You're obviously a very clever and intelligent individual, you know so much. Why don't you apply for the chair's position? I must say whilst you're giving readers plenty of information, largely negative information, you don't offer any practical solutions only that to get rid of the GS. You may be right but don't say how. You appear to give with one hand then take with the other ie too much negativism. Maybe you want Napo to fail?
*****
I've also noticed Jim is anti Napo.....
*****
Sunday, 1 June 2014
Napo - The Future
Today, June 1st, marks a watershed not just for probation, but also for Napo the trade union and professional association who have traditionally represented many in the profession virtually since the beginning. Whatever happens over the coming months, nothing is ever going to be the same again and the next AGM in Scarborough is going to be absolutely critical to Napo's future. The topic is a difficult and painful one and arouses strong emotions, but I feel it's important that I offer my thoughts from what I know and have observed from having run this blog for the last four or so years.
I have been a member right from the beginning of my career, through thick and thin, because I feel it's the right thing to do, simple as, but I could best be described as having been 'non-active' in that I've turned up for branch meetings, but chosen to remain in the background and never held office. Over the years I've been on rallies and marches, worked-to-rule, demonstrated, come out on strike and attended conferences. I've benefited from excellent representation on two occasions for disciplinary and competency matters that concluded satisfactorily I'm happy to say. I've enjoyed the Journal and the camaraderie.
To say Napo has been through a difficult period over the last couple of years would be putting it mildly. There's still a small herd of elephants in the room and lots of unanswered questions from the he-who-cannot-be-mentioned era. With the departure of National Chair Tom Rendon last week, for reasons that are not entirely clear, there's bound to be a degree of manoeuvring behind the scenes as hopeful candidates position themselves to fill the void.
We know there's a key meeting next week because we all got this email:-
The Officers group will be meeting on June 3rd. At that meeting we will put in place contingency plans to cover the work of the Chair up until the NEC on July 9th. The NEC will then decide the optimum way to cover the vacancy until the newly elected officers take up their posts in October. (This is in line with the Constitution 9g and 9d). We will issue regular bulletins to update members.
Thank you for your support.
Megan Elliot, Yvonne Pattison, Chris Winters - National Vice Chairs, Keith Stokeld - National Treasurer
We also know that the officer group were pretty quick to distance themselves from their erstwhile Chair:-
Subject: Resignation of National Chair – Napo Officers response
Date: 23rd May 2014
Members all received a resignation email from Tom Rendon yesterday. The Napo Officers believe it is important to clarify that the views expressed were his personal views and not those of the Officer group. The timing is regrettable but we promise you that the Officers will do all that they can to carry forward all the ongoing work and to communicate with members. We will continue to have a constructive , mutually respectful and professional relationship with all of Napo's Officials and Napo staff. We need to all pull together to achieve the best possible outcomes for all our members in Napo at this critical time.
Megan Elliot, Yvonne Pattison, Chris Winters - National Vice Chairs, Keith Stokeld - National Treasurer
And some may feel there was just a hint of unseemly haste and dismissiveness in the General Secretary's response:-
"Members will by now be aware that Tom Rendon has decided to step down from his role as National Chair. I have replied to Tom on a personal basis and wished him well for the future. He has many talents and has made a major contribution to the life and fabric of the union. I believe that the Napo Officer Group have themselves made a statement in response to Tom’s resignation which should be going out to all members later today.
Meanwhile, the Napo staff and I intend to work in the same way as we have always done in partnership with the elected Officers, to progress the campaign strategy that was agreed by the NEC at their last meeting. This will be crucial as we approach the critical period during which Grayling will seek to push through his blatantly corrupt attempts to sell off of your work and your professional careers."
I know Tom's resignation email was written with some care following much agonising thought and gives a very strong hint as to his reasons and helps to explain the subsequent responses. It contained this key passage:-
"For several months I have disagreed with the direction of travel taken by Napo's senior officials on some important matters of employment and on the campaign against Transforming Rehabilitation. Although debate is healthy, the differences here are so fundamental as to make my position untenable."
For some time now this blog has been alluding to what I choose to call a serious dysfunctionality at the top of Napo. I suspect most Napo members will have been blissfully unaware of an almighty internal row going on at Chivalry Road and personalities aside, basically concerning the prosecution - or not - of the fight against TR.
I have it on good authority and from numerous sources that it's been the General Secretary who had to be reluctantly persuaded to proceed with Judicial Review, contrary to any impression he may wish to subsequently convey. In effect there has been a power struggle between the elected Chair and General Secretary for some time, and one in which most significantly the other elected officials failed to support their Chair.
