*****
I would say that 21 months training is far too little. I would also say that if you have to ask what advise, assist and befriend even means, then you're arguing against something you have no understanding of. I would also say that basing your argument around something said once by a singular probation officer is plain nonsensical.
I would say that 21 months training is far too little. I would also say that if you have to ask what advise, assist and befriend even means, then you're arguing against something you have no understanding of. I would also say that basing your argument around something said once by a singular probation officer is plain nonsensical.
******
I doubt that [above] finds the 'concept' of advise, assist, and befriend too difficult to grasp. I suspect the words are well understood. But if it's so glaringly obvious what it provided then that can't be provided by a good practitioner now, why is [above] still waiting for the example that's been requested. I agree that the 1980/90s remit of the Probation Service allowed more freedom to work imaginatively (and I certainly trusted my employer more and felt less badgered), but it also allowed some staff to do little or nothing... to the extent, I recall, that gave rise to the term 'positive inaction' (doing nothing at all in the management of a sentence, including trying to deliver the sentence or enforce non-compliance, in case it negatively impacted on the service user).
I doubt that [above] finds the 'concept' of advise, assist, and befriend too difficult to grasp. I suspect the words are well understood. But if it's so glaringly obvious what it provided then that can't be provided by a good practitioner now, why is [above] still waiting for the example that's been requested. I agree that the 1980/90s remit of the Probation Service allowed more freedom to work imaginatively (and I certainly trusted my employer more and felt less badgered), but it also allowed some staff to do little or nothing... to the extent, I recall, that gave rise to the term 'positive inaction' (doing nothing at all in the management of a sentence, including trying to deliver the sentence or enforce non-compliance, in case it negatively impacted on the service user).
What I hear in many posts on this site is the voices of those who weren't doing much then, and who are now outraged that expectations had to change as a result and have steadfastly refused to try and adapt since. I'm not happy with lots of things in Probation and I try and work with and around them in the best interest of the individuals on my caseload. If I felt the whole situation was so utterly doomed and futile I'd have left 15 or 20 years ago. And yes, it was me yesterday that posted the first of the comments reprinted above... and I suspect I'm at the opposite end of the career spectrum from [above]. People can't still be scratching their heads about why the previous model of Probation wasn't really sustainable. Can they?
--oo00oo--
Lets revisit Guest Blog 26 from Monday, 23 February 2015 to help answer the question:-
Advise, Assist and Befriend
I've seen a lot of changes in probation over the years. When I started working in probation most of my colleagues tended to have 20+ year service records, while managers had been in post for like forever. The success of qualification as a Probation Officer was a real achievement, particularly when working alongside such long serving staff, some with previous careers in professions including mining, finance, teaching and the military. In those days you had to be qualified for at least two years to supervise a dangerous offender or lifer, you wouldn't be allocated a Parole Report unless you had already proved your worth in both report writing and through-care, and you needed an arms length of quality service to become a manager and a lifetime of service to become a senior manager or Chief Officer. Nowadays the new recruits can be allocated a caseload of high risk offenders on the first day and management is an escape route for those that have the least understanding of probation work. Pay increases were on an annual basis and I'm sure pay bands used to be a lot higher too.
There were always unique characters in probation offices, such as the good-natured colleague that supervised all the lifers and was always visiting prisons, the colleague that was an expert on mental health and seemed in need of the service too, the rebellious Union colleagues that management revered, you know the ones that were eventually seconded off to the local prison (the elephants graveyard for burnt out probation officers), the colleague that would bring in token presents for the most isolated clients at Xmas and allegedly on occasion would invite the most needy to dinner at Xmas and Easter (to which management turned a blind eye), the colleagues that awoke the office with Reggae tunes first thing every morning (if you were in early enough to hear), the colleague that seemed to have mastered the art of avoiding all unnecessary meetings in place of fag and coffee breaks, the colleague that was always trying to bend and reinterpret legislation and sentencing guidelines (sometimes summoned to appear before Crown Court Judges to explain their proposals), the colleague that wrote Pre Sentence Reports so lengthy that the rest of us went into hiding at gate keeping time, and the colleague whose Pre Sentence Reports were so short they could fit on two sides of A4. What united us all was the value of being probation officers and the desire to help our clients to change and improve their lives
I think I joined up when Probation had just about clawed back its status as a worthwhile profession after Michael Howard had tried to kill it off, but since qualification it's been downhill all the way. Unfortunately much of our good work seems to have been eroded and this has escalated under recent governments and the introduction of TR. Pay freezes and 1% pay rises are now an expectation, sickness and stress levels have risen even for the most experienced staff, probation management (particularly those recently retired CEO's) sold us down the river and told us to say "thank you", and we've lost a disproportionate amount of experienced staff to CRC's to be replaced by probation (PQF) trainees fresh out of university, some of which don't really seem to know what probation work actually is, or don't really care. Sad but true.
I joined probation a few years after leaving university too. I had the experience of youth work and being employed with various non-statutory rehabilitation agencies, and before that manual labour was my thing and long before that I was a delinquent and subsequently a prisoner, that's the experience I brought. On the last point (now that I have your attention), probation believed in me and in turn I've believed in every client I've supervised. I've once known a client return to probation as an employee, and I've counted amongst my probation officer friends over the years a few former football hooligans, two reformed prostitutes, numerous recovered drug addicts and alcoholics (some in relapse if the Xmas party is anything to go by) and a few convicted of the more minor indiscretions.
So I'm not at risk of being accused of glorifying offending or bringing probation into disrepute. I add that over the years my undesirable bunch of probation officer friends has also included a range of identities and top notch exemplary characters from the lowest classes to the borderline upper class, and even two 'new money' lottery winners still actually coming to work. I've also been lucky enough to work with some of the best probation managers, and thankfully my current manager is 'old skool' and and falls into this category.
What binds us together in probation is the contribution we make to society in supporting probation clients. We hold a basic set of values believing every person can change, given adequate support, motivation and opportunity, and this can shines through for many no matter whether they qualified with DipSW or DipPS. Ever since the Probation of Offenders Act 1907 provided the statutory foundation for the probation service we've been 'advising, assisting and befriending' those under our supervision. A few weeks ago when prepping for a parole hearing I came across documentation from what was then the Probation and Aftercare Service and I thought to myself, "even though it's hard to see amidst the MoJ limescale and gloss, we still are that service".
Despite all the changes, the IT failures, the TR omnishambles and the combined impact of the ideas of Michael Howard, Chris Grayling and all the other probation-haters, we will always be probation officers doing probation work. I won't pretend that probation officers are not overworked or are sometimes too preoccupied with assessing risk, MAPPA and "protecting the public". And we know when we attend hearings with barristers and psychologists that we're evidently not lettered enough to earn anything more than £27 per hour in providing our opinions. However, for whom the Courts think fit to be placed under our supervision every colleague I know takes their duty seriously in helping probation clients to improve their quality of life, which is what probation work has been about for over 100 years.
