Saturday 13 June 2015

Guest Blog 39

Is anyone out there listening?

When training as a probation officer there were two elements, amongst other things, that I considered to be very important to performing successful probation work. The first was teamwork and the second was feeling able (and being able) to ask for help. Walking around the probation office over the past few months (and probably since TR) I feel these two important aspects of our daily probation work lives have been seriously eroded.

Take the model of team development I was taught when learning about the theory of teamwork; Forming - Storming - Norming - Performing. As a probation officer I really don't know how this type of teamwork model still applies to us. I now work in an NPS office where we were Formed via a possibly unjust process that sifted us all into being based on what we were doing on a particular day (allegedly). We never Stormed as we were told what to do from the get-go and are continuously told what to do via NOMS circulars seemingly created by persons that have no idea what probation work actually is. We cannot Norm because we are now bound by policies and legislation (TRash, ORA and PiSS) that do not work. We are supported by services and systems (NDelius, OASys and MoJ Shared Services) that never worked. We are reliant on resources (adequate staffing, manageable workloads and partnership agencies) that do not (or no longer) exist. Regardless of the above struggles we have been given a list of targets we must meet (or else) and we're all required to Perform (whether the above enables us to perform or not).

I think it is more than reasonable to believe that because of the unnatural evolution of the NPS it is near impossible to achieve an adequate state of team working. If it is also believed that the aforementioned phases of team work are all necessary in order for the NPS to grow, to face up to challenges, to tackle problems, to find solutions, to plan work, and to deliver results, then we are all well and truly stuffed.

This brings me to my second point about the important elements of daily probation working life, which is about feeling able (and knowing when) to ask for help. It is very difficult to seek assistance when our job roles and working practices are changing so fast that none of us are able to keep up. I have long stopped reading instructions emailed to me from 'NPS Communications', including that contained in Probation Instructions, management emails and even Napo circulars, as I do not have the time or energy to read them. In this day and age when we are all pushed for time and resources I find it very stupid that anybody would want to send me multiple emails and documents as long as my arm. Thankfully I do have a manager that will occasionally summarise the important bits, and for the rest we muddle through together as best we can.

Luckily I've worked in probation long enough to know how to do the job and myself and those I sit with have been so far able to coast along under the management radar. The problem is that this is not the same for everyone and while I do my best to (re)interpret new "practices" and cover the tracks of my shortcomings, I have lately witnessed too many probation colleagues reduced to tears and suffering because they do not know what they're meant to be doing, or just don't have the time to complete the tasks they're required to do. There's nobody to really seek help from as the rest of us are too busy coasting or winging-it too much of the time, or just too busy. The less capable colleagues that have to go to managers for support are scrutinised for competency while the more capable receive instructions amounting to JFDI. On top of all of this our IT systems that seem to have been built before the birth of Bill Gates are crashing on a regular basis, our partnership agencies providing support for housing, employment services and the like are disappearing before our eyes, and our colleagues (practitioners and managers alike) are beginning to drop like flies.

This week the morale in our office hit a new low when we learned that CRC colleagues are to be relocated elsewhere and this will tie in with expected reductions in CRC admin staff. Word on the CRC grapevine is that those admin left will be forced to reapply for their jobs, a customer service centre will be created a few hundred miles to the North and the CRC caseload is to be split into cohorts based on age, need, community and resettlement, with probation staff allocated to a specific cohort. While we worry about the immediate future for our CRC colleagues our anxiety levels are skyrocketing in anticipation of what Michael Gove has in store for the NPS.

So yes, thanks to the above it's been a long week for me, as is every working week in the NPS. As I'm a glutton for punishment I usually spend a few minutes of my weekend reading about probation on this blog, or in the Probation Journal and elsewhere to see what's been happening in the world of probation. To my shock and horror I've just read that the Probation Institute (PI) has launched its so-called "professional register" for probation. Reading through the registration criteria I think I'd probably be an Advanced Member or even a Fellow (lucky me). For this privilege of writing MPInst or FPInst after my name (I seriously doubt there's any real benefit of this) I'd have to sign up to the PI and pay £80-100 per year.

