Friday, 11 March 2016

Latest From Napo 100

The latest blog by Napo General Secretary:-

NNC agrees to some breathing space on E3 Job Evaluation outcomes

Yesterday’s meeting of the National Negotiating Council saw a full and frank but highly productive discussion between the employers and ourselves over the job evaluation (JE) results that were published last week.

In advance of this I had sent the attached correspondence to Colin Allars (LINK) where I made Napo's position clear that the results of the JE for AP Managers and Area Managers, AP Residential Workers and Victim Liaison Officers were unacceptable.

That much has also been made very clear by our members across all of the grades concerned, with VLO's top of the league in that respect; and this week we have been working very hard to analyse the helpful feedback from our members (and a number of non-members who will benefit from our representations) to try and explain the context of the JE programme as part of the wider E3 operational strategy: see the Briefing that we issued on this Link to the circular that Katie and I did.

But what yesterday's meeting also revealed is that NOMS themselves have serious issues over the outturn of the AP Area Manager and AP Manager roles and intend to appeal this.

Given the furore over the conflicting advice that was being given by NOMS earlier in the week (albeit in good faith) which was nevertheless contrary to our understanding of the existing mechanisms, we asked that some breathing space be agreed between the parties to the National Job Evaluation Agreement to avoid hundreds of individual appeals from already hard pressed and seriously unsettled staff.

I am pleased to say that the NNC Joint Secretaries have just signed off the following statement which the unions agreed this morning which demonstrates that while we and NOMS still have fundamental differences over the JE outcomes and the reasons for them, we have at least been able to do the right thing by agreeing to a sensible period of reflection where we hope that we can reach an accommodation on a moderation process.

NNC JS Circular No2

Pay latest

This week we issued as comprehensive a briefing on pay as we are able to at the moment (LINK). It mentions the expected payment of the outstanding entitlement to contractual progression and I can confirm that this will be appearing in March salaries.

Since then we have received early feedback from members (generally those at their pay maximum) pointing out the harsh fact that the absence so far of any negotiations presents them with the possibility of a further pay cut.

Be assured that Napo is cognisant of this disgraceful situation, Government policy of course, and that's why we again made strong representations at the NNC to the effect that we have now seen the results of the Prison Service Pay Review Body which recommends a non-consolidated pay increase for staff in the same situation in the HMP Estate and that well, we want the same please, along with anything else that might be available.

We have asked for urgent talks to try and resolve the outstanding claim for 2015-16 but also a programme for longer term reform of the shambolic pay system and you can see our initial thoughts about this in the above briefing. More to follow as soon as possible.

Some clarity around trainee placements

Following a number of enquiries from concerned members who have just qualified, about their expressions of interest for local vacancies having been inexplicably turned down, I raised the issue directly with Colin Allars.

Here is his reply.

This provides helpful clarification and I am grateful to Colin for his swift response but it may not cover every individual situation, so if you are a new qualifier and are running into difficulties about your posting please contact your Napo rep straight away.

Lots more to follow next week but all of the above again shows the value of belonging to Napo in these difficult times.

44 comments:

  1. "the present PQF staff have PSO contracts and if not placed as a PO, they will have the option of employment at PSO level."

    Why have they been taking on so many trainees?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "They should not though bank on a particular post becoming available as normal staff deployment arrangements may result in these being filled in other ways or because of other changes such as E3"

      Bummer!

      Delete
  2. They have been taking on these trainees as they are the future of E3 in terms of having fully qualified POs but on a PSO salary.......simples yet wholly unethical but the again what do we expect?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unethical is a significant understatement! The word that comes to my mind at the moment is obscene. I want to weep with rage for colleagues that signed up for TPO training thinking that they were entering something worthwhile. As for the treatment of VLOs! A total failure to recognise the psychological and tremendous emotional strength that is needed to carry out the role properly. I know I couldn't do it, coping with all the pain, distress, anger, trauma and grief that is experienced by victims takes special skills and people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. However this govt is stuffed with people who lack empathy and therefore will not understand this.

      Delete
  4. TPO recruits would have been aware at point of application about the PQF's condition regarding being employed as a PSO until PO posts available.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If employed as a PSO it will be important not to take on PO work. Boundaries need to be very clear.

      Delete
    2. E3 is putting an end to role boundaries.