The reason for this now rambling post was to respond to the comments on this blog from probation clients, the ones that have unfortunately had a negative experience of probation. I occasionally comment here as 'Probation Officer' and I used to Tweet as 'SaveProbation', so this is an addition to my previous two-pence worth. A while back I fell out with my probation bosses over too many outspoken views and so moved on to pastures new, but I returned a while later because of my love for probation work, albeit less active in the campaign against TR (which has now been lost). The disclosure about my own background and that of some of my colleagues is to highlight that probation officers come from all walks of life as do the clients we work with.
I cringe at the implementation of too many conduct policies, vetting procedures and the now forced adherence to the Civil Service Code, which I think has become partly responsible for some of the rigid probation practices that undermine 'best practice'. This is unfortunate as our gift is that we're real people with real experiences and we use this in our work. Saying that, we do need forms of appropriate regulation and this is not an excuse for the discontent towards probation supervision, but if recruitment does not allow for variation and diversity then we may as well buy a bunch of robot probation officers like they have in the USA (probably coming to a CRC near you soon). Sometimes we don't have the time to bend over backwards for clients, we can't provide flats in Mayfair or jobs with the Bank of England, and yes sometimes we do have to refuse a release from prison or return clients to custody. We can't please all of the people all of the time.
I understand the frustrations of both supervising and of being supervised, and I have in the past come across probation officers that wrongly believed that probation clients should not be anxious or angry about having to come to probation and should even welcome their supervision. I've witnessed probation clients wrongly breached for arriving 10 minutes late and even learned of clients recalled to prison for trying to 'chat up' their probation officer or expressing a few profanities during supervision. I remember when 'supervision' wrongly began to take a back seat to CBT programmes and the activities on offer from outside organisations became increasingly more important, and when Community Service worryingly became a way to generate an income and create photo opportunities for local politicians and Police and Crime Commissioners.
What I'm saying is that we all know that there has been problems in probation for some time, made worse by TR, but I've also seen all of the good work. Some say they took away probation's social work roots and others say they turned probation into an enforcement agency, but they did not. Every probation office I enter has the same old mix of varied staff all trying to work towards the greater good. The age and experience of new entrants to probation officer training seems to be ever decreasing with the latest recruits fresh out of university, but I still don't think the ethos of probation work can ever be removed because by the time the 'nodding dogs' have escaped to management roles the rest would have already begun evolving into "poxy social work types" (as I was recently referred to).
The government is constantly banging on about reoffending rates but what's usually omitted is the fantastic news that the majority of people on probation do not reoffend. I know my own work has aided these figures and this is a summary just from today for those wanting an insight into probation work. After dropping the kids off at school I arrived at work, fighting the traffic to arrive at my usual time. I checked my emails and picked up a file and on to visit a local'ish prison. The visit was to discuss release plans for a man soon to be released after serving a very long sentence. He has no home to go to and no family to support him, but I've got him a place in a probation hostel and he's happy with that. We finished with a bit of a chat about Morgan Freeman's parole speech in the Shawshank Redemption, one of his favourite movies.
Two hours later I was back at my desk going through emails ranging from concerns about a young offender to gripes about what may be lurking in the office fridge. I tend to pick up the phone to respond to emails it's faster and I don't need to evidence everything I do with an email. As I was on my way to join colleagues for a team lunch I bumped into a client on his way in to see me unplanned. He wanted to use the phone to call the Benefits Agency so I put my coat back inside and sat with him while he made the call. He's not very articulate (and "where's my effing money" never works) so I explained the situation to the person on the other end of the line to get the ball rolling. 40 minutes later and after listening to his reflection on his recent melt down over Xmas, job done and I managed to grab a sandwich to eat at my desk.
Over the next few hours there was the usual steady stream of emails, telephone calls and clients in my direction. At the same time I was working on a Pre-Sentence Report due in Court in a few days time. The person in question is suitable for a community sentence and that's what I'm recommending. I try to keep people out of prison wherever possible, and I try to emphasise rehabilitation over punishment. My to-do list also includes a Parole Report, a recall review report, a few risk assessments and supervision plans, and I'm usually running a bit behind in updating the contact logs with details of every phone call and email and every visit from a probation client.
It had already turned dark outside and was nearing the end of the day. The last client through the door is young and headstrong so I always try to spend a bit more time with him. He's really started to do well since being released from prison and we have a chat about his future plans to keep him focused. He failed his driving test in the past week so we talked about that too and I gave him a few tips for his retest. In return he let me hear his lyrics in his latest Youtube video, which thankfully only lasted a few minutes.
The last part of my day is usually spent updating the contact logs, and then finishing outstanding prices of work. I managed to complete a recall review report ready to be countersigned and sent to the recall unit. The client in question has outstanding offences so I'm recommending that he's not released from prison just yet. His solicitor had been constantly phoning me about this decision and doesn't seem to understand legal processes so I'm no longer taking their calls until my report had been submitted.
Just as I was having a chat with colleagues and about to switch off the computer an email came through with confirmation that a prisoner due to be released will not be detained by the immigration section. I rang his parents with the good news and my working day ended on a positive note. It was a long day but a good day, as are most days in probation. There were no crisis situations, I wasn't called a "cunt", nobody turned up homeless, and there wasn't a fire drill so it was all good.
It's probably a good point to get back to the point of the article, which is to remind probation clients that we are here to help and we are darn good at it. I'm not interested in claiming to protect the public, provide a service to victims or to enforce 'proper' punishments. My job as a Probation Officer, not an Offender Manager which is an awful term, is to advise, assist, befriend, help, support, motivate and rehabilitate. Anybody can be an 'Offender Manager' (whatever that is) and in my book impersonating a Probation Officer should become a criminal offence.
The Government meddling and the introduction of TR will not change my ethos and nor will the business plans of the new owners of private probation companies. As the news of the cost cutting strategies of the new private probation companies begin to emerge it is quickly becoming apparent that they may have bitten off more than they can chew. The Offender Rehabilitation Act is built on too much controversy, TTG to be delivered by privateers and charities is already a looming failure, and only an idiot would introduce a Post Sentence Supervision strategy that is abbreviated and referred to as PSS.
Probation work cannot be properly costed because if it were we'd be getting a lot more than £27 per hour. Nor can our work be time restricted or dictated by government whims, that's if rehabilitation is to remain an achievable outcome. When probation services are in tatters, when a new Justice Secretary is in post and when all those probation Chief Officers and management types that aided and abetting the sale of probation are forced to lower their heads in shame, we will continue to say "We told you so" and we'll carry on with advising, assisting and befriending.
Probation Officer (10-20 years to retire!)
