Working Links in the Spotlight 2

Again, many thanks to the colleague for forwarding the following which, although a long read, fills in some gaps as well as amply demonstrating some considerable effort being expended in making sure Working Links don't have an easy ride in the West Country.     

Branch report redundancies update 4

Including not a very Christmas message from Branch Chair & JNCC reps.

Date 22/12/15.
Dear Union members NAPO and Unison,

NPS CRC (the majority of this report is for the CRC)

Here is the situation so far, since reporting to members on the 1/12/15, we have also attached the letter of the 30th of November to Mr Wiseman. Both found their way onto popular blog media sites On Probation and Facebook! We realise that once sent, these reports cross the country and into the public domain as we all look for help and support.

Shortly, we will be looking to gather wider public opinion through direct discussions with newspapers, TV and radio to expose the local cuts that will generate deficiencies in all areas of public protection. It is our intention, with you, to disclose the deepening implications and risk to local communities. Already there are a number of predicted and emerging T.R. related SFOs. This trend is certain to continue, possibly more sharply as the incredible, unfair and appalling proposals from Working Links continue unchecked. Reducing staff will only reduce critical public safety.

Despite the calming language we have been hearing and reading, it is a simple truth that this employer, by way of its intentions to centralise services into hubs, will radically cut appropriate and proper offender management in the DDCCRC area. It will draw funds from our budgets and redirect the cash equivalent in resources to its own Working Links head office in Middlesbrough. Despite the denial of this from Mr. Wiseman, terming this as shared services. You decide.

NAPOs experience of the way Working Links has managed most aspects of engagement in consultation have, in our opinion, been poor. Ignoring many of the flaws in the way we are treated and engaged with, the biggest and clearest failure has to be the submitted HR1 form to the Business Innovation and Skills Department. It is attached to this report for your information. We are interested to hear your views on this incredible document. For the moment we have to look to ourselves locally, and we ask all members to inform Union Reps of any matters that contribute to the growing catalogue of risk escalation and failures of services, arising from the implications of the new working model. We encourage you to decide to what extent you are prepared to act to maintain appropriate resistance to what has effectively become the biggest threat to your employment, Working Links the contract bid holder. If you believe you will survive the current proposed cuts, it is certain a reduction in pay from altered jobs will follow. Having said that, we will be continuing to aggressively challenge the proposals by Working Links and to ensure all the appropriate risk assessments have been conducted and, where we discover any irregularity, these will be challenged.

New job role descriptions and variations to different contracts will certainly follow. It is unlikely Working Links will be looking to pay staff at the current appropriate rates for the job. What remains clear to Napo and for you as members, is that we must withdraw all goodwill immediately. This is not industrial action, but maintaining your working expectations is all you should do. Covering extra duties, additional support tasks and filling in wherever asked should be refused. Managers should also think carefully about what they ask staff to do under the current situation, where there are many gaps requiring staff support these should be fed back up the line and not be redistributed.

We also saw the HR Director from BGSW who attend our JNCC on 16/12/15, and as far as we are aware they do not work for the DDCCRC. We have our own HR official, yet they included an external employee, telling us what is to happen to your jobs!

We learned in discussions with management, despite resistance to the obvious conclusions, they remained committed to Job Evaluation as the outcome of wage rates in the future. Also they would obviously engage consultations to vary roles that survive. This was not discussed in much greater detail at this stage.

We have also had sight of supporting evidence of this position from Wales Cymru copied to us on 15/12/15. We sense the management are trying to play down the implications of the changes. Further confusions reign in the release of information. Denice James JNCC Napo rep, exposed and challenged the content of documents not actually reflecting what was exchanged in the DDCCRC meeting. What is more obvious and likely, is a sense of one set of minutes fits all JNCCs across the three CRC’s and that is where we think the confusions arise. We have asked for separate and timely minutes to all meetings now and prior to any further meetings planned.

Existing Administrative FTE

	Permanent	Fixed-term	TOTAL
Wales	79.5	3.4	82.9
DDC	38.5	8.2	46.7
BGSW	74	5.6	79.6
TOTAL	192	17.2

Proposed Administrative FT

	Wales	BGSW	DDC
Hub Admin	66.7	40.5	24.8
Local Admin	7.4	4.5	2.8
TOTAL	74.1	45	27.6

Difference FTE

	Reduction
Wales	8.8
BGSW	34.6
DDC	19.1
TOTAL	62.5

On the 16th of December we asked for the local breakdown of the regional full time equivalents to be dismissed and how these translated into the DDC area. There was some reluctance to answer, despite the fact it must have been known, we have since discovered that the above figures had already been released.

