Pick of the Week 16

From my (long ago) experience of NEC and long agendas - if a meeting is well and fairly chaired, business can be got through while still allowing time for discussion. Managing time for discussion is key. The reps need to know that concerns are being taken seriously and will be addressed & reported back on or else the discussion can go on and on. Unless procedure's been changed, any one of the elected National Officers can be asked by the Co-Chairs to chair the meeting - how able they are to chair is another matter.

******
NEC has been dysfunctional all of this General Secretary's watch. I have seen it deteriorate all that time and will say again that this union is being led on the decisions made by the General Secretary and his assistant. The collective bargaining challenge at AGM only came about because it was the General Secretary unmandated and in talks with NPS who started out on an agenda to move away from the collective bargaining to individual single units in a reckless and single minded approach. No strategy or evidence was offered to NEC or PNC to be able to debate and agree on how this would impact on members and how the union needs to be structured to manage that process despite this coming to NAPO's attention in December 2015. 

The position of the General Secretary was made clear at this AGM, at NEC and PNC in that he was driving NAPO out of collective bargaining on an agenda unknown to the members he serves. Any CRC who acts on a decision to pull out of collective discussion will be in breach of their contract with CRC employees. The officers and officials were pressurised to agree to bring this debate to AGM when inquorate NEC meetings failed to give the attention this needed. AGM showed the top table they have forgotten who they serve, out of touch with members, their interests and poor skills to organise our union and develop strength where we need it at branch level.

******
I have to say I was relieved and surprisingly uplifted by this AGM. I feel we as a union have lost our way to some extent but feel more positive about our future. NEC has needed reforming as far back as Judy Mcknights tenure. The ability to attend committee meetings is becoming increasingly difficult due to reductions in facility time often leading to reps using leave to attend. We need to encourage members to get active.

******
Out of the 6000 members it's a poor show we can't get enough active members to do our business so we can function with strength and influence. I agree there is a big problem in our local branch that means NAPO HQ need to find ways to enable activists, they need encouragement and support not a message from their leader blaming them for any demise. Coming out to meet the branches to engage positively to work with the problems would be a start. Yes we need to increase membership, but if staff see the local branch struggling and ineffective then what incentive can they see? Its not a club so promoting Parliament Hill membership isn't enough, we are a UNION lets start promoting that and the principles of a union like collectivism, solidarity, equality, the right to work.

******
I am disappointed to say that I found much of the AGM embarrassing and awkward. Looking at the top table, I have little confidence that this will improve. Surely something has gone very wrong if you're sat at the AGM asking yourself whether you feel that your union have your best interests at heart and feeling ashamed to be part of whatever is going on in the room. Alarmingly, one of the best speakers was Jim Barton. Don't panic, I haven't lost control of my senses and was not sucked in by him, but he was more inspiring and believable than some of the top table.

One of the biggest concerns for me was the blaming of members and not just from the top table. The motion regarding quoracy included a lot of talk about members choosing not to attend the AGM. There was a brief nod to reasons, citing childcare but I heard little else to explain this. Unless I missed it, there was no discussion about cost or how more staff could be enabled to attend. Talking to other members I became more concerned about this. One branch funded their members for three nights in a hotel, their train fare and registration fee. Another branch paid for two nights in a hotel, their registration fee and a branch meal. One branch funded one night in a hotel and travel. These are just three examples. Surprisingly, they are not branches that you would expect to pay more or less than others. 

NAPO bang on, rightly and understandably about holding the employer/s to account, demanding equal and fair treatment for members, but are not modelling this in something as fundamental as funding to attend the AGM. I know that there aren't unlimited funds and I don't necessarily blame individual branches for their decisions, but there should be a national policy/process. It is my opinion that the AGM may be better attended and there would have been no need to change the quoracy rules if it was shorter with less "filling" and dead time and more business done. This may also help to fund more members to attend.

The highlight for me was Dai Donovan who, it appeared to me, did far more to inspire the membership to unite than the top table. I do realise the irony in that this section could, arguably, be described as "filler". After the AGM I am left doubting that I'll attend another and questioning whether NAPO is the right union for me.