Advise, Assist and Befriend
I've seen a lot of changes in probation over the years. When I started working in probation most of my colleagues tended to have 20+ year service records, while managers had been in post for like forever. The success of qualification as a Probation Officer was a real achievement, particularly when working alongside such long serving staff, some with previous careers in professions including mining, finance, teaching and the military. In those days you had to be qualified for at least two years to supervise a dangerous offender or lifer, you wouldn't be allocated a Parole Report unless you had already proved your worth in both report writing and through-care, and you needed an arms length of quality service to become a manager and a lifetime of service to become a senior manager or Chief Officer. Nowadays the new recruits can be allocated a caseload of high risk offenders on the first day and management is an escape route for those that have the least understanding of probation work. Pay increases were on an annual basis and I'm sure pay bands used to be a lot higher too.
There were always unique characters in probation offices, such as the good-natured colleague that supervised all the lifers and was always visiting prisons, the colleague that was an expert on mental health and seemed in need of the service too, the rebellious Union colleagues that management revered, you know the ones that were eventually seconded off to the local prison (the elephants graveyard for burnt out probation officers), the colleague that would bring in token presents for the most isolated clients at Xmas and allegedly on occasion would invite the most needy to dinner at Xmas and Easter (to which management turned a blind eye), the colleagues that awoke the office with Reggae tunes first thing every morning (if you were in early enough to hear), the colleague that seemed to have mastered the art of avoiding all unnecessary meetings in place of fag and coffee breaks, the colleague that was always trying to bend and reinterpret legislation and sentencing guidelines (sometimes summoned to appear before Crown Court Judges to explain their proposals), the colleague that wrote Pre Sentence Reports so lengthy that the rest of us went into hiding at gate keeping time, and the colleague whose Pre Sentence Reports were so short they could fit on two sides of A4. What united us all was the value of being probation officers and the desire to help our clients to change and improve their lives
I think I joined up when Probation had just about clawed back its status as a worthwhile profession after Michael Howard had tried to kill it off, but since qualification it's been downhill all the way. Unfortunately much of our good work seems to have been eroded and this has escalated under recent governments and the introduction of TR. Pay freezes and 1% pay rises are now an expectation, sickness and stress levels have risen even for the most experienced staff, probation management (particularly those recently retired CEO's) sold us down the river and told us to say "thank you", and we've lost a disproportionate amount of experienced staff to CRC's to be replaced by probation (PQF) trainees fresh out of university, some of which don't really seem to know what probation work actually is, or don't really care. Sad but true.
I joined probation a few years after leaving university too. I had the experience of youth work and being employed with various non-statutory rehabilitation agencies, and before that manual labour was my thing and long before that I was a delinquent and subsequently a prisoner, that's the experience I brought. On the last point (now that I have your attention), probation believed in me and in turn I've believed in every client I've supervised. I've once known a client return to probation as an employee, and I've counted amongst my probation officer friends over the years a few former football hooligans, two reformed prostitutes, numerous recovered drug addicts and alcoholics (some in relapse if the Xmas party is anything to go by) and a few convicted of the more minor indiscretions.
So I'm not at risk of being accused of glorifying offending or bringing probation into disrepute. I add that over the years my undesirable bunch of probation officer friends has also included a range of identities and top notch exemplary characters from the lowest classes to the borderline upper class, and even two 'new money' lottery winners still actually coming to work. I've also been lucky enough to work with some of the best probation managers, and thankfully my current manager is 'old skool' and and falls into this category.
What binds us together in probation is the contribution we make to society in supporting probation clients. We hold a basic set of values believing every person can change, given adequate support, motivation and opportunity, and this can shines through for many no matter whether they qualified with DipSW or DipPS. Ever since the Probation of Offenders Act 1907 provided the statutory foundation for the probation service we've been 'advising, assisting and befriending' those under our supervision. A few weeks ago when prepping for a parole hearing I came across documentation from what was then the Probation and Aftercare Service and I thought to myself, "even though it's hard to see amidst the MoJ limescale and gloss, we still are that service".
Despite all the changes, the IT failures, the TR omnishambles and the combined impact of the ideas of Michael Howard, Chris Grayling and all the other probation-haters, we will always be probation officers doing probation work. I won't pretend that probation officers are not overworked or are sometimes too preoccupied with assessing risk, MAPPA and "protecting the public". And we know when we attend hearings with barristers and psychologists that we're evidently not lettered enough to earn anything more than £27 per hour in providing our opinions. However, for whom the Courts think fit to be placed under our supervision every colleague I know takes their duty seriously in helping probation clients to improve their quality of life, which is what probation work has been about for over 100 years.
The reason for this now rambling post was to respond to the comments on this blog from probation clients, the ones that have unfortunately had a negative experience of probation. I occasionally comment here as 'Probation Officer' and I used to Tweet as 'SaveProbation', so this is an addition to my previous two-pence worth. A while back I fell out with my probation bosses over too many outspoken views and so moved on to pastures new, but I returned a while later because of my love for probation work, albeit less active in the campaign against TR (which has now been lost). The disclosure about my own background and that of some of my colleagues is to highlight that probation officers come from all walks of life as do the clients we work with.
I cringe at the implementation of too many conduct policies, vetting procedures and the now forced adherence to the Civil Service Code, which I think has become partly responsible for some of the rigid probation practices that undermine 'best practice'. This is unfortunate as our gift is that we're real people with real experiences and we use this in our work. Saying that, we do need forms of appropriate regulation and this is not an excuse for the discontent towards probation supervision, but if recruitment does not allow for variation and diversity then we may as well buy a bunch of robot probation officers like they have in the USA (probably coming to a CRC near you soon). Sometimes we don't have the time to bend over backwards for clients, we can't provide flats in Mayfair or jobs with the Bank of England, and yes sometimes we do have to refuse a release from prison or return clients to custody. We can't please all of the people all of the time.
I understand the frustrations of both supervising and of being supervised, and I have in the past come across probation officers that wrongly believed that probation clients should not be anxious or angry about having to come to probation and should even welcome their supervision. I've witnessed probation clients wrongly breached for arriving 10 minutes late and even learned of clients recalled to prison for trying to 'chat up' their probation officer or expressing a few profanities during supervision. I remember when 'supervision' wrongly began to take a back seat to CBT programmes and the activities on offer from outside organisations became increasingly more important, and when Community Service worryingly became a way to generate an income and create photo opportunities for local politicians and Police and Crime Commissioners.
What I'm saying is that we all know that there has been problems in probation for some time, made worse by TR, but I've also seen all of the good work. Some say they took away probation's social work roots and others say they turned probation into an enforcement agency, but they did not. Every probation office I enter has the same old mix of varied staff all trying to work towards the greater good. The age and experience of new entrants to probation officer training seems to be ever decreasing with the latest recruits fresh out of university, but I still don't think the ethos of probation work can ever be removed because by the time the 'nodding dogs' have escaped to management roles the rest would have already begun evolving into "poxy social work types" (as I was recently referred to).
