Pick of the Week 4

Feeding this monster I've created can be difficult at times and you're never quite sure when or how things are going to 'kick off'. Saturday and Sunday's heated debate as a result of Guest Blog 52 popping up is a classic but very welcome example and I like the blog to be as relevant and responsive as possible. One result has been the postponing of a couple of 'roundup' posts. 

As I've said before, the blog can move at an alarming pace sometimes and I'm loathe to miss some important contributions along the way, so here is what had been scheduled for last Sunday. (By the way, I rather like the banner I nicked from Facebook and hope the clever creater doesn't mind me using it now and then - thanks).     



It is an appalling abuse of power to sell public services off to companies that are not competent to run them. It's THE scandal of this and the previous Tory Government. Taking generally effective public services and replacing them with incompetence and amateurism. It is everywhere. I am an ex-PO who is not working in another field. All the clients I work with are being processed by private companies who have replaced public providers and all of them are basically waiting and waiting and waiting for services that are woefully inadequate and who are proving incapable and insensitive to the needs of their service users. The truth is, we all expected this. We all saw it coming. We all SCREAMED that this was going to happen - it is a matter of record. Despite this, the civil servants, ministers and commissioners all put their own career aspirations before common sense and the public interest.

I heard yesterday that POs in Suffolk (NPS) were being asked to provide reception cover for the office because there were no support staff available to cover it. We all saw it coming. We all said it would happen. Most of these critics have already left and the rest are leaving almost daily because it is a farce that few are willing to continue perpetuating. Agency PO this week (working with the NPS) explained that s/he left the local CRC because s/he was not willing to continue interviewing offenders in these open plan 'booths' that have been installed. It's a professional disgrace and those who facilitated it should hang their heads in shame. As an ex-SPO, I am increasingly embarrassed by the disclosures of those who remain involved.

*******
I left Probation some years ago. Now working for a Social Services department. You can see privatisation slowly creeping in but Social Workers appear to believe it will never happen to them (like many of us before them). At the risk of sounding like a bitter cynic, I see no point in further professional development at the present time as the goalposts are constantly being moved. What is the point in spending 20k plus developing ones practice and studying new qualifications when there is a very real risk of the requirements of having to have any qualification being removed. It's soul destroying. It's the government saying "anyone can do your job".

Whilst I admire talk of standing up to the bullying; it is a lost cause. 'They' have all the power. Just look at the junior doctors. They had public sympathy, a well organised fight with a strong Union and are a profession that has a degree of respect from ministers. They fought the good fight and lost. What hope is there for the rest of us who are even more susceptible to the effective divide and rule strategy? Unfortunately the public on the whole aren't interested. It's the mentality of..... 'I don't get that much in the way of job protection.... pension..... salary... whatever.... so why should you?

Going back to the ambulance issue, in London they have never had so many paramedics leaving. They have had to hire private support in the way of Medicare and have had massive recruitment campaigns in Australia and NZ to try and plug the gaps. Yet no-one seems to be examining why so many are leaving in the first place. Instead of spending money to improve working conditions they would rather fill the void by various private companies filling the gaps or recruiting from abroad. It's a massive false economy. It just goes to show there is no duty of care and ideology rules for the foreseeable future.

********
Did anyone see the recent programme about the PIP scandal? An ex mental health worker went undercover to expose the shameful situation when a private company trains and employs staff to do this work with vulnerable patients. He shadowed a man who was apparently 'the best'. It was sickening. This man gloated about earning up to 20k a month by rushing through reports. Was happy to say that in some cases he had written the report before he met the patient. He ridiculed one woman saying he had turned her PIP down because she didn't deserve it being simply 'too fat to wipe her own *rse'. Thankfully he was sacked but how many more like that? It worries me that we could go the same way. We could be corrupted by being offered bonuses or the like for reaching targets. Pushing through shoddy reports. What sort of people would this attract?

*******
I saw the programme. It was disturbing. Assessors, target-led, adopting exploitative methods towards those hoping for holistic assessments. Totally unethical methods. They sacked the arrogant thug who was in fact the hero of the office, the go to man who was a whizz kid at the assessments. But he was only a symptom of the diseased working culture.