Personally I think it's a bloody cheek that this so-called Probation Institute, which has done SFA for probation, has set itself up as the epicentre of the probation world (funded by the MoJ that destroyed probation with a TR earthquake) and wants us to pay to validate it's deluded self-importance and help it overturn it's largely unrecognised existence amongst probation practitioners.

I've never been a supporter of the PI and never will be while it presents as a Trojan Horse for both MoJ and Tory ideology to privatise probation and banish us and the rest of the public sector into non-existence. In my humble opinion the PI is no friend of probation while it is headed by ex-probation chief officers that did not oppose TR; while it has a committee base and working groups dominated by ex-probation chief officers that did not oppose TR, the same groups that include reps from private companies that view probation as a profit-making adventure; until it ends it's relationship with the MoJ, publicly denounces TR and the privatisation of probation and calls for probation to be fully returned to the public sector and its social work roots and values primarily focused on rehabilitation.

If anybody out there is listening and does want to help probation then all I ask is the following. Get rid of the red tape, stop bombarding us with the wave of dysfunctional polices and procedures, help us to do our jobs as part of fully functioning teams, which for me is to advise, assist, befriend (and control/enforce), and don't ask me to pay a fee or join a pointless institution to do my job.

With all of that off my chest I'll get back to my weekend and try to stop racking my brain about who I could get to nominate me for a Butler Trust award.

Probation Officer
15 years to retirement

61 comments:

  1. Good stuff - have a good weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was only dubious academic set-ups from which you could buy letters to put after your name. Seems not, as the Probation Institute is now in the marketplace. For your money you can suffix MPInst. I am not aware of any rules that govern this process. Anyone can set up a society, or whatever, and then charge a registration fee for the privilege of using what are called post-nominal letters. The PI needn't stop at letters, they could start flogging a coat of arms and then members could wear epaulettes and bits of gold braid. And there's always tattoos fro the enthusiastic. Anyway, seems probation staff don't need any more letters in addition to what everyone already gets for free: JFDI.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If probation services are as fractured and chaotic, and the workforce is as disenfrancised as the guest blogger describes, (and sadly I believe it's true), then the service extended to clients must be of very little value to them, if any at all.
      It strikes me that if the service continues along this path, then in a years time it wont matter if your supervision period is a face to face appointment with a probation officer or visit to your local kiosk reporting point.
      The human officer wont be in a possition to provide any more assistance or support then their mechanical colleagues.

      'Getafix'

      Delete
    2. Probation Officer13 June 2015 at 10:21

      Getafix, I'm today's guest blogger which I thank Jim for publishing. Because probation has been so badly fractured is why we're all becoming run so ragged by running at double-steam trying to maintain a decent level of service to probation clients.

      When i describe ignoring instructions, this is so I can focus on the job at hand. Take yesterday for instance, if I had sat reading all the hogwash sent to me or spending what can be hours on the unnecessary new swathe of additional forms, procedures, etc, there would have been no time for the handful of prison releases, the client in extreme crisis, the steady stream of clients that came in for their weekly/monthly chat, the PSR and parole report I managed to finish, and all the other queries, bits and pieces from those in custody and the community. And that's just Friday!

      But you're correct, there will be nothing left if those in charge continue the current path and unfortunately nobody except the staff is standing up for probation (where are you Napo???). We all fear that the powers that be are trying to transform probation supervision into a tick-box management function where probation officers may as well be robots because we'll probably only be allowed to provide time-limited "support" where connected to cash-linked targets. This flawed govt direction is what we've all been fighting against.

      Delete
    3. Your experience is identical to mine and that of my colleagues. I spent most of last week dealing with complex individuals with no support from NPS managers just endless emails with increasingly time consuming beaurocracy!! We keep our heads down and avoid managers at all cost but we know this will soon change and we will have to get out because we can no longer provide a useful service so why bother!