The government is constantly banging on about reoffending rates but what's usually omitted is the fantastic news that the majority of people on probation do not reoffend. I know my own work has aided these figures and this is a summary just from today for those wanting an insight into probation work. After dropping the kids off at school I arrived at work, fighting the traffic to arrive at my usual time. I checked my emails and picked up a file and on to visit a local'ish prison. The visit was to discuss release plans for a man soon to be released after serving a very long sentence. He has no home to go to and no family to support him, but I've got him a place in a probation hostel and he's happy with that. We finished with a bit of a chat about Morgan Freeman's parole speech in the Shawshank Redemption, one of his favourite movies.
Two hours later I was back at my desk going through emails ranging from concerns about a young offender to gripes about what may be lurking in the office fridge. I tend to pick up the phone to respond to emails it's faster and I don't need to evidence everything I do with an email. As I was on my way to join colleagues for a team lunch I bumped into a client on his way in to see me unplanned. He wanted to use the phone to call the Benefits Agency so I put my coat back inside and sat with him while he made the call. He's not very articulate (and "where's my effing money" never works) so I explained the situation to the person on the other end of the line to get the ball rolling. 40 minutes later and after listening to his reflection on his recent melt down over Xmas, job done and I managed to grab a sandwich to eat at my desk.
Over the next few hours there was the usual steady stream of emails, telephone calls and clients in my direction. At the same time I was working on a Pre-Sentence Report due in Court in a few days time. The person in question is suitable for a community sentence and that's what I'm recommending. I try to keep people out of prison wherever possible, and I try to emphasise rehabilitation over punishment. My to-do list also includes a Parole Report, a recall review report, a few risk assessments and supervision plans, and I'm usually running a bit behind in updating the contact logs with details of every phone call and email and every visit from a probation client.
It had already turned dark outside and was nearing the end of the day. The last client through the door is young and headstrong so I always try to spend a bit more time with him. He's really started to do well since being released from prison and we have a chat about his future plans to keep him focused. He failed his driving test in the past week so we talked about that too and I gave him a few tips for his retest. In return he let me hear his lyrics in his latest Youtube video, which thankfully only lasted a few minutes.
The last part of my day is usually spent updating the contact logs, and then finishing outstanding prices of work. I managed to complete a recall review report ready to be countersigned and sent to the recall unit. The client in question has outstanding offences so I'm recommending that he's not released from prison just yet. His solicitor had been constantly phoning me about this decision and doesn't seem to understand legal processes so I'm no longer taking their calls until my report had been submitted.
Just as I was having a chat with colleagues and about to switch off the computer an email came through with confirmation that a prisoner due to be released will not be detained by the immigration section. I rang his parents with the good news and my working day ended on a positive note. It was a long day but a good day, as are most days in probation. There were no crisis situations, I wasn't called a "cunt", nobody turned up homeless, and there wasn't a fire drill so it was all good.
It's probably a good point to get back to the point of the article, which is to remind probation clients that we are here to help and we are darn good at it. I'm not interested in claiming to protect the public, provide a service to victims or to enforce 'proper' punishments. My job as a Probation Officer, not an Offender Manager which is an awful term, is to advise, assist, befriend, help, support, motivate and rehabilitate. Anybody can be an 'Offender Manager' (whatever that is) and in my book impersonating a Probation Officer should become a criminal offence.
The Government meddling and the introduction of TR will not change my ethos and nor will the business plans of the new owners of private probation companies. As the news of the cost cutting strategies of the new private probation companies begin to emerge it is quickly becoming apparent that they may have bitten off more than they can chew. The Offender Rehabilitation Act is built on too much controversy, TTG to be delivered by privateers and charities is already a looming failure, and only an idiot would introduce a Post Sentence Supervision strategy that is abbreviated and referred to as PSS.
Probation work cannot be properly costed because if it were we'd be getting a lot more than £27 per hour. Nor can our work be time restricted or dictated by government whims, that's if rehabilitation is to remain an achievable outcome. When probation services are in tatters, when a new Justice Secretary is in post and when all those probation Chief Officers and management types that aided and abetting the sale of probation are forced to lower their heads in shame, we will continue to say "We told you so" and we'll carry on with advising, assisting and befriending.
Probation Officer (10-20 years to retire!)
--oo00oo--
£27 quid an hour!!!!!!!! Bloody hell that's an absolute fortune for most people who will never earn close to that in their working lives, including most of the people you supervise. For that £27 an hour it is not unreasonable to expect that the person earning that do their job absolutely brilliantly at all time: no cutting corners, no failing to uphold the law, always treating the client as a human being, not misrepresenting things in reports etc. So my question is, is why have I now had four probation officers who have all failed to earn their £27 an hour by not doing their job properly??
£27 quid an hour!!!!!!!! Bloody hell that's an absolute fortune for most people who will never earn close to that in their working lives, including most of the people you supervise. For that £27 an hour it is not unreasonable to expect that the person earning that do their job absolutely brilliantly at all time: no cutting corners, no failing to uphold the law, always treating the client as a human being, not misrepresenting things in reports etc. So my question is, is why have I now had four probation officers who have all failed to earn their £27 an hour by not doing their job properly??
******
£27/hour gross is about £1000/week (@ 37 hour week) That's £50K p.a. - certainly NOT what most probation staff are paid. I think there's been some confusion or over-excitement. Still not in the realms of Jack "I need to earn a living" Straw, expecting £5,000 a day over & above his gilt-edged MP's pension, exit bonus (a tidy sum) & any other personal &/or financial benefits he's managed to accrue whilst being paid by the taxpayer; not to mention assisting the UberWeasel in taking us to an illegal war. It is nevertheless useful to remember that the minimum wage is £6.50/hour, whilst I would guess most probation staff are paid somewhere between £10 & £20 per hour.
£27/hour gross is about £1000/week (@ 37 hour week) That's £50K p.a. - certainly NOT what most probation staff are paid. I think there's been some confusion or over-excitement. Still not in the realms of Jack "I need to earn a living" Straw, expecting £5,000 a day over & above his gilt-edged MP's pension, exit bonus (a tidy sum) & any other personal &/or financial benefits he's managed to accrue whilst being paid by the taxpayer; not to mention assisting the UberWeasel in taking us to an illegal war. It is nevertheless useful to remember that the minimum wage is £6.50/hour, whilst I would guess most probation staff are paid somewhere between £10 & £20 per hour.
*******
You can't drill holes in concrete with a plastic spoon, regardless of how much you're being paid! It's a sad fact, but some people are so entrenched within their own belief that they are always 'right' they really do miss out on a lot in life. My real regret in life is that I burned that many bridges in my life before I realised I actually did have some level of ability, I now wake up every day in the knowledge that what ever success the day brings, I can never actually realise my full potential. It hurts too that that is because I didn't take opportunities and assistance when it was available. It's my own fault, and my cross alone to bear.