*******
I'm a CRC PO and I was in a meeting recently and when I suggested that we recognise that if we are now a private company that was grossly under resourced to deliver what we had delivered as a Trust and that we should ask the MoJ what it is that must be done and what we can stop doing. Their reply was we must appear to do everything including going through the motions of returning people to court even though we know the applications will be rejected. They also said they were aware things were crap but were in no position to say so.

Yesterday I met a trainee on placement and had a long chat. She told me that she had initially been confused about the difference between proper POs in the NPS and those now called POs (but aren't really) in the CRCs. She said she had been put straight by experienced NPS colleagues and the situation explained to her that all the best staff had been hand picked to go to the NPS and that all those in the CRC were basically rejects who were not fit to hold any real responsibility for high risk or report writing or speaking as a professional in court or at oral hearings. She on the other hand as a recent psychology graduate whose only work experience had been a Saturday job in Boots was more qualified. She accepted some people may have slipped through on either side but her experience of unprofessional CRC staff tended to confirm what she was told. She had noticed they tended to dressed more shabbily have lower vocabularies and appeared to be less well educated and basically a lot thicker than her NPS colleagues.

She was warned not to take too much notice of CRC staff who were no longer considered proper probation staff along with other 'partnership odd bods' like housing association staff who would in any case be made redundant soon as they were not fit to do the job and privatisation was the most efficient way to finally get shot of them. She said she had been told it was very hard for an ex CRC person to join the NPS and if they did, their previous CRC experience counted for nothing and they were at a disadvantage as they had already been rejected. She had apparently heard these kinds of things from several sources.

The most worrying thing she said was that those who were physically disabled had been deliberately left in the CRC because she had been told they were a nuisance and the private sector was more efficient at encouraging them to resign. I was also told that financial institutions now give better rates to NPS staff than to CRC so even the banks think CRC are second class. Welcome to the future.

*******
Trouble is, this isn't the future, this is the 'now'. Hey ho, I've quickly scanned the E3 blueprint, and noticed in the section on courts that 'POs will support the PSO's in court' with PSO's doing the lion's share of the work. What a turnaround hey, once upon a time it was PSO's supporting PO's in their role. But what do I know? I'm just a badly dressed, less well educated (2 first degrees anyone?) thick CRC PO.

*******
There is some irony that Amey is also the company that has the NPS cleaning contract as well as being part of MTCnovo in London. The Courts, Police and others have some evidence to think that the CRC is basically a beefed up cleaning company with ideas above its station and beyond its skill set. They haven't even got a proper email address. Some in the NPS have taken a little too eagerly to the notion that they are some kind of elite rather than 3rd class civil servant wannabees and you can spot these by the increase in the number of people now wearing suits to the office. CRC staff on the other hand seem to be reinforcing their identity by dressing down.

*******
You might want to tell that trainee PO the following: I am a PO in CRC. I have two good university degrees. The latter being a post grad degree in social work with CQSW probation option. I'm better qualified than some Chief PO's. Prior to graduating with post grad degree, I worked my arse off working with children an care. My first ever job was working in a bail hostel at 23 years old! I do not come from an advantaged background and went to an awful school. I witnessed DV growing up and also as a young adult. My first partner died of a heroin overdose. I was the victim of two sexual assaults as a child and had anorexia. I have dragged myself up from my arse and am proud of what I have achieved and the effort I put into my job which I remain committed to. 

I worked in the public protection team with offenders such as NPS now have. I have also worked for YOT and Home Office drugs prevention initiative as a senior practitioner. I chose to go to CRC and turned down a job i was offered at NPS as CRC suited me better. More face to face work. She sounds inexperienced and maybe being fed detritus so I won't take this personally. What I would day is NPS role has a shelf life. How long can the average person cope with working with high risk offenders? My experience is maybe 3 years or so and then you become emotionally drained. Burn out or even PTSD are not uncommon. 

I coped until I had kids and then it began to effect me emotionally and I became hyper vigilant and terrified for my own kids. In this job you need alot more than a professional qualification. My training was great and I consider myself very lucky to have had that opportunity, but life experience and working with relevant groups are also vital. It worries me that newly qualified PO's, some with no previous experience, will be in this position. I don't want to be patronising, but has anyone considered how they will cope emotionally long term and where will they go if they need a break from high risk offenders?