******
Good point, how are branches managing their funds to support members interests? AGM must be a priority and although it is worrying our quorate is reduced significantly, we have retained the ability to attend as a member rather than by nomination only. We do need to make sure branches are organising effectively to enable members to attend so we don't loose this right, likely to be taken away if we are not active.

******
This from the co chairs statement 2016

'ln 2014 we originally chose to stand as co-chairs because we believed that collectively we bring a wider range of skills, knowledge and both professional and trade union experience. We believe this has worked effectively over the past two years and has fostered good team working within Napo'

"Genuine gasps at learning that our joint Chairs have presided over 8 months of inquorate NEC meetings and astonishingly the motions passed on indicative votes at last years inquorate AGM remain unratified’. Apparently three branches, including Wales, have no members of NEC identified. Why?"

Ironically they must have known of the dire situation, yet made no mention of any strategic thinking or planning on how to put their current failings right. Read their statement, they are not going to do what they promised either as current performance is an indicator of future activity. 

“Chairs need to get a grip on things if the General Secretary can't.”

I don’t think this is wholly fair Jim, as the General Secretary is not, and cannot be, all things to all people. It looks from what we observed in the performance of the co chairs in the speeches, and in general, clearly not capable in this role. That is not to say they are not their day job. The General Secretary is not well supported by the right combination of skilled or able membership led governance. Having seen the top table argue against a charitable grant to the Edridge fund is as far from our values and disconnected from membership one could ever imagine possible in NAPO.

“I think it's worth bearing in mind that all this has (not) been going on behind the scenes during the period when the current joint Chairs were standing for re-election and the membership were blissfully kept in the dark.” 

Is this a hint that they have not been wholly honest in their accounting for their period of leadership? It is a good thing the motion for national collective bargaining was reinforced and incredible that our Co Chairs were for the break-up of the union’s ability to function. On this defeat alone should they not be called to account? This is more than a difference of opinion and can they lead NAPO in light of this? Well done to Chas for his break away from conformity but let’s be honest, the brilliant speeches from the supporters destroyed the pathetic efforts of the co-chair. Did they throw it or are they just not able?

In relation to the one professional issue, should we not remind the Officials that motions are member led and member decided in debate. Role drifting for the press and parliamentary press post might need re assessing in light of the desire to dump our profession in support of a new merged desire that will keep MoJ happy on E3 as our pay become reduced further and being a PO disappears, supported by Union officials. I think they might want to look elsewhere for jobs as they are clearly in the wrong place.

******
I will only admit I voted for Chas in his first term of office but felt let down and disappointed by him, so much so he did not get my vote this time. However, I am the first to say I am so grateful that he has stood up for maintaining our collective bargaining and delighted the membership have supported him. Now all the top table and membership need to fight to maintain this and not allow the NPS or the CRCs to again overturn agreements made to protect staff. Will Unison unite with us on this and fight the employer to protect all staff.

******
The chairs only got in on a marginal difference, led more by apathy. We are stuck with the same old unless the members stand up and be counted, branches get active and hold their leaders to account, you don't need to leave it solely to NEC. Mandate the chairs with action and direction not silence.

******
My experience of the AGM leads me to believe that if the election of National posts had taken place afterwards (and enough members had attended or had feedback) then we'd be looking at a very different top table next year. The only person that I would be happy to see remain was Chas who at least showed some integrity. Interestingly, I didn't vote for him and I don't think he is strong enough for chair but the AGM did leave me feeling more positive about him. I note that Dino did not attend the AGM. I have seen (from this blog) that he did not waste this time and was busy fighting "at the coalface". If Dino had been chair and Chas, vice chair I don't think I'd be questioning my ongoing membership in the way that I am now.

It feels a little like the EU referendum and the propaganda that people believed when voting leave. Subsequent information that has come out, if it were widely know prior to the vote then the result may have been very different.

******
In January 2014 the membership was 8123 - if it's now 5060, that's a drop of 3063 (37%) in two-and-a-half years. Given NEC inquoracy and the inability to service committees, it's a picture of serious decline. The tasks of the union are not being carried out. In view of the leadership's ambition to abandon national collective bargaining, from where would the resources be found to support local bargaining, when existing tasks cannot be fulfilled and a key part of the union's decision-making structure has stopped working? The absence of the NEC removes accountability and oversight of the paid officials which makes a nonsense of Napo being member-led. And as for openness and transparency, when an AGM audience gasps following disclosure of chronic inquoracy, what members there are are being kept in the dark. The clarion call for members to get active has gone unheeded for years. It's more likely that the levels of activism will continue to fall.