As to the role of the NEC, they appear to be an unwieldy body and pretty ineffective in being able to exercise any effective control or meaningful degree of accountability over the General Secretary. Interestingly, this has been known about for donkey's years and I'm told was a parting observation made by former General Secretary Judy McKnight and subsequently proved beyond doubt by the shenanigans involving the following incumbent.
This dysfunctionality and disagreement regarding policy direction has been present for some time and long before Tom took the extraordinarily unwise decision to apply for an ACO post in the London CRC. This one key mistake sadly sealed his fate in the power game at Chivalry Road and he was unable to prevent the summary dismissal of Harry Fletcher from his temporary employment, contrary to the wishes of the NEC. The loss of Harry meant that his well-thought-out 50 point Action Plan was effectively consigned to the bin.
It's quite likely that one of the officials who so singularly failed to back their Chair will assume the vacant position temporarily and possibly join other candidates in seeking a mandate from the membership at the next AGM. I think the membership will want a number of questions answering before casting their vote and in particular may well want to hear what plans any candidate may have in dealing with a whole raft of issues, such as:-
"For several months I have disagreed with the direction of travel taken by Napo's senior officials on some important matters of employment and on the campaign against Transforming Rehabilitation. Although debate is healthy, the differences here are so fundamental as to make my position untenable."
For some time now this blog has been alluding to what I choose to call a serious dysfunctionality at the top of Napo. I suspect most Napo members will have been blissfully unaware of an almighty internal row going on at Chivalry Road and personalities aside, basically concerning the prosecution - or not - of the fight against TR.
I have it on good authority and from numerous sources that it's been the General Secretary who had to be reluctantly persuaded to proceed with Judicial Review, contrary to any impression he may wish to subsequently convey. In effect there has been a power struggle between the elected Chair and General Secretary for some time, and one in which most significantly the other elected officials failed to support their Chair.
As to the role of the NEC, they appear to be an unwieldy body and pretty ineffective in being able to exercise any effective control or meaningful degree of accountability over the General Secretary. Interestingly, this has been known about for donkey's years and I'm told was a parting observation made by former General Secretary Judy McKnight and subsequently proved beyond doubt by the shenanigans involving the following incumbent.
This dysfunctionality and disagreement regarding policy direction has been present for some time and long before Tom took the extraordinarily unwise decision to apply for an ACO post in the London CRC. This one key mistake sadly sealed his fate in the power game at Chivalry Road and he was unable to prevent the summary dismissal of Harry Fletcher from his temporary employment, contrary to the wishes of the NEC. The loss of Harry meant that his well-thought-out 50 point Action Plan was effectively consigned to the bin.
It's quite likely that one of the officials who so singularly failed to back their Chair will assume the vacant position temporarily and possibly join other candidates in seeking a mandate from the membership at the next AGM. I think the membership will want a number of questions answering before casting their vote and in particular may well want to hear what plans any candidate may have in dealing with a whole raft of issues, such as:-
- An independent inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the departure of the previous General Secretary
- An internal constitutional review of governance arrangements
- An effective member involvement and communication strategy
- A financial, staffing and office accommodation Review
- An Action Plan for the continued resistance to TR, sale of the CRC's and member retention
What utter bollocks. 'Led the way in the fight'? What fight?! 'the industrial action... has not caused the collapse of TR – and it was never claimed that it would do so' - yes, because it was never fucking meant to! Why didn't we take action that WAS aimed at toppling TR? and as for 'I appreciate that there are Napo members who have questioned whether we should have done more. In an open and transparent organisation like ours that’s understandable and we should rightly be accountable' well, I guess that's why EVERYTHING I wrote on the NAPO forums was deleted, and why we don't have the faintest fucking idea why Tom Rendon resigned - the same Tom Rendon who was also happy to tell us that his conduct as NAPO chair was none of our business.
******
NAPO's leaders have not organised, not agitated, not campaigned in any meaningful fashion. They have colluded in establishing the Probation Institute, funded and launched by Grayling as central to the success of TR, and allowed us all to be 'sifted' with barely a whimper. They have failed us all...so yes, lets all spend tomorrows lunchtime handing out leaflets like it means a fucking thing. And right on Unison for joining some collective action...for fuck's sake!