      Delete
  3. I am from the JFDI Trust (deceased, the Trust not me)....and think it is so funny that the legacy of our Chief Exec has been the use of his favourite motivational phrase, JFDI, to this blog.
    I am NPS and simply not in a position to keep up with the written instructions and repeated communications that spew forth on the email system, as identified in this guest blog, I do not open or read them as I do not have time. Email communication has replaced training in NPS at a time of massive change using systems that are not fit for purpose. That is the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great guest blog. I'm in CRC and feel exactly the same - minus the reams of instructions. We hardly get any direction about how to do anything and winging it is the only way forward. RAR's and PSS are beyond me. I feel like I've been playing Snakes and Ladders and then suddenly someone's told me I've got to play Ludo at the same time, on the same board with no rules and I'm not allowed to talk to my fellow players. I've never had such a sens of being completely out of control. The only thing keeping me walking in every week is the hope of redundancy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The onslaught of email instructions in respect ofnew practice and compliance with performance measures continues in my CRC ... can't keep up with the pace and maintain any degree of quality practice.

      Delete
  5. I loathe the Probation Institute and its Trojan Horse raison d'etre. Probation Register ? Paying ? Noooooooo don't think so. Think I might just use some initials of my own after my name.....thinking of using MOtTPI ( morally opposed to the Probation Institute)
    A PO

    ReplyDelete
  6. Some people are experiencing difficulty in leaving comments. This e-mailed to me:-

    Thank you for your guest blog. There you have it straight from the front line, a snap shot of what is undoubtedly replicated right across the country. I adopt many strategies in order to cope, but the best one is to keep my head down, in an attempt to avoid detection from above. I understand whilst this is effective for me, it is not always possible to adopt such a strategy. I too have seen my colleagues crying, being sick and then going off on long term sick. Amongst my colleagues there is still a sense of support and camaraderie and if I want anything I go to my colleagues first.

    I too do not read any "communications" from central control. There is no time. I have one priority, my caseload. Paperwork, targets are a low priority. I will always help my colleagues and see people who come in for others. I ask myself above the coal face who is there for us? It feels like a void. Indeed if there can be "nothing" it almost feels like nothing.

    NAPO I feel a loyalty to office reps and local officials, but it stops there. Again it feels like after them there is "nothing". Plenty of "communications", but PLEASE LISTEN NAPO, it feels like no one up there at the top table is actually doing anything to help us out down on the shop floor.

    I have been in the service 20 years plus and feel exhausted with it all. I am a person that is super optimistic, but sadly I do not see this entire sorry situation improve anytime soon. I hope I will live to see the entire welfare state, health service, public transport and our service once again back where it belongs, entirely in the public sector. Until then I continue to fight against this rotten system wherever I can. See you in London on 20th June.

    ReplyDelete
  7. looks to me like a bit of storming and norming going on here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. our CRC are absolutely useless. No directions on how to record RARs and someone in our office has guessed how to do it but it is so convoluted I am doubting that it is right. Here goes what our understanding is:

    as we know supervision isn't ordered anymore but it is apparently a foregone conclusion that supervision is the length of the Order. Now, the activity for the RAR can be made up of several components. Are we right in thinking we set up an NSI for each one. ie if I want to do one 1-1 alcohol work would that be an NSI for x number of days. And if I wanted to do some problem solving work would that be a separate NSI for x number of days - and so on. I know at the start of the Order we have to forecast where our RAR days will be used but can we adjust these as we go along? Does anyone have any other general advice about recording for RARs?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In addition to adding a contact for the RAR (as you say an NSI is initiated for this) you need to add a 'planned office visit' that relates to the ORA (the event) for each RAR attendance. This double recording is required because ndelius doesn't have the capacity for an outcome to be added to the RAR for the purpose of enforcement. More convoluted time consuming work because the cms is not fit for purpose.

