Napo vs the Civil Service?
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig."
For a while now I've been thinking about this subject needing a bit of attention. I'm just going to jump in and say it to get it off my chest.
I'm a probation officer and have been with Napo since I started. The problem is that I don't think Napo represent me any more, and I don't believe it's even able to represent me anymore. Before the attacking comments from the technical know-it-all's and die-hard unionists strike me down I'm going to try to elaborate on this. I'm no expert on unions and it may be that I'm saying what many people are thinking. I may be out of line, I may be thinking this due to frustration, anxiety and fear, but I am thinking it.
Let's start with TR as its no use dragging up too much of the past. Napo failed to stop TR and as a result we've been split into two sides, NPS and CRC's. Napo failed to secure a better EVR deal for probation staff in CRC's and so 600 staff are waiting to be shafted with severance payments. As a result many have opted for severance and most of the staff left will probably face compulsory redundancies. There's talk of a strike but nobody can really believe it'll happen, and what's the point striking when the irreversible damage has already been done. Napo has proved it can't or won't fight Sodexo, and can't or won't get the MoJ to intervene either.
I wonder what's going to be the Napo response when all the other CRC's announce restructuring and redundancies too? According to 'Man down the pub' there hasn't and won't be Napo-supported employment tribunals against CRC's because Napo is saving its bank balance for its inner circle down at Napo HQ. Of course I can believe that, it's not like Napo has been anything more than a weak pulse over the last few years.
Over on my side of the divide, the NPS, we really don't know what's coming yet. We've had the civil service code and associated disciplinary policies, also the new targets, a wave of new directives and Probation Instructions, the rumours of directing PO's to prisons, reductions in expenses and mileage rates, rising workloads, threats of justice cuts, and not to leave out the oppressive office cultures, the power-mad managers, the problems with shared-services, etc, etc, etc.
In my neck of the woods we're all concerned that more is being expected for less, and the work is increasing and unnaturally soaked in red-tape, risk management and public protection tick-box procedures. They want goodwill, top quality work and best practice, but from staff who have been used as work horses and set to be pastured and put-down when the work is done. Anyone else in the NPS hearing JFDI quite a lot lately?
So my question is whether Napo can hack-it in the current set up? What has Napo done for the NPS since the split? I mean, Napo has failed big time and yet many of us still pay to be members. In comparison to the bigger unions, including Unison, our Napo is a small fish in a big pond - a small-hitter that seems to charge the highest subscriptions. More so, because Napo is so tiny it has very little weight to bargain and negotiate with the MoJ, and I'm not aware that it even has any bargaining power or rights with the MoJ or Civil Service. This bargaining ability and lack of credibility is not going to improve because probation is a small agency with a small member/staff base, and was made even smaller by TR. I'm not sure how many staff the NPS has, but whatever it is will be insignificant to the existing 400,000+ staff in the Civil Service.
While I was writing this 'Man down the pub' frowned and told me to find a bigger and better union that already successfully represents large numbers of civil service staff and associated professions. If Napo had been smarter it would have created the fallback position to be a professional association for probation. They must be kicking themselves at Napo HQ for handing that role to the Probation Institute which is despised of by most I speak to.
I think now is the time we need to know in plain terms how Napo intends to protect our rights, terms and conditions now we're the NPS and civil servants. It needs to come clean about its place in representing NPS staff and be honest about its limitations. If it can't help us then we need to be looking for suitable alternatives, and for the unions that will best represent us individually as probation officers and civil servants, and collectively as a profession.
A quick read of Wikipedia lists the following (and some are less than £15 a month).
Napo - 9000 members (really?)
Prison Officers Association - (POA) 37,000 members - I doubt we can join this one
Prospect - 118,000 members
Public and Commercial Union (PCS) - 262,000 members
Unison - 1.3 million members
Unite the Union - 1.4 million members
Final thought: Probation has always been the poor relation of the CJS. Without an effective union to represent us we're going to be forced to sit at the 'back of the bus' and will remain in the economy class of the Civil Service. I doubt there're many of us that want to go unprotected in the NPS without having Union representation for the unexpected events that may pit us against our MoJ and government worshipping masters. We need a strong Union for when the new bosses move the goalposts just as we're currently witnessing in the CRC's. Without bargaining power against the Civil Service and MoJ, Napo is effectively firing blanks. Unless I've got it all wrong, I think we'll be smart to be moving on.
