NAPO members will be aware that there are currently National Officers elections underway and everyone by now should have received their ballot paper. I wanted to take some time to write to you all about why I am standing as I may not be a name on the paper as familiar to some of you as the incumbent officers or those who have been regulars at AGM for many years.
I have decided to stand for national election as I believe these elections are probably the most critical that NAPO has faced in a decade. At a time when we need to ensure that our officers are effective at steering the union in the right direction for survival and future longevity, we also have a general membership that is as disengaged and apathetic about those at the top than at any time I can recall. This was no more evident than in the General Secretary election, where no amount of positive spin can put shine on a turnout of 16%.
I make no secret of the fact that I voted for radical change in the GS election, but I am fully prepared to work with the newly re-elected GS in working towards a more open, democratic and accountable union. I believe this to be critical at re-engaging you and then with the top table and the NEC.
I have sat in NEC meetings and seen critical debate shut down too soon with too few members to challenge the chairs rulings or ask the really difficult questions necessary to hold officers and officials to account. This is not me criticising the NEC either, it is an extremely difficult job with members often conflicted between representing the will of their branch and voting independently for what they feel to be the good of the union.
My point is the NEC agenda is not led by NEC members but by what the Officers and Officials wish to cover. It’s why at AGM a couple of years ago some of you may recall my emergency motion for NEC reform, following from a year of in-quorate NEC meetings. I fear that we are facing this threat again with numerous NEC posts vacant. Which makes it even more important that we have elected National Officers who work for the members and hold each other and our paid officials to account, where officers do not hide behind the veil of collective responsibility and challenge each other.
The Assistant General Secretary has an ambitious strategy for growth which will be covered fully at AGM. This will require buy-in from members and elected officers at all levels in order to be a success. It is therefore critical at this stage that we have National Officers who can see this strategy through in whatever form the members decide is appropriate and hold all to account for it’s effective implementation.
As an aside I implore those who read this, those who are critical and discerning about NAPOs activity, to stand for NEC, we need people who are prepared to scrutinise, to question and yes to be critical and ensure as a union we don’t pass bad decisions on the back of apathy.
That’s my statement anyway. I have Jim’s agreement to engage with you on here. You will no doubt have read the election statements of all the candidates and so I am here to discuss anything from my statement you may wish to discuss.
Over the last few years I have been made aware of National officers being ‘frozen out’ of key decisions because they did not see eye to eye with the majority. This cannot be allowed to continue if we are to survive as a democratic union.
The Assistant General Secretary has an ambitious strategy for growth which will be covered fully at AGM. This will require buy-in from members and elected officers at all levels in order to be a success. It is therefore critical at this stage that we have National Officers who can see this strategy through in whatever form the members decide is appropriate and hold all to account for it’s effective implementation.
As an aside I implore those who read this, those who are critical and discerning about NAPOs activity, to stand for NEC, we need people who are prepared to scrutinise, to question and yes to be critical and ensure as a union we don’t pass bad decisions on the back of apathy.
That’s my statement anyway. I have Jim’s agreement to engage with you on here. You will no doubt have read the election statements of all the candidates and so I am here to discuss anything from my statement you may wish to discuss.
Regards,
Jamie Overland
Jamie Overland
What’s your view and intended action on Vetting?
ReplyDeleteI think it is a fundamentally floored concept and can’t see how it can be fair retrospectively apply a condition of employment to staff who have been doing a job effectively for a number of years. There are some members of staff with prior convictions or with close family members who have convictions that will be fearful of their careers now. We are effectively allowing the Police to decide who we allow to undertake offender management in NPS. I don’t buy the argument that everyone needs VISOR access to do the job and I think that members of staff need an opt out option. I think NAPO need a written agreement in place as to how this would work and to make it clear that it unacceptable for NPS to even consider moving staff out of a front line role if they fail or opt out of a vetting process which is clandestine and unaccountable to us (the police are not obliged to explain why someone failed, just give their decision). NAPO should quickly establish a legal position to prepare for inevitable challenges to the decision
DeleteJamie you should have run for chair very good answer my respects to you.
