Saturday 9 June 2018

General Secretary Election 15

Hi Jim,

I thought a contribution for the weekend would be an opportunity to move the debate on a little. There seems a lot of apathy, disillusionment and waning enthusiasm both for the fights ahead, the current election and the Union itself. I do sympathise with your readers’ views but if I’m honest this is exactly why I wanted to stand for the role of Napo GS, I know given the opportunity that I can reinvigorate the membership, I did this with the POA and I’m confident that I can do this again with Napo whilst recognising things will be vastly different.

I know that I would only be the post holder of the role if successful and that the members always come above the personalities in terms of what the union’s direction should be. I have seen and met many people in senior roles within unions that start to believe they are more important than the union or its members after a period of time, then as time passes and when the end comes near they become desperate and frantic to hold onto power stooping to any level in which to retain their role twisted and bitter at the thought of losing a comfortable salary and accustomed life style. This is certainly the reason in my opinion why the POA attempted to place a ban on me re-standing for elected posts for 9 years following last year’s election and for which I successfully challenged. Ultimately I know this was mainly down to my popularity with members, their knowledge that I would try to give it my all in pursuit of their issues and this became a threat to their own positions should I have decided to stand against them.

I am not looking at this role as a lifeline for my finances; in fact I have been offered two jobs that have paid more in the last year and thanks to the 30% increase in overtime rates which were negotiated on my watch with me leading for the POA. Many of my colleagues are earning in excess of the salary that I would start on simply sitting with Prisoners at hospital a couple of times a week; this is not me belittling some of the concerns around pay just a simple fact. Similarly I am also not seeing this role as a forever job, 5 – 10 years is sufficient time for any leader to try and make things happen and if you haven’t seen any success in that time then something is obviously wrong, eventually you run out of ambition, ideas and usefulness. There is a shelf life of any trade union representative and you need to recognise that yourself without trying to grip onto power offering much of the same, sadly many fail to see this.

I’m not trying to deliberately attack anyone with my views in this post but if I’m honest…what is left for Napo? Falling membership, deteriorating conditions both financially and in working conditions for most members, and no light at the end of the tunnel. Whoever leads Napo forward needs to do so with a clear sense of unity, communication, transparency, they must be honest about the issues faced and be prepared to face each adversity head on with vigour and enthusiasm. Spouting rhetoric which is not followed up by actions will not achieve anything but further apathy and disappointment. I believe Napo must act, and act soon or it really will be the final curtain call in a couple more years. I personally don’t want to see this happen, a Union with a proud history, a history that dates back over 100 years will be easy pickings for a larger union looking to increase their own membership, but then where will be the individual voice for probation staff, for court staff for the probation board in Northern Ireland?

One thing I know for certain is that I will not be everyone’s cup of tea, I will challenge the age old perceptions on how business for the union should be done, I will come into conflict with opposing views and I will be dogged and determined in ensuring that my views on strategy and taking the union forward will be heard and acted upon. If you want this for your Union then the choice is simple, if you want more of the same then also your choice is simple.

Many questions have been raised during this debate about what my views are on certain issues and what I will say is that everything will be up for review if you elect me. During my time as National Chair of the POA I not only acted on longstanding issues such as pay and pension by controlling the narrative of all stakeholders through media pressure earning the public support needed to pressurise politicians, I thought outside of the box threatening to take control of all Prisons to ensure staff safety and I was fully prepared to put my neck on the line by coming out of the shadows and not just hiding and running every time the temperature was turned up, this enabled me and my team to achieve positive negotiated outcomes. But the job didn’t end there I also looked internally at the union itself, I made necessary cuts to expenditure that did not affect members’ services, I stopped the employed staff having too much sway on NEC decisions, I told other executive members that if they did not have the stomach to see through the fight then they could go home and I would accept that as their own resignation, I created new routes to communication and I was not afraid to ensure that we spent money even if it was lost money in defending individual members and the collective in tribunals and legal settings, all of this I believe Napo members need to see also.

So you have your choice to make, I may well be too much for some of you and you may be absolutely terrified of me winning this election, but if you do select me then you will have someone who will not take that personally and seek to isolate you and your opinions, you will have someone who will debate you and respect your rights to have different views from myself and someone that I’m convinced you will learn to respect because I stand by my word and I also do so with principles and with the acknowledgement that the responsibility of continued failure will rest at my feet.