      Delete
  5. 'we are seeking to manage what is a complex scenario fairly and openly' well Colin it might be a good idea to try harder. After 2 years of uncertainty staff still don't feel confident that they have a future.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Amazing Ian Lawrence has the neck. He clearly has no idea of the complexity of the role of VLO and as pointed out above. Yet why do we feels so royally shafted. Is it because the panel on the JE should not have been there in NAPO guise because they give credence to a process that now will not be reversed.
    Is it the duff explnations the Vice chair is offering on the basis of NAPO involvement and appear more incredible as the explanations shift. Is it that the General Secretary is wading into to ensure a no blame game when actually all thst does is highlight the issues of the closeness of the relationships. I hear the Panel member is on the NNC and is the right hand man to Ian Lawrence. Now instead of lodging a formal dispute with the employers for the situation we end up with some more of the GS in a new side show. He will bargain away the whole issue again as he did before while waiting for his term to end and a pay off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's nothing to do with complexity. The Victim Liaison Officer is a band 3 role. In terms of role and responsibility they don't do nearly as much as probation officer roles in offender management and elsewhere. The issue is that band 4 probation officers are based in VLO roles and shouldn't be forced to take a pay cut to band 3. At best the existing probation officers working as VLO's should retain band 4 and band 3 for all new starters. The problem will be that the VLO role will suffer when it becomes only staffed by band 3 probation service officers who are generally not as good. If this re-banding isn't properly challenged then we'll begin to see many other roles suddenly re-banded in a similar way, and without the usual protections one would expect. I think probation officers in approved premises, programmes, and courts for starters.

      Delete
    2. Are you a complete fool in your spare time too? Your commentary not only outrageous but you must realise what you are saying. The reality is that many PSO staff are properly evaluated at pay level 4 and it is not a job that requires any contribution from being PO qualified. It was never a PO job that is to say POs have found their job satisfaction as a VLO but they are not probation officers in the role. You need to understand that the Job evaluation process evaluates the job and the responsibility not the value of a Probation officer. It is not all about POs its about workers. Sadly I work in a office where VLO PSO does the same job as a PO and gets paid 10k less. Equal work equal pay not in this organisation and not a value Napo understand either.

      Delete
    3. Unless there is a change to the initial E3 blueprint, there is no role for Probation Officers within Approved Premises.

      Delete
    4. Keep your hair on. When I last looked when we were trust the VLO roles was band 3 but if probation officer did it then they retained band 4 as if it was a secondment. For the record, I know what the role is and it's a band 3 role and I've always found VLO PO's to be better overall than PSOs. This is what comes with training, qualification and experience.

      Delete
    5. Some of your PO colleagues can hardly read or write properly. Sad as that it the services and trusts found jobs for them having other skills. Your commentary is good fun as it will generate a debate but you know as we all do being a PO qualified in not much really that makes a difference the Jig is up run before E3 wipes out the differential.

      Delete
    6. I've never met a PO that could "hardly read or write properly". Also the PO role does differ and training/qualifying does set people apart. If E3 wants to foolishly wipe this out this is not my problem or concern. CRC's have already started this trend.

      Delete
  7. "It mentions the expected payment of the outstanding entitlement to contractual progression and I can confirm that this will be appearing in March salaries."

    I trust that anyone who left post-March 2015 under whatever arrangement will be contacted & paid their "outstanding entitlement to contractual progression", including any and all adjustments to final severance, EVR, VR figures. This was never a negotiated or contested pay settlement, simply a contractual entitlement per NNC regulations withheld by MoJ.

    Otherwise it must surely be theft, i.e. intentionally depriving someone of what is theirs by contractual entitlement.

    Has anyone raised this issue anywhere?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Outstanding pay is usually paid to ex-staff members. I'm not sure about recalculating redundancy payments.

      Delete
  8. This is a very interesting development. In 2012 the Forensic Science service was sold off and fragmented amongst private providers. It has not worked. In effect it is going to be 'renationalised'.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35793073

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So from a national service to a fragmented service, all ran with differing standards and which ultimately did not work, and back to a national service.

      Those who do not learn from history.......

      I have a feeling that once the FFS drops off and PbR makes up the majority of 'income' for CRC's, then there are going to be a lot of unhappy faces in boardrooms across the country. Does anyone wish to run a book on which company will be the first to hand back it's contract(s).

      Delete
    2. A new forensic and biometrics service is planned by the Home Office, four years after it controversially abolished its predecessor. Ministers say there will be a "national approach" to forensic science in criminal cases in England and Wales.

      The Forensic Science Service, a government-owned company, was shut down in 2012, after the government said it lost £2m each month. But in 2015, the National Audit Office warned standards were slipping. It said forensic science provision was under threat because police were increasingly relying on unregulated experts to examine samples from suspects and crime scenes. The spending watchdog's report came after work was transferred to in-house police labs and private firms.

      Senior politicians, scientists and lawyers had warned in 2012 that closing the forensic science archive would cause miscarriages of justice and stop police solving crimes, as police forces had to create individual storage systems.

