Thanks for the questions via the blog. Please see my responses below;
1: I stood in last year’s General election for the variety of reasons not purely due to having political aspirations but to actually try and offer something in terms of voicing the issues and concerns for the many supporters I have accumulated from the POA era and also locally fighting for issues within the local constituency, however if I was successful I would be committing to the full 5 year term. Whilst I don’t think you can 100% guarantee to sticking the full-term out due to potential unforeseen instances, ill health etc…at 40 years old I still have much of a career ahead of me and I would understand that Napo members would need to know that I would be committed to the job, which I can assure you I would be.
2: I am a team player, but my team would most definitely be the wider membership who is the people I would feel most responsible too. I have never made decisions based purely on my own view of things, in fact I will listen to a variety of public and personal opinion before setting my own message based on what I have heard and recognise for myself. I do however realise many people will be looking to set agendas and influence decision, I think I am pretty good at understanding people and foreseeing potential pitfalls, so I won’t allow myself to be led down a path that would upset, disappoint and lose faith for the wider Napo membership. Whilst you rightly suggest I would need to learn much to fulfil the role of General Secretary, I am a quick learner and if successful I fully intend to spend the early days in the role ensuring that I travel the length and breadth of the country spending time in workplaces with members understanding the issues not only for Probation (NPS & CRCs) but also the court staff and the Probation Board Northern Ireland.
3: Yes I have weaknesses and I definitely enjoy working with a proactive team that are happy to take work on and complete it to a high standard. If I know I’m better served either through shortage of time, or not having the necessary skill set I am happy to delegate; however I do expect all work to always be of a high standard. I do not enjoy turning up for meetings without the facts and figures, I will always check over work to ensure it meets the standard as ultimately the reputation of Napo, members and the profession is at stake if the work or brief given is poor.
4: I want Napo to survive as an independent trade union; small unions are the best for tailored membership representation and I do not like the big business approach of larger unions at times. In fact these larger unions and the inactive TUC seem happy for the managed decline of trade union membership without any effective response. Smaller unions seem to have followed suit dutifully overseeing the managed decline of their own organisation but without the funding to survive for the long-term. This I believe is because they are too scared to take risks without the wider trade union movement protection, however this is short sighted and the larger unions just keep consuming the smaller ones in the process which if you consider this carefully is a very effective way to create a monopoly of trade union membership. The managed decline seems to work on the premise that at some point soon there will be a Labour friendly Government that will help recover union membership and restore the trade union movement to its former glory. Unfortunately this is rather wishful thinking, even if the current Labour leadership retains power and successfully wins at the next election there are still many pale blue Labour MPs within the party that once in Government would then start to push their agendas to the fore once again, creating many obstacles. There would be no ideation of merging Napo with the POA or any other trade union from my perspective and one that I would not be bringing to the table.
In response to other questions posed on the blog;
I do still agree with my comments in the Guardian newspaper and it will be your expertise and knowledge of your profession that Napo should be seeking to achieve and support. I trust that AGM motions past, present and future that will help set the message Napo and the GS role will take forward.
As I’ve said in previous posts, I have my initial views on some of the more specific questions posed and from what I’ve read. However I would be at a disadvantage giving definitive answers to questions without access to the information that has not been issued for wider publication. Also as I have mentioned in answer to question number 2, I like to take time and consider various opinions and absorb all information available to me before shaping my answers to best suit the message for the Napo membership. There will most definitely also be AGM motions on some of these topics which will set Napo policy and therefore I don’t want to fall foul of this before potentially being successful and taking over as your GS, but to keep with the spirit of being open, honest and transparent I will give a response without trying to compromise these potential pitfalls I have spoken about.
1: Napo opposes the privatisation of Probation and therefore understands that some members will want the CRCs to fail and for Probation to be renationalised ASAP, however this is now a very complicated situation which won’t be fixed overnight. Napo has many members in the CRCs and will need to increase this membership in order to drive the narrative on the wider issue of the future of probation. What Napo cannot afford to do is demonise the workers in those private companies and rather should focus on attacking both the business model, factual evidence such as HMIP reports and gain the necessary statistics to support the case for a renationalised Probation Service. Using the press to cultivate public opinion and then ultimately place great pressure on the Secretary of state and other responsible ministers will be the best course of action to achieve the results the Napo membership desire.