Probation Officer
The obvious one would be the PCS, but as we have different terms and conditions to the rest of the civil service, we'd end up in a Unison style situation where we are just a small drop in their ocean.
ReplyDeleteAnd definitely not Unite, with that odious socialist they have as their leader.
When it comes to Union choices , Hobson Choice comes to mind. Its grim.
ReplyDeleteThere is, of course, one flaw in the blogger's argument. UNISON, with over a million members, ALSO failed to 'stop TR'. I share some of your concerns about how NAPO will operate in the future but joining a union in which 98% of the membership have no interest in CJ matters or Probation strikes me as folly.
ReplyDeleteA dickie bird told me some time ago that the POA was indeed a likely suitor....
ReplyDeleteIf choice was unlimited the best union to join at the present time would be the RMT. The PCS have been ineffective in preventing outsourcing; so have Unison and Unite did not get far in their dispute with British Airways. The Police Federation has been neutered and the POA has hardly been a bastion against deep staff reductions. And is a union with a focus on custody and security really best placed represent a rehabilitative service?
ReplyDeleteThere seems an implicit passivity in choosing which union will make everything OK, as though a subscription is an investment and one awaits a dividend. A union's strength is not determined by its numbers, but by its activism and solidarity. When the RMT strike, the service shuts down, picket lines are not crossed, unity is seen as being in everyone's self-interest. On the other hand, Napo members go through 9,000 dark nights of the soul and forget that it's quite simple really: you either stand together or fall separately. We are witnessing the disintegration of unionisation in probation and changing the brand will make no difference because it would be the same apathetic and atomised content. I would estimate that somewhere between 10% and 20% of members actively opposed TR, the rest slept through it. Napo is not the RMT and probation is not a railway – it's only solidarity that makes the difference.
It's rubbish to suggest that it's only solidarity that makes the difference. RMT strikes are effective, as the withdrawal of labour leads to a significant financial cost to their employers, via a loss of fare revenue, and massive inconvenience to the general public. Even if every PO and PSO went on strike, there would be little financial cost to the government and virtually zero inconvenience to the general public. That's why strikes in the public sector are so ineffective.
DeleteJust as with the NUM, the power of the RMT is going to wane, particularly where the Underground is concerned because of fundamental changes in the industry. The current dispute will speed up the introduction of automation and driver-less trains. This technology has been around for ages and so far successfully resisted by the union, but eventually the tide can't be stopped.
DeleteThose with long memories will recall the change from steam to diesel on British Rail still meant two crew in the cab, despite there being nothing for the second person to do. The NUR and other rail unions put up a vigorous fight, but the inevitable happened and we got one person operation.
When every PO and PSO goes on strike your hypothesis can be tested, so until then you are speculating about what the impact would be.
DeleteThe BA strike action, which similarly caused the public expense and inconvenience, failed through lack of solidarity. As did the Miner's strike!
It is true there would not be the type of financial impact associated with the railways, though there would be some but there would be wider social costs. The other point to consider is that when a management is confronted by a united workforce it's options are fewer and day to day management becomes more difficult. A management in those circumstances becomes inclined to negotiate. The purpose of achieving solidarity is not to strike, it's to demonstrate to the employers (who are always united) that we, the workers, are as united as you and we want to bargain with you. And if you refuse, then are last option is to withdraw labour.
But if you take the view that the public sector cannot achieve anything through solidarity and collective action, then unions are futile in the sector.
This is true, but I really think there is a particular problem with the probation mindset, still largely founded in social work principles, where there is genuine concern that clients will be harmed by industrial action. Added to this is a new breed who maybe don't share these concerns, but simply feel unable or unwilling to make the financial sacrifice. The incredible sacrifice of the miners springs to mind. Maybe dare I say, it's a class issue?
DeleteO Netnipper-hearty applause for your posts above!! What I have been seeing from position as PO in NPS is how the current CRC crisis sorts the sheep from goats/wheat from chaff in terms of who shares values and who thinks of number 1. (Actually I have not exerienced much surprise about the people concerned -the cut in behaviour has been as anticipated BUT it has been upsetting just how overtly not interested & unsupportive some NPS colleagues are regarding the pressures and dilemmas faced by CRC colleagues)
DeleteI think your absolutely right, the public sector never considered itself to be in this position.
