Sunday 7 October 2018

Napo AGM 2018 Day 2

As in previous years, the highlight of Napo's annual sojourn to the coast - for it is normally the coast - is often provided by external speakers and 2018 proved to be no different. Terry Renshaw is the youngest of the so-called 'Shreswbury 24' building workers 'fitted-up' by the Heath Government in 1974 for daring to strike and picket. Most, including the famous Brookside actor Ricky Tomlinson, were given jail terms for a variety of concocted offences including unlawful assembly. 

I'm ashamed to say I don't know much about the case so this was a steep learning curve for me, something I intend to remedy as soon as possible now I'm back home. It's really staggering to hear that at the time the building trades decided to unionise themselves, on average a man was killed every day on building sites across the UK. Living as I think we do in a largely open democracy, proud of the independently-operated rule of law, it's shocking to hear that even all these years on, successive government's have consistently denied that this was a political trial with court papers remaining closed until 2022. It is said release 'would pose a threat to national security'. Just pondering on that statement sends a chill down my spine. No wonder Terry rightly received a rousing standing ovation.

Unfortunately the same cannot be said for our usual tub-thumping, huff, puff and bluster performance by the General Secretary. If he can't see it for what it is, a contrived bit of histrionics full of words but basically saying nothing, plenty in the hall did and remained firmly in their seats when the set piece reached its phony climax. I think I'm being generous if I said a third of the audience rose to their feet as if he's been rumbled at last. It's just a pity it's taken so long. 

Which brings us on to the Emergency Motion:-
Trade Union Certification Officer's decision
On the 20th September the Trade Union Certification Officer's upheld four complaints against Napo by one of its members. She "reached a decision that the union breached its rules".
This conference calls upon the General Secretary to explain to AGM how the union's Constitution was allowed to be breached, Furthermore, it instructs the General Secretary to confirm that he will ensure there is no such recurrence.
Proposer: Jamie Overland Seconder: Chris Pearson  
There is no doubt this was the low point of proceedings with many on the top table looking decidedly uncomfortable and irritated, so much so that an intervention from the floor saw fit to chastise them. There was never any danger of the motion not being carried unanimously and a very sullen General Secretary duly delivered some carefully-crafted weasel words devoid of any hint of mea culpa but citing 'a complex situation, inadequate constitution and no detriment having been suffered'. A totally unsatisfactory state of affairs in my submission and at the break I was reminded that in earlier 'fire-brand' times a motion of no confidence would have likely followed.

Of course trying to get to the truth of anything in Napo is a somewhat trying and ultimately fruitless exercise as history has demonstrated. A dickiebird tells me that one reason why the General Secretary was so obviously an unhappy bunny was because the leadership went against his advice. Of course some of them were sat beside him on the top table and this possibly goes some way to explain the subsequent cack-handed and perfunctory change of officers and gift presentation. I think I'm right in saying that Katie Lomas was not even named as the incoming Chair. 

It will not escape the attention of the sharp-eyed reader, and at least one contributor in the hall, that the seconder of the motion, one Chris Pearson, has been named on this blog as having been party to the decision to deviate from the constitution. Surely he would be in the obvious position to know what the hell went on? Well, yet another dickiebird whispers that he was on holiday at the time. 

What the hell is wrong with our union and why is it so dysfunctional at the top? And it's no use saying it isn't because the room is full of professionals well-used to reading, analysing  and sifting fact from fiction. The attempt to co-chair the organisation was a disaster and been a recipe for poor organisation and effective management. It's to be hoped that Katie Lomas has the drive and determination to get a grip on things before it's too late. With an eye-watering net operating deficit of £224,000 for 2017, in the words of the General Secretary, we do indeed either 'grow or perish'.  

Unlike Nottingham last year, we didn't manage to get through all the business, but even so lots of uncontentious and worthy motions were passed. Unfortunately time did not allow discussion of number 36 General Secretary Election Process, pointedly proposed by London Branch and which highlighted how our newly re-elected General Secretary had so successfully managed to circumvent any debate during the election process. But maybe that would have been a bit of uncomfortableness too far for ending things at Southport?  

Postscript

For those wondering why there is no mention of pay, this is because it was the subject of a private briefing session for two members of each branch. We were told this was for 'timing' reasons. Read into that what you will.   

40 comments:

  1. Wot? No mention of the AGS?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Didn't hear a peep out of him.

      Delete
    2. The AGS is cited in the blog for being involved in the certification officers report what was it about.

      Delete
  2. One of the complaints was about Katie Lomas. It was upheld by the judge. Where does that leave us?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just viewed a video posted on Facebook, where the pay deal was being talked about. 3-6 years to get to top of pay band, 6% rise, something about people at the top of the band.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Saw the same clip. No mention of what's being given up but I think it said it wouldn't be performance related

      Delete
  4. Jim, do you or anyone else have a detailed and accurate account of what the GS said about what happened? I think we should have it on this blog so that those of us who weren't there can know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More likely for team Dave and Dino to go over it will they tell us the truth please.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps Napo might consent to members requesting publication of the General Secretary's statement on the website?

