I'd like to remind readers and contributors to this blog that, although there may well be justifiable anger and frustration with the Napo 'top table' and their unwillingness or inability to acknowledge there are serious problems, people should think carefully before pressing the 'publish' button. I'd appreciate it if we stick to a forensic examination of exactly what has gone on, and is still going on, in the admittedly vain hope things might improve.
I am not at all surprised by this email sent today, which amply demonstrates how easy it is to turn attention towards ill-advised comments on this blog and hence away from the key underlying issues of systemic dysfunctionality within the union:-
Whilst it is fully accepted that social media can offer an additional platform for Napo members to exchange views and offer ideas about the direction and governance of their union, the Napo Officers Group, who formally act as the employers of Napo staff on behalf of the National Executive Committee (NEC), are seriously concerned about the increasingly personal and abusive comments in relation to Napo staff which have appeared on social media. These have been brought to our attention by a number of concerned members and representatives of the Trade Union for Napo’s employees.
In our view, such forms of communication are not only totally unacceptable but are directly contrary to one of Napo's stated aims and values, of treating people with mutual respect and dignity. We wish to make it clear to all members that Napo staff are hardworking and committed individuals who should not be subjected to anonymous abuse and derogatory comments. If members have concerns or particular issues about Napo as an organisation or any individuals employed by it, there are clear and democratic channels for raising these, and we ask that they should be properly utilised in a transparent and attributable manner.
Yours in solidarity,
The Napo Officers Group
4th September 2015
This is a fair observation by the Napo Officers. It's not what you say, it's how you say it and so I agree with the main point of the Note. I would add that in addition to personal abuse of Napo staff, there have been unpleasant comments from posters being abusive to other posters. As regards the secondary point of raising issues through Napo's own channels, Napo itself raises issues through social media. As for anonymity, in today's workplace that's known as self-preservation. Just as governments can be pressured to rethink their policies and activities when issues of concern are raised through petitions, Napo can respond to issues, if it wishes, through channels other than those it controls. On the day that vice-chairs are elected on a turnout of 13.1%, Napo should seek engagement with member's issues wherever they are raised.
ReplyDelete"On the day that vice-chairs are elected on a turnout of 13.1%, Napo should seek engagement with member's issues wherever they are raised."
ReplyDeleteIndeed.
Wrong NAPO have had plenty of opportunity to respond to issues raised in a form of engagement with views on this blog. There Zero view or interest in the NAPO forum. Yet bizarrely there are many informed NAPO member views here. It is because there is a less restrictive mood here for people to say what they feel than be exposed or censored off the NAPO site. Anonymity is a protection we all need in NPS these days. If you want to engage members issues NAPO there are hundreds of napo questions poised on this site start anywhere acknowledge the blog and start posting some answers.
DeleteClear and democratic? transparent and attributable? If this was the case why does no one seem to be using them? Whatever they are!
ReplyDeleteBear in mind some of the abusive anti napo comments may be from sodexo bods up to mischief.
ReplyDeleteNah, I reckon they're from current and ex NAPO members like me who just think they are not up to the job. I disagree with the personal abuse but agree entirely that the officers and officials have been ineffective.
DeleteI don't condone abuse of any sort including the abuse of power. Whilst the officers are asking for self reflection and order and quite rightly so it is also the time for officers to consider the abuse of power by the hand of NAPO officials and officers. In case anyone is not certain about what I refer to it would be the inappropriate misuse of power to suspend NEC reps, misuse of power to exclude individuals and suppress views and opinions for democratic debate, not forgetting collusion to increase the level of power to minimise and deny facts. Abuse comes in many forms.
ReplyDeleteWell said the action to suspend NEC reps was an amazingly poor judgement. That pair went on to their own miseries by their own hands. One applied for an ACO role . No way whilst in mid TR battle . The membership would have taken action but that oppression is ever present from top table. The way they manage is not maintaining order it is something else. The other had massive failings that fortunately she had resigned. None the less the action to rid NAPO of these problems is always too slow and the complicit nature of the general secretary was a factor. That soon turned into fact after bullying Joanna and the ex Chair. No matter how poor he was there issues should have been dealt with through the employers sub committee. It is too late to cry wolf NAPO you have made the bed. Closing off the NEC reps from a shared e mail group to ensure they cannot have a collective memory of events and to make damn sure they could not circulate debate issues to ensure the Top table were accountable and to gather support for direction is what is centrally responsible for the mess you are have made. Mr Lawrence allowed it and it was called a data protection matter. Nonsense it is plain censorship. Come on napo carry on attacking the wage payers of your salaries. Telling us we are apathetic when its gone wrong. You have reduced this union to anything but member . You !
