A Plea
I’m currently a PSO looking to attend the Napo conference this October. Despite being in the service for a number of years, along with countless others, I’ve never seen an increase in my salary. Therefore I nearly fell off my perch when faced with the £50 cost. I'd like to point out the ever-widening chasm in pay between Probation staff who are current Napo members that seems to go largely unrecognised by this blanket charge to attend conference.
As a union who prides themselves on equality of opportunity, isn’t it about time Napo considered that £50 is quite a lot of money to those of us at the bottom of the pile? Especially those of us who are currently on the bottom rung of a career ladder that’s just been snapped off and face being sold off - yet again - down the privatisation river ....
As a PSO in Programmes I face the possibility of quite literally never catching up with my once equal peers in the land of Offender Management, despite 9 years service, two degrees, a Level 3 Diploma in Probation and an ongoing Masters in Criminal Justice.
With all this talk of Public Sector pay rises and vacancies for OM PSOs advertising pay scales of up to £27,300 whilst those of us who are qualified PSOs see so-called Intervention Facilitator posts advertised at a static £22,039 with no such rising scale.
My question to Napo is thus : can they please consider a sliding scale of charges in the future for conference? As a single parent on a PSO wage that will never increase (unless I finally see sense and leave the service) £50 is a daunting prospect in comparison to a household with two wages that includes a PO paid in excess of £12,000 more than I am. Can they really expect us all to pay the same amount to attend?
And what of TR2? Once the poorer Intervention cousins in UPW and Programmes are sold off yet again will we even be entitled to call ourselves Probation Staff, attend conference and remain Napo members? So many uncertainties to be faced yet again!!!
Anon
BBC Website:-
ReplyDeleteThe government has temporarily stopped sending inmates to a troubled young offender institution (YOI), after an inspection revealed an "extraordinary" decline in safety and care. The chief inspector of prisons has demanded immediate improvements at Feltham A YOI in west London.
As a result he triggered the "urgent notification" process, giving the government 28 days to respond. Previously only five adult prisons had triggered this process. These prisons were Bedford, Nottingham, Birmingham, Bristol and Exeter.
The latest inspection of Feltham A found:
very high levels of violence between boys and against staff
high use of staff force
poor care
long periods of cell lock-up
escalating self-harm
Justice Minister Edward Argar said the report was "deeply disappointing and concerning" and the government would respond with a formal action plan within 28 days. He said the decision to stop sending young people to Feltham A was made to provide space for staff to make improvements.
Feltham A, which holds just over 100 15 to 18-year-olds, "has for many years been recognised as a challenging and complicated establishment", chief inspector of prisons Peter Clarke said.
"We found that, in the six months since the last inspection, there had been what can only be described as a collapse in performance and outcomes for the children being held in Feltham A. The speed of this decline has been extraordinary."
Analysis
Deleteby Danny Shaw, Home Affairs Correspondent
The alarming decline in standards at Feltham A appears, in part, to reflect the growing difficulty of coping with an increasingly violent and vulnerable population.
Although the number of boys has fallen, from 148 in January to 108 at the latest inspection, those who remain are among the most challenging - on remand for, or convicted of, the gravest offences.
Many will have been perpetrators of serious violence or knife crime. The gang allegiances and criminal behaviour they displayed on the streets won't automatically get left behind at the gates of the prison.
However, a report on Wetherby Young Offender Institution in Yorkshire, published this week, shows there is a way of successfully managing troubled young people.
Inspectors found that the centre, which holds 250 15- to 18-year-olds, including 48 on a specialist unit, was well-led, had lower levels of violence than elsewhere and was delivering "good outcomes" for the boys held there.
At Feltham, since January, inspectors reported:
a 45% rise in violent incidents
a 150% rise in assaults on staff
a trebling in self-harm incidents, which are now 14 times higher than two years ago
In a letter to Justice Secretary David Gauke, Mr Clarke said 40% of boys at the unit told inspectors they had felt unsafe at some point, while:
almost three-quarters reported having been physically restrained
fewer than one in five felt cared for by staff
a third said they were allowed out of their cells for fewer than two hours on weekdays, rising to almost three-quarters at weekends
Resources were being wasted as healthcare staff, education facilities and resettlement intervention services stood idle waiting for children to arrive, said the report.