      Delete
  5. 3. I grant Mr Peros’s application for a declaration that on or around 7th September 2017 NAPO breached Disciplinary Rule 4.3 when Katie Lomas (Vice Chair) wrote to Mr Peros stating “We have been commissioned as the investigating panel for your case”. Katie Lomas had been involved in the decision to initiate the disciplinary process and this meant the panel did not consist of at least three members who were not otherwise involved in the disciplinary action.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ms Lomas had to have understood her position was both errant and failed all justice process so what reason could anyone offer to legitimise this?

      Delete
  6. Just a quick dip in regarding the Shrewsbury Trials.
    Unfortunately, what the Heath government and the agencies of the establishment and the large corporations did in 1972 is so disgusting and sinister that I believe the truth will never come out. Its just too damaging, that's why its always hidden behind national security. It's something that could only happen in the Soviet Union.
    But the current Tory government are just as dirty and devious when it comes to trade Unionism.
    Check off, voting thresholds, making employment tribunals too expensive, limiting access to legal aid and judicial review, gagging laws. Different tactics then 1972 but designed to achieve the same. No resistance, no organised opposition to what we tell you you're going to do and how you're going to do it.
    This peice in the Guardian by Paul Mason a few years ago is pretty informative.
    Could it happen again? You bet it could!

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/shrewsbury-trials-1970s-trade-unionists-ricky-tomlinson-edward-heath#ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/07/shrewsbury-trials-1970s-trade-unionists-ricky-tomlinson-edward-heath

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  7. Too many good people have already been lost to Napo, who presumably needed to accept that it was beyond them to unravel the self destructive canker that I for one did not realise was present until we learned of the payoff to Jonathan Ledger, which was presumably necessary "to keep the show on the road."

    It took several years of persistence from the former Napo Members Action Group, to get The Association into a functioning Trades Union; something similar is needed now, from current Probation AND Family Court Practitioners, across England, Wales AND Northern Ireland.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As always a informed and enlightened summery of AGM. Thankyou.
    It's good to see individuals still willing to as the difficult questions, well done Jamie Overland and interesting to note the seconder of the EM was Chris Pearson a respected and recent former National Treasure....it is of course difficult to get at the truth of this matter without any independent inquiry.....what is clear is a number of named individuals breached Napo Constitution....through ignorance or intent?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Intent they went to court on it paid barrister and lawyers beaten by Dave Rogan lay rep and team Dino. What one earth do we think of the competancy duplicitous or complacency of what is now a confidence issue of the general secretary.

      Delete
  9. I was at the pay briefing and I do think it was best being with just a few reps. It is a bit complex and if it was presented to the full conference it would have taken over the whole day. It would have also
    not been fair on our CRC comrades. Felt bad enough later talking to Branch members & apologised to CRC comrades. It will be sent out to all staff anyway this week so everyone will know what’s being offered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's good to know as at the moment it all feels a bit secretive

      Delete
    2. Secretive is how Napo seem to operate It will be interesting to see what Unison and GMB make of the pay offer? I think I heard IL say they weren’t recommending it to their members?

      Delete
  10. It's very disturbing when two former national reps are obliged to challenge the union they spent their careers representing in order to get justice for members in all sorts of employment disputes. They would have had many experiences of employers engaging in mischief, abusing procedures and flouting natural justice. Now we have an example of Napo breaching rules designed to protect its members. This isn't what a member-led union is supposed to do. For a coterie to manipulate a constitution for arbitrary purposes brings the union into disrepute and does reputational damage. If a constitution has aspects that may not be fit for purpose then you seek to amend it through constitutional means – you don't arrogate powers by arguing that the ends justifies the means. Any dip into history soon shows that this is how power becomes unaccountable and malevolent. It's ironical that those individuals who collaborated to bypass the constitution are not to be subject to an investigation leading to possible disciplinary proceedings. How can it be fair to engage in such abuses with apparent impunity? Is this another example of rules for the many but special treatment for the few? - the proverbial double standards.

    It is not surprising that there is a loss of trust in the leadership. If they will behave badly in one context, then how can they be trusted to represent the best interests of members in other situations. Napo is sitting on 2 million from the sale of Chivalry Road. Can they be relied upon to reinvest these funds sensibly? Which would exclude using it to fund budget deficits. We need to guard those who are allegedly guarding members' interests.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Net nipper insightful skills in pointing to what's must be surely required a full investigation. The process to ruin a members standing and reputation led them to court. What part did all those play and why. Then instruct lawyers with members monies to attack a member. We need answered and what does it cost in all terms.

      Delete
    2. I thought NEC was the employer so surely NEC must have approved Napo funds for the tribunal or were they not informed? is there anything about Napo that is functioning?

      Delete
  11. Thks 14:23. Offer will be sent to all Union members though not all staff as it is only Union members who can vote on the offer. Staff who want a voice/say in negotiations can still sign up to join a Union & vote (GMB, UNISON or NAPO).