These wider regional collective figures were released on 15/12/15 by Mr Hindson in the combined CRCs meeting. The headline cuts are described as worst case scenario affecting the regional staff complement, keeping in mind cuts may not be equitably distributed as can be seen by the BGSW proposal for 34+.

Management want to reduce the current staff compliment of 1288 FTE, down to 704 FTE staff. This means a staggering 584 staff are to lose their jobs across the three CRC’s. You can see these cuts are disproportionate to each CRC. Please note the current position is to seek all voluntary applicants for redundancy but given the figures Napo and the management are clear, compulsory cuts are almost certain if they really want to achieve this staff reduction agenda. The reduction figures for administrative roles were NOT mentioned in the DDC JNCC on the 16th December, although we will be making the point that losing these valued staff with their experience will make it incredibly difficult to get their work covered. Even if that work is abandoned, the implications for changes to other staff roles should be obvious.

Napo’s letter to Mr Wiseman.

Regarding Napo’s branch letter to Mr Wiseman dated the 30th November ‘15. There was a small acknowledgement in an e -mail from Mr Wiseman having made the just ‘noted’ comment. However, we have pushed on with the serious issues and we have been promised answers to our questions from the lawyers. Who’s lawyers, CRC or Working Links? We wait to see. Napo would prefer to see these legal costs diverted into savings for jobs along with the £15.00 per person Christmas contribution that is continuing, rather awkwardly, to be available for substantive staff only. It is another morale sapping gross error of judgement by the Working Links senior management. We have made this point to them, our comments also being dismissed as ‘noted’. When our NAPO branch receives the promised written response we will publish and report on it.

What we are wanting before any further cuts are offered is the impact and equality assessments with the Health and Safety assurances. Assessments and risk analysis that should have been completed ahead of the proposals, having been developed this far. How genuine these reports will be is something that will face particular scrutiny. It was announced at the regional meeting on the 15th December that the CRCs for Working Links is linked with the company known as Innovation Wessex. This group will be undertaking all the checks and recording of the need to deliver assessments. Mr Hindson, Working Links director and a director on the DDCRC made it clear that independent reports will be impartial. Napo made the point that Innovation Wessex are commissioned by Working Links and DDCCRC and is paid by them. This group are in the main seconded or early voluntary redundant DDCRC staff, yet some of them have a new post with salary having just exited DDCCRC? Returning staff perhaps, could have been seconded to save money where their skills are required. Similar financial comfort for our members is not something we could hope for. There are further questions yet to be directed about the Innovation Wessex arrangements and what they cost? Possibly this structure could be axed instead of our jobs, making savings for all frontline staff! The input of Innovation Wessex does not stop there, we asked Management who would be conducting the impact assessments for the safety of the changes to probation services they were to make? They offered Innovation Wessex as the organisation that would certify and report the assessments, claiming their independence and objectivity. Management could not deny, however, on whose budget this group is being financed. Independent, really? You decide!

In researching previous practices of the Working Links group we found this interesting article

Investigation of South Wales contract, February 2007. Failings in relation to the control of this contract led to the DWP requesting that WL should repay around £45,000. After further examination and challenging these claims, and reconciling the amounts overpaid, ultimately some £32,000 was repaid to the DWP; and

Investigation of North Wales contract, August 2007. Malpractices identified in this contract included the inflation of claims and the falsification of records through the block signing of jobseekers’ signatures by some WL staff.

Plaid Cymru MP Hywel Williams MP said: “Any organisation which carries out systemic fraud to profit from exploiting easy targets is wholly unfit to run any legitimate and transparent operation. The coalition needs to review Working Links urgently in light of these allegations.”

A spokeswoman for Working Links said: “We have a zero-tolerance approach to fraud and rigorous processes in place to handle any suspected incidents of fraud or other misconduct. We firmly reject any assertion of widespread fraud within our business.

Yes, well of course they would have to say that. It does feel uncomfortable reading when we now consider what role this company has in deciding our futures.

The regional Napo & Unison Working Links meeting.

This took place on the 15th December and we have referenced it already, this meeting was organised by Mike McClelland, National Napo Official. He managed to ensure Ian Lawrence the General Secretary’s attendance along with wider local NAPO reps from the three CRCs. There have been several sub local DDCRC meetings in between and from these, branch reps have concluded we have all been told different things at different times. Is this deliberate misinformation or are they just constantly confused by not treating the three CRCs separately? NAPO have concerns at the level of growing evidence for this. Helpfully Pen Gwilliam Napo Chair for the Wales CRC has also been recording their situation. Also attached is the Wales branch report for your information. You will read similar concern from our comrades in relation to the “working links way” of consultation, although we do not accept it can be regarded well.

