Latest From Napo 138

Thanks go to the reader for forwarding the following from London Branch:-

JNCC Report Back 17th February 2017

Introduction

Since the last branch meeting on the 18th November there have been several scheduled JNCC meetings with LondonCRC (LCRC) although one was cancelled on 3rd January. The frequency of meetings reflects the rapid pace of change and reorganisation within London CRC as well as a willingness on MTCnovo’s part to recognise consultation with the unions at a local level as a high priority. All meetings apart from the last one were Chaired by Helga Swidenbank with the last one being chaired by John Biggin who is a newly appointed Director.

Estates Moves and associated developments

One thing you can rely on in LCRC is constant change with offices closing and staff relocating whilst trying to get the work done. Napo was active, for instance, in intervening in the case of the Hackney office closure and the then proposed move to St John Street (this has happened and we are monitoring progress) to try to minimise the impact on staff, for instance by suggesting that some staff could have been relocated to Cambridge Heath Road, and highlighting ongoing concerns and unanticipated issues.

The LCRC SMT recently visited Birmingham for a model office workshop with a company called Kinnarps who’s tagline is ‘We believe in making life better at work’ Napo has no issue with that particular aspiration. Feel free to check them out at 

http://www.kinnarps.com/en/uk/InteriorSolutions/KinnarpsBenefits/ 

The SMT were inspired to do something similar in London and the unions were invited to a presentation Kinnarps. The initial idea is to create a model office at Huntingdon House and then use the learning from this throughout LCRC – watch this space. Early plans include a café style reception with free Wi-Fi and modern interviewing facilities. The plans for office space looks modern and of a good standard with different areas to work, meet, have a break and a chat, and even facilities to make a private phone call. We will of course be keen to promote staff welfare and ensure the planned good facilities do not suddenly decrease or mysteriously drop off the plans. Fingers crossed.

Equality and Diversity

Concerns were raised regarding the restructuring of the E&D team that appeared to disappear overnight. The SMT assured unions that they are taking E&D seriously and a new Inclusion Manager is being recruited with union input into the JD – appointment imminent at time of writing.

Napo have continued to work with senior managers in the PDL department regarding the Reasonable Adjustment Policy. SMT recognised in response to concerns raised by Napo and other unions that reassessment of all RA is needed and acknowledged this is a large piece of work involving HR and H&S. LCRC H&S department despite having few administrative resources has somehow managed to complete the Herculean task of completing all the online DSE assessments that identified many staff who require new RAPs. The publication of the new policy is now overdue but we are hope to have this shortly.

HMIP Inspection

Clearly the big news for LCRC was the anticipated critical inspection report from HMI. The themes of concern were caseloads, unseen cases, leadership and management. No real surprises.

To an extent LCRC has already begun to address these concerns by bringing in outside help and listening to employee representatives regarding modifying their operating model and taking other actions as part of a comprehensive Change Plan to try to form an organisation that is more likely to succeed in reducing reoffending (or at the very least capable of carrying out our core work well) in London. Dealing with the aftermath of critical inspections can be difficult for staff who may feel unfairly blamed for faults that might be traced to the decisions of others further up the line.

Change Plan

Whilst there have been concerns about how performance management has been managed other changes such as the return to a more geographical based organisation with local managers, caseload smoothing, staff training, and clearer lines of management and accountability have broadly been welcomed across LCRC. Local and national Napo and other union colleagues have been working with Paul McDowell and his team in respect of what is considered necessary reorganisation and change to advise them and hopefully help ease the impact, on those at the frontline. We welcome the recruitment of more frontline staff.

Concerns were raised at our last branch meeting, regarding both the execution and the perceived transparency of the performance and talent management process, and Napo requested information and an explanation of process. We will continue to pursue the promised information regarding this that was apparently circulated to middle managers but for some reason no one appears to be able to find it or access it. IT glitch? As always, Napo continues to keep the dialogue going, hold senior managers to account for their decisions, and we are seeing some evidence that those in positions to improve matters are now listening and even, in some unexpected cases, showing signs of being positively influenced by probation culture.

Consultations regarding ACOs and Coordinators are concluding with several ACOs opting for early retirement and some failing to get through the process. Therefore, fewer ACO colleagues are left at the end of the process than was anticipated i.e. 7 out of 15 as opposed to an anticipated 10. This potentially leaves 3 vacancies that need to be filled to populate the new structure. Missing information and JD confusion a legacy from LPT did delay matters but has now been resolved. It is anticipated that middle managers are next to experience change as part of the plan. We have been informed that Investors in People has been approved for 2018 as part of LCRCs drive to improve and be the best at reducing reoffending. Another consultation regarding receptionists is ongoing.

