Sodexo Joins Wimpy

We knew they were coming, well here's the first glimpse of what Sodexo's new 'Wimpy bar' style interview booths look like, but according to facebook and a lot of hard work by Andrew S. Hatton, the reaction has not been favourable:-  

OMG - we are going to talk about child protection issues in here, with a predator next door, or someone who would decide to do some vigilante action? Even just checking someones address? I would be embarrassed to talk, never mind a client. Confidentiality?

Sodexo have no interest in health and safety, confidentiality, or public protection. All that nonsense is far too expensive and would make a huge dent in their profit.

I really don't think these companies that have taken us over understand the type of people we deal with. This situation needs to be relooked at.

Or maybe Sodexo (and the government) don't believe they have the right to be treated with respect, and, therefore, don't actually care.

What immediately comes to mind is health and safety. As we know we deal with unpredictable behaviour from some of offenders we work with. How on earth could this be managed in this setting? The impact that could then have on others being interviewed in such close proximity doesn't bear thinking about. Unacceptable and intolerable.

I would love to see the research feeding into the engagement and health and safety policies for this 'American Diner' focus! Smacks of enabling concerned and informed Offender Managers to ask closed questions only, to ensure you spend as little a time as possible with Service Users!

Apparently Sodexo are solving the issue of conversations being overheard by applying for a music licence to drown out the chat from the booths.... 'Course thats going to work....NOT!

What about issues with gangs? All open and can be seen! Concerns about disclosure - imagine telling someone you are recalling or breaching them and their friends or family are sat in the next booth and over hear this.

I'm still in shock, no trust can be built up, that moment when you finally gain trust and get somewhere with them will be completely taken away. It will be nothing more than going through the motions with them. Everything probation stood for is being thrown away.

What about the male offenders who play up to the crowd and love an audience?! Taking them into a private room used to allow you to unpick that veneer.... Now they're gonna just play up to the audience in the waiting room! How do you calm them down with an audience?! This is dangerous.

How on earth can you have a private conversation about intimate and personal aspects of people's lives? Everything will be so superficial. Perhaps that's what they want? If you don't know about risk you can't be held responsible for risk?!

Welcome to Tory ideology. This is not about public protection, rehabilitation or staff welfare, it's about maximising profit for share holders at any cost. I wonder how many MP's or their friends and family are involved in these companies and waiting to reap the financial benefit? After 20 years involved in criminal justice I did not think things could get much worse, wrong.

--oo00oo--

Now, somewhat interestingly, the Probation Institute seems to be discovering its bark and it just so happens has very recently published the first of a series of position papers entitled 'Principles for office arrangements' and I quote (my highlighting):-

Principle No. 3:
In any office environment there must be private space for confidential and difficult conversations.

At the heart of engagement between probation and service users is the gaining of mutual respect to encourage the rehabilitative endeavour. This is not possible where arrangements are inadequate to deliver a secure and private space for such conversations. A current trend towards the use of pods with half height screens between them is inappropriate and cannot be condoned. Whilst the worker needs arrangements where they can be safe this has always been possible in conventional interview rooms and this should be the norm. Sufficient space must be available so that all such interviews can be conducted in the right therapeutic and safe environment. Workers are asking service users to be open and honest in their interactions this is simply not possible if their conversations can be overheard.

Principle No: 4:
Open plan arrangements must facilitate workers to develop good working practices with service users

Evidence suggests that open plan can cause stress and lower productivity, particularly for work that requires contemplation and thought. Noise, such as phones ringing or colleagues chatting, is a problem for concentration and distracts workers from tasks requiring concentration, complex processing and creative thinking. Few can work without interruption and many staff find it a major source of stress which is exacerbated when workload demands are high. Blueprints for change which may look convincing on paper are not worth the anticipated savings if not conducted with worker satisfaction in mind. Workers and service users should be consulted and their views taken on board when open plan arrangements are being introduced.

Principle No 5:
Open plan arrangements must ensure that there are no costs to the physical well being of their staff

Although introducing open-plan offices may appear cheaper in the short-term, providers must acknowledge the indirect costs to the wellbeing, performance and retention of staff. One piece of research reported that ‘people who work in open-plan offices are less healthy. They typically experience more headaches, fatigue and stress-related illness, and are at increased risk of infectious diseases’ (Kinman and Garfield, 2015) Probation’s productivity comes from its staff and such a finding should give rise for concern about introducing practices which would increase stress and dissatisfaction already experienced by the dislocation caused by the new spilt arrangements.

Conclusion

The PI is in favour of making the most of more modern arrangements for office accommodation but urges serious attention to the evidence base which challenges the conventional wisdom that open plan is the best and only solution. Staff understand the arrangements which enable them to work effectively and their views are crucial to the construction of workable arrangements. Service users can be unpredictable and care must be exercised to introduce arrangements which protect the security and well-being of staff, accessibility and inclusivity, adaptability, openness and interaction across workspaces as well as ecological sustainability.