Kind regards

Mike Rolfe

44 comments:

  1. Something definitely to get one's teeth into first thing in the morning! When I heard Mike Rolfe was going to stand I admit I was mostly preoccupied by his being a Pruson Officer. Then I wondered what Ian Lawrence's previous job was and had to scratch my head. I didn't know. How important is a previous or current job in itself? After doing some digging all I could come up with in relation to Ian was that he previously held a role in PCS. Not in itself a problem but it made me think again about what the previous work experiences meant these 2 men offered. It occured to me that whilst the role of Probation staff in CJS is vastly different to that of Prison staff they both work with the same client group. That is Mike Rolfe has personal experience of what it feels like often engaging with difficult and/or damaged and sometimes dangerous people. He knows to a degree Ian won't what that feels like,some of the personal impact and what it feels like doing a job that Joe n Jane Public(or Ministers) dont necessarily like/respect/know much about. Those experiences are incredibly valuable and cant be acquired second hand. Ian has learnt a lot about Family Court work and that will be a new arena to Mike Rolfe if he were appointed but then the number of people interested in standing as GS with experience of the CJS AND Family Court will be. ....negligible I surmise. Mike Rolfe also clearly has experience in and appetite for "getting things done" within how a Union functions and in how the Union promotes best interests for the workers . He would need to do a lot of listening to members and National Officers (Ie the elected HQ staff group)and remember he would be part of a team not a soloist also needing to work with his fellow employees(National Officials & Admin Officers) but I like the sound of his energy which brings me to another point. He sounds a better communicator than Ian to me, not perfect but more direct,less wadding and cliches.I suspect there was a typing error or clumsiness of expression in his candidate's statement but that doesn't detract from the overall impression I have formed of a positive and determined man who is prepared to talk to and listen to members and take their argument to the employers. I have changed my mind and have given my vote to Rolfe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The more I read Rolfe's observations, the more I think it's really time for a change of leadership. I am of the same mind as 06:28. I think it is an asset that MR has direct working experience of the system. He is not a careerist trade unionist. He will be able to speak authoritatively, based on actual experience, and he will know the bread and butter issues – he would be able to reel off the starting salaries for probation staff to a Select Committee. Napo needs a stronger profile in the media, someone who can go on the offensive and make an impact. I like the fact that MR stood his ground when the POA effectively sought to cast him aside – he's gutsy. Napo has been marginalised in recent years, the branch network is fading away through lack of member engagement and though revitalising branches has been an objective of the current leadership, the facts on the ground have not changed, in fact the situation remains one of grim decline. When the old ways are not working, the intelligent thing is to try something different.

      Delete
  2. Post this in the ‘private’ probation Facebook group. Many current probation people are in the Facebook group but not every one reads this blog. Someone should also invite MR to join it. He is on Facebook - Michael Rolfe (has a blue tick)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This private group really annoys me. I've been in the service for a decade and a half, Facebook friends with dozens of people inclusion branch chairs but no one seems to know anything about it.

      Delete
    2. It was set up
      When we were fighting privatisation

      Delete
  3. 2nd paragraph sums up the Napo exec entirely. I’ve thought this for some time too. Pointless remaining a Napo member if no change of GS.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike sounds like just the person we need...someone with guts and a bit about him.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'd like to hear some specifics from Mr R. HOW will he grow confidence in Napo, HOW will he improve communications, WHAT specific changes would he make to how NAPO is structured. Not expecting detailed knowledge of probation, looking for a strong strategic plan

    ReplyDelete
  6. In particular I am interested in the pay reform. Why after 17 years qualified am I nowhere near the top of my payscale? Why am I earning less than a newly qualified social worker? Why can the administrative role of a Business Manager (with no formal qualifications required) get paid more than me; being on the same pay band? No wonder people are jumping ship and doing agency. Loyalty appears to count for nothing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The payscales when 'sold' to us abd introduced came with a supposed agreement that there woukd be regular incremental rises(eg move up scales 2 levels per year before/after a 'development' point and 1 rise otherwise..cant remember now the exact pattern)but the employers stopped following the model. Hence it is accepted by ministers that we've been shirt-changed but they say they haven't got the money....

      Delete
  7. Loyalty does not count for anything.

    ReplyDelete
  8. But they have the money for agency staff. It's an absolute disgrace and demoralizing. It seems to me that being a maingrade PO attracts zero respect or reward. Seriously thinking of leaving the service.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So who is the best option for sorting this out? Ian Lawrence or Mike Rolfe?

      Delete
    2. Mike Rolfe is the best option. We’ve can’t have another 5 dire years of Ian Lawrence!

      Delete
  9. I have no confidence in either of them and that's not a personal attack. NAPO cannot be sorted out by one man. The whole of the top table is a disaster and the only hope for the future of the union is to have a major overhaul of the 'leadership'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I have no confidence in either of them and that's not a personal attack. NAPO cannot be sorted out by one man."