Delete"I think it is a fundamentally flawed concept and can’t see how it can be fair retrospectively applying a condition of employment to staff who have been doing a job effectively for a number of years."
DeleteOkay. So how can you move Napo on over the vetting issue? Its been stuck in "raise concerns, make representations" mode for FOUR years post-PI03/14 while staff have been - and still are being - humiliated, disenfranchised, isolated, having careers destroyed (again).
Hi Anon 10:05
DeleteMy first task would be to find out what discussions had taken place already and to see how the employer had responded to our concerns. I would then look at our ability to challenge any decisions through legal mechanisms and in answer to your question about what I would do, true to my campaign for greater participation, I would take that information back to members. Members would have to decide how strongly they felt about this issue and how far they wanted to oppose it. Given the openness of this forum perhaps discussing industrial strategy is not wise but I would be more than happy to discuss my ideas with you at AGM if you are attending. I hope that doesn’t feel like a cop out and I hope to see strong motions on this issue at AGM in order to give us such a mandate.
A refreshing read. It's the first time I have read a critical perspective from a NEC member. It makes clear we do not have a member-led union, as NEC members are not bound by any mandate from their branches: they are free to vote independently at NEC meetings. This makes it easier for cliques and vested interests to shape agendas and operate more like a politburo than a decision-making body fairly reflecting the wishes of all members. The union needs more openness and accountability – and, above all, member engagement which gets worse with each election.
ReplyDeleteWow ! Revelation of the officers doing what they like and segregating out disagreement. Who would you vote for chair Jamie and why please. Great post and brave.
ReplyDeleteMorning. With regards to the chair vote, I have a lot of respect for both candidates for different reasons. Katie works exceptionally hard for NAPO and was a great support to us divisional reps at the SEE JCC and I found this particularly useful when registering a dispute with Sonia Crozier over working conditions in court (she was SEE dd at the time and the dispute was positively resolved). Katie has also done wonders to promote the profile of women in NAPO and should be commended for that. Her statement makes positive overtures about accountability and openness which is a platform I fully support but having been a National Officer for four years it will take significant effort to critically self reflect on that last few years and work towards change. That’s why in my personal view (I stress that this is not meant to be a pitch, I think it’s very important people make their own decision on this) Denise is my choice. When I have been to NEC meetings Denise was one of a handful of members who was always ready to question and challenge, unafraid to tackle difficult subjects and really ask if we are doing the right thing. Her presence on the other side of the table is undoubtedly a loss to the NEC and the rigour it applies to the reports it receives. However, have seen the principles she stands for I am convinced she would apply the same scrutiny from within the officers group. Both candidates bring positive strengths the role but for me Denise design for the functioning of our union is more closely aligned with mine.
DeleteJamie thank you for the response yet despite current activities of the incumbent vice chair you recommend Denise Mason for chair as able and aligned. That is what we could expect given what you had said. Your engagement here is a reboot as it has been said. What direction would you take Napo knowing the 5000 members are made up of 4000 women and 1000 men. The women in Napo strategy is perhaps not as necessary. Napo growth is clearly needed and how would you recruit. The growth strategy is not well received and poorly understood being nabbed from the TUC how would you develop napo in other ways.
DeleteI think there are obvious mechanisms that could be exploited for recruitment purposes. Like for example the civil service induction policy (which NPS is bound by) states that all new members must be offered a meeting with a recognised union. We should be at every staff group induction with a slot to promote NAPO. The same should be arranged with CRCs and we should be clearer on our offer to agency staff, who now have the right to join NAPO, but I don’t know a single one who has.
DeleteFinally we need to reflect on why people have left and fix it. We lost hundreds of lapsed members through check of and we sent them letters reminding them but that’s not exactly engaging. We need to be approaching them, talking to them, asking if not rejoining was a conscious choice and if so why. We should not be too proud as a union to accept the criticism of members who have decided to leave us, we should listen and adapt.
Fundamentally though, NAPO needs a ‘win’. I think the pay claim should be central to it recruitment. As risky as it is we should ask people to back us with their membership and judge us on our results. If we don’t meet expection then people can vote with their feet. But we need their/your support and the weight of those numbers to show the strength required to achieve our ambitions with pay. I don’t doubt negations will be difficult but that’s what NAPO exists for at the end of the day.