*******
I completely agree. In NPS and stressed out my box by the relentlessness of what my clients have done. There is no light relief.

*******
At present we in CRC still have daily contact with NPS. We are in seperate offices but same building. Often discuss the cases I have risk escalated. Are they doing anything different so me? No, we come from similar position so no real difference there. Also frequently converse with NPS court staff when they are dealing with a CRC breach etc. Have never felt looked down on. I'm too much of an old timer for anyone to get away with that. Sadly we will move out to our new offices soon to save some pennies. Our only contact with NPS will be by phone. 

The split just goes on and on. Admin will go to their call centre or whatever and we will be a very small team managing all the DV cases. Any so called low risk will be 'remotely controlled' via a human maybe a robot at the call centre. I must start practicing my new phone voice, maybe a dalek or darth vader would be appropriate! Why even bother having an office..it would be easier to have us working at home making calls all day to people we haven't even met using a checklist devised by..could save even more money if it was all done by phone minus a human or robot..'if you have re-offended please press 1' 'for all other options or to speak to someone with no qualifications or experience on the minimum wage press 4'..otherwise just bog off.

*******
I like this blog because it very often mirrors my experiences of working in the post Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) apocalypse world. There was a time when it was referred to as a TR revolution. We pointed out at the time that the problem with revolutions was that people often got hurt and post revolution euphoria, the reality was not so pleasant, that voids and divisions would emerge and so the evidence is now presented. Our on message management refer to these as 'transitional issues'. Those of us at the sharp end are not so understated in our sentiments regarding these issues, they were and will continue to be predictable consequences of an extremely bad plan. An appeal then, therefore, to our leaders and politicians, put away your fixed and entrenched positions whatever side of the divide you are on and concentrate on what our common goals and needs are to bring about a settlement that works. Too idealistic and unrealistic?

*******
I'm fairly certain that, though a staunch neoliberal who would privatise his own grandmother, Gove genuinely does want out of the CRC contracts as he can see a duff deal and will be aware that Grayling screwed them over too. Gove is perfectly aware that he has no real investment in seeing them succeed at any cost as he can blame Grayling for failure. He can't simply end the contracts because of the poisonous clauses, but he does have the option of turning the screw and systematically starving them of funds to frustrate the contract then renegotiate. 

Private probation service providers have made a total mess of everything and no sane person would have suggested such a barmy system in the first place. An idea apparently being given serious consideration and gaining momentum at the MoJ is that it makes sense for NPS and CRCs to be brought back together in the community under the working title of National Community Rehabilitation Service (a public private sector partnership) with larger package areas roughly coterminous with police areas and courts probation to be absorbed by the courts service and prison probation to be absorbed by the prison service. Interestingly, APs would be part of the new NCRS but will be managed by a private prisons contractor. Apparently this is the preferred option at the moment and it's all being kept under wraps so as not to alarm the CRC owners as their relationship with the MoJ is a little strained. Waiting for costings.

*******
You only have to check your emails from the recruitment agencies to see how desperate both the CRC and NPS are to recruit, here in the South East at least, as they grapple with fire fighting approaches to work demands and how to provide an efficient and effective service whilst valuing their staff because no one from middle managers to directors to CEO's have a proper understanding of what the hell is going on as the private companies take charge. 

It's no surprise good staff are leaving, yet there are huge numbers being forced out without any consideration on how the businesses are going to meet their contractual requirements when skilled, experienced and dedicated staff have walked or been discarded through a redundancy all over the country. I work in the South East for CRC and for the former Trust for over 10 years and the Trust arrangements were always problematic given the restraints on Trusts from the government, despite being told they would have autonomy. Now the CRC's have been created on the premise of more autonomy, only to be at the behest and strangulation of the private companies. Notwithstanding NAPO assisting these pirates in strengthening their hold over the CRC's by attempting to bargain away collective agreements on pay, which will facilitate the race to the bottom on professionalism and skilled labour. 

One day Napo says we want to support the PI and influence decisions to protect the professionalism with a licence to practice and whilst doing so they are meeting with the CRC purchasers round the back of the filing cabinets to sell off the protections we have from the transfer. In the mean time the CRC leaders are unequipped to understand the legal implications and obligations of being a director and CEO of a subsidiary and have handed all the power to the parent company, who also has no idea about how to be a parent company of their subsidiary when they don't 'own' the employees. 