2: I have read the PI 03/2013 on VISOR, which was originally used as an acronym for Violent and Sexual Offenders register, but now is the name of the database that is owned by the Home Office for use by the Police and security services. Probation Officers are expected to create and manage VISOR records which contribute to cases of MAPPA level 2 & 3 Offenders. It would seem that the introduction of this PI in 2013 was the catalyst for change in clearance levels and gave the authority to prevent qualified individuals from being able to undertake roles that they are qualified to fulfil but not security cleared for. I would obviously like to look into this issue in detail and understand what steps if any have been taken to resolve this issue since the PI has been in existence and mandatory actions since 2013.
3: There are no guarantees when pay rises will be achieved and the Government and employers could continue to watch the decline of the Probation and court Services without any intervention on pay. However if successful in the role of GS and if initial discussions prove fruitless or that we are being fobbed off with the promise of future talks on pay then I would definitely be advocating industrial action. This would need to be a carefully constructed process building up, whilst engaging via the media to the public and also ensuring that our message would be consistent with all members of Napo in the various different employments, i.e. NPS, CRCs and for court staff. Unfortunately everyone will need to understand that you do not see change without fighting for it and giving it all your energy, similarly unity of the membership will be key as will being in for the fight for the long-term and not giving up at the first hurdle. I do genuinely believe that if the narrative is controlled amongst other interested organisations, ministers, Napo activists and the message is sound and fully supported then mounting pressure applied consistently and for a prolonged period will achieve results.
4: Napo member subs generally are quite consistent with other trade unions both domestic and abroad, however as stated in other posts I would be open to reviewing all areas of union business and also using some of my previous accountancy experience and qualifications to look at other potential options, which could include looking at the feasibility of lowering subs to increase membership.
5: As the incumbent GS has been recently speaking at the probation institute and on reading previous blogs that mention the Probation Institute I assume Napo wants it to become the successful ‘centre of excellence’ for professional registration that it was intended to be. However, I note that many members see it as having failed in its objective and therefore just an expensive quarterly magazine. This is an area that I would definitely like to engage more widely with the membership on before giving a view on what Napo should adopt as its future view of the probation institute.
Finally I understand some members believe that replacing the current GS would be an expensive process. I hope that this is not a ploy to try and gain votes almost by financial intimidation. Contract law is quite clear and when you come to the end of a fixed term contract you are not entitled to compensation or redundancy. Compensation would only be paid to employees on a permanent contract as per the rules I have read and seen and I’m sure any of the NEC would be able to confirm this position for members who contact them. The previous pay-out to a former GS was due to early termination of the contract.
I will continue to try and answer questions as they are posed, however please remember I am still working full time in a Prison Establishment without available access to the internet or this blog.
Kind Regards
Mike Rolfe
'Contract law is quite clear.....'
ReplyDeleteOh dear! Not clever. Surely it depends on the contract and in NAPO the GS is entitled to the large pay off as detailed in yesterday's blog.
Mike has just gone down in my opinion.
This argument is going in a circle. I repeat:-
Delete"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."
"All terms and conditions have to be applied to the particulars of a given situation."
Jim mike stop digging a hole your both wrong and this sort of error makes you both inadequate on the knowledge required. It's a term and condition of the Gs service. Mr should not guess why ledger went on what terms either another big gaff. pi and wider membership views blowing smoke get a grip lead tell us no flim flam please your doing what we already have. Next you'll be hollow chest thumping. Poor response.
Delete"Jim Mike stop digging a hole your both wrong and this sort of error makes you both inadequate on the knowledge required."
DeleteI repeat for a third time - there will be no compensation or redundancy payment should IL lose. Please contact Napo HQ and seek clarification.
07:54. As you are making the assertions, it's for you to evidence them. I know Ledger was paid about £70,000 for the termination of his contract and as a reward for his misconduct. He should really have been dismissed without any compensation.
DeleteAll these stories about what IL would receive sound like a bit of fake news. But if you believe otherwise, prove your point instead of asking others to disprove it.