DeleteWhen probation strikes we rearrange our work and managers arrange cover. You'll even get a singleton ACO on the picket, usually the same one that coordinated the SPO strike cover.
DeleteThe only way a strike would have ever work was if everyone downed tools as is. The means letting clients turn up for supervision and PSR appointments, not turning up at courts and no cover provided, and what would make the biggest impact of all, either leaving AP's unlocked and unmanned or turfing out all residents for the period on the basis of health and safety.
Napo has never pressed the AP factor in strikes, our biggest weapon - imaging the headlines. Instead we cover the work because we care. The problem is that this won't pay the bills when probation is gone.
It has already gone. The ongoing momentum is simply a twitching carcass.
DeleteTo Jim @8.16. Of course there will always be technological changes that change working practices and in some cases see the total demise of industries – I think of the once powerful print unions before computers or the dockworkers before containerisation. It will be some time before the RMT wane, but the RMT has adapted to new technologies and practices for decades. As an aside, the decline of mining was more to do with cleaner fuels and cheap imports, not technology. With any changes, the role of the union is to establish how their members will be affected and how changes/restructuring can be best managed so that workers are not just tossed aside; that they are treated fairly and with dignity as their services are superseded by other means. My overriding point is that to get the best possible deal there must be solidarity amongst workers otherwise they get swept aside and are poorly compensated, as we see with the reduced EVR.
DeleteAs for the sensitivities of social work scruples that preclude some workers in good conscience from taking strike action, I think in the longer term these are best protected by through solid industrial action. Mind you, when it comes to values in probation I am not sure whether you could get consensus on what they are, never mind achieving solidarity in fighting for them!
You don't protect those values by not striking. There are always lots of good reasons for not taking industrial action. However, as I have said, industrial action should be a last resort, it's the threat of it that can move minds towards decent agreements that stand up after the ink has dried. I don't know what would have happened TR-wise if the whole of the union membership had stood four-square. But, to my mind, it was this obvious lack of solidarity that enabled the MoJ and now the CRCs to ignore union protests.
Good Guest Blog, expresses much of what I think too. I think NPS POs have changed from practitioners to functionaries and it is awful. I understand all NPS areas have been given budget cuts to implement in the next year, the smallest areas being around £5 million mark, it has got to be staffing that is in the firing line.
ReplyDeleteNAPO is now reaping what it has sown ie the seeds of its own destruction. Strength is not shouting and bluster, it is not behaving like masters and servants Strength is often the quiet voice that plans then mobilises but there was no place at the top table for strategists...people I saw got carried away with their sense of power not responsibility, as it should have been.
We must learn lessons from Unison because at many joint meetings I attended their reps / regional officials understood TU organisation but NOT probation. When NAPO folds...and it will...I would prefer POA or PCS for that reason.
A PO
Mortgages and general debt makes cowards of all of us. Netnipper is correct on this issue, during the limited action NAPO took to try and stop TR I would come into my office only to be told that " I'm not listening to you, you scare me with your suggestions"
ReplyDeleteIts over for our profession I fear.
Papa
Netnipper is spot on and far more eloquent than I have been in pointing out that the majority of our colleagues sleepwalked through the campaign against TR. I left NAPO early last year having grown tired and frustrated by the ineptitude of its leadership and short sighted apathy of the majority of its members. I tried and failed to win arguments both locally and nationally for many years and eventually gave up. I saw first hand the bullying and cronyism at NEC and was witness to some staggeringly stupid decisions including Ledger's pay off and the blind walk into the glaringly obvious trap that is the Probation Institute. They are clearly a busted flush so what do we do now? Our excellent guest blogger asks the question very well because we must do something. The Treasury is coming for us next year because there is little else left to cut except people. We learn as practitioners and through experience that the best indicator of someone's future behaviour is what they've done in the past. On that basis we can expect NOMS will offer a vastly inferior deal to EVR. The unions will bluff and bluster about securing a better deal but not oppose redundancies in principle. And the membership will walk quietly into the abyss bemoaning the fact nobody stood up for them when they wouldn't stand up for themselves. Meanwhile the quality of public protection work will suffer and even more victims of serious crime will pay a terrible price. Previous commentators are correct to point out that we are a tiny and little understood part of the public sector but translate this scenario across the board and people will see that the bedrock of state support for ordinary people in this country is being destroyed in the name of paying back the bankers. Lets hope the British public are more savvy than most of our colleagues. Woops, look at the time. I'd better get off to work.