NAPO's leaders have not organised, not agitated, not campaigned in any meaningful fashion. They have colluded in establishing the Probation Institute, funded and launched by Grayling as central to the success of TR, and allowed us all to be 'sifted' with barely a whimper. They have failed us all...so yes, lets all spend tomorrows lunchtime handing out leaflets like it means a fucking thing. And right on Unison for joining some collective action...for fuck's sake!
There is no sign that Napo has reviewed its TR campaign and learnt any lessons, never mind looked at governance, which would be a very delicate subject, no doubt, as it would ultimately touch on issues of decision-making, and structures of power and authority.
ReplyDeleteI was interested to read that Pat Waterman says because of quoracy issues they will move to a regional model in London. This will apparently 'make the branch more responsive to local needs and concerns'. I have no idea what this will amount to in practice or in how it will affect the balance of constitutional power in what is meant to be a member-led union.
The current governance model is not working and I am not sure it ever has. It has certainly relied heavily on grassroots activism to run branches and deal with all the representational work and local consultations and negotiations. Branch work can be extremely stressful and demanding and some cases run on for months and months, and sometimes years. The pathways between branches and Napo nationally were not well-signposted and a branch could easily feel like a silo that had been Made in Dagenham!
There is a need to rethink the structures. Quoracy is a problem not just in London, despite its large workforce, as it's clear that many branches struggle to stretch their resources to meet demands. There needs to be a stronger connect between branches, regions and the leadership in Chivalry Road who need to demonstrate through their productivity that they are really joined-up and share responsibility in an operational sense for the issues on the ground. Napo officials making royal visits to local branches for set-piece speeches in not what's needed. Rather, there needs to be a sense that the leadership is shoulder-to-shoulder, is listening and, through their activities, exemplifying to the membership that they are value for money.
I do think, however, that some people need to learn that 'listening to the membership' is not the same as 'doing what the membership says'. A lot of people have screamed for protracted strike action for weeks, for example. Chiv. Rod knows that this would never happen given the membership's response to previous strike calls. Some of the strategy requires knowledge of context etc and many of the barrack room lawyers on here lack that insight. It's chess, not arm wrestling.
ReplyDeleteI am not aware of many who have screamed for protracted strike action. But this straw argument nicely introduces the trope about barrack room lawyers, chess and wrestling. Leave it to the experts and grand masters at Chivalry Road, and others inducted into the inner circle.
DeleteThis is the old elitist argument about those at the top knowing best. You have to believe they have a strategy and know what they are doing and that whatever they are doing is in the best interests of the membership – whether how TR was fought, whether there was an indecent delay with the JR, whether the lack of coordination on strike action with Unison mattered, whether internecine struggles at Chivalry Road made one iota of difference, whether jettisoning Harry Fletcher, the only experienced media performer, was motivated by sound arguments or malice - all this is the stuff of those barrack room lawyers and wrestlers who lack the insights and qualifications to comment. In essence the membership is to be seen and not heard, not speak out of turn and show respect to their enlightened leaders – and, oh yes, nearly forgot, pay their subscriptions without linking them to performance.
Thanks Netnipper, this is exactly it. Decisions are being made based on what a few at the top think instead of consulting with what members to find out what they want. The leaders should be there to represent the members' views but so far they're not asking what those views are. If this continues it's likely to be the downfall of Napo.
DeleteLet those who have so much to say put themselves forward as national officers and NEC reps instead of cat calling from the benches.
ReplyDelete"Let those who have so much to say put themselves forward as national officers and NEC reps instead of cat calling from the benches. ".
DeleteWhat a stupid response.
14:43 hang up your boots and walk
DeleteTo 19.52 and 21.19 I fail to see why it is stupid to suggest members consider standing for a National post if they don't rate current postholders. And no I'm not 14.43.
DeleteIt doesn't matter when you post and I can see why some might say that but the expectation that anyone can do anything while this tainted shower remain is sad. The only people who will stand are those who may start with good intention but will be swallowed by the napo collusion.
Deletecat calling from the benches perhaps.....but who on the pitch is listening???
ReplyDeleteofficialdom getting rattled because they finally reading the blog and hear the real membership concerns - not just those at the top table
ReplyDeleteI think so too good point 1911
DeleteTom.R are you willing / able to speak out about what was going on at that time?
ReplyDeleteThe only way to get through the Tom R is going to be through a spiritualist.
DeleteHaha brilliant. He is hovering around though and whilst I doubt very much he has intention of saying anything. It was his naivety and playing the gallery that sent the pair of them into the TR agreement discussions. Any sensible, capable chair would be aware of basic trade principles. They destroyed the prospect of formal legal disagreement before the proposals were printed because of their involvement. He resigns whining of different directions between him and the GS. Silly boy he was there to instruct and lead. Total loser wrecked us all. One gone one to go. Before he wrecks everything left of what was Napo the union for probation.