The General Secretary made it clear if the South West NAPO/ Unison members were prepared to take part in industrial disruption, no matter what form this takes, then NAPO central will ensure the full support and protection for our members. Members should understand at this point, taking part in possible action or work to contract processes and strict job description adherence with appropriate workload observations, will deliver all that is required to Management. It will ensure they know clearly that their plans are most certainly unachievable, if the workforce do not support them, action is the only collective way we can ensure they get this message.

The regional meeting heard from Mr Hindson who was in a clear leader role. Mr Wiseman not so full of the usual script mode. That said, he made little contribution apart from supporting the other director.

Mr Hindson went on to make several apologies on the state of the current consultation relations so far. Not appearing to have any regrets it did not go unnoticed that the common link to the failing situation may well be the HR Director who works for BGSW, as both Mr Hinson and Mr Wiseman appear to seek approval from her. We heard the apologies and a commitment to do things better. With this admission now formal we could consider the failing consultation process and wonder are they going to take different advice? Whatever happens, this has all led to a deepening mistrust, as well as examples to evidence that the current talks do not actually constitute reasonable or proper consultation.

In order to protect our members as widely and effectively as possible the current arrangements give rise for the local branch Executive to consider the issues raised and the following passage gives examples of failing consultations and the risks to employers. It is worth reading keeping in mind if we get to a compulsory redundancy situation.

Unfair redundancy while fair and proper consultation is a necessary ingredient of a fair dismissal, whether the consultation is adequate in all the circumstances is a question of fact for the tribunal. However, some guidance as to what constitutes 'fair consultation' was provided in R v British Coal Corporation and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Price and ors 1994 IRLR 72, Div Ct. Lord Justice Glidewell said that fair consultation means consultation when the proposals are still at the formative stage, adequate information, adequate time in which to respond, and conscientious consideration by an authority of the response. Putting it another way, Glidewell LJ stated that consultation 'involves giving the body consulted a fair and proper opportunity to understand fully the matters about which it is being consulted, and to express its views on those subjects, with the consultor thereafter considering those views properly and genuinely'. Although Glidewell LJ's comments were made in the context of the duty to consult collectively under S. 188 TULR(C)A, they have been applied by the EAT in Rowell v Hubbard Group Services Ltd 1995 IRLR 195, EAT, and Pinewood Repro Ltd t/a Countv Print v Page 2011 ICR 508, EAT, and by the Court of Session in King and ors v Eaton Ltd 1996 IRLR 199, Ct Sess (Inner House), all of which are unfair dismissal cases.

In the King case the Court of Session applied Glidewell LJ's definition of 'fair consultation' to the facts of the case before it and overturned a tribunal's finding that there had been proper consultation with the unions. The Court found that, although there had been several meetings with the unions over the redundancies, these had taken place after the employer had formulated its proposals. There Was no indication that the unions had had time to respond to the issues raised or that their views would have been considered. Nor had there been any specific reference at the meetings to the method of selection and this was a further Pointer to the fact that the consultation had been flawed. The Court ruled that the redundancy dismissals were unfair for lack of consultation and because the employer had not shown that its method of selection was fair. The question is always one of what is reasonable in the circumstances.

In a 8.14: small workplace fewer formalities may suffice. In Milne v Distillers Company (Cereals) Ltd EAT 692/87, for example, all but one of the staff were members of the General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trades Union, with whom the employer had agreed the redundancy selection procedure. M challenged his dismissal for redundancy on the ground that, as a member of the Transport and General Workers' Union, his union had not been consulted. The EAT upheld a tribunal's rejection of the claim. Given the small size of the plant, the claimant must have been aware from an early stage of the redundancy situation. He had not asked his union to intervene and, moreover, had been individually consulted about his dismissal.

The situation the NAPO branch reps have faced is very similar to being presented a fait accompli. The argument on consultation will no doubt rumble on.

The single most important thing Mr Hindson revealed when questioned on local policy was to make no less than two acceptances that he would in the DDCCRC honour the agreed contractual rates of the full redundancy scheme which of course is welcome. What this means in reality is, that all staff, however they exit either voluntary or compulsorily, will get the enhanced rates of redundancy payments. He made a commitment to honour all the redundancy policies actually, but in that flash of concessions Mike McClelland pulls in the national agreements and was joined by Ian Lawrence General Secretary, who argued that the position is to harmonise the redundancies in Working Links to the most favourable terms. It was a great moment and something we will watch because since then we start to hear the word affordability slipping back. That means someone is going to lose out and that someone will not be our Union members!