      So best not vote then?

      Delete
    2. Maybe a no vote is good position. The problem is whether MR can be worth what it costs to get rid of IL. The facts are two years salary plus pension and 6 month handover pay. Add that lot up and we are in a tidy sum of 225k and an extra 40k as the two work on handover. These costs could severely disable the top table for later on. The other issue is NAPO have taken no disputes or employment tribunals and this reflects a disastrous attitude inside of NAPO. 10:21 makes the point there is no profession and that is about right when you look at what is happening. The issue of contractual breaches on Pay incremental points and suchlike are all there and not one case has made its way to ET supported by NAPO. I think the answer may lie in the fact NAPO is keeping its cash for itself if the worst should happen and the membership leaves. The growth strategy is just a moving deckchairs exercise on the decks and this needs to be stopped. Spend the money on legal challenges and growth will restore. The direction NAPO has taken has been consistently wrong. If you changes the leadership we have to be sure the new GS will heed the failures of the current yet be worth the additional costs to depose him.

      Delete
  10. For the last 10 years to union has been falling apart around our ears & no-one has implemented any form of maintenance programme. Its now beyond economical & ideological repair.

    Scrap it & start again. Old Napo has no place in the new world of zero-hours-contracts, agency work. There's no call for a professional association because there's no fucking profession.

    Time was...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/dec/12/comment.homeaffairs

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "My trade union and professional association, Napo, represents probation staff - dedicated and professional public servants who care passionately about their work. They are committed to the objectives of the service, to 'reduce reoffending' and to 'protect the public'.

      Assessing and managing the risks posed by those who commit offences is highly skilled work. Probation officers have to meet rigorous training requirements...

      ...The article (Criminals on probation murdered 98 in two years, Guardian, December 6 2006) noted yesterday's parliamentary vote "on a massive shake-up of the service including plans to open its work up to the private and voluntary sectors". Why did it not question how legislating to abolish the National Probation Service, with a view to replacing it with a mishmash of different providers from the public, private and voluntary sectors, will add one iota to public protection? Why did it not point out that the government has never produced a business case to show how reoffending will be reduced by the introduction of marketisation, by fragmenting probation provision, by replacing the principles of partnership with competition, or by replacing local probation services with a centralised commissioning model?"

      Delete
    2. "The probation service works best when there is a genuine interpersonal professional relationship at the heart of strategies to tackle reoffending; when it is properly resourced; and when it acts as the hub, coordinating criminal justice services at local level. It would be a tragedy if the government's obsession with privatisation were to destroy an invaluable and internationally respected public service."

      Two Thousand and Fucking Six!!!!

      Judy saw it coming a mile off, but Ledger & Lawrence were either taken by surprise or complicit in the whole TR disgrace.

      Delete
    3. Not correct my understanding is that the current juggernaut was already running when London was Unpaid Work was privatised. MR Ledger and the then Chair failed to take any action to stop. That opened the door. The Current GS had already missed any chance.

      Delete
    4. May I suggest now is not the time to discuss history - it is news to me that if Napo ditches our current General Secretary it will cost 2 years salary plus! We need to talk about this and fast.

      Delete
    5. Read Your own blog Jim ?


      ReaAnonymous8 June 2018 at 09:20

      Jim it is important at least to report the facts and your facts should be accurate. There is a lot wrong with the election process and the responsibility for this farce which is bordering fiasco is not the responsibility of the incumbent.


      •As the incumbent candidate has served a full contracted 5 year term there would be no financial cost to the union should they fail to win a further term


      b) If you wish to stand for re-election but are not nominated under the
      rules your employment will end at the completion of the contact (unless
      an alternative date is agreed between yourself and Napo) and you will
      be entitled to six months severance pay from the date employment
      ends.
      c) If you stand for re-election but are not elected your employment will
      end at the completion of the contract (unless an alternative date is
      agreed between yourself and Napo) and you will be entitled to two
      years severance pay from the date employment ends.


      Delete
    6. 19:43 Yes I do read my own blog and always try and make sure what is said is as accurate as possible, especially regarding something as important as the GS election.

      This contradictory contribution has caused me some considerable angst since published last week, but I have sought to satisfy myself that my original assertion is correct. As far as I am aware circumstances are such that no payment would be made. Of course it would be helpful if the position could be clarified officially.

      Delete
    7. It's in the GS terms and conditions. Wake up!

      Delete
    8. All terms and conditions have to be applied to the particulars of a given situation.