You can't drill holes in concrete with a plastic spoon, regardless of how much you're being paid! It's a sad fact, but some people are so entrenched within their own belief that they are always 'right' they really do miss out on a lot in life. My real regret in life is that I burned that many bridges in my life before I realised I actually did have some level of ability, I now wake up every day in the knowledge that what ever success the day brings, I can never actually realise my full potential. It hurts too that that is because I didn't take opportunities and assistance when it was available. It's my own fault, and my cross alone to bear.
I have a great deal of respect for todays guest blogger, because they obviously did not make the same errors. I've had many probation officers over the last few decades, and one or two I didn't really like, but that didn't exclude me from getting the help I asked for. To my mind getting four on the trot that have all failed in their duty suggests the real problem doesn't lay with probation, four on the trot does not only suggest piss poor luck, but defies all the laws probability. It's a sad thing to look back on a life of missed opportunity and unfulfilled potential.
Maybe by meeting the world halfway you wont make the same mistakes I have, and who knows, if you grab all on offer you may end up with a job that pays £127 an hour. 'Getafix'
Maybe by meeting the world halfway you wont make the same mistakes I have, and who knows, if you grab all on offer you may end up with a job that pays £127 an hour. 'Getafix'
*****
Bear in mind £27 per hour is an agency rate and before tax. These amounts differ between areas. The average PO salary ranges from about £28k - £35k per year.
Bear in mind £27 per hour is an agency rate and before tax. These amounts differ between areas. The average PO salary ranges from about £28k - £35k per year.
******
Sorry to come back so soon, but I think the real riches and rewards contained in todays guest blog go far beyond monetary remuneration. I hope todays discussions focus on the real value contained in todays post, and not the hourly rate of pay. 'Getafix'
Sorry to come back so soon, but I think the real riches and rewards contained in todays guest blog go far beyond monetary remuneration. I hope todays discussions focus on the real value contained in todays post, and not the hourly rate of pay. 'Getafix'
******
You are, in my view, absolutely right 'Getafix - there are more valuable things in life than cash payments. Sadly not everyone agrees, and most are those allegedly 'leading the country' or 'representing' their constituents.
You are, in my view, absolutely right 'Getafix - there are more valuable things in life than cash payments. Sadly not everyone agrees, and most are those allegedly 'leading the country' or 'representing' their constituents.
******
Comment overheard today in CRC. "Our job should be reducing reoffending rates, not dealing with all the regions f***ing social problems". Methinks reality is dawning.
Comment overheard today in CRC. "Our job should be reducing reoffending rates, not dealing with all the regions f***ing social problems". Methinks reality is dawning.
******
Maybe, just about right now, they are realising that re-offending, or indeed offending, is down to 'f***ing social problems'.
Maybe, just about right now, they are realising that re-offending, or indeed offending, is down to 'f***ing social problems'.
*****
As another many many years in, I too have worked through many types of change and up to this point have always been able to find a way through whilst carrying on without really changing the core. However, this is the biggest and worst mess of them all. The abusive way the so called management are prepared to behave whilst deluding themselves, their sycophants and those 'above' them that they are actually achieving anything is slick / slimy management speak and the ability to present the Emperors New Clothes seems to be their only skill. They achieve nothing. Their job is to resource and manage the worker to produce. They do neither. They produce nothing. They do not protect the public, reduce crime or victims. Yet they have the gall to sit around in meetings, oh so important, best frocks and suits and think they can come up with processes, solutions, when they could not, had no interest in or did not, do the job of protecting the public by reducing crime, they now seem able to persuade those who know no better that they actually know what they are talking about.
As another many many years in, I too have worked through many types of change and up to this point have always been able to find a way through whilst carrying on without really changing the core. However, this is the biggest and worst mess of them all. The abusive way the so called management are prepared to behave whilst deluding themselves, their sycophants and those 'above' them that they are actually achieving anything is slick / slimy management speak and the ability to present the Emperors New Clothes seems to be their only skill. They achieve nothing. Their job is to resource and manage the worker to produce. They do neither. They produce nothing. They do not protect the public, reduce crime or victims. Yet they have the gall to sit around in meetings, oh so important, best frocks and suits and think they can come up with processes, solutions, when they could not, had no interest in or did not, do the job of protecting the public by reducing crime, they now seem able to persuade those who know no better that they actually know what they are talking about.
Consult they say. Utter rubbish they wouldn't and don't know how to consult. No wonder it's a mess, cobbled together, ridiculously lengthy and ineffective. They don't even have the decency to proof read the stuff. Amendment after amendment Now, having given themselves plenty of time to get their dishonest self affirming, haven't I done well, stuff to send up the line. What manager tells their manager they are actually hopeless at their job? They forgot all about the 'bottom up' appraisal process conveniently and quickly didn't they! Now they reckon we have had enough time to have been able to work through their mire and let's pretend the months since June just didn't happen.
*****
Good blog and yes, familiar! My respect and admiration goes to 'Getafix, who always causes me to check I'm still doing the job well and have a strong allegiance to those I work for and with! I consider myself lucky to have a job I love and a reasonable income, although no pay rises anymore as I've been in a while, however a colleague pointed out, no pay rise is actually a reduction in my pension. So for anyone who begrudges us payment, it's not all its cracked up to be especially as I now have to work until I'm 67! I've never been scared of hard work and will keep going, although I will do so with the same attitude expressed by today's guest blogger!
Good blog and yes, familiar! My respect and admiration goes to 'Getafix, who always causes me to check I'm still doing the job well and have a strong allegiance to those I work for and with! I consider myself lucky to have a job I love and a reasonable income, although no pay rises anymore as I've been in a while, however a colleague pointed out, no pay rise is actually a reduction in my pension. So for anyone who begrudges us payment, it's not all its cracked up to be especially as I now have to work until I'm 67! I've never been scared of hard work and will keep going, although I will do so with the same attitude expressed by today's guest blogger!
*****
I have tried to close my ears and eyes to all the bull shit speak that people seem to think they need to spew to sound as though they have something to say: "driving the..." "mobilisation..." "reconfiguration..." I try to remember why I chose to do this work, but I notice that, increasingly, those who come before the courts, are utterly irrelevant to the new and unnecessarily complex systems and processes dumped on us. CG has set out to destroy the CJS - and the notion of 'justice seen to be done' - by replacing it with a production line set at such a pace we will all be too busy with our faces stuck in yet another shitty IT tool that doesn't work to notice exactly who is passing through the doors of the court. Once an error has occurred, it tends to be compounded as it travels along what is now an increasingly bureaucratic journey. The excellent reviews coming out of Hanson & White and others, all now counts for nothing, because all that matters now is the market, the volume, and process. I mourn the simplicity and efficiency of what has been destroyed.