ReplyDeleteWhilst I understand concerns for NPS staff and which union to join,CRC staff are even more limited for choice of union. The threat of job losses in CRC is imminent in Sodexo and others will follow swiftly after. Surely if someone is made redundant napo is duty bound to offer legal representation to an individual at an employment tribunal. Many of us were pushed into a CRC without a choice. Also if we change unions now and need support with a TR related problem would a new union be able to help us as we are already in dispute. I am disgusted that no test cases have been taken through the court by napo but would I leave myself even more vulnerable if I joined another union at this time.
ReplyDelete"Surely if someone is made redundant napo is duty bound to offer legal representation to an individual at an employment tribunal."
Delete"I am disgusted that no test cases have been taken through the court by napo...."
Not sure how many times it's been said on here but to repeat, even though Napo has not said so publicly, there will be no ET's because the cash is being saved for possible redundancies of Napo's own staff.
Put this on a post it on your Work PC or home notice board and MOVE ON : `................Even though Napo has not said so publicly, there will be no ET's because the cash is being saved for possible redundancies of Napo's own staff'
ReplyDeleteAnyone that takes a 'severance package' will also be signing away any rights to take their case to an employment tribunal.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's why NAPO are quite happy move the debate away from Sodexo's refusal to honour agreed terms on redundancy, and instead arguee that the 'severence' offer is just not enough.
I find it surprising that NAPO have not yet bothered to inform staff of the differences and legal implications between accepting redundancy, and accepting severance.
I think this is probably the most objectionable aspect of severance arrangements.
DeleteBy enticing an employee to voluntarily resign, and then be contracted to certain conditions such as not speaking publicly about matters related to the severance and former employment it is simply despicable.
That by offering severance- what a horrible euphemism that is - the employer is then protected from the restrictions they would experience if they had made a person redundant.They can re-advertise the position on lower pay & other worse job conditions.
Parliament has really let ordinary people down by not legislating to change such poor employer behaviours.
Don't be naïve trade repos have been agreeing closure on Cot 3 agreements for years. The issue is the money and the amounts . It would be the same sign off in a VR process you confuse the issues and for those that have to deal with these issues it complicates readers understandings of what exit is about. In anycase however for those going this is what the fight should be where are you napo its about anti redundancy not the shillings. This is a union matter but members feel this failure is why any deal is a deal. Wrong MAKE THEM SACK US !
Delete16:57: you are incorrect to say that VR is the same as severance. There was VR under the Trusts and it was VR, not severance, in that there was no call for compromise agreements or legal advice. It's of course true that compromise agreements are not new in probation but not in the context of redundancy. Sodexo, unlike the Trusts, is not about genuine redundancy, but a means to recruit cheaper labour.
DeleteI am sorry Anon at 16:57 I do not understand what you think I have said that is particularly naïve, neither do I understand the term " Cot 3 agreements" please elucidate.
DeleteIn all the circumstances I am not surprised many are reported to be interested in severance - ultimately a worker's first duty is too her dependents and unless there is an agreed campaign to decline interest it is little wonder that people do express an interest, however regrettable others may consider that,
Breaking: lawyers suspend legal aid action - Law Society Gazette
ReplyDeletePractitioner groups have decided to suspend their nationwide legal aid boycott with immediate effect despite receiving no offer to settle the dispute. An announcement this morning, on the 52nd day of the protest, described the move as a 'goodwill gesture'.
Following meetings with the Ministry of Justice to discuss alternative savings to the second cut in legal aid fees which prompted the protest, the Criminal Law Solicitors’ Association and London Criminal Courts Solicitors’ Association said they ‘firmly’ believed the time was right to suspend the action ‘as a gesture of goodwill and recognising the importance of this engagement’.
The Ministry of Justice said it 'welcomed' the practitioner groups' decision and 'look forward to continuing to work constructively with the professions'.
The groups' statement continued: ‘There are many challenges ahead and the engagement to date is a sign that those challenges can be debated constructively in a receptive atmosphere.' The groups said the mandate to suspend action was made after members were surveyed 'over the course of 72 hours’.