      Delete
    9. Jim you have the facts and if you want to see another load of money spent just remember it is most likely why the Ledgergate was paid out on an entitlement had he run again We do not know why the incompetent chair paid him off but guessing to stop him running and saving a gross misconduct battle.

      Delete
    10. As we are all aware, our union is not known for transparency and it's been the subject of much debate as to where the boundaries are in terms of legalities, embarrassment, convenience, incompetence, politicing etc etc. If anything, this blog has only been as successful as it has by trying to get to the truth, but believe me when I say it's bloody difficult.

      I absolutely want to see Napo money spent wisely and in the cause of members interests - period!

      Delete
  11. Sorry, can you explain why it will cost 2 years salary? I am erring towards Mike; he appears to have the right attitude to me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. See post of 8 June @ 09:20 who quotes:

    "If you stand for re-election but are not elected your employment will end at the completion of the contract (unless an alternative date is agreed between yourself and Napo) and you will be entitled to two years severance pay from the date employment ends."

    Presumably from napo constitution or similar?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank you 13.17....so entitlement would apply to him but incremental entitlement does not apply to me when I earn over 4k less than colleagues 17 years in. That sounds fair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aye. Know your place.

      For you - Pay freeze, no increments, no pay awards, sold to privateers, no EVR, no employment tribunals, no legal challenges, loss of annual leave, extended pay scales...

      For 'Them' - Oodles of cash, regardless of how big a fuck-up viz-Grayling, Spurr, Romeo, Brennan, Ledger...



      Post @ 10:41 above:

      "The facts are two years salary plus pension and 6 month handover pay. Add that lot up and we are in a tidy sum of 225k and an extra 40k as the two work on handover."

      Delete
    2. The post of 8/6 cannot be relied upon until it is sourced and can be checked. There is no such wording in the Napo Constitution. It could be pure invention. It would be extraordinary if a person whose five-year term is not renewed is paid two-years salary.

      Delete
    3. After 30 years the best I can hope for is 18 months pay at half the rate of the GS in the event of being made redundant
      Doesnt seem right to me.
      Perhaps any future payments should be directly linked to what is delivered for the members

      Delete
    4. 1414 these are the facts.

      Delete
  14. I really must remember the advice of my manager: don't focus on other people. Ok. I shan't focus on how they earn over 5k more than me when after 2 years qualified they applied to be an SPO (for a 7 5k pay rise) and got it. Within those 2 years they have never even sat before a parole board whereas I have 17 years in and have a breadth of experience and get outstanding in my appraisals. I shan't focus on how some within administrative roles earn more than me when they have no qualifications. Do I sound bitter?? YES I AM. I want someone to FIGHT and represent me. That someone sounds like Mike to me because the man has a pair of balls. And no I don't want to be a manager...I like working with the punters but come on, is it the only way I will ever get a pay rise???

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dont focus on other people is the oldest trick in the book also known as divide and conquer.
    Does your manager say the same thing if you miss a target or do they say,’well everybody else can do it.’

    ReplyDelete
  16. The answer to that is a resounding NO. Do as I say and not as I do...

    ReplyDelete
  17. The election of Donald Trump has demonstrated the world has changed. Things get done by being ultra aggressive, not giving an inch and fighting for the best deal possible, rather than settling for compromise. It was due to compromise that we lost the essential car user allowance. It was due to compromise that our mileage rate got reduced. It's due to compromise that we've had no pay rise for years. The time for compromise is over! We need to aggressively fight the MOJ, the Treasury and whoever else it takes to get the pay rise we all deserve!

    ReplyDelete
  18. EXACTLY.... Mike all the way for me as he appears to want to FIGHT. We have been nothing but doormats and just accepted taking leave off us with the promise of a shorter payscale. It's still 26 years last time I looked. Why is there so much apathy? The majority must be in really good financial positions to just take this lying down.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I have a fear that he'll somehow amalgamate us with prisons. It's bad enough that they want us in there without a GS that is holding open the door.

    Tread carefully, sometimes the devil is in the detail!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HMPPS!! The Napo Exec already held that door wide open and the current GS shined the MoJ’s shoes.

      Any effective Napo activity requires a change of GS.

      Delete
    2. OMiC absorbs us into prisons and ARMS aligned us with the police. We’re even being Vetted so we can be forced to use Visor. The current Napo GS didn’t challenge any of this. Was too busy campaigning for our direct debits.

      Delete
  20. You could be forgiven for thinking there is an election underway. We have heard from the challenger, yet the incumbent keeps his head down and refuses to debate any of the issues with branches. It's a situation that should not be tolerated by his employers, the membership, and our representative body, the NEC. It's all upside down and inside out.

    ReplyDelete