I have tried to close my ears and eyes to all the bull shit speak that people seem to think they need to spew to sound as though they have something to say: "driving the..." "mobilisation..." "reconfiguration..." I try to remember why I chose to do this work, but I notice that, increasingly, those who come before the courts, are utterly irrelevant to the new and unnecessarily complex systems and processes dumped on us. CG has set out to destroy the CJS - and the notion of 'justice seen to be done' - by replacing it with a production line set at such a pace we will all be too busy with our faces stuck in yet another shitty IT tool that doesn't work to notice exactly who is passing through the doors of the court. Once an error has occurred, it tends to be compounded as it travels along what is now an increasingly bureaucratic journey. The excellent reviews coming out of Hanson & White and others, all now counts for nothing, because all that matters now is the market, the volume, and process. I mourn the simplicity and efficiency of what has been destroyed.
*****
Everything that has ever come out of any serious case review has been completely ignored and abolished. Lets remember this when the Serious Case Reviews start pouring out in the future - and when they do lets bombard the MOJ and the media with the reasons for the failings, reminding them how we repeated said what would happen. The more pipes you put into a system, the greater the risk of leaks - that's the only thing I remember being said by a previous ACO - the very one who as a CEO was known for the JFDI quote.
Everything that has ever come out of any serious case review has been completely ignored and abolished. Lets remember this when the Serious Case Reviews start pouring out in the future - and when they do lets bombard the MOJ and the media with the reasons for the failings, reminding them how we repeated said what would happen. The more pipes you put into a system, the greater the risk of leaks - that's the only thing I remember being said by a previous ACO - the very one who as a CEO was known for the JFDI quote.
*****
As the guest blogger I'm grateful to read those familiarising with my experiences. Despite all the changes forced upon us we are a 'probation family' united by our work (long may it last). Totally agree with anon 00:13, I also consider myself lucky to have a job.
Just to respond to Anon 9:10 and 9:33, £27 (gross) per hour was a big city agency rate. I referred to this rate to show our maximum monetary worth, which is not as much as you think when all the relevant reductions have been made, and then compare it to all the other "professionals" in the room. I think it's reduced now and about £24 (gross) on average. Permanent Qualified probation officers (which I am) are not paid hourly and earn between £28,000 to £35,000 a year. Whatever the pay rate we all work much more than the 37 hours per week we're paid for.
It's a decent income and I'd love to earn more, but I doubt anyone joins probation primarily for the money, which means we have a lot of staff that love their job. Probation should though do more to promote serving probation officers as justice consultants of sorts (just my opinion), if it had then maybe we'd have had more of a say in NOMS and TR.
'Getafix', thanks for your comments and it's never too late.
Just to respond to Anon 9:10 and 9:33, £27 (gross) per hour was a big city agency rate. I referred to this rate to show our maximum monetary worth, which is not as much as you think when all the relevant reductions have been made, and then compare it to all the other "professionals" in the room. I think it's reduced now and about £24 (gross) on average. Permanent Qualified probation officers (which I am) are not paid hourly and earn between £28,000 to £35,000 a year. Whatever the pay rate we all work much more than the 37 hours per week we're paid for.
It's a decent income and I'd love to earn more, but I doubt anyone joins probation primarily for the money, which means we have a lot of staff that love their job. Probation should though do more to promote serving probation officers as justice consultants of sorts (just my opinion), if it had then maybe we'd have had more of a say in NOMS and TR.
'Getafix', thanks for your comments and it's never too late.
bbc r4 womans hour - discussion on women in prison - now, live or bbc sounds whenever it suits
ReplyDeleteSeen on the internet:-
Delete"Been retired X years now and I see some things haven't changed. Just been listening to Lucy Frazer talking on Women's Hour justifying building 500 new prison spaces for women. Her reason? Because the government are employing 20,000 more police officers, WTF??"
"I agree that the 1980/90s remit of the Probation Service allowed more freedom to work imaginatively... but it also allowed some staff to do little or nothing... to the extent, I recall, that gave rise to the term 'positive inaction' (doing nothing at all in the management of a sentence, including trying to deliver the sentence or enforce non-compliance, in case it negatively impacted on the service user)."
ReplyDeleteInteresting point that rings true of a handful of cynical individuals who misappropriated the valid theory of radical non-intervention to excuse their lazy arse behaviour (yep, they've always been around.
This is a good recent article (& not too long):
https://sw2020covid19.group.shef.ac.uk/2020/07/14/why-radical-non-intervention-needs-some-help-like-we-all-do-a-response-to-forrester/
"It is worth reflecting too on some of the lessons we have learned throughout this pandemic. Across the world, and within the UK itself, it has become apparent that the state matters... it has also been clear that there is a need for state responses to the pandemic that do not seek to command and control and ride roughshod over local and community expertise... Radical non-intervention can open many doors... let us focus on reducing coercive state interventions"
The Forrester article referred to is here:
https://sw2020covid19.group.shef.ac.uk/2020/06/03/in-defence-of-radical-non-intervention-reconsidering-fox-hardings-value-positions/
"To adapt the words of Ronan Keating, sometimes we do social work best, when we do nothing at all."
This subject deserves covering in greater detail another time, but it should be remembered that this dates from the time when a Probation Order was not a sentence, but an alternative and the client had to consent to its imposition.
DeleteForrester argues that sometimes not doing anything is the most helpful thing you can do and that this is the essence of ‘radical non-intervention, noting this was a key aspect of the approach to youth justice historically. Two of us had our first jobs in social work in this area in the 1980s and Forrester’s points have prompted us to reflect on that time. We remember radical non-intervention, not as an end in-itself but as part of a broader philosophy, a philosophy that promoted decarceration. Thus, we were not anti-intervention per se but rather were opposed to interventions such as incarceration. Keeping young people out of the criminal justice system so that they did not get labelled with a criminal identity and, crucially, were offered the opportunity to ‘grow out’ of crime meant that workers offered bail support and intensive support programmes as alternatives to the courts. Indeed, in our attempts to provide a persuasive case to the courts and avoid custodial sentences, we were often criticised by colleagues in the youth services as we enforced, or acceded to, quite strict controls on young people’s liberty in the community, for example, through intensive supervision programmes.
On reflection, it is both amusing and depressing to note how hopelessly out of touch we were with wider developments in 1980s Britain. For example, we assumed that ‘growing out of crime’ meant getting a job, getting married and starting a family; all assumptions that were in many ways naïve, and, out of touch, in a climate of mass unemployment, de-industrialisation and significant shifts in sexuality and family forms. A salutary reminder of the complex and intricate interconnection of public issues and private troubles, a reality that so many radical non-interventionists seem oblivious to when rehearsing a narrative of non-intervention and ‘ageing out of the system’. There was, undeniably, value in this approach but, without a robust interrogation of the intersectional nature of these young men’s experiences, the model was wanting.