    ReplyDelete
  12. At the AGM was there any news on Visor vetting?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Patronising smoke and mirrors bollocks on the pay offer. Who says it's too complicated for me to understand? The failure to report until next week is appalling. Methinks they are enbarrassed about what they've signed up to. The Dino thing is also an example of the shambolic nature of officers and officials in that joke of an oeganisation. Once again they get away with zero accountability.
    Nothing new though. Ledger got 100k to walk away after having had to admit whilst giving evidence at an ET that he'd been shagging a member of staff he line managed. Decision made by officers group in isolation and presented to NEC as a done deal. When asked why he wasn't sacked for gross misconduct the answer came that they didn't want another ET. Incompetence and cronyism ad infinitum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://probation-institute.org/invitation-to-discussion-about-professional-registration/

      Delete
    2. Tosh blog to avoid greater important crisis raising blog at 16:00.

      Absolutely agree Napo leader shambolic performance as JB says. More bluff and bluster. Those officers and officials chose not to engage properly in the level of responsibility to the to people who entrusted them.
      They let Dino down they let all Napo members down. They let their office staff and officials down. They let the constitution take blame unfairly and down. Most of all they let themselves down. Illustrating gross incompetence or was it really collusion. Certainly there are lies as Chris Pearson has made clear and that the weasel words of the General Secretary avoiding the courts ruling, has failed in his job in competence honesty or negligence?

      The role of the Assistant general secretary where clearly the paperwork was noted as the originating issue. It was stated in the SSw branch a long time ago that Dino had been acting properly and in sound process. Napo central derailed those members needs and interests. There was also an NEC sub committee complaints issue that had ruled unanimously in favour of Dave's presentation yet still they went to court funded by members money with a known 200k plus deficit. How much exactly then? It is obvious they chose to attempt to do Dino down.

      Delete
    3. * TR was allowed to be discussed, planned & implemented with barely a squeak during the Ledger/Lawrence transition (what a convenient time for a scandal?)

      * There was a deafening silence & rush to do sweet fuck all from HQ when EVR was scrapped, the Sodexo clearances were instigated & blame for voluntary severance was pushed upon staff who had (1) no meaningful union advice in all cases & (2) binary choices in many cases, e.g. risk being kicked out with nothing or take 40% of what they were promised by their union

      * Dino & team were making noise & waves & clearly upsetting the apple cart - I think I posted something back then about Lawrence being unhappy at this local hero scenario & reluctantly having to travel to 'support cause' - when Dino was publicly positive about the GS's support

      * No surprise in this neck of the woods that Dino ended up at the sharp end of someone's wrath

      * I'm not a member of Napo anymore, haven't been for some time due to circumstances of THEIR making. Perhaps a current member could take this shower to the Certification Officer?

      As previously noted by "Anonymous5 October 2018 at 07:50

      There's an invitation in the final paragraph of the judgement:

      'Additionally, members who believe that Napo is in breach of its constitution are currently able to bring their complaint to my office or to the Court under section 108A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.'"

      Time for another round of 'clearances'?

      Delete
  14. It astounds me we have a GS in post now for a second term who appears to think similarly to the very people Probation serves. To claim there was no detriment regarding the ET claim from a member is as bad as saying a crime is victimless. Is that what the officers at AGM believed or are they all colluding. I hope NEC take them all to task and make it clear that attacking the dwindling Napo membership by their own hand and arguing they didn't know how to apply the rules is not acceptable. Perhaps there are people who should stand down from their role and let someone with integrity and proper ability to run a Trade Union step in. NEC should demand some type of external investigation, sounds like you can't trust anyone on the top table.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Resounding yes all around here! There is are clearly many detriments that member suffered but the despite the competing crisis issues of trust and integrity is exactly the GS justifies issues exactly like offenders and he does not understand our work. It is challenging offending behaviours.

      Delete
    2. Lomas should resign she is untenable in my view.

      Delete
    3. The pay briefing outcome isn't private. A question was asked about this and DR said it could be shared.

      Delete
    4. Actually Bernard the gist of what he said was that there was no reason that headlines could not be shared with members but for detail to remain confidential until all parties sign. Seems fair enough.

      Delete
  15. Any mention at AGM of the MoJ having already put out TR2 to tender on the market including such amendements as:

    * Re-baselining frequency of reoffending payment-by-results measure from 2011 to the average of performance between 1.10.2015 and 31.3.2016

    * An obligation on the Authority to terminate the contract by 31.12.2020. This is justifiable on the basis that it is a further response to the unforeseen circumstances

    * Adjusting binary reoffending payment-by-results measure to reflect the impact of a change in data source.

    * Waiving 2014/15 fee-for-service reconciliation payments due from the CRC.

    * we are minded to reorganise the current system in England so that CRC and NPS areas are aligned, and will potentially move into 10 contract package areas in England instead of current 20.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No there was a lot on about emergency motion.

      Delete
    2. Thank you. Understood.

      Delete
  16. Any chance of a clue as to what you're all on about? NAPO using members money to attack/ do a member down? What happened exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Previously my post claiming corruption was deleted. There should be a full investigation. Heads should roll

    ReplyDelete
  18. haha 0542. It was of course all Napos fault.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Investigation to clear Napo or show the truth they won't go there or report on it. Scandalous.

      Delete