Thursday 11 May 2017

CRC Dispute - Latest 23

Thanks go to the Napo member for forwarding the following:-

Dino Peros, Chair South Southwestern Branch
Ceris Handley, Chair Western Branch

5th May 2017
Dear Dino, Ceris and Pen

Firstly my thanks to you and your Branch Executive and to those members in the Working Links/Aurelius Unpaid Work Service for their continued support of our negotiating position in respect of the proposed contract variations.

It has been disclosed to Napo in our discussions with the WL contract areas that staff within BGSW and DDC CRC’s, that it is the intention of the employer to seek to impose new job titles on all staff contracted to work in Unpaid Work units as has happened in Wales. My understanding is that contracted UW supervisors are to be re-designated as Case Workers as soon as the employers can either force the issue on staff or attempt to negotiate agreement from the trade unions.

Talks are due to take place this week on an agreed agenda which is designed to address the various issues around UW. These follow the NNC Joint Secretaries’ meeting at which the (then) NOMS contract manager was present and the subsequent JS determination which made it absolutely clear that an attempt should be made to reach a collective agreement to resolve this aspect of our wider and long running dispute with the company.

As you know, these issues are wider than Unpaid Work situation but the UW changes are currently dominating WL intention to drive ahead with their change agenda.

The unions will not be hurried or bounced into any non-negotiated arrangements impacting on the roles and job titles of our members and Napo is making it clear in the strongest of terms that all members who are affected should reject such changes and submit in writing their refusal to both change either their job title without consent nor to accept any contractual role changes.

We are aware that in fact the employers are already planning to publish the role changes without additional appropriate training or remuneration. The suggestion by the employers that staff should accept the revised job title but not actually deliver the new job description is nothing more than a ruse and the acceptance of a new title will be the first step to an employer driven deception of your roles. This cannot be appropriate and we are challenging this nonsense.

This will create confusion and further divisions in the fragmented workforce that cannot be good for service users, staff or beneficiaries We wait to see if this experiment can actually provide the number of staff that WL require to eventually drive out the existing job roles and conditions. In response we have said that we will enforce all the protections of the Staff Transfer and Protections Agreement if necessary and undertake to consult with the affected members over appropriate action should any staff become displaced unfairly and/ or inappropriately.

This letter can be shared with your members in the Unpaid Work service.

Yours sincerely

IAN LAWRENCE
General Secretary

20 comments:

  1. Does the above mean such changes have already happened in Wales? Any Welsh CRC staff who can clarify?Such bullying tactics are disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK : UPW has ben in probation hands since its inception in 1972.... Probation never wanted it... not then..... not now... let's look at the historical facts... when probation was tasked with it back in the day... the hue and cry was not us we do rehabilitation not punishment!!!!... lost the battle so it stayed... Community Service Officers were created.... who manages them? POs who were dragged kicking and screaming to manage the new kids on the block... CS/CP/ECP/UPW; the 4 titles it has had since 1972... all not wanted and all who looked after and managed them were felt to be only part of the probation family.. associated members if you will.. supervisors, CSOs, Operation Managers who chased the golden projects... the implementation of the Jack Straw and Dame what's her face ( she of the titled was the problems family Czar!!) Justice Seen Justice Done was the cry and resultant project.. Not quite the orange jump suit she wanted ..but the orange UPW HV Vest.... was introduced.. Front of house Probation stuff.. Why? Because that is what the public and politicians understand.. simple punishment... they do not get or understand rehabilitation, its boring.. UPW, if worked well, produces results on the day and can show actual physical results.. The probation soundbite if you will.. But.... let's be frank here..not supported within probation from top to bottom... NOw is the time to take it out of the hands of probation... contract it out and give it to anyone.. anyone but not probation.... they have ignored it for 37 years , they take the Kudos and suck it dry when it works, but when it fails, it's 3 steps backwards, sack a few supervisors who lets face it, are bottom of the probation food chain so no problem there... NAPO steps in and attempt to fight the fight but eventually give in and we al move on....Let's have no pretence here , not on this blog, hold up the mirror...

      Delete
    2. Correction to the above: I clearly was pissed in the 80s and have lost a decade, 47 yrs!!!

      Delete
    3. Unfortunately UPW is in the hands of the privateers - CRC's and in my 20 years in Probation ( last year's in CRC !!!) I have never known it be so bad

      Delete
    4. I think the author is still pissed. CP is a great tool to replace failing prisons. If the author of this highly offensive post would like to see what CP actually doe's, I can arrange a visit at my unit. Just be brave enough to post your details so I can contact you.

      Delete
    5. I was involved with a CSO Pilot in South West Lancs PSD in 1974/5.

      There was reluctance among some in Probation, especially some in Napo but many probation practitioners embraced CSO from the outset.

      I saw innovative rehabilitative CSO schemes in Merseyside, Essex, ILPS, NELPS & some in LPA but it became more problematic after the Party Politicking with CJS became more extreme. The principles inspired by Baroness Wooton were lost the more the focus was on punishment rather than service.

      Delete
    6. for 08:56, behave yourself... you show me yours and I'll show you mine...