A bit of repeated read but what's the real deal. Advise is simple enough even direct now days seems to be a practice requirement. Good advice is the question.
ReplyDeleteAssist another simple task that could have been lift a pen to help move furniture or clothing. I don't recall many officers doing either. However befriending broke all the norms. If a service is to be professional it cannot be your friend. This is what breaks open the modern debate. Friends befriending open the door to look the other way . Lean on understanding closer emotional support. Also a rarity in those days. The words are defunct today get used to it and let probation move to its new home control direction enforcement so the new culture direction can bury social support services for another decade.
The words on the new hymn sheet:
ReplyDelete"get used to it and let probation move to its new home control direction enforcement so the new culture direction can bury social support services for another decade."
That will be such sweet music to the ears of Romeo, Farrar, Rees, et al.
It dismisses the nuances, the subtleties, the craft of working with a range of individuals who are variously angry, damaged & otherwise disenfranchised or dysfunctional.
For me, it displays an attitude that fits hand-in-glove with the facile approach adopted by serially incomepetent UK governments over the last ten years [at least], but most especially under the casual cruelty of the dismissive vandal that is Johnson. He's got form:
"The acts of vandalism were commonplace. A biography of Boris recalls one night where Boris took charge of destroying a new Bullingdon member's room with twelve others. Wearing tail-coats, they managed to break furniture, books, and a hi-fi in friend Radek Sikorski's room. "At the end of the proceedings, Boris is reputed to have shaken Sikorski’s hand and said: 'Congratulations, you’ve been elected'," Purnell writes."
He takes nothing seriously beyond his own hedonistic desires:
"Boris assumed he could get by on bluster and intelligence alone, but came unstuck as he simply hadn't done his homework."
And in a practice run for both Brexit & Tory leadership:
"For an ambitious young Tory, being President of the Oxford Union is the first step on your path to world domination. Having tried and failed to get elected the year before – his opponent blasted him as a toff – Boris tried a different tactic in 1985.
Despite being a textbook Tory, young Johnson hid his conservative views and rebranded as left-wing. It was "Boris Mark Two". He went to leftie parties and looked beyond his typical circle of posho supporters for votes.
Boris even bribed people, dishing out bottles of red wine to an influential society, in what Purnell calls "a particularly brazen, even crass attempt to 'buy' their votes... In Oxford being in charge of the debating society apparently makes you a sex symbol. "Women threw themselves at Boris when he was president – it's one of the perks of the job," a former "associate" tells Purnell."
And there he is. And with him come all of the traits, the behaviours, the contempt for others who are not of your 'standing'; a man driven by his dick with not a jot of compassion, an under-developed intellect and an over-developed sense of privilege.
Whatever traits, attitudes & language are modelled by the rich, powerful & famous, they are quickly assimilated & emulated by the wannabes & the inadequate.
So here we are - "get used to it and let probation move to its new home control direction enforcement"
More jolly brexit stuff:
ReplyDelete"For decades, bees have been imported to replenish stocks, strengthen breeding lines and as early awakening pollinators for fruit and honey farms in the UK... A beekeeper trying to bring 15 million bees into the UK says he has been told they may be seized and burned because of post-Brexit laws... new laws that came into effect after the UK left the single market mean bringing bees into the country is banned... He says his inquiries into the reasoning behind the ban have been met with a wall of silence, except an email reading: “Illegal imports will be sent back or destroyed, and enforcement action (criminal charges) will be brought against the importer.” "
Huzzah!!
The argument that surrounds Adise Assist and Befriend, and the way probation functions today, really has nothing whatsoever to do with probation at all or what it achieves.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about ideological viewpoints.
Ok - please expand further!
DeleteIf the argument was all about which model made probation more effective, which model realised the best results, then people would be using reoffending rates, incarceration rates, recall rates etc etc to give an evidence base to their preferred position.
DeleteBut that's not the case. What's really being argued is what the fundamental purpose of probation is or should be, and people will attach themselves to the probation model that best suits their own political and ideological viewpoint.
https://www.mmuperu.co.uk/bjcj/articles/probation-people-and-profits-the-impact-of-neoliberalism
Probation may have survived for over a century outside the market, sustained by exceptionally dedicated and creative practitioners. However, neoliberal ideology dictates that markets provide the definitive guidance for decision-making in every sphere of human endeavour, including the optimum allocation of resources. Perennial claims are advanced by advocates of neoliberalism for increasing efficiency, enhancing quality and effectiveness, cutting bureaucratic red tape, and saving public money; all of these arguments have been relentlessly rehearsed to reinforce the imperative to ‘reform’ probation. As Harvey (2007:165) argued, ‘Commodification presumes the existence of property rights over processes, things, and social relations, that a price can be put on them, and that they can be traded subject to legal contract.’ This is precisely what has occurred within probation, just as it has in other public institutions (including prisons). Every practitioner understands that intervention with those who may pose a significant risk to society is challenging and demands high levels of interpersonal skills, yet probation has been transformed from ‘a people-orientated service into one of commodities and products that can be competed for in the market-place’ (Whitehead, 2010:89). The commodification of rehabilitative intervention is fully underway.
DeleteThe practice of rehabilitation (and punishment) has been impacted by the conditions created and fostered by neoliberal policies and their cultural underpinnings. These include the marketisation of society, notions of individual responsibility for behaviour, poverty, inequality, and discrimination in terms of race and ethnicity (Goldberg, 2009). All of these have clear implications for probation practice. Neoliberal culture, which typically depicts individual offenders as ultimately personally culpable for their offending, rather than understanding offending as related to neoliberal social and economic structures - may be linked with a tendency to punish. Reiner (2007a; 2007b) has argued that neoliberal economies are associated with higher levels of serious offending than may be found in social democratic economies, and that crime may be an inevitable outcome of neoliberal political structures. In a culture which is propelled by consumption, places a strong value on competitive individualism, and is riven by widening inequality, crime is able to flourish (Hall, Winlow & Ancrum, 2008). Neoliberalism may also be associated with increased offending, higher levels of violence, and even murder (Hall & McLean, 2009).
Wacquant (2009) contends that neoliberalism’s predominance has been paralleled by a shift towards greater punitiveness, in order to ensure the maintenance of social order. He observed that in American prisons, ‘the therapeutic philosophy of “rehabilitation” has been more or less supplanted by a managerialist approach… paving the way for the privatisation of correctional services’ (2009:2-3). This process has been replicated in the transformation of probation in England and Wales (Teague, 2012a). What had been, in essence, an organisation engaged in social welfarist intervention was metamorphosing into a more punitive, target-driven agency, propelled by the twin imperatives of enforcement and compliance. Robinson and Ugwudike (2012:301) noted that prior to the 1990s, enforcement ‘was neither a key, nor a consistent, aspect of practice’. This has now changed, perhaps irreversibly. Neoliberal culture has permeated probation.