Jim we have some respect for you and Mr Rolf however you have made it patently clear you have lost your usual objective stance. Mr Rolf will of course be available on your blog to stand any chance to reach a well read audience of voters. Mr Lawrence just sends them all a personal e malail so whay would he bother to use the blog in an open debate? This type of election is won and lost by a small group who
Delete1 bother to return a vote
2 Have a voting right
3 Have a genuine open view on either candidate
4 Many may just vote for a named known.
5 The voter reads the ballot statements and then decides who they want
It is a simple enough and yes I agree a poor way to get there but that is it.
DeleteI have said and will again while I have no views on MR what points can he make that change the likely course of IL re election? Nothing new in the replies in this blog from him. Sadly we see no new vein of hope but more testing the views before he could lead a position. Trying to encompass all in that fudge turns voters off and will increase IL return no doubt.
Jim you are well out of it and so is MR when you proffer the wrong views on the ned of contracts. Short term temporary fixed and part time are all variations of contracts that a may suit but the end of any contract is constructed on its terms. You have both been shown the actual terms that apply in the NAPO terms and conditions pertaining to the General secretaries post. Il has not been dismissed he merely ends his 5 year terms and then his contractual entitlements will be paid should he lose. If you want to see someone with integrity look back to Judy Mc Knight who also new she could have run sought to lose and also pick up a cheque. However to be fair Judy McKnight could have run again and there would have been no opposition. IL want s to win and that says something of his integrity to be fair to him. In my view with those sorts of figures at his age whatever that is he could take the 2 years pay and retire? He wants to win through and as we have heard finish the battle of restoring the CRCs to public ownership. So do we all actually.
MR weak response today have not helped him. In fact it has demonstrated a real error in his basic employment knowledge. In fact it is so worrying can I pose this simple question Would MR please publish his trade union training CV and or any of his particular training qualification in employment law and trade union courses. Ending contracts and entitlements alongside collective agreements are all basic terms. As are dismissal redundancy bargaining recognition and many other required basic concepts.
In relation to contacting NAPO for confirmation of the published entitlement of a defeated GS situation . I doubt after the current written performance of MR that this could be a real situation now. However there are no reasons why anyone at NAPO HQ would provide the clarification. In fact it is published on the Blog for you all to determine the clearly stated contractual term. If this is not your usual strength then be carful in reply. That said it cannot be ignored what MR did say
Delete" I understand some members believe that replacing the current GS would be an expensive process."
Yes it will be and some of us in NAPO actually understand this and the expensive cost unless MR R offers added value to the tune of 225k and on this blog today he is many years away from the experience I would requires to vote for him.
"I hope that this is not a ploy to try and gain votes almost by financial intimidation."
This is incredibly risky no one could be forced or pressured to vote in any way other than as they choose in a closed ballot process. This suggestion is badly considered by MR and at the very least it would have been better form to be silent than suggest such a folly of argument. Members will not be swayed by what it costs in the mainstream of NAPO their voting will be on their card and their judgement not pressure.
"Contract law is quite clear and when you come to the end of a fixed term contract you are not entitled to compensation or redundancy"
Oh dear what are you saying here? Contract law is often disputed by parties it leads to Employment Tribunals because it is arguably not clear on many terms conditions or breaches. Any half trained basic performing representative would know this. As a perspective GS MR should know that fixed term contract will end but as specified in the terms of that contract ending. To suggest the dismissal of employees at the end of the contract carries no contractual entitlements and in this case specified terms on ending the contract which have been published is primary failure in knowledge. MR has failed to distinguish the role has come to the end of the contractual terms and Redundancy entitlement is not part of the agreed contract because it holds a SEVERENCE entitlement. This supersedes any redundancy minimums that would not form any relevance in this end of term entitlement.
"Compensation would only be paid to employees on a permanent contract as per the rules I have read and seen and I’m sure any of the NEC would be able to confirm this position for members who contact them."
Similar basic error again compounded by Jim assisting this mistake. There is no talk of compensatory payments in the terms it is clearly stated a SEVERENCE arrangement contractually specified to ensure NAPO is protected in the event of future earnings claims. In the event of potential issues whereby a GS might be displaced. This poorly understood account of MR just goes to show a real lack of key stone required knowledge.