I haven’t even talked about bolstering the offer that NAPO has as part of its professional association but this is an area where Dean and I see eye to eye in that it needs to be improved. I have touched on this in my election statement I believe.
Perhaps ‘Men in Napo’ is required.
DeleteI think it strange that an ostensibly female profession, I have never understood why this should be the case though, has been trampled on ostensibly by men and with very little retort. Is this an issue that NAPO should address or is it an 'elephant' in the room? I imagine if the Fire Service, for example, was outsourced we might see a more belligerent reaction?
Delete"The Assistant General Secretary has an ambitious strategy for growth" Are you actually saying that Dean Rogers is overly optimistic?
ReplyDeleteI’d say Dean is positive and that is what would be expected of him as a leader in the union. I think the strategy is ambitious and does show an attempt to change direction. I think personally it could be strengthened but that is for members to debate and decide on. The most key aspect for me though is regular review, if we embark on a new direction it’s important we keep a close eye on whether we are meeting our objectives. The times of throwing money hopefully something with no idea if it has been successful are over
DeleteHi Jamie
DeleteI really appreciate you replying to these posts.
However, I am concerned that you describe Dean Rogers as a 'leader'. I think this is much of the problem. Dean Rogers needs to remember that he's an employee and as such is accountable to us.
That’s not a problem, it’s why I posted on here. To clarify my comment, I meant leader in the technical sense, he is a line manager to a fair few of our paid administrators and officials and that is why I mentioned the expectation of positivity. If he was negative about the future of NAPO and our chances to turn it around it would hugely affect the morale of his team. Whatever his personal views I think we would all expect him to show leadership and be outwardly optimistic. That being said he has put enormous amount of work into the strategy for growth and I have no doubts in his genuine belief that if endorsed by members, it can be a success. It is our job as Officers, reps and members to ensure that those tasked with seeing this strategy through are accountable for its success.
DeleteJamie Thanks for engaging on this blog. Can you tell us how much experience do you have representing members in disciplinary hearings etc and what branch positions apart from NEC Rep in Essex have you previously held? I just want to get an idea of how much experience of nuts and bolts trade union work you have to offer when engaging with IL etc
ReplyDeleteI doubt Jamie will need anything at all . Given the prospective chair incumbent who has done enough time as a training position and not served any position with note.
DeleteJamie has maturity and leadership potential being seen in challenge. That's more than enough for now.
Hi anon 11:13
DeleteI have represented members in all forms of disciplinary and capability hearings as a rep and for a period following the split I was one of two trained reps in the NPS when the E3 ‘process’ commenced. As far as branch positions are concerned I have been a membership secretary twice, a branch chair/convener and Vice Chair (NPS). It’s clear from the election statements that I have less experience than some of the other candidates given their time in the service but I hope that I have demonstrated experience enough to show I am capable of undertaking the role
Hi Jamie, I have voted for you already. I also voted for Denise Mason - as current post holders have done nothing visible for members despite 4 years in the role already. With you and Denise in post it looks like a better future for us. You will need to inspire members and be active and vociferous in defending members which will encourage new people to join. Our lost membership is the strongest protest against the prevailing apathy over recent NAPO officials inactivity, lack of management challenges, no resistance and their downright laziness. Things can get better
ReplyDeletePerhaps the most serious challenge facing Napo is lack of engagement. Improved engagement would likely increase activist numbers and reverse an overall shrinking membership. It seems obvious that over the last five years nothing has worked, exemplified by the re-election of a general secretary on a lower turnout than the 19% of five years ago.
ReplyDeleteThe general secretary is in office, but not in power. Napo is a weakling with no industrial muscle and therefore no bargaining strength. Whether it's VISOR, pay claims or changes to working practices, if a union is seen to lack the ability to mobilise its membership, the employers know the workforce can bark and moan – but it cannot bite and fight. It's impossible from this vantage point to see Napo ever reaching the 50% turnout threshold required for any industrial action. Also, as the employers impose policies reflecting their objectives, a union's ability to effectively represent individual members in grievances and so forth is hamstrung at the outset by unfair and biased policies. When a union is not seen to be making a difference in the workplace, union recruitment suffers and why, perhaps, many existing members let their membership lapse, as 750 did following the imposition of check-off.