It also found children being released without stable accommodation, without education, training or employment in place and without support from family or friends.
"The atmosphere feels tense. I could sense that many staff were anxious," Mr Clarke said.
"Some were clearly frustrated about the situation in which they found themselves. They wanted to do their best for the children in their care."
Mr Clarke said Feltham A had for many years focused too heavily on containing problems rather than addressing them.
"'Keep apart' policies, developed so that children from rival gangs, or who for other reasons are likely to be violent to each other, are kept separate, have come to dominate.
"This has led to a collapse of any reasonable regime, has prevented many children from getting to education or training, delayed their access to health care, isolated them from meaningful human interaction and frustrated them to the point where violence and self-harm have become the means to express themselves or gain attention.
"There clearly needs to be a new approach which looks fundamentally to change behaviour and goes beyond merely trying to contain violence through ever more restrictive security and separation."
Despite efforts from staff and substantial support and resources from the government, Mr Argar said underlying challenges remained at Feltham A and progress needed to be quicker.
He said the government had appointed additional, experienced management staff and refurbishment would also be taking place.
"The governor, who is still relatively new in post, is working hard to drive improvement in an establishment which has one of the highest and most concentrated proportions of violent offenders in the country," he added.
May aswell change the name of this blog to ' in prison blog'.
ReplyDeleteGuest Blog author - PSOs have always been second class citizens in probation-world. Many moons ago (early 1990's) when they were known as Probation Service Assistants working under the direction of two or three designated POs, there was a ballot to strike for PSA pay - the strike was defeated because POs refused to go on strike in support of their PSA colleagues. That caused a lot of resentment & damaged what had previously been a (generally) harmonious working relationship.
ReplyDeleteWhen probation structures changed with The New Choreography (2001-ish), POs threw their hands up in horror when PSOs were offered caseloads and report-writing tasks. To be fair to the nay-sayers the imperative was a cost-saving exercise by a new breed of CEO-style bullies as opposed to a career development strategy by a nurturing employer, but the motivation for POs to be up-in-arms was about *their* terms & conditions, NOT about the impact on PSO staff.
I personally believe that PSOs should have resisted the changes pending improved pay at that time, but many were so frustrated they simply grasped the new roles in the hope they would be rewarded later. Er, no. They were just taken advantage of yet again.
So, don't feel PSO-bashing is a modern malaise. Its been around for 30 or so years - probably longer.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tim-flesher-cb-appointed-to-the-prison-service-pay-review-body
DeleteAnd what of TR2?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thirdsector.co.uk/government-accepts-not-involve-enough-charities-probation-service-reforms/policy-and-politics/article/1591819
'Getafix
The Ministry of Justice has accepted it did not do enough to involve charities in its flagship Transforming Rehabilitation programme.
DeleteIn minutes released by HM Treasury in response to recent Public Accounts Committee reports, the MoJ said Transforming Rehabilitation had been a failure and it would seek greater involvement from charities in probation services.
The MoJ’s statement follows a critical PAC report earlier this year about the programme and its failure, as well as criticism from the National Audit Office.
Under Transforming Rehabilitation, the government abolished 35 probation trusts and awarded contracts to 21 community rehabilitation companies to manage low- to medium-risk offenders in England and Wales.
Voluntary sector involvement in the scheme was far lower than the government had initially hoped, and a Justice Select Committee report in 2018 said the number of charities working in the rehabilitation system had reduced as a result of Transforming Rehabilitation.
The MoJ announced earlier this year that it would bring an end to the scheme in 2020 and move responsibility for offenders back into the public sector, a move that was welcomed by charities.
In its response, the MoJ accepted it had failed to involve voluntary sector organisations in delivering probation services on the scale promised, and said it was fully committed to giving charities a greater role in probation services.
A more flexible approach to commissioning should generate £280m for services, including those provided by more specialist and voluntary organisations, the response said.