The last two key points in this meeting, for me at least, was the bizarre discussion that attracted some misinformed support for keeping the figures confidential from members prior to Christmas. Of course I would have none of that and said so! Thanks to Ian Lawrence the General Secretary who listened, said little and then tweeted them the following morning.

Helen Coley JNCC Rep reminded the employers of the need to look carefully at the groups of staff they were proposing to cut and the demographic with a majority of women in roles that are irreplaceable. We wait to see that impact equality assessment.

Related matters in short

DDCRC continues ongoing recruitment although on temporary contracts against the threat of cuts, we are still not clear on their position?

Targeting offender model has still not been released although is promised. This should illustrate a jobs and locations list.

Mr Hindson also promised the Working Links full blueprint after Christmas, something that was denied us previously so some movement. This is to form part of the consultation information.

With regards the issue of the consultation period clock. There are rules that govern the dismissals notice periods and as yet we are not clear that the employer has engaged the issues properly. Why we need to be careful is the issue of protective awards, the reason being is because if the employer does not get what it wants via voluntary measures to reduce staffing, it will almost certainly try and quickly thereafter, make compulsory cuts. I suspect they will try and do this with minimum consultation time, claiming the clock is running and we are within the appropriate notified time periods. They would have known this as they had the figures but we only received these figures on the 15th December. Yes, it has been the Unions being kept in the dark .

Early retirement was also called for by NAPO and Unison, still we have had no definitive answer, but instead of compulsory redundancies they will almost certainly have to offer this. While we keep asking and they keep ignoring the point, that it will have to be opened to all grades of staff. You can see why the management would want to deny the option. We will keep it on the front burner for all those members who have reminded us of its importance.

NPS Information The NPS is not alone in their share of bad news. The forthcoming E3 proposals have opened up a whole new debate on who does what and a marked shift to reduce roles and diminish Probation Officers structures. The worst news is around the production of reports. The clear and open attempts to reduce the VLO roles has a national resistance movement building against the general swing to form a more controlled and subdued workforce. What is unhelpful has been the inability of Napo to secure local representation rights, which we should have, but are somehow stuck in the drama of being a split organisation. It is a year on and this is about as bad as we could have imagined, yet we all have some ideas we are not at the end of the road yet. In the NPS we have Jill Narin as the deputy chair and she has continued to work hard for members both at the consultative committee meetings and taking on the care for representing members. Well done and thanks to her for that. In relation to all general matters, we will continue to be here and remind all NAPO NPS members to get your electronic direct debit mandates sorted out for continuing in NAPO. The check off ends this month for NPS and it is important, especially with the onslaught of E3, that we are in place to help support and protect you from the excess desires of London control to take what is left from you disguised, in efficiency language. Keep in touch through Jill and write to us at anytime.

Chair’s Message.

It is a sad time for our members and I am sorry, we as a Union, remain split from the NPS. We are bigger in region by number and despite this we are just not able to diminish the threats to your role and jobs easily or quickly. You all know the political climate we are in. That said, we will do all we can to mitigate job losses to a minimum, or preferably with your help, none on compulsory terms. Still not my preferred position, as I would like to ensure a model that works and ensures your future, retaining all our key skills. The obvious thing is, the employers do not want to keep any non qualified skills as they clearly are able to change the culture by removing the people and changing the jobs. It is only PO grade that NAPO have been informed will not be cut under any circumstances. Ok, great news for some and yet this in itself is a message from management of more division towards its staff. This is not the place to argue the merits of role boundary but lets not ignore some of it, either.

The key skills of PSOs are from highly developed and costly training. This places many able to do multiples of roles within the CRC with some additional and appropriate training required around risk and its management and containment. I say this because we do not produce court reports anymore and under redundancies these issues will be tested no doubt. I thank all our branch members and especially branch activists who are holding things together. They know who they are. A special goodbye from the branch to a man who has done so much work and agitating behind the scenes and leaves us now but wants no fuss! To the JNCC Reps Helen Coley and Denice James who continue to work hard for you with Glo Curtis of Unison.

The national team in the form of Mike McClelland who I irritate regularly but respect him for he has many a class moment in this battle we are in and the General Secretary who will be committing further time to the region when he starts his busy every branch tour. We’ll keep you posted.

Finally

Into the New Year and through the break, I hope you find some time to forget the work issues and truly have a relaxing time. Whatever your plans we hope for your continued support so that next year we can restart the combat with more energy and effectively tackle the threat they pose to all staff communities and the wider public given the choices they have appeared to make.

Dino Peros - NAPO Branch Chair.

Helen Coley & Denice James - JNCC Rep