Franklin Sinclair, senior partner at Tuckers, a key member of the Big Firms Group, whose 37 members carry out around 25% of criminal legal aid work, said on Twitter that the group had decided to suspend action 'as a result of continuing dialogue with the MoJ and in order to facilitate progress to a successfull outcome'.
The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) backed the move. Mark Fenhalls QC, chairman-elect, said he was suspending ‘no returns’ with immediate effect. 'There is no reason why barristers should not accept any fresh instructions,’ he said. Fenhalls said solicitors and barristers ‘must continue, even at this late stage, to try to persuade officials and politicians that there are viable alternatives’.
Thousands of solicitors have been taking part in the boycott since 1 July, when the government introduced a second 8.75% fee cut for litigators. Barristers joined the action on 27 July when members of the Criminal Bar Association voted to accept no new work and adopt a policy of ‘no returns’.
The practitioner groups are currently consulting members on whether firms would be prepared to withdraw their bids for the government’s new contracts to provide 24-hour cover at police stations, to commence on 11 January next year. The deadline for responses is 28 August.
The groups said they recognised ‘this has been a very difficult time for those participating in the action and we are grateful to those who have stood firm in support of their principles’. They also thanked the CBA for its involvement in the action, ‘and in doing so recognise the immense sacrifice made by many on both sides of the profession’.
The comments have proved GB 44 is timely - so thanks for writing it and to JB for Publishing, it also seems apposite.
ReplyDeleteMy mother would say to me as a child ..."by the time you realise... so & so it will be TOO LATE.
I think she was mostly right and we often find ourselves needing to retreat and regroup and prepare properly whilst continuing to suffer attacks and damage - I am thinking of Britain's war effort really taking focus after the Dunkirk evacuation.
Meanwhile the blitzkrieg did much damage before gradually things were turned and the Nazis lost out on the Moscow Front and allies really came to Britain's aid once they realised at Pearl Harbour they were not immune to attack.
So maybe now is not a moment too soon for the three probation Unions to unite in real agreed action & for Napo to throw its lot in with another Union because it simply cannot fight on all the different fronts simultaneously, especially when its members have been divided by employee status already. Even within those divisions union members seem seriously divided whether it is better to contribute to the collective action or just pay a subscription and let others decide how it is spent.
I am pretty sure that now as ever, for anyone doing client facing work, where some national scandal could be considered to be connected with that work it is absolutely foolhardy not to be in a trades' union that will represent individuals in the event of members getting investigated/blamed for the consequences of such as a serious further offence.
Failing that individuals need a very good personal insurance policy - defending oneself through public enquiries when the other side are represented by QCs can be VERY expensive.
There is more that might be said on other aspects but this is sufficient now - thanks JB and GB44 and all commenters.
We knew what was coming , we are educated and work within a setting thats sees through people and charades. We had no union back up, are slaves to our debts and mortages AND TOO ILL EQUIPPED AND FRIGHTENED TO GO IT ALONE. From Shoots from the Hip
ReplyDeleteThe union had the funds to back you up they squandered it on pay offs and back slapping nonsense. Those elected were members choices and if that's the best from choice it was the wrong choice. The same can be said for the current GS . He needs to go if napo have any chance of survival meantime they may not be any use to us now.
DeleteShock Horror, "Jeremy Corbyn has links with Dick Dastardly"
ReplyDeletepapa
In my area so called NAPO fundamentalists are receiving sessional payments to do FDR s because system is faltering. Whilst preaching solidarity maintaing the chaos by lining their own pockets
ReplyDeletetrue happening all over
Deleteonly 2 people left who have stood firm in our little part of the NPS...one minute people are irate and mutinous about the change to 10 FDr's a month ,next minute taking 'paid reports' as fast as they can...excuses and justifications at the ready
DeletePeople in KSS who we carried for years, now never out the office falling over themselves to do sessional reports. Some people have no morals.
DeleteSame in Lancashire as well
DeleteAnd all supposedly in their own time.
ReplyDeletebefore and after core hours apparently..see people trotting off to interview rooms at 4pm on the dot...seems they 'make up' the lost hours....not sure when .
DeleteCant keep up with their own work but have TIME to do reports for money. Pull the other one.
ReplyDelete