Napo at Work in the South West 20

As usual, thanks go to the reader for forwarding this:-

Branch report 28
February 2019 

Dear Napo members SSW branch, 

I draw your attention to the branch report just before Christmas. In particular the mention of selling or holding Companies that are “going concerns”. This point is important. 

Aurelius, the parent owner, has a few days ago removed the Working Links trademark from its website and published the sale announcement yesterday. This news has broken out on to social media.

From the Aurelius accounts a going concern should mean a company has funds to sustain itself for a period of time. Despite what was said in their accounts, the disposal was clearly their intention. The risks were greater than the rewards for Aurelius. To avoid public scrutiny of justice CRCs being traded due to their failings, it appears a secretive grace and favour arrangement may have been brokered. Is this to spare the MOJ embarrassment? TR is not allowed to fail. 

The most recent news is that Seetec is in discussions about a temporary arrangement to cover the Working Links areas. The Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee will be looking for the same questions as the CRCs are due to report back progress by the end of February. Perhaps Working links have dodged another bullet there too. 

It does not solve the problems just yet there has been no formal MOJ announcement and nothing proper from Working links save to say the local CPO short and unclear explanation. Followed by Seetec which says one thing but actually admits they are in in talks to rescue the failing operation of Working Links controlled areas. This failure can only mean one thing that the HMIP report publishing in March must have condemned the operational model. The Unions, at time of writing, have had no indication on what way the HMIP view of the Working Links model and workloads indicator tool which in fact should be agreed weightings. Anyone would have expected the usual MOJ statement along the lines of ‘we are pleased to announce this wonderful collaboration of existing partners taking the contracted areas to an early amalgamation and new horizons on a bigger scale for service delivery’. Nothing as yet. No doubt something will come soon enough as the spin masters catch up on the early unplanned announcement from Aurelius. 

Workloads 

Napo has a branch meeting Cornwall 7/2/19. We will be raising a workload Motion and a formal position on the handing back of work in allocated tasks that have no weightings agreement. Working links through their policy of exploiting skilled staff, and their failings to manage workloads properly with an agreed workload calculation, is now too much for all staff to bear because so many are reporting absence through overwork stress. 

From our collective agreement (legacy agreement between management and the unions) on the workloads priorities and employee care (WPEC), I have extracted the relevant passages below. Senior management claimed to not have a copy and the unions have had to provide it. This is one of the documents that would have been provided in order to achieve ‘due diligence’ prior to the take over. 

Working Links subsequently changed the narrative and termed their new calculator tool an indicator. This means nothing as tasks have to be weighted for the timings they involve in order to follow an agreeable structure. Workload with assessed timings can then be allocated to staff. Instead the use of a meaningless indicator tool by Working Links remains in dispute. Under the terms of WPEC NAPO SSW shall be issuing members guidance on the legitimate ways to hand work back subject to the agreement principles. This is a legacy protection and they have no scope or agreement to change those terms unilaterally. 

1. The proposals have two major timelines. The first centres on provisions which need to be implemented with immediate effect to address current workload problems affecting teams, clusters and individuals. The second centres on further detailed work that will need to be undertaken regarding analysis of workload, to ensure by the beginning of May 2003 that the allocation of resources is based upon accurate and up-to-date information. 

4. The DCPA Board and Chief Officer recognise that difficult prioritisation decisions have to be made now by managers to address serious workload problems. The Home office in Probation Circular 4/2001 set out a Joint Agreement on Workload Priorities and Employee Care reached between the Home Office, ACOP, Napo, CPC and UNISON. The Circular required all Probation Areas to undertake joint work with the trades unions to develop a local agreement. This document reflects a new, shared approach to addressing these issues urgently with Napo. It also marks a significant commitment by both DCPA and Napo to working together in line with the following statements and obligations, which are the accepted building blocks for workload priorities and employee care in the National Probation Service: 

None of this has been achievable under Working Links who block, stall, and avoid responsibility. We hope to see our Probation professionals in senior management released to rectify the inbuilt fault lines dominated by the Working Links ideology, working within public sector to deliver credible public services being fair and appropriate in managing staff terms and conditions. We have been three years in formal dispute, constant complaining on budgets, yet at no time have they been able to acknowledge any failings. 

Last week saw the Working links release of an annual summary of their achievements. Many staff have reported their anger at the insensitivity, and many have asked at what cost the value of the claimed achievements in comparison to what the probation trusts provided do not compare. What they did not mention in their achievements list was 

1 More staff off with sickness than ever before 

2 More staff deprived of their working terms and conditions 

3 Exiting staff deprived of their genuine entitlements to redundancy terms as agreed under the STAP 

4 More staff than ever dissatisfied in the workplace over workloads. 

5 Conditions of buildings estate infrastructure depleted and not fit to use. 

6 Removal of phones, Wifi, reduction in travel provision. 

7 Loss of decent formal training arrangement as all developments are IT based Q and A 

8 The loss of staff retention as many chose to leave. 

9 Serious failings developing in Unpaid Work. 

10 Loss of vehicles issues, and desks telephones. 

11 record dissatisfied staff in disputes 

12 Health and Safety failings across the board 

The list goes on. 

The recent statement from the finance director of Working Links sent to all staff last week on the 1st Of February exacerbated a serious situation. It was an incredible statement. Full of excuses. Not one shred of taking any responsibility, and feeling sorry for themselves as they would have known their situation before the statement was drafted. Disingenuous from the outset. 

Over the past few months we have been in negotiations with the MOJ regarding the future of our three Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC): Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire (BGSW) CRC; Dorset, Devon and Cornwall (DDC) CRC and Wales CRC. We understand that this is uncertain times for many of you working in the CRCs, as well as those of you that work across the wider Working Links Group. We continue to hold discussions with the MOJ and will keep you updated on progress and what this means for you, as soon as we can. 

Another mislead from the Working Links way as we all learned of the situation via Aurelius sounding celebrations publication of their news. The author would have already known the situation and had no intention to tell staff anything. Will anyone in Working links ever be able to tell the truth instead of just the spin? 

If you’re not in NAPO and reading this join now. The future is not clear and despite rumours of an NPS take over of the case management duties it does not appear obvious in the current exchanges. Other than already agreed for Wales then why not here can we not be returned to public services. It remains a murky hiatus. As yet we do not know how the pan agreements are going to work out and of course the harmonisation agenda may now need a revisit. 

On that basis we will be looking to ensure that despite the return to the shared drive of some of DCPA collective agreements we have still not seen published the DDC Redundancy collective agreement WHY not? 

Whatever happens now? NAPO will be ready to represent and protect members in this difficult and uncertain time. For that reason alone join Napo now help strengthen the collective bargaining process and work to protect your terms and conditions. 

In light of the as yet unpublished HMIP report we can only go on the feedback from contributing members and venture it is not likely to be good perhaps there is another reason why Working Links had to be side-lined fast as they may not be able to hold any credibility and have already had two bad HMIP reports. They are not likely to have learned anything from the disaster that has been the unmitigated failings of the Working Links way whatever we will see. As this chapter closes and a new one opens in all their time I cannot find one positive thing to say about the Working Links tenure I am sorry for that. 

Dino Peros 

Napo Branch Chair SSW.