Unison have 1.3 million members and 67 NEC members, Napo have 8000 odd members abd 50 odd NEC members. Sure then its about quality and not quantity?
ReplyDeleteBoth the union and the NEC are significantly smaller than that. But the argument for slimming down the NEC has been made for years. But people don’t want to lose that branch connection
DeleteCheck those figures both wrong. Facts like that no wonder Napo is
Deletefu#+£d member led by more guesswork .
Read it and weep! Accredited programmes were programmes that, on the whole, barring the odd exception, were evidence based and proved to be efficacious. I would love to know what the Probation stats for such programmes are but here, according to Russell Webster are the Prison stats:
ReplyDelete'In the last eight years, there have been year on year falls in the number of accredited programme completions in custody commissioned by HMPPS. The number has fallen by 65% from 16,099 in the 12 months to March 2010 to 5,619 in the 12 months to March 2018. Over the same time period, the number of starts has fallen by 66%. (This is one of the factors linked to IPPs serving so far beyond their sentence; their risk level cannot be deemed to have gone down until they have attended an accredited programme which they are not given the chance to take.)'
How will NAPO support an evidence base for Probation work?
Hi Jim, Review into death of Tanis Bhandari has been commissioned:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/murder-review-finally-probe-killer-1859384?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Calls for a wide ranging multi-agency review into the monitoring of Tanis Bhandari’s killer have been answered.
DeleteIn January this year Plymouth Live reported how Devon and Cornwall Police’s most senior officer, Chief Constable Shaun Sawyer asked Plymouth’s Adult Safeguarding Board (PASB) to consider undertaking a detailed safeguarding adult review (SAR) into the circumstances surrounding the monitoring of one of Tanis’s killers.
The 27-year-old was murdered by two men on New Year’s Day 2015 in Tamerton Foliot. One of his killers, Donald Pemberton, had been arrested two weeks prior to the murder after brandishing two meat cleavers in a Stonehouse street.
Pemberton, who was on license at the time having just been released from prison, was released on bail by police following the incident.
At this time Pemberton was also under the care of Plymouth’s mental health team. During his trial one police witness confirmed custody records which noted how Pemberton was “prescribed mental health medication”.
The week before Tanis’s murder, the mental health team had been in contact with Pemberton’s probation officer regarding his arrest on December 15, 2014 for brandishing meat cleavers and threatening others.
Separate reports by the police and the Probation Service, and inquiries by the head of the organisation which manages offenders, have already revealed a number of issues which resulted in Pemberton remaining at large over the Christmas and New Year period.
Tanis's family have long held out hopes the PASB would see fit to launch an enquiry which would finally see a host of partner agencies – including police, probation, mental health and other organisations involved in Pemberton’s care and monitoring – all meet to determine what role each organisation had and whether improvements or changes needed to be made to their protocols to prevent future incidents.
Andy Bickley – the former Chief Superintendent of Plymouth police and former Assistant Chief Constable with Devon and Cornwall Police – is now chair of the Plymouth Adult Safeguarding Board.
He said: “The board has agreed to commission a safeguarding adult review into the circumstances prior to the death of Tanis Bhandari, following a referral from Devon and Cornwall Police and consideration by partner agencies.
“A safeguarding adult review looks at how well an adult’s care and support needs have been met by the relevant authorities and aims to establish recommendations for multi-agency learning, service improvement and change.
“It is led by an independent person, supported by a panel of partners and others as required.
“We have been in contact with Tanis’ family, confirming our intentions and to discuss the purpose and scope of the review and their involvement.”
As previously revealed by Plymouth Live in a series of detailed articles, internal reports by the Probation Service and Devon and Cornwall Police separately examined the monitoring, arrest process and action taken in regards to Donald Pemberton before and after an incident on December 15, 2014 in Anstis Street, Stonehouse.