Deleteoff topic but interesting, Holme House Prison can't cope with any more staff cuts
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/stockton-prison-holme-house-cant-9399668
Clear of 19.48. Your totally of topic
ReplyDeleteJim Brown you represent the membership voices of not only NAPO. This blog keeps us going and gives hope that each one of us is battling the same destructive demon known as TR
ReplyDeleteEnough talk. If the GS is so inept, how can we get rid of him? If he is not inept, let's get the show back on the road and back him to the hill! Man in the pub tells me Jim wants to head up Chivalry Road?
ReplyDeleteJim would do a better Job I don't doubt but the GS has failed every pledge and plan he is totally keystone . No one takes him seriously he has no credibility and the union has lost everything to a point members are leaving . He ought to resign now he cannot take NAPO anywhere other than bankrupt.
DeleteI'd love jim brown to have a leadership role at the top. But I wonder if jim as clever and as analytical he appears to be, will spend time helping napo to get back on its feet for the members specially as he's been a 'quiet activist' in the past or is jim brown he'll bent on destroying napo cos he hasn't got the balls to do the groundwork what all the activists are doing from branch level to the top table - come on jim show us what you're really made of especially for the sake of members you claim to be publishing all the gossip.
ReplyDeleteYou do not expect that to be taken seriously do you. JB is not hell bent on destroying NAPO that is what the current weak and regrettably poor GS is doing. The officers group have no idea on how to stem the haemorrhage of member resignations. Everything they do is spun. Take the climb down over the AGM and the awful spin on the explanation. Despite that they naively openly admitted they were to attempt to bypass all the accountable process. We do not need officers officials that act in this way. They are lost in the glare of headlights . The point of being clever analytical sort of suggests you think the GS is ? Head to head it would be a over in a flash. Ian Lawrence is not an analytical thinker and delivering us to TR on this scorecard he has demonstrated he is not clever .
DeleteS'funny really innit. The hounds (of hell) are amongst us and the full ravages of TR and the socially bankrupt narcissism of our new government is only just beginning to flower - and still we allow ourselves to trust in the old institutions. Unison are striking for pay next week, NAPO might/could/would/should do something. Neither are worth a fart in the wind. The current situation is so bad and so awe-inspiringly terrifying to those that actually understand Probation and our clients that I honestly believe the only way forward is the taking on of individual responsibility.
ReplyDeleteThere is no point in whinging and blaming the Government, your Senior Management, your Managers, your Colleagues or the last remaining human in HR for the sh*t we are in - our current reality is fact and we, as intelligent people who do this job because we believe in rehabilitation (not f***ing transforming it) are the last line of defence.
We have to take on personal responsibility and start to challenge the situation on an individual level. For a service that was built on developing trust and behaving pro-socially, challenging that which is wrong and providing solutions, it is unbelievable that we are we not doing the same for ourselves. Are we sheep just awaiting the cull, battery farm chickens or people who actually give a sh*t.
If you can see what is going wrong - challenge it and document your challenge. If you have ideas on how to make things better then share them. Spend time thinking about how we can fix things and not who to blame (the blame will be dealt with anyway as history shows (however it would be good to get any investigative journalist anyone knows to start asking freedom of information questions around the increase in SFOs in the last year!) )
We all know how bad it is - the question is how do we as individuals and teams start to work to make it better?
Sorry missed out in the 2nd to last paragaraph 'share' should have read 'challenge it, share' and document your challenge.
DeleteOne can remain anonymous on this blog (thanks Jim) so sharing our challenges and what we are doing is not a problem :-)
I'm starting to see movement in suggestions for doing something. I largely blame members for doing nothing - hence no quoracy at branch meetings hence poor show in previous strikes, locally members except few activists doing. So Jim and other bloggers instead on being critical of those who are easy to criticise, how can you help members to realise the importance of showing interest in their union the union that they pay subs for?
ReplyDeleteIt is the activists in Napo who are fed up with being deceived. Most members have no problem turning off because they have little investment other than subs as insurance for the worst. It is the activists that have been betrayed two fold. Worse to come they disbanding the national reps and then that insurance money wont be worth paying at all. .
DeleteWhen and where was it decided to disband the panel of Napo National reps? Is this fact or rumour anyone know? Thanks!
ReplyDelete