******
I have to say it makes my blood boil to hear the excuse that some non attendance at NEC meetings may be due to the lack of facility time. The right to adequate facility time to carry out trade union duties is enshrined in The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Attending NEC will be covered as a duty under Sect 178 (2) of the Act. I can therefore see no grounds for this to be a reason for non attendance (there may be other reasons of course). In my previous role as Branch Chair and JNCC Rep, my current role as a Branch Rep (and now as a newly appointed NEC Rep for SSW Branch) I have (and will be) taking time to attend to NEC and repping business. I have never been given 'adequate' workload backfill, but no matter, that is not my problem. Work left undone is also not my problem. The provision to be facilitated to carry out my duties is enshrined in employment law - end of. I sympathise with the motion brought to AGM by Napo Cymru concerning the difficulties experienced in some areas around facility time but really this motion wouldn't be necessary if all appointed officials just firmly and politely remind their employers of their obligations - and attend to their duties. I accept some Managers don't know much about the law and HR depts can also be woefully inadequate on providing relevant advice. Sometimes therefore, printing off a copy of the ACAS Help and Advice sheet for Employers/Employees Section 1 Time off for Trade Union Duties and shoving in a Managers hand helps!

******
Great conference. We have a rumble of energy and activism. Interestingly this is a Momentum driven rumble. Trouble with that - in general and in the room this last few days, is that the recent election of Mr Corbyn to lead Labour, has promoted a deluded optimism. That optimism springs from rallies, party meetings and SGMs of tiny unions with shrinking members. Small numbers of people in a room agreeing with each other, they (we) need to look out of the window.

******
I don't agree that all the energy on display at Conference was primarily 'Momentum' driven. Of course the confirmation of Jeremy Corbyn as the current leader of the Labour party isn't the panacea for all worldly ills, but his re-election has firmly demonstrated the power of the collective when individuals come together and challenge the naysayers. At a time when trade unions are under so much threat and challenge, this is refreshing and empowering, a reminder of what can be done when people stick together, regardless of political allegiance.

******
Just a few thoughts from the perspective of someone who has been a Branch Chair, NEC rep, TUO Committee Chair and a National Officer. Top table - an impressive performance from Chas who brings a passion (clearly lacking elsewhere amongst the officers) to his interventions. I may be being cynical, but I suspect (and received some confirmation of this at Cardiff) that he was very unhappy at the election process - did he receive (cynical) encouragement to stand by some elements at Chivalry Road to ensure the anti co-chair vote was split?

NEC reform - this body has been dysfunctional for decades. I've been involved in putting together 2 formal reform proposals which went nowhere, because the union at those times preferred to perpetuate a system whereby branches provided (sometimes monumentally ill-prepared and ill-informed) co-reps, who, because they attended alternate meetings, often had no knowledge or grasp of interim discussions and were therefore unable to hold officers and officials to account. Will this attempt at reform produce a more positive result?

Finances - a total nonsense that the direct debit issue took up so much time and effort by the entirety of Chivalry Road staff that they were unable to deal with NEC and Committee issues! What was obvious was that there was a significant drop in income from 2014 to 2015. This was before the direct debit issue really bit and the apparent linked massive drop in membership, so the predictive budget for this year (not alluded to at Cardiff) must show a further/larger income drop. Will Napo be financially viable by the end of this financial year?

There were some passing references to an HQ move and I know that Chivalry Road hasn't been fit for purpose for a long time, but is the move to sell and then rent simply to ensure a sufficient redundancy pot when the seemingly inevitable happens? And in terms of supporting activism, I was offered no financial assistance at all to attend Cardiff.

******
Spot on regarding the move. Estate agents have long been instructed and it is in a prime location. Ian and Dean have been offered their old offices back at PCS for a discount. The problem is that the office staff are a feisty lot and the top table have to navigate a knife edge to deal with them without a fuss and much cost and keep the money for the juicy redundancy packages when things are wrapped up after the next AGM. Their strategy is to leave falling membership to fall to justify shutting shop. We can thwart their plans by increasing membership and making the buggers work harder for their bulging pay packets.