      Delete
    2. Forget to say, supervision no longer exists, but a reasonable instruction to attend appts with the RO can be issued in addition to RAR appts. These are enforceable for the duration of the order and recorded against the ORA. More than one RAR activity on the same day counts as only one RAR day even if for more than one type of activity! (and breathes)

      Delete
    3. thanks - we'd heard about adding an office visit for each RAR activity attendance but didn't understand how this needed to be and so we've not been bothering doing it - sounds like double-bookeeping and a bit dodgy but I kind of like feel the penny is sinking now you've explained it.

      With regards to the ''outcome' for RAR do you mean that if some one fails to attend we cant put a 'failed to attend' and 'final warning letter sent' so this is why it needs to be recorded against the office visit? sorry to sound a bit simple but it seems to becoming clearer. Thanks

      Delete
    4. Simple you are not ... au contraire, the system is shite! Exactly as you said, the RAR contacts don't have the option to add an outcome as in 'attended complied' etc, hence you have to duplicate with a blank 'planned office visit' against the ORA in order (same date/time) to do this. Otherwise the NS summary won't be up to date in respect of AA, UA etc. I add the ORA office contact in advance so this is on the appt list for admin each morning, then add the RAR contact on the NSI once attended. This way also avoids having a blank RAR contact when for example you end up dealing with an alternative or crisis issue that is entered only on the ORA office visit. Hope this makes sense, if it doesn't ... please ask again.

      Delete
    5. ... and also you're correct that you need the duplicate entry office visit linked to the ORA to be able to attach any enforcement letters.

      Delete
    6. I've just realised there is one thing I should be grateful for in respect of TR. I've learnt a new language ... acronymashite!

      Delete
  9. NPS now have a system with process maps for every NPS process. All the relevant PIs are attached to each process. It looks good apart from there are about 300 processes to re-learn. Disciplinary threatened if you miss a step in a process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes - looks good so long as the (a) IT is working at all and (b) can load a page before timing out. Then there's the implicit assumption that each process map covers all eventualities. Additionally - I forget - does whatever workload measurement tool is in vogue this week have an allowance for the amount of time per day spent looking at the little Microsoft hourglass where the cursor used to be? If not it needs to.

      Delete
    2. I've come to the conclusion I spend more time watching the hourglass than it takes to perform the data entry ... and that's within a CRC that doesn't even have a WLMT!

      Delete
    3. Moi aussi - it also all adds to the fun, time and tedium of ploughing through all the mandatory Janet & John online training that seems to be replacing training as-we-knew-it in NPSland.

      Delete
  10. Love it! Just looked up the PI membership levels. If I'm reading it right, to be a professional member level C you need a professional qualification BUT for the higher level D you DO NOT need a professional qualification! I have many friends and assocviuates with MBAs who have worked in various settings and it appears they can become a probation manager for 3 years then register at a higher level than me with my relevant degree, probation qualification, 15 years experience and continued professional development. Which other 'professional institute' would allow this?!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probation Officer13 June 2015 at 15:41

      It's a very confused register. For instance, an ex-client working as a peer mentor could join as an Associate Member for £10-40. Same goes for a volunteer or student. If either of these groups are employed by any organisation providing probation services but have no qualifications, for £40 they could become a Registered Member and add MPInst to their name. A qualified and employed probation officer has to pay £60 for the MPInst privilege which rises to £80 as an Advanced member if they declare a Masters degree. It's unclear where one has to be "employed" to meet the criteria of Category C MPInst, but managers also meet the Category D 'Advanced' criteria if they have 3 years management experience and a Masters degree but are not required to have a probation officer qualification. Managers of Category B who may not have probation experience also meet the Category D criteria if they have a Masters degree. For £100 nearly anyone can become a Fellow and use the letters FPInst, which is dependent on showing a contribution to the sector or expertise with two supporting referees.