DeleteHang on let me get this right. The NAPO Officers Group are “concerned about the increasingly personal and abusive comments” on social media. Wow, are these people for real. Here we are in the midst of a massive attack on probation. People have been shitted on, treated like dirt, abandoned on the scrap heap and they talk about being concerned about comments on social media.
ReplyDelete“In our view, such forms of communication are not only totally unacceptable but are directly contrary to one of Napo's stated aims and values, of treating people with mutual respect and dignity.” – I wish they could have said the same for the way many members feel who have been treated like crap by it’s union they trusted to uphold the same values rather than selling us out.
My final comment – how dare they lecture me about a democratic channel when they got into Graylings bed by supporting the probation institute. Corruption comes to mind.
Too right I support that . They are scared of being caught out something in this blog has got to close and perhaps some of them should resign fast.
DeleteMy recollection is that support for the Probation Institute derived from an AGM motion.
DeleteYour recollection is nothing but a fabrication of your own imagination. It was never debated or discussed at AGM. The membership was mislead an misguided with false information. In my books that's called corruption and Freud. If it was discussed were is the record of it having been debated. That's right there isn't any record of it.
DeleteOH No ! Comment Police are coming next. There has been some out of order statements. Some have been comedy or closer criticism. However, the job is not all flowers ribbon cutting, kissing and hugging babies. The Napo officials are in a public open role they would all grab a photo shoot when it is a positive chance to show off. The reverse is the questioning when things are disastrously wrong. The double standard is being applied here as they never balked when others named on have been totally slated. I suspect for some they snigger and don't care, yet now its closer to holding them to real account it appears a fearful risk to being found wanting. Take a look at the potential cover up over the issues raised by one of the NEC members.Naming no names but we have published minutes of the Napo chairs not seeing documents not sent them by the official. Something is adrift and an explanation has to sought. This is because there are many views unable to express in what might be an oppressive sounding top table. We had read a well known resigned POs account of aggressive treatment from apologetic GS. It is all poor conduct and something NAPO need to understand in the day of instant communication there can be no hidden agendas.
ReplyDeleteI think they are deflecting from the NEC scandal on the way they fiddle the changes through the Officer group report that takes all of them . If the proposals were rejected then why was it not rescheduled properly and rewritten ? Napo answers are welcomed here to engage members issues .
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget those of us who have agreed to Sodexo decapitation. ..and yes I'm so desperate to not not be in sodexo I am one. Signing to leave you accept not discussing them
ReplyDelete.........Ever
So anonymity is the only way. .Thank you Jim for supporting this. I've not gone of topic as I see sodexo and napo very closely intertwined
As employers NAPO (via the NEC and the officers) have a duty to support their staff just as those of us would expect our employers to support us by responding to abusive clients/customers/colleagues. It is perhaps unfortunate that the outcome oversight of performance through supervision and appraisal is not readily evident. Put bluntly I fear we run the risk as an employing body that we could be facing having to deal with long term sickness absence of key personnel at a time when we can least afford it. More worryingly, whilst to face one Employment Tribunal is unfortunate (?), to face two in the space of as many years would suggest carelessness and given the tone of the criticism of purported manoeuvers on social media. I therefore support the officers position (this time).
ReplyDeleteThe point of asking dean for my emails and 2 letters (subject the National reps panel) was to make the information available to NEC and Members. The question is why was the chair not informed of my request. It seems .........the chair was happy to have this item as an addition to the officers report ......but if you read the draft minutes was not informed of the legitimate questioning letters and email submitted by me. I have shared these with my co rep and chair and happy to share wider. At the risk of being expelled from the NEC ......again.
ReplyDelete