******
Nostalgia was definitely in the air Jim, as a band of brothers and sisters who rallied, striked (is that a verb) lobbied and marched meet up each year for a cwtch. But nostalgia aside, it seems to me there is something happening, not least as inspections and parliamentary committee reports are heaping up the evidence that something has to change. Meanwhile at the Cons conference the Chancellor seems to be back peddling. Time for all of us to write to our MPs as we were encouraged to do during conference.

******
Local TTG services have delivered no positive outcomes for any of my clients but have significantly increased my workload with lots of liaison and reversing their damage. Recent communication from a local TTG provider concerns me that they are making efforts to claim credit for outcomes that have been achieved following release and without their involvement.

******
I usually hate it when people say I told you so but in this case it's appropriate to shout it from the rooftops. The issue now however, is what happens next? Weasel words from the new minister indicate he'll not hesitate to do what's necessary to protect the public. Let's hold him to account then. We want a comprehensive independent judge led inquiry into TR. The terms of reference should be to hold those responsible to account and to recommend changes to enable performance to return to levels achieved under the Trust's. Short sentence provision under ORA must be repealed and replaced by a framework that allows probation professionals to use limited resources to target work with risky people properly. The list of necessary reforms is a mile long. Come on NAPO, UNISON and the PI, it's time to stand up and be seen and heard. The inspectorate are giving you the ammunition. For fucks sake, Get firing.

******
Thank you to the Inspectorate for speaking up. Those of us on the front line, knew all this and experience it every day, but it is helpful to know someone, somewhere is reporting it. Please someone do something about those awful basic OASys screens; it is obvious they are completed without any reference to the people they supposedly reflect, just a useless tick box activity, which seeks to satisfy NOMs. HDC coming up for approval, without any identified address for checking and ROTL being delayed due to lack of staff and the misappropriation of staff time on ticking all those useless boxes.

I urge all colleagues to record delays, poor communication, the absence of information and generally high levels of incompetence in Parom 1's and SDR's. I cannot see anyone taking any notice, unless we get the Judiciary and Parole Board on side.

******
I served 23 years in the Army, joined probation at 42 yrs of age as I felt I could offer something. 13 yrs later with Probation now CRC, I can say that in all my days I have never seen such an unmitigated disaster as TR. It has gone from joke, quickly moving to farce. We are now in the pantomime phase. No matter who you are: WL, Sodexo, Seetec, even good old PF who are flying under the radar (PF : look at your TTG with Shelter, a disaster but you are hiding it well.. beware the Dame Inspector, she is on your case). I really do not know how you untangle this mess. I am constantly amazed at the integrity and the sheer stamina of my colleagues, who, despite the utter madness they are faced with, never forget why they do this. No saints; but you have to admire it. I would have you in my trench any day of the week, and twice on Sunday...

******
Blogs, unions, staff have all warned against Grayling Rehabilitation Revolution, but I think it appropriate to also remind people that the governments own risk register warned against it also. It should also be remembered that the government refused to publish that document and only come to public attention by way of a leak. They knew by way of their own commissioned risk assessment that failure was a very high probability. They should be reminded of that when they're being interviewed.

******
Before some of us left probation we warned that TTG was not going to work and it was a cosmetic exercise to convince the public that "something" was being done. TTG is expensive and private companies are reluctant to spend money on it.....

******
It is interesting, that an in dependant inspection of 86 cases can find huge failings, you can bet if this was the same 86 cases surveyed by either Probation Service that the Offenders themselves would tick the box that says their experience with Probation was 10 out of 10 and of exceptional high standard..

******
I think you might loose that bet, unless some form of gratuity was offered in exchange for a 10 out of 10. Many on supervision are very aware not just of the lack of services they can now expect to access, but also the services they can't access elsewhere because there are lots of organisations that now won't afford any support if you're subject to a Probation supervision order. Indeed many may feel that the reality of Graylings lies has added problems to their lives, and closed off much needed avenues of support support rather then enhancing their opportunities. 