      Let's take Jim Brown as an example. He's a probation officer and wants to join the register. He pays £60 and becomes a Registered Member. He's not happy that the Sodexo managers that have barely seen a probation office are Advanced Members so he declares his Masters, pays an extra £20 and becomes an Advanced Member too. Not contented that the MPInst letters on his email signature are in use by volunteers and all of the PI linked UserVoice who paid £40 less. He decides to up his game, declare his blog identity and for a further £20 becomes a Fellow and updates his title with FPInst. He then realises that FPInst is more worthless than MPInst as it's been pimped out to not only current/former chief officers, but also academics, privateers, self-declared justice experts and others that have never stepped foot in a probation office but were not content with being Associate Members.

      Even if we did need a professional register, this money grabbing format that was clearly designed to backslap our current/former leaders and romance the privateers, is definitely not the one! What says Napo?

      Delete
    2. To Probation Officer 15.41 thank you for above. This stupid gimmickry would be hilarious were it not so sad that some people are seduced into joining the farce in the belief membership counts for something and don't realise who some of their bed-fellows are. What does Napo say indeed.I'd ask Keith Stokeld but I'd never understand his answer.

      Delete
  11. Every time I see the words Probation Institute I only register ProStitute. Is it just me?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it's not just you. I had concerns about TOM and inappropriate language about sex workers until my SPO took me on one side and said Target Operating Model. We laughed like drains.

      Delete
  12. Thanks for todays guest blog, it sums up the situation in another area of NPS , EXACTLY.

    ReplyDelete
  13. losing a temp this week, they're moving on to pastures new, unclear as to if we'll get another but holiday season is all but upon us I know if the boss had his way he'd cancel all leave and have us all chained to our desks indefinitely.

    ReplyDelete
  14. After years of failing to employ consistent systems and practice across the country it appears that Noms is finally managing it.......again guest blogger, it's the same here !!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I work in an NPS region which still has paper leave cards and also still uses fax machines. Some day soon I expect Tony Robinson to arrive in the office with the rest of the Time Team and start digging trenches.

      Delete
  15. Why is Gove all over sky news for appointing a Torie donor to the MOJ CJ Board? What's wrong with that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probation Officer13 June 2015 at 15:56

      Seems to be for services rendered whilst Gove was destroying education. Amongst other things Sir Theodore Agnew is a trustee of Policy Exchange. The very same Tory think tank that provided Grayling with misinformation for his "rehabilitation revolution". Looks concerning.

      http://news.sky.com/story/1501469/gove-sparks-row-over-tory-donor-appointment

      Delete
    2. Justice Secretary Michael Gove is facing accusations this weekend of undermining the impartiality of Whitehall by appointing a wealthy Conservative donor and a close personal ally to his department's board.

      Sky News has learnt that Mr Gove effectively sacked the four independent directors of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) just days after he was appointed to the role by David Cameron in the wake of the Conservatives' General Election victory.

      The quartet included respected figures including Tim Breedon, the former chief executive of Legal & General and a current non-executive director of Barclays; and Dame Sue Street, a former Permanent Secretary at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

      The MoJ is now seeking their replacements but Sky News can also reveal that it has already decided to appoint Sir Theodore Agnew as a director.

      Sir Theodore, a businessman who founded Somerton Capital, a private equity firm, served on the board of the Department for Education (DfE) during Mr Gove’s tenure as Education Secretary.

      He was knighted in the most recent New Year honours list for services to education, and filings show that he donated £134,000 to the Tories between 2007 and 2009.

      Sir Theodore, who then went on to chair the DfE's academies board, was also at the centre of a row about whether Mr Gove would seek to install him as the chairman of Ofsted, the education watchdog.

      He is also a trustee of Policy Exchange, the right-leaning think-tank.

      The MoJ board changes - which were outlined in the department's annual accounts, published this week but were not the subject of a separate announcement - are likely to fuel a fresh row about ministers' efforts to politicise the supposedly impartial roles.

      Any perception of political interference by independent directors may be particularly sensitive at a time when Whitehall is preparing for significant new spending cuts which are likely to include the redundancies of thousands of civil servants.

      Dozens of figures from the worlds of business were recruited to Whitehall boards in 2010 as part of a project orchestrated by Francis Maude, the then Cabinet Office minister, to improve their governance and operational efficiency.