      Smart phone analysis
      In its plan, the Home Office acknowledged forensic science provision had become fragmented. Digital analysis of computers and smart-phones was being conducted in an "ad hoc manner" which did not provide value for money, it said. Ministers said they were supporting a police review of whether there should be a "joint Forensic and Biometric Service" to achieve economies of scale, increased capability and resilience.

      Delete
  9. Does the MOJ Voluntary Early Departure scheme announced this week of one months salary for every year worked up to a maximum of 21 months mean that this is the benchmark for POs in the NPS?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope so. I'd happily walk away with that offer!

      Delete
    2. Probation Officer12 March 2016 at 14:27

      I'd take that offer too. Not bad in fact.

      Delete
    3. Is it still the case the first £30k is tax free?

      Delete
  10. Announced in what publication?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its also on the MoJ webpage when you log into ie or Firefox at work.

      Delete
  11. The General Secretary says in his blog that they will be demanding a non consolidated payment for members at the top of their scales. These are likely to be long serving and therefore nearer to retirement. Non consolidated payments do nothing for pensions.
    In the bulletin issued in March 16 there is an outline of what future pay negotiations might look like and includes these two points
    1 a possible buy out of the right to progress to existing pay band maxima.
    A what if any are the benefits of this. My first impression is that it is detrimental but I hope I have missed something.
    2 extended pay protection in the event of re-grading.
    What exactly is being considered? Civil servants pay band 3 and 4 is well below probation rates and if we are to be incorporated into their pay scales I would expect to be at an equivalent grade to match current salary.

    It seems odd to me to be raising these questions as I have always previously assumed that union negotiators would safeguard my terms ,conditions and interests but of late, I am much less sure.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is a total fallacy to state that those at the top of their scale are likely to be near to retirement. I've been in for thirty three and a half years, am at the top of the scale and I have another eleven years before I reach retirement age.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I'm at the top of the PO scale and have 20 yrs to go!

      Delete
  13. The exact quote is 'nearer' to retirement age and you achieve that every day! You have nothing to gain in the long term from a non consolidated pay rise, and with 11 years to go, this is precisely the time to start giving great attention to pensions.
    There is nothing fallacious in the earlier comment

    ReplyDelete
  14. Job opportunity for those social work trainned: https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/6273437/safeguarding-officers/?CMP=dis_1215

    ReplyDelete
  15. It would be interesting to know the gender of those at the top of band 4. I suspect they will be, in the main, male. The recruitment trend over the past 12 years appears be predominantly female. Probably due to the reducing salary.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The JE was necessary alongside TR

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm female, top of the PO scale, 30+ years. Although not very scientific, I'd say, based on the county in which I've worked for years,that the top of the scale is still very much female dominated; male colleagues having transferred to management jobs in areas such as YOS etc.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bunch of money grabbers in here. It's never been about the money for me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh dear. It has for me. Awarded deferrd EVR on sc.6, worked on sc.6 until the deadline, started related agency work as a consiltant the following week on £40+\hour plus tavel and subsistence around the cntry. Paid off my mortgage (peanuts by today's prices, and its been 0.25% interest for years anyway. Sold my house for a kings ransom and I now have just short of £800k invested for when I'm ready to retire aged 45 (quite soon).

      I love probation. The best bit? I work in IT, so TR has been a success, certainly better than buying lottery tickets.

      Delete
    2. A vulgar braggard, maybe a glass too many tonight? Perhaps they will have some sense of shame in the light of morning? It nevertheless illustrates pefectly the raft of beneficiaries from this ridiculous farce which, as with the NHS, throws unbelievable sums of good money after bad at fairystory solutions whilst forgetting there are end users losing out.

      Delete
  19. One still has to eat, pay bills and pay either rent or a mortgage.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It would be interesting to know the gender of those at the top of band 4. I suspect they will be, in the main, male. The recruitment trend over the past 12 years appears be predominantly female. Probably due to the reducing salary.

    ReplyDelete
  21. E3 = Enabling the Employer to Eradicate us

    ReplyDelete
  22. It was in 1992 when there was a gender balance. In the NPS it's now about 75% female and 25% of staff are part-time. See Noms Workforce Statistics

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-offender-management-service-workforce-statistics-june-2015

    ReplyDelete
  23. 07.45 Definitely. Just listening to the Boy George being talked about on the radio with regards to the forthcoming budget. Cuts, cuts, cuts. The Devil will be in the detail.

    ReplyDelete
  24. On the Job Evaluation topic Napo seems to have forgotten the PDA'S many of whom were band 5 now downgraded to band 4 PTA'S because of the corrupt process.
    These are PO's with years of experience
    Plus other qualifications necessary for
    The role.Now that cannot be right if VLO'S come out at the same banding although actually I think the VLOs they have a good case.Looks like PTAs should appeal also.
    Anon

    ReplyDelete