The MoJ agreed it had let down offenders and those working in the justice system by enacting the reforms and said it would address the failings highlighted.
The department accepted the committee’s assertion that the "breakneck speed" with which Transforming Rehabilitation was implemented created an "unacceptable level of risk" and that the safeguards put in place to protect the taxpayer were insufficient.
It also accepted the committee’s conclusion that the reforms had led to an "underfunded and fragile probation market" that would be unable to cope with any further provider failures.
Community rehabilitation companies now have contingency plans in place to ensure any services are not affected by the collapse of a service provider, the MoJ said.
An overarching strategy to reduce reoffending is also being put in place, it added.
NAPO should not be charging anything to members to attend their own union's conference. Other unions don't.
ReplyDeleteThe whole idea of charging members to take part in their union's democracy is madness and distasteful.
who is the 7th justice minister?
ReplyDeleteRobert Buckland
Deletei give him 12 months justice is in a terminal mess. it will not be sorted. what is his history on justice?
Delete"In minutes released by HM Treasury in response to recent Public Accounts Committee reports, the MoJ said Transforming Rehabilitation had been a failure... The MoJ agreed it had let down offenders and those working in the justice system by enacting the reforms... The department accepted the committee’s assertion that the "breakneck speed" with which Transforming Rehabilitation was implemented created an "unacceptable level of risk" and that the safeguards put in place to protect the taxpayer were insufficient."
ReplyDeleteWho will be held accountable for this lamentable situation? Who will carry the can for the £hundreds-of-millions of taxpayer money wasted? Who will face the consequences of the many devastating losses caused by the imposition of TR - loss of lifelong careers, loss of financial security, loss of liberty?
Or for the loss of life?
Grayling? No. He couldn't take responsibility for his own bowel movements;
Spurr? No. He's now fucked off with bulging pockets;
Romeo? No. She's now Permanent Secretary of the Department for International Trade;
Brennan? No. For her public service, Brennan was appointed Dame Commander of the Order of the Bath in 2013.
Anyone? No. Not one person involved with or responsible for creating, imposing or otherwise implementing the travesty that is TR has taken any hit whatsoever.
Staff - hundreds of jobs cut, thousands lost overall (including early retirements, career changes, ill health)
'Clients' - thousands have lost access to meaningful support, their liberty and/or opportunities to make changes in their lives because of the shite that is TR.
The State will punish, impugn, deprive & deride those it believes have committed 'offences'. But when The State breaches trust, breaches contracts, breaches human rights... Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Now we have a PM who embodies all of the duplicity, incompetence, arrogance & self-styled elitism that was central to the TR chirade.
'They' are safe as houses. 'They' act with impunity.
We are fucked.
0751 I completely agree with you especially " we are fucked " - I'm more concerned now BJ is in power than I was before with all the changes that lie ahead of us as the meddling maniacs that we have at the helm of the CRC's , staff and service user's alike will continue to be well and truly shafted and I would say to my PSO colleague get out whilst you still have the mental capacity to do so as the bastards will and continue to drive us into the ground as our so called leaders don't give a shit about anyone but themselves
ReplyDeleteSo let me get this right. PO’’s attend the same conference as Guest Blogger 75 but should pay more for their tickets because they earn more?!
ReplyDeleteHopefully this will soon be applied everywhere. My neighbours earn more than me. Perhaps they can be charged more for petrol, groceries and utility bills so I can be charged less.
Hmm. Do you think it's possible that your neighbours pay more in income tax?
DeleteFool.
Oh so I should pay more in income tax and more for my Napo conference ticket too?! You’re a selfish sort !
DeleteWhy is the union not holding the government to account for it's now publicly accepted failure of tr and requesting they cough up the equal pay that we would have had if we had not been shafted off to the crcs. The government were able to find money to bail companies out.
ReplyDelete@ Guest Blogger 75. Yes you should pay £50 just like everyone else has to. Stop the blame game for your decade-long stagnation. Put your arse in gear and get a promotion or better paid job.
ReplyDelete