Policies

Substantial work was done in respect of a new whistle blowing policy was undertaken only for this policy to be abandoned at the last JNCC and replaced by an MTCnovo policy that was presented at the meeting for comment. This was also the case regarding an acceptable usage policy though this is perhaps less controversial. Napo reminded LCRC SMT that whilst we understand that it suits MTCnovo to have a policy that covers all three of its businesses local consultation should still take place with the recognised trade unions. We would like to see an improvement from LCRC in this regard in future particularly if time and effort has been expended to produce a local policy only for this to be abandoned at the 11th hour on advice from MTCnovo. On the other hand, the policies have not benefited from our involvement -that would normally include consideration from experience of practical matters such as how policies might function in real world use. This is of course a lesson the MoJ, and others who have decided not to consult with staff representatives, have sometimes ultimately found costly.

MTCnovo proposed future framework

Last year members attending the Napo’s national AGM voted for a motion to attempt to preserve the agreement made with all employers to continue with collective bargaining arrangements made for a National Negotiating Council post TR. As far as can be gathered most interested parties have now served notice and withdrawn from this national framework agreement (for commercial and other reasons) rendering it effectively obsolete. It is perhaps regrettably indicative of the times that we are in that there appeared to be little appetite for action, other than by a minority of Napo activists. These activists subsequently campaigned for an AGM resolution to preserve the NNC at all costs whilst Napo’s own negotiating committee, National Co- chair, and others campaigned for another motion that had to be withdrawn when the other motion was passed - in accordance with Napo’s national constitution. 

Unfortunately, this motion was not heard by those attending the AGM. It recognised that there was little or no commitment from employers to continue with the NNC arrangements and effectively proposed a distributed model of collective bargaining that was apparently acceptable to most employers. To attempt to reverse the direction of travel of most employers was a highly principled course of action by Napo activists - whose motives were undoubtedly honourable. However, as anticipated employers decided to leave the NNC including the NPS, who had previously walked out, and the other two recognised unions and all parties have now effectively abandoned national negotiations under the NNC in favour of local arrangements.

MTCnovo the owners of our employing company LCRC and Thames Valley CRC (TVCRC) have decided to withdraw from the NNC and this will be effective before their next joint meeting with unions. The JNCC on 07/02/17 was therefore the last under the national agreement and as Napo London Branch has yet to sign a draft local partnership agreement we are effectively in a state of limbo regarding consultation and negotiation with our employers. This means that we are now potentially at risk of being excluded from a position of influence regarding ongoing consultation and negotiation on behalf of members. LCRC/ MTCnovo have made it clear to us that they will not return to the NNC or similar but would prefer to continue to consult with Napo on local matters and are also willing to negotiate matters such as leave, pay, terms and conditions across CRC’s with both Napo London Branch and Thames Valley Branch including the involvement of our national reps with matters that they would normally expect to be involved in negotiating under the previous NNC arrangements - in accordance with a new partnership agreement.

IT Issues

Napo continues to actively engage with employers in respect of IT issues particularly issues with the supply of new kit (a two-week delay!!) and the prompt return of used kit (including AT equipment) when staff leave that can help others. The SMT have taken steps to improve rebuild turnaround and do appear to be making some headway towards improving matters generally by focussing on the bottle necks. The recent phone upgrade seems to have been a smoother process than previous upgrades.

AT Users

Napo continues to highlight the plight of AT users and voice concerns regarding this group who have suffered additional IT hardship and lack of support on top of that suffered by all. Getting AT users recognised/registered is ongoing.

Long service awards

We are hopeful that employers will continue with the policy of recognising those who have stuck with it over the years dedicated to the work we do through thick and thin as part of the new staff engagement plan. Every little bit of recognition counts and more experienced staff can often feel that they are like invisible glue holding things together because that is what you do but receiving little recognition from the organisation for doing so.

Probation Training

London CRC made a shock decision not to continue to participate in the professional training of new and existing probation staff under PQIP. Although we fully understand that LCRC is under pressure because of recent events many staff saw the possibility of training as a probation officer as evidence that working for a CRC offered similar opportunities for career development and enhancement as working in the NPS. After all, at the time leading up to the split CRC staff were told that if anything the CRC would potentially offer increased opportunities for advancement and assured us that we would not be at all disadvantaged regarding training and career development. We were therefore disappointed to see the CRC effectively cancel PQIP training without something tangible in place to replace it. Now, there is no pathway that existing staff in the CRC can take to train as probation officers without leaving LCRC and working for another organisation such as the NPS. Napo believes that LCRC should have persisted with the PQIP until such time that they are able to reassure staff that there was a suitable equivalent training pathway available to them. Discussion is ongoing.

Facility Time

Discussions are ongoing and we are hopeful that a suitable arrangement can be agreed shortly that suits all parties.

David Raho Co-Chair London Branch (CRC)
Karen Malan Vice Chair London Branch (CRC)