"The previous pay-out to a former GS was due to early termination of the contract."
Another major failure of the known facts. Many of which were published on here. I would like to know who has fed poor MR this rubbish. MY advice would be to let MR be himself speak free yourself from responding and tell us your vision of how you want to run a Union. I doubt MR could have any realistic chance to win at this stage but I would rather read his attempts are born from a value base than this clumsy trite.
While an ambitious run for GS role, I think MR will remain on the landings a while longer turning the keys and calling the inmate numbers a while longer yet and unless we experience a skilled and proper assessment of the issues facing us all.
The PI response inadequate yet it would unfair to attack the whole response as the issues I have focused are the very important underpinning failures that illustrate MR is just too far away from this role with his current understanding and in Part JB you are not helping his appearance to voters.
What a load of whingers! Without access to the Red book that certainly used to hold t&c etc for Napo paid staff or it's current equivalent I don't know who will know what an exiting GS might or might not be entitled to receive (though it sounds bizarre to me that if you come to the end of a fixed tenure that you should be able to depart with a load of money)It is much better in my opinion to be honest and say I don't hold all the answers or know exactly what I think until I know what the membership as a whole want and have a chance to find out more. For those who want a choice of GS candidate and a potential change where do you think all these people exist who have professional experience & knowledge and political and Union savvy and can provide answers that suit you on Probation CRC, NPS,NI and Family Court Welfare??? You will be gazing into a very small pond with barely a "frog" to be seen. To have a candidate with very positive Union negotiating experience, a desire to build up membership and value their voice and 1st hand experience of direct work with clients in the CJS looks pretty good to me....
Delete0754 absolutely incorrect you clearly do not know the true detail but a good ruse.
DeleteWhile in terms of the big picture I think Mike Rolfe is now the front runner purely by being accessible and by being willing to fight, there are a couple of parts of his strategy that cause me concern.
ReplyDeleteRunning with the media and the lawyers has never been a successful strategy for trades unionists.The media and the law are owned by the ruling class and their agents.
Hoping to use these as agents for change with government assumes that it is a debate and government are willing to listen. Grayling is being hammered over rail nationalisation and realises that the argument is lost but merely says the time is not right.
As we know, privatisation is Tory dogma, not for debate and not for backtracking.
The only strategy these people understand is industrial action and there needs to be a massive amount of work done on the ground to prepare Napo members for such a course. This usually starts with winning the minor skirmishes and boosting confidence from its subterranean level
Yes front runner to second place .
DeleteNo we do not create or manage Visor records. Yes Napo subs are more expensive than other unions. Skimming other responses these are vague too. I’m not interested in the replies of a ‘company man’. Seems to struggle on any issue that is more in-depth. As I suspected, both candidates as bad as each other and neither are worth further comment or a vote. I’m out.
ReplyDeleteWell you might not create any VISOR records but as a PO in NPS I and colleagues here do make Delius records and have to select what is or isnt seen on VISOR. To my mind thats making a VISOR record and as it goes on, we are "managing" our contributions to VISOR records. Probation Admin staff regularly relay VISOR info to us as well that has to be stored somewhere. I assume that also falls within "managing" records.
DeleteTo 07.58 come on, your vote matters. Give both candidates more thought than has been reflected in your post above please. Were MR a "company man" he'd not have sought election as a MP last year and then on not being successful(though increasing size of Labour vote there) not bothered seeking new employment with us but have sat tight as Chair in the POA!
Delete... but he did jump ship and now he can’t return to the POA he’s trying his luck with Napo. Personally I don’t think a prison officer should be GS of a probation union, nor somebody without proper experience of being a GS.
DeleteI agree but he did not jump ship he fell right in the drink !!!
Delete1445 he left a solid role having been elected and let the members down very fast in pursuing the new role as an MP. The POA sought new chair at additional costs and MR commitment lasted about a year . We need that record like a boot in the arse. CV is poor skills are poor knowledge not good by a long country mile and for the cost of putting that in post for an apprentice it is has to be Lawrence all day long . Find a better candidate and Lawrence will fold but not against the lad in short trousers he cant measure up at this time.