Something I can't recall being mentioned in Graylings TR plans, was the suitability of some offenders to be supervised by probation services. It's only my opinion, but some under 12mth that are on licence don't actually need supervision at all. Others require supervision not by probation, but by mental health services. The 12mth and under are, again my opinion only, by far the most problematic group to supervise and those that have the most chaotic lifestyles, and those complexities does not allow a one size fits all approach. 

Grayling has created a very expensive system that works for no one, creates extra problems for upon release, and prevents many of those that can provide support from doing so. People receiving probation services know just what they're getting, and they know it's possible poor. Of the 86 subjects the report authors reviewed, 25% were recalled to custody before the review was completed.

******
The shit is hitting the fan now. Inspection after inspection, committee, and press reports. A moment of "We told you so" is not sufficient reward for what we have been through, and damage done. I just hope that there is the will left out there in a depleted and battered probation profession to grab the moment and turn this into something positive.

******
A good documentary exposing the devastating affect TR has had on individuals and their families. We all knew it would take murders to bring it into the Public domain. Yes only the tip of the iceberg but I thought the documentary captured the essence of failure of TR. Can this government seriously continue with the privatisation of Social Services.

******
How many staff who listened to the radio programme connected with the experience of 'crossing your' fingers on a Friday afternoon, hoping you have 'covered all' bases with that case you saw earlier in the day? Then checking your emails first thing on a Monday morning in case there's bad news? Probation practitioners find it hard to 'switch off' in their 'own time'. Whenever there's a local incident, first thought is 'I hope it's not one of mine'.

When the Porthcawl case was covered by Welsh media, my first thought was 'I hope it's not a CRC case'. I soon heard through the 'grapevine' that it was. Why didn't Wales CRC slow down their change programme to address how they were supervising such chaotic individuals with mental health and substance misuse difficulties? No - Working Links wanted to carry out it's operational hubs pilots in Swansea and Cardiff areas - remote telephone case management of lower risk cases.

The Victim's mother was so brave in sharing her experiences on both emotional and rational levels. Strong messages regarding the 'Corporate' approach taken by CRC leaders she met when seeking access to the SFO Summary Report and the laptop lid being slap closed in front of her when she asked to take a photo of the screen. Her success in accessing the Full SFO Report and how it compared to the Summary. So much more to take from this programme.

******
Ok so if they are reading this then they could send an undercover reporter to some of the completely public buildings where probation staff are forced to interview in public! Come along incognito and you will spot the CRC staff because they have two forms of ID around their necks. Last time I came in my officer was apologising cause only one office for 6 staff so we had to sit by reception and talk about stuff. I said I didn't want to cause people could hear and she said she understood and would maybe get the 1 office next time but then the next week someone got in first and the library was really really busy so just had to try and talk quiet. I could hear someone else on probation shouting at the officer so I just made an excuse.

******
I am NOT attempting to judge my NPS colleagues, but some of the proposals and sentencing in my area is a joke. 3 suspended sentence orders running along side each other, two imposed for reoffending, the latter for taking drugs into a prison. Individuals reoffending during PSS period, getting conditional discharges or SSOs with no mention on court results of the breach of PSS. Repeat DV offenders being sentenced with no PSR OASys, not even a basic. Due to NDelius fiasco of the last two weeks, CRC having to interview with no risk info, no CPS, no reports, no precons. Now backlog of uploading, do you think NPS will prioritise uploading for CRC cases before their own? 

TR is a mess, the whole system is a mess, but it is not all down to CRC providers and nor is it all down to CRC staff. I don't condone profit before people and fought against this shambles of privatisation, it is this Government and MoJ that made this mess and it is them that should be accountable for the failings.

******
I wonder if the good ship Yvonne Thomas is aware that she has the bizzare situation of a receptionist who has no access to any IT, has to have the Duty Officer next to her/him fielding calls which the receptionist takes, then asks the Duty Officer to check who the case manager is then, if that information is available should the IT work, then pass the info on. In effect the Duty Officer is reduced to being a receptionist assistant and has no time to cover his/her own case load..... You could not make this up. 

Yvonne, please ask questions from you own senior Managers because they are not going to tell you. Chris Edwards .. you have seen this mess, so please at least give your staff a fighting chance...... It has come this far to use this blog to circumnavigate senior managers who will not tell you how bad it really is... Frustrated of MCRC........