      Lord Browne, the former boss of BP, was recruited as the Government's first lead non-executive director working across Whitehall.

      He was recently replaced by Sir Ian Cheshire, the former boss of Kingfisher, the DIY retailer which owns B&Q.

      One source close to the MoJ said the four existing non-executives had been "asked to resign", and said that Mr Gove was treating the directorships "as if they were special adviser posts rather than independent roles".

      Chuka Umunna, Labour's shadow business secretary, has previously questioned the impartiality of some of the Whitehall directors.

      On Saturday he told Sky News: "We warned about the creeping politicisation of Whitehall before the Election, and there is now the distinct whiff of it afterwards.

      "Non-political appointees should be as independent and objective as possible - it is, in part, why they are appointed."

      The website of the Centre for Public Appointments, a unit of the Cabinet Office, displays an invitation to apply for the vacant MoJ directorships, saying that at least three are currently open and that they are not ministerial appointments.

      Non-executives are expected to "advise on performance and transformation, operational issues and the effective management of the Department", the advertisement states.

      The roles pay between £15,000 and £20,000 annually, with a time commitment of up to 30 days per year.



      Delete
    3. I am not concerned about TR anymore. They broke it. End of. Now I just have to engineer my departure for an employer who has some idea of what it is doing and a chance of actually achieving something of value. That used to be Probation. Then came Carter and then came chaos. Nothing to worry about. It is over. Probation, on both sides of the divide, is about to become a 'joke' service like the Border Agency, the Work Programme, Domicilliary Care Services, Court Translation Services, Local Authority Housing Departments (that offer no housing), NHS hospitals where people die of thirst or hunger.... you get the idea.

      Anything outsourced is doomed to deteriorate. I cannot think of a single service where this has not happened (speak to the staff and service users, not the management or politicians). It's all gone to s*** because the politicians are corrupted by their own ambition. Nothing to worry about.

      Delete
    4. By e-mail:-

      Well surprise surprise Policy Exchange set up in 2002 by a number of Key Tory MPs and MPs in waiting - its founding chairman was ??? you got it, Michael Gove. Handouts for the loyal alumni.

      Delete
    5. I knew I'd find the answer in here somewhere... Policy Exchange is Gove's baby; Gove was adopted; Agnew is Gove's chum who he has adopted into the MoJ; £20,000 for 30 days' work = £666 per day... It is truly diabolical, the work of the devil, the end of days. If you hold the words 'Policy Exchange' up to a mirror, close your eyes and turn the mirror upside down, it will read ''Evil Think Tank Bastards'. Its Rosemary's Baby, Damien & The Omen all over again. Dum-dum-dah-dum: dum-dum-dah-dum: dum-dum-dee-dum-dah-dumdum...

      Delete
    6. Don't forget the policy exchange document comissioned by working links from about 2012. It in gs the praises of EM, punitive sanctions and complains change resisted POs are the biggest barrier to change.

      Delete
  16. Anon 16:10 thanks you are so right, probation as we knew it has ceased, it is smashed beyond repair. Personally, I am working on my exit strategy. Public service as it used to be is consigned to the dustbin. MPs are the only people who believe themselves to be public servants now and look what a self serving shower they are, there's a gravy train and they and their cronies are the only ones riding it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The more I read it's clear that this rubbish from the PI isn't a "professional" register. It's designed for everyone but probation officers and I won't be signing up.

    Paying £60 to write MPInst after my name doesn't benefit me as a PO. Not when an admin or an offender I supervise who does a bit of voluntary work pays £40 and also writes MPInst after their name.

    http://probation-institute.org/membership/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like its full of Members to me.

      Delete
    2. I doubt it! I think about 5% of probation staff signed up ... CRC's paid the subscription for most of these.

      Delete
    3. No, I meant it sounds like its full of "Members" to me.

      Sorry for any confusion with optimism or a positive comment.

