - only thing missing would've been the £46 - oh and we would not have had to pay for his incarceration.

*****
He might well get less support being an ORA/PSS case than if he were given a CO or SSO, because the requirements are very different. There's not even a pretence in my area that we can offer the same levels of contact. Hope that £46 is worth it.

*****
NAPO and UNISON need to start a clear campaign to re-nationalise the Probation Service. The need is clear to those in the know and the evidence will build week on week. Advise Assist and Befriend the whole caboodle, even bringing back the good old Fighting Fund. Back in the day the universities acted as the gatekeeper to the profession. Bring that system back or using technology we could Skype interviews and let the whole team make the appointment. The Unions second campaign should be to end managerialism and kill off the parasites.

*****
We have been told that Sodexo were meeting with the MoJ last week to discuss the issue of EVR, specifically in relation to onward redundancies. Sodexo say they can't afford this and were surprised to be told that our CRC terms and conditions, which they inherited, provided for EVR. They wanted MoJ view, I gather. Has anyone heard anything as to the outcome of these discussions?

*****
Recent Managers briefing gave the impression that successful bidders in our area (Sodexo) "misread" the EVR aspect, & are (as suggested above) whingeing to MoJ & trying to wriggle out. If true, Sodexo legal team are due a kicking. Wonder if they'll take high risk strategy of JR?

Sad, if true. So keen to trouser vast sums of taxpayer money that they miss a key element of the contract, and rather than act honourably they try to weasel out of the responsibility they bought into. Also it was thought they were trying to strongarm NOMS over the delays/impossibility/delay in IT compatibility, presumably trying to extort more cash from the UK public purse. Didn't they make a 'pledge' about their public duty? Hard to know what the truth is anymore.

*****
I think the 'lack of information', whilst frustrating, is linked to the fact that a lot of this is being made up as they go along. Much of the problem is a manifestation of the indecent haste we have talked about before on here. Mistakes were and are being made, mostly at the expense of staff. It is important to note that the Sodexo team at the heart of this is no more than a tiny handful of fallible human beings who are, themselves, being kettled down paths they barely comprehend. It is the blind leading the blind and, unsurprisingly, the 'expertise' is a lot more limited than they would like to admit.

*****
Bleak (Purple) Futures in Hampshire rewording policies on the database without any consultation. Introduced inferior pension arrangements without any consultation, refusing to say whether they are going to 'Sodexo' their workforce. They have a conference next week but refused the union a stall. Low morale amid disorganised working practices.

*****
A No Smoking Policy introduced in our PF area - service users and staff have to go beyond the perimeter of CRC premises for a whiff and this even goes for vapours!! Apparently it looks unprofessional. So the job's bloody stressful enough and we can't even use what helps take the edge off it. Also, we're not against chatting to service users but if we're having a quick smoke we don't really want to be getting into conversations with them if you know what I mean.

*****
Mr Nick has used a lot of words an tried to suggest he has offered answers, seems to me it's just more of the same. We'll do all we can to look good, but in reality, we cannot provide any answer, because we don't actually understand the questions!

We dreaded 1.6.2014, we dreaded 1.2.2015 and now 1.5.2015, and 1.10.2015 not too far off and it's a shambles! The good news, the privateers have underestimated our clients and their legal representatives, but then I guess, trying to understand the service you're currently trying to shaft, means you take your eye off the ball! Fuckwits!

*****
You are right. In fact the most demanding clients usually come in the lower risk groups. I think introducing private companies is not a bad thing in principle, but the problem here was that none of the companies had any understanding of the client group. They were bidding in the dark, which is high risk for them. For me the key will be the effectiveness of the auditors and compliance staff who hold the CRCs to account. If they are allowed to do a good job, then the prospect of private profit for companies who don't understand the sector disappears pretty fast.

*****
Wise words. Sodexo's only focus is money so I doubt if they've any 'small print' that's going to cost them pennies. My feeling is that if they are talking to the MOJ about EVR, it's because they are now in a position of considerable power and as a consequence of that position they're trying to 're-negotiate' terms to access a few bob more. Any disagreement regarding contract terms should also have union involvement. They're looking for MOJ backing for the action they want to take.

*****
Any news from the discredited charities? Shelter, NACRO? I wonder how one of my clients being sanctioned for 6 months sits with Shelter who are now co-responsible for managing him.