In summary folks there is no one looking after your terms and conditions, not your employer because they are too busy understanding the contract and delivering on their super doopa new delivery models to prevent the pains of a breach, not your union because they are too incompetent to know the difference between the employer and parent company to be able to negotiate with your boss. In the mean time, and I have this on fairly good authority after seeing a friend over the weekend who works for Noms policy department, that they are well aware the CRC's are ticking boxes to be able to report that yes guv course we're doin it right, here's our returns you asked for and it's all goin swimmingly mate. Just anuver 200 staff to get shot of and we should be able to deliver streamline services!!!! 

Local branches haven't the resources to deal with this, there is no strategy to help them from Chivalrous Road only to sell em off. It's a waiting game as far as I can see on the union, the members and the staff but not how long, just when. Ultimately if NAPO stays on this road it will no longer be able to demonstrate it is acting in the interests of its members.

*******
Totally agree that the owners are calling the shots with a big controlling hand thrust firmly up the rear of the puppets that are the CRCs. If you could find one backbone amongst the CRC bosses to resist staff redundancies, then you would be doing well.

*******
The next month is going to see a lot of changes in Purple Futures CRC. All staff are being transferred into 'flex teams' and we have it on good authority that PSO (now known as Case Managers) caseloads will be 65 as opposed to current 95-00. 8 office closures in Gtr Manchester; Merseyside HQ closing in May and moving to an already occupied building by Interserve which is in Liverpool city centre and has good bus/rail links. Admin find out this week where they will be based and what role they will do some expecting to leave probation and work for Interserve but all will be revealed. New case management system is called the Interchange model - seems to heavily focus on referring to partnership agencies and groupwork rather than the traditional 1-1 delivery. So we just need to see what the next month or so brings.

*******
Do you work for the company as this is nonsense. There are always little lying minions of private companies that come here to peddle their wares. The Interserve flex/interchange model is not sound. Use your brain. If 8 offices are closing it means caseloads will increase not decrease. It means admin and others will eventually be jobless and I doubt Interserve will absorb them. Group work over 1:1 work means reduced individual contact with offenders so no need for probation staff. Ker-Ching.

*******
Replace 1:1 work with groupwork and reporting to other providers? What an absolute farce. I am splitting my sides here. You can try and put a positive spin on it but the reality at BGSW CRC is that service users are routinely waiting 6 to 12 months to get on the BBR group. These are DV offenders and most are classed as medium risk of harm. Who ends up working with them, liaising with DV unit/police intel..even contacting partners to check they are ok..oh and social care if you can persuade them to get involved. 

A real practitioner, be they PSO or PO will know the hard reality of being left holding unpredictable and risky cases whilst they try to negotiate a start date for BBR. Even once they are on the group, do you think we have a break and put our feet up? No, of course not because we are still liaising with the agencies mentioned, checking their progress and seeing them to address any other issues that inevitably come up. I really wish that managers, CRC/Noms etc. would actually speak and take note of what practitioners and service users say. Maybe then they would have a service fit for purpose as opposed to the shambolic mess we are in now.

*******
I'm currently holding 60* cases of DV and now sex offenders since the Mappa rules were changed!! I've not got time or motivation to even try as I've got 5 ISP's stacking up with no relief of sending these people to anything remotely meaningful. People have moved to our new central it fits all office and are already pointing out the obvious mistakes for example a fire door propped open for the clients to attend and then to be told "it's a brave new world" No it's bullshit of the highest order!! Where the fuck are the union?

*******
60 plus cases mainly DV and now sex offenders! At BGSW CRC we have also heard rumours that Working Links may want us to take back some sex offenders from NPS. Sex offenders = more cash from Noms. Sex offenders traded for cash in this brave new world of private sector. Do you not have any programmes to send people to? If not, how on earth can you be expected to risk manage so many risky cases? Saying that, there is a huge backlog of service users waiting for programmes in BGSW and we were told recently that we are likely to lose all programmes other than Thinking Skills and BBR. I think we need to think about taking alternative action such as a vote of no confidence, writing to your MP or writing to magistrates (perhaps anonymously) I'm sure the latter would be interested to hear practitioners version of events as opposed to what they are fed by NPS managers at meetings.