      Delete
    4. I'm not sure why they're calling it a "probation" register??? As most of its "Members" probably have nothing to do with the probation service.

      Delete
  18. Ms X convicted of public order offence, given 3 months jail under ORA & released on a Weds, with a 48 hour post-release Licence that runs to midnight on the Friday, after which she is subject to PSS for 12 months. Released NFA (homeless) as a vulnerable adult with both mental & physical health issues (medication required for both).

    Fails to report on day of release. Fails to appear on the Thursday. Recall? Pointless as she'd be released immediately - that's if Recall@NOMS had dealt with it before end of working day on Friday. So as of 00:01 hrs on the Saturday, Ms X is subject to PSS. Manager's advice - "You'll have to wait until Monday then breach her via the mags court".

    Our NPS have appointed a zealous PSO as their gatekeeper of magistrates' court breaches (newly appointed to the service, loud & proud about their First Class Honours degree in Psychology & MPInst status). Before accepting my breach pack said PSO is demanding s.9 witness statements from staff at HMP to prove Ms X signed her Licence & was released, a s.9 statement from me to confirm instructions were given, and a s.9 statement from our local authority housing manager to prove she is accepted as homeless in order to justify a Warrant not backed for bail so we can eventually prosecute breach of PSS.

    Guess what - HMPS staff aren't playing, nor has there been any response from the local authority, so nothing has happened as yet because my breach pack doesn't meet the requirements of one of NPS's finest.

    Ms X? I've pulled a fast-one & registered her as a missing person for now, hoping our friendly Bobbies might find her while I struggle to satisfy our NPS colleagues' demands for 'evidence'.

    Welcome to the new, efficient, effective, streamlined CJS of 2015. No extra work for anyone. All is just tickety-boo. Well done Grayling, NOMS, MoJ. Well done Everyone. Nothing to see, nothing to complain about - move along now, JFDI.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sung to a well known tune at the MoJ:

      "And we'll all pull together,
      Fat profits for CRCs
      Yes we'll all pull together,
      And do as we jolly well please."

      Delete
  19. To Anon 02:52
    Can we stop the NPS versus CRC crap starting up again PLEASE?
    The breach process is RUBBISH for everyone.My breach was rejected because there was no letter in the breach pack offering the (failed) appointment. True, but there was something evidentially superior in the pack....a signed ( by the offender) appointment slip for said appointment. It is just a tick box mentality with rejection as the aim rather than a quality management approach. It is a shocking waste of both public and private money.
    A PO (NPS)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon@06:29, 02:52 here - The point being made is not crc v. Nps but, as you rightly point out, tick box insanity. Sad to say it just happens to be a nps role, and one they seem happy to have given to a voracious, blinkered box-ticker. Please don't assume any & every criticism of nps processes by crc staff means we're throwing rocks over the wall that's been erected by those who have annexed our organisation to forcibly separate us.

      Delete
  20. Off topic I know but Harry Fletcher has been described in the Observer as a child welfare expert.Did I miss something?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Saw him on BBC news speaking about Rolf Harris as part of something called the criminal or digital trust. Seems like a new venture. I thought he was with a project to do with stalking, maybe didn't work out. Pity Napo lost him, he was the only one at Napo that Was any good at networking politicians and the media.

      Delete
    2. Harry Fletcher is Criminal Justice Director of Digital-Trust CIC, working with police, politicians etc in the fight against digital abuse, having identified developing digital technology as being the biggest problem in the C J system.

      There are several sites about him and his role but google 'About Harry Fletcher', and you get his whole profile.

      Delete
  21. Maybe he has FPInst after his name?!