      Delete
    7. Again for 08:56 benefit: Lets take a metropolitan area like Manchester or Merseyside... the whole of MCRC has only got 10 contracted UPW Supervisors in 2017... in 2003 they had 30+.
      MCRC has approx 1200+ offenders currently with UPW as a requirement. Do the math...with an 8:1 ratio of supervisor to offender , if all 10 staff are deployed across the week , each and every week... no leave.... no training... or God forbid... not sick.. how many of the 1200 can be supervised in groups.. 400 only.. OK let's then add, for argument sake, individual placements of low risk offenders to charity shops.. I will be kind and say 200 (I know the actual figure and it is less than that but I won't quibble over 20 or 30). That would see 600 of 1200 worked , all at fell pelt, fully staffed with all supervisors available, still only 50% can be looked after, managed by supervisors or charity shop staff... So the perverse situation is that the senior management push for more UPW Completions so as not to hit a service credit yet cannot see that if that push to complete and get them in they would be turning offenders away.. Sessional staff (really) I hear the cry.... just pull anyone off the street and give them a group of 8 of mixed age and mixed offending behaviour... it happens.. you know it does.... So the best risk management plan they come up with is do your best and cross our collective fingers....
      I repeat 08:56, who is being offensive here, me for highlighting a serious collective failing that has worsened since TR ,yet it also has to be acknowledged that it was still being badly managed by (some)trusts.... Of course there is great projects which can be done and done well...... but,,, and it's a big but... You need to put capital expenditure and staffing costs into them ... and guess what.... well, over to you....!!! So why don't you ask for a FOI (Good luck with that) and see what the actual car crash looks like with supervisors who do go on leave, who do attend training and sadly, go off sick.. This is an open secret....

      Delete
  2. It's just a thought, but I do feel that there's a trick being missed somewhere in union negotiations with CRCs.
    In prisons they have Prison Service Orders and Instructions (used to be called Standing Orders) and they define in basic terms what obligations the prison service have towards the prisoner.
    As I said it's just a thought, but couldn't an argument be made for a similar process to be applied to probation?
    Whether defined by the MoJ or by the Probation Institute, having a set of standards that CRCs are obligated to provide to their service users would surely slow role changes and maybe even impact on the number of staff leaving?
    It's just a thought, but maybe extending an argument for some minimum standards to be applied to service users, could possibly impact on the privateers who's only interest is money.

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a good idea, and one that I'm sure all CRC frontline staff would support, but both the MoJ and Probation Institute want/need the CRCs to succeed (for different but connected reasons) so I very much doubt that either would be pushing for raising minimum standards. The rhetoric is all "innovation" and "bespoke", but the reality is a race to the bottom and doing just enough to get away with it.

      Delete
    2. PLEASE do not suggest the Probation Institute with its ridiculously glossily titled self awarded decorations having anything to do with setting standards.



      Delete
    3. Who sets them then? Or is there no standards set at all?
      I have a feeling that the general public have a perception that someone sets them? Service users should have a bottom line.
      It's a question of what's acceptable and what's not.
      Who's drawing the line? Someone should be.

      'Getafix

      Delete
  3. The Train to be a Probation Officer lures are starting again AND still folk seem keen to have a go, they cannot have been reading here or even have the research skills to know that the Probation Qualification is of very limited value compared to a SW one that will be accepted for most jobs that require the Probation Officer Qualification - whatever it maybe called nowadays - I have not kept up and avoid the Probation Institute website where I presume the trainers "hang out"



    https://www.facebook.com/TrainToBeAProbationOfficer/posts/1298029160234419

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Pqip as it is now is open to staff in NPS and CRC - staff in CRC are seconded to NPS for a couple of days !!!! in order to complete some high risk training - they still however have to hold a case load within CRC

    ReplyDelete
  5. Should have said the Pqip is the Professional qualification in Probation

    ReplyDelete
  6. Off piste of Interserve here... latest nonsense from the Interserve carousel..
    They are publishing the social media policy again and telling us plebs to watch out... so clearly this blog is having an effect... keep them on their collective toes I say...
    Anyway.. they publish a document called the "Business Support Services Update... a corporate update that is full of stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with what the coal face in MCRC/CGM does, it really is what we call corporate interserve and PSC Centric... I am sure... no.. I am certain.. that the PSCs were created to support the field teams (or Flex teams in modern parlez)and not the other way round... we struggle with IT, enforcement.. letters.. every day admin support... and what does the closing item in the interserve Business Support update cover... its the size of the kitchen in the Cunard Building in Liverpool and that they think it's too small... and.. insult to injury... who should was up and cleans the cups and saucers.. oh what sorrow.. what pain.. clueless management to allow that drivel to be printed and worse... posted out by e- mail to teams... In the words of that great Irish Poet and pixie beauty Sinead O'Connor: Just another sad case of the Emperors new clothes (sic)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interswerve have built themselves an all singing and dancing massive HQ next to Birmingham international airport - they and the previous Probation staff that are now Snr management ( CEO , CD 's etc ) are a bunch of absolute useless lying bar stewards ( I'm being polite here ) or they might as well be as to what use they are to the criminal justice system - makes me so bloody angry to be a part of Interswerve CGM and not being in a financial position to tell them all where to shove their " business support service " bullshit

      Delete
  7. Best community service project I ever came across was one where the Saturday group spent their 7 hours winding up balls of wool and the Sunday group spent their 7 hours unwinding them! This went on for years and nothing has really changed in the meantime. It's always been meaningless work, no matter who runs it or what the staff are called. This is a pointless battle by Napo, particularly since the war has long been lost. Private companies have taken over and are renaming probation staff up and down the country, just as is the NPS too.

    Offender Manager
    Responsible Officer
    Case Manager
    And the rest ...

    It was so simple when we were just Probation Officers !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many staff holding out know your wrong . Also there is more than one staff group PO is finished across the board in the long run no wonder.

      Delete
  8. I've heard that a CRC new starter has been given 100 cases.

    ReplyDelete