*****
Finally I am out!! Got a new job as a housing engagement officer today, 3k better money than my current 24k probation service officer post, and it seems a great job for a reputable not for profit company that is in growth. No caseload and lots of opportunities to progress. I'm told that I was up against 6 really strong candidates and that my personality and skills learnt whilst working for Probation secured me the role. Have a look into housing roles people, our skills to this role are very transferable and the money is decent. Probation Officers could go for senior housing officer posts which have a similar wage structure.....

*****
In our Sodexo owned area so many have expressed interest in leaving they could easily achieve 60% cuts to staff numbers. And most of those who say they'll stay seem flat and low in mood, citing mortgages, children or other financial commitments rather than any desire to do the job anymore. Its so very sad. To Grayling, Spurr, and all those who were involved in TR and privatisation;

I hope you're ashamed of the damage you've done to the probation service as an organisation, and to the professional lives of thousands of staff. In almost 40 years of my working life I have never before witnessed such blinkered, destructive, divisive behaviour towards a dedicated and successful workforce. It is a scandal.

*****
In the letter to Sodexo, Napo mentions that the bad news was broken just before Easter. This releasing of bad news on Fridays or before bank holidays, is a common tactic. They don't release it on Mondays because they don't want everyone talking about it in the workplace and potentially influencing each other. Better to let individuals stew in their own juices at home where they may be a little more vulnerable without the support of colleagues. They are cynical. I hope all union members will see this as an opportunity to demonstrate solidarity, as in these situations the only strength is that acquired through unity.

*****

All the above evidences that the problems being experienced by 'Probation' are entirely the consequence of poor procurement by the MoJ and a complete lack of knowledge and commitment on their part to the concepts around rehabilitation. They DO think Probation is a community prison and DO believe that everywhere is London.

*****
True. Rehabilitation never really took off within the Prison Service because it was always very low on their list of priorities. We are now seeing Prison Probation staff replaced by Prison Officers once more. This means that anyone allocated to Probation type work can now be called upon to do general Prison duties. Because they can, they inevitably will so almost NO rehabilitative work will take place IN prisons and, with Sodexo et al's approach, NO rehabilitative work will take place in the community. All because Carter couldn't see that zoo keepers were not the same as Vets.

*****
I don't think there is anything in the union's letter to Sodexo that is likely to lead to a turnaround. Important as they are, equality impact assessments, workload weighting tools and H&S may bark but they won't bite Sodexo and there are tiptoe routines for procrastinating on all these issues anyway. As for 'members' anger', this opinion piece will achieve only crocodile tears from Sodexo and business necessity mantras. In releasing this letter, I hope it's not just public relations, but that the unions will keep the membership fully informed of all developments, stay on the offensive, and not go quietly.

*****
My understanding is there will be national meetings between Napo and Sodexo. There will also be local JNC rep meetings with CRC and Sodexo with liaison between national and local Napo reps so Branch meetings ought to be means of getting updates.

*****
I suppose I am making a slightly different point to being updated through the usual channels. The Napo leadership have chosen to release a letter in advance of a meeting, which I think is good. However, this letter could have been disseminated through the branch structure for branches to update members. The letter is stridently angry and suggests Napo and the other unions will not be supine in the face of these proposed compulsory redundancies. It's not commonplace for Unions to release these shopping list letters in advance of a meeting and I read it as a kind of throwing down the gauntlet.

Maybe it's an opportunity for the union leaderships to stay loud on this issue, show there will be no appeasement with regard to these proposals and that more of this type of communication across the membership may have a mobilising effect and reach those who fail to engage at the branch level.

*****
"That loyalty and commitment now sees hundreds of them at risk of losing their livelihoods without the guarantee of the protections for Early Voluntary Redundancy as enshrined in the National Staff Transfer agreement that we are maintaining should be available for the life of the CRC contracts."

I'm afraid that I don't hold out much hope for EVR being upheld when the unions' strongest gambit is that its a scenario "which we are maintaining should be available". No sign of: "a position which is legally binding"; or, "which you signed up for"; or, "which you are responsible for upholding"...

Maybe I'm TR-war-weary, maybe I'm suffering from compassion-fatigue, but it does feel like the unions are waving dead flowers in the air, like there's no conviction in the argument. Akin to the JR scenario it feels we'll just get trampled on and made to pay the price, whilst the bullies get away with it yet again.

*****
Yes, the position is weak and that's reflected in the beseeching language. The only power is collective action to oppose compulsory redundancies, and maybe anger will be translated into industrial action. But it's a big maybe. More likely, it will be death by a thousand cuts. It will be interesting to see what line the unions champion.