    ReplyDelete
  22. The feeling of too much to do and too little time in which to achieve the tasks is endemic, not only amongst practitioners but also the admin staff. The constant expectation that as a band 3 admin I'm always going to be capable of absorbing just one more task has finally sent me home in tears every evening but one this week. I went in to work yesterday just to try and not miss a particular deadline by too far and as a result I find myself spending my one day off in a miserable heap on the sofa, crying without reason, instead of doing something that I'll enjoy, and unsure if I can face going through it all again next week. .......the new targets are a joke, why can't someone dig their heels in and say so?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a similar experience. I agreed to run a specialised role as a PSO the job tasks were discussed with me verbally and I agreed them on that principle. Since then there have been add-ons that are eating into my time. I am constantly pushed and pushed with no workload management tool to support my case although it wouldn't make any difference anyway. I refuse to work longer than 9 - 5 because I've done that in the past and then had my request for toil turned down - unbelievable - they want you to do all this work and then deny you time to take off. I've had it, they treat us all with contempt.

      Delete
    2. 13:29 - please don't allow this to impact on your health. Been there, done it, not worth it. Speak to HR, request an occupational health referral, or refer yourself. Saying no is not a weakness, it's protecting yourself.

      Delete
  23. Don't expect any improvement soon but at least you can put MPInst after your name!!

    ReplyDelete
  24. http://euro-vista.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/A-Prescription-for-Making-Probation-Work-.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Snake oil!

      Delete
    2. It opens thus...

      "A Prescription for Making Probation Work Andrew Bridges
      Former HM Chief Inspector of Probation (2004-2011)
      [This article is based on the presentation I gave at the Royal Society for the Arts on 22 October 2014 for the University of Southampton on ‘The Future of Probation’ at their Institute for Criminal Justice Research seminar.]

      In England and Wales there is currently much anxiety about the Government’s ‘Transforming Rehabilitation’ (TR) programme, whereby much of what Probation currently does will be outsourced to a range of other providers. I offer, instead of a prediction about what the future might or might not now bring for Probation, an immodest prescription for a potentially successful future that Probation should still be able to have, despite the serious hurdles that Probation has been facing recently, and will continue to face. I call my prescription Making Probation Work.

      We need to be sober about the difficult path ahead, but we can still be positive and determined in our approach to it, which is realistic if we are clear about what we want to achieve. It is consistent with the advice I gave in New Zealand, described in a previous article in EuroVista 2.1.

      In fairness, it’s not easy for people working in the Probation world to be optimistic when you’re trying to get your day to day Probation job done at a time of constant upheaval and rebranding, capped by the most recklessly gung-ho reorganisation that Probation has ever faced. The Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) programme is indeed fraught with potential risks, plunged into boldly when the current Justice Secretary decided to forgo the pilot projects planned by his predecessor, so in this context it’s not exactly easy to feel optimistic.

      Indeed, if I’d been asked at the planning stage whether I thought that the TR programme was a good idea I’d have had to say No, as it clearly sets out to change much too much, much too quickly. In particular, it was a bad idea to divide off so-called “High Risk” cases, and have them supervised separately by a rump National Probation Service. But once it became the policy of our constitutionally elected Government, I – and everyone else involved – had a choice to make.

      One option is to snipe from the sidelines, as many commentators do, saying loudly “I wouldn’t start from here”, and then walk away, while another option is to try to help make it work – or at least offer to do so – hence my offered prescription. For I have little patience with the ideological position-taking approach to discussing public services, when many people decide that being state- run is unequivocally a good thing, and privately-run a bad thing, or vice-versa."

      I struggle with the concept that you 'make it work' - as it is then turned into an argument to legitimise the TR bollox, fact & fiction merge, JFDI rules and the truth is lost. So I think it is important to make a visible, audible, tangible protest. That's not 'sniping from the sidelines'. I agree with the 'snake oil' assessment. This is bad medicine you're prescribing, Mr Bridges.

      Delete
    3. Does he write FPInst after his name?!

      Delete
  25. I humbly offer my prescription for Making Probation Work:
    1. re-unite the service as Public Sector Probation, to provide a unified consistent approach.
    2. take it away from Civil Service Control and Command ( no ex Chiefs may apply).
    3.commission a viable IT system that delivers.
    4. repeal ORA
    5. maximum of three layers of management
    6. stop funding the Probation Institute
    err, that's it.......

    ReplyDelete