DeleteTo 15.15 but (a) he is back inthe POA but he can't obviously "walk back into" being the POA Chair again and (b) none of most of past Napo GSs had been a Napo GS before!
Deletea. Can’t chair POA so “walk into” Napo instead. b. None or most were not prison officers either!
DeleteThe risk is whether a prison-centric GS (Mike Rolfe, Prison Officer) will further hold the door open for probation to be further absorbed into prisons. I suspect it will and therefore wouldn’t advise the condemned to vote for the hangman or the noose carrier. Simple as.
ReplyDeleteBut does working currently as a Prison Officer mean a person is "prison-centric" (whatever that means)?? It is not the choice of GS that will determine if Probation gets absorbed (further)into the prison service. If anything having someone with prior experience of POA might help us be better able to fight any ministerial machinations of that nature
DeleteNo (Mike) I don’t think so. Prisons have had enough power over probation in the last 10 years, and to our detriment. We don’t need a prison officer heading the union too. That would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.
DeleteYes not what I would have said but it would cause some significant exodus even though we may not want the current GS based on his turdy and lethargic record and not one case for legal challenge says its all a bit save the money for them not spend on protecting the members.
Delete15.11 and 16.38 as I'm female, a PO and from the North I can assure you I am not Mike and it is disappointingly puerile to suggest that anyone supportive of him on here must be "him". I could as well say to you both "hello Ian" but that's repeating the idiocy. I dont want more of the limp same thank you so am voting for someone who wants to engage with members and stimulate Union growth not someone who prefers to sit on (London) sidelines, wring his hands (metaphorically speaking)and say but the members don't really want a fight so we'll just wait till they do before we at HQ do anything etc.
DeleteMike, Mich, whoever. Frying pan or fire is the choice, and many do not want a prison officer as Napo GS.
DeleteThere's some bizarre nonsense on this blog today - and I am not referring to the contribution from MR. At least he is seeking to connect unlike his opponent who hopes member apathy will deliver a low turnout and favor his name recognition.
ReplyDeleteBecause MR engages on an unofficial probation related blog does not make him the best candidate. And IL not engaging here does not make him the worst.
Delete11:40:'Unofficial', you sound like an old Soviet. Would you extend your permissions to Twitter and the Facebook groups that discuss probation issues. Have you tried the official channel ?– the Probation Forum – it's a dead zone, which typifies the state of member engagement in this so-called member-led union. IL never deigned to contribute to that either!
DeleteMR has been shut out from communicating directly with members. It doesn't make IL a worse candidate because of his refusal to engage with the blog, but by his refusal to address branch meetings alongside MR, he is hardly showing much respect for the membership whom he is asking to give him another five years.
There is no election campaign. And yet all you can do is attack a media outlet that is 'unofficial'. It's this going through the proper channels, like many of the moribund branches and nomination by Executive rather than Branch, that serves the interests of incumbent over challenger.
Good point well made
DeleteI don’t think posting at the first available social media outlet is the solution or very professional for that matter. How many probation / family court staff or Napo members read this blog?
DeleteTo 13:24 what alternative outlet by which to speak would any alternative candidate for GS have? Give the guy a break. At least he is trying to communicate with people!
DeleteI have to agree. It’s a schoolboy error to think posting here is the solution without knowing how many probation / family court staff or Napo members actually read this blog. Did he not discuss communication when nominated? All sounds very adhoc.
DeleteI despair at the level of dialogue on here. Candidates don't get choice as to this Union's electoral restrictions! Why do you think Mike Rolfe views using this blog is " the solution"? What on earth is "ad hoc" about making use of a Probation based social media forum? If you yourself are using it to post presumably you think it serves some function?
DeleteAnon 16:44 sums it up very well. “Find a better candidate and Lawrence will fold but not against the lad in short trousers (Rolfe), he cant measure up at this time.“
ReplyDeleteJust checked the Napo website. Some sign of life on twitter but still nothing from IL.
ReplyDeleteHope he is more vocal in negotiations if and when they ever happen