The shift in probation’s professional ethos (Canton, 2011; Mair & Burke, 2012; Senior, Crowther-Dowey & Long, 2008; Whitehead & Statham, 2006) has been paralleled by the advent of neoliberal governance since 1979. Probation has – like other public sector agencies – experienced the impact of a radical transformation in the overarching ethos of public provision. Support for privatised intervention has crossed the continuum of party affiliations; Conservative, Labour and Conservative-Liberal Democratic coalition governments have supported public sector reforms rooted in free market principles (for example, Blair 2010; Conservative Party 2010). In their typology of economies and their penal tendencies, Cavadino and Dignan (2005:15) cited England and Wales as archetypal neoliberal economies. For most of the twentieth century, the public provision of justice and penal services was universally accepted throughout Western Europe. However, privatisation within the UK justice system gained a significant profile when privatised imprisonment was introduced in the early 1990s (Teague, 2012b).
DeleteA decade later, the Carter Report endorsed private profit as a key component of public sector provision, citing a classic neoliberal justification for change: ‘Effectiveness and value for money can be further improved through greater use of competition from private and voluntary providers’ (Carter, 2004:5). The seismic shift to private provision within probation was presaged by a Conservative party policy statement asserting that ‘The old monopolies in the prison and probation system need to be opened up to create a far more diverse range of suppliers of criminal justice services’ (Conservative Party, 2008:49). When the then probation and prisons minister, Crispin Blunt, addressed frontline practitioners at the 2010 Napo conference, he assured them that he was a pragmatist, unconstrained by ideology. His audience was demonstrably unimpressed to learn that, in practice, this meant outsourcing much of their work to private companies (Blunt, 2010). It hardly needs stating the imposition of privatisation was not an initiative propelled by grass roots practitioners. Nor were the changes to probation evidence based. As Oldfield (2002:93) had bluntly concluded, ‘late modern transformations in probation can be seen as the result of political rather than epistemological influence’.
"Are you honestly saying probation officers should undertake 21 months of training and be paid £30-35k to go to the cinema?"
ReplyDeleteI really can't fathom out what point this person is trying to make? Why should encouraging our often dis-enfranshised, dis-engaged and socially excluded service users to do different things and getting to know them outside of a formal interview room, be "beneath" the work of a probation officer, irrespective of what they are paid? What are you saying the role of a PO should be, as all I see are risk management and sentence plans about "addressing lifestyle", "engaging in pro-social activities" or "moving away from peers", with no substance or skill attached on behalf of the PO to actually making this happen.
I once took a service user to the theatre (in my own time and while I very briefly mentioned this in Delius records I feared my employer actually finding out which itself speaks volumes). And why did I do this? Because I was getting NOTHING meaningful out of him in office visits and wanted to open his mind to "another world" and felt he had the potential to enjoy and experience other things in life (he'd never been to the theatre before, was a chronic alcoholic, it was actually a free event, but he had no idea these things even existed or how to access them).
Am I bad probation officer? Would you not class this as an "intervention to assess and manage risk"?
As I recall it, the recent thread of posts started off due to a (yet another) commissioning proposal about NPS employing "mentors" to "support" our vulnerable and isolated during COVID19. So while such mentors get to know the "real person" outside of an office context, our jobs once again become fragmented - we try to "manage risk" with only partial information because the person is engaging with so many other agencies, or get in trouble if we weren't effective enough at "joint partnership working". We've fragmented off the job to so many disproportionate and disparate agencies, that it's no wonder our job is often described as reading a million emails and phoning people all day long, interspersed with "check ups" with our service users about whether they have done X or Y with another agency - personally I don't think that's worth £35K either, and writing crappy OASYS isn't either.
So in response to this poster, why should it be OK for a mentor to "take our service users to the cinema" and not develop such relationships ourselves? Why is "mentoring" seen a valid endeavour, but probation officers delivering mentoring not?
Be warned that the more we accept or jobs being farmed off to (generally lower paid) keyworkers, ETE workers, mentors, resettlement agencies, drug workers, charities, mental health workers, generally none of which are particularly more trained than us to deliver useful interventions in their respective fields, that our role will become even less necessary than it already is. Just look at the list of "day one services" under the new model - ETE, housing, "emotional support", accredited programmes, and I believe "one to one" interventions are being delivered by a separate team too - just what exactly is left to do for the Probation officer paid £35K?
I concur completely 20:01
DeleteNot just with the sentiment of your comment, but what seems a glaringly obvious consequence of the direction probation is being steered. That is when everything that was once done by probation is being done by other agencies, and probation is left with just monotering and enforcement (even getting a 'recall tool'), then why would the state still pay wages at probation officer level and not at the much lower rates that security guards and CCTV operators are paid?
"let probation move to its new home control direction enforcement so the new culture direction can bury social support services for another decade."
Careful what you wish for.
'Getafix
NPS employing "mentors"? Nope. Let's look at it again:
Delete"I understand the probation service is in discussions with a major volunteering charity about providing volunteers who can support the more vulnerable people on probation, mentor and befriend them"
They're going to pay someone like Bubb to oversee carefully selected folk to do the work for nowt. Gratis. So you can be chained for many more hours inputting data & taking the shit when it all goes tits up.
Haven't heard much from Napo or Unison about this. Anyone?
I think the original poster was lamenting the past not advocating for the new. It was obviously meant to trigger a debate. Not a wish.
Deletedoes that mean they think in period of high unemployment recession and covid control they think free volunteers will come to do our job. It will need a miracle not a spell.
DeleteEqually 20:01, be warned that if we don't farm off the lower-skilled aspects of our work to 'generally lower paid' keyworkers etc, then we are at greater risk of becoming the lower paid partner in the arrangement ourselves. We may all aspire to be part of a nobler profession, but there's a limit. And to be frank, what would the justification be for, say, accompanying a service user to buy new bedding, or escorting them to a healthcare appointment if someone else can help out (aside from just limiting the pressures of our own workloads)?
DeleteThe lower skilled work what are you talking about. PSOs do everything in my office they don't want any more cases I can tell you.
DeleteWhich was why I was supporting the idea of farming it out.
Delete“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
DeleteAnimal farm owellian dystopia probation. It's already impossible to see who the real leaders are. If the work is shed externally there will be less of a need for all staff. Are we all so daft on this blog. Thatcher's legacy the privatised structures are all about self employment. If you once worked for telecom you now work in a franchise. Public sector lost staffing to private ownerships on reduced pensions and piece meal working. There can be no advocating our work out. Instead you must define the professional work and get it established as key core po functions. Stop the rot.
DeleteI agree...I'm 20.01, the person who started this initial thread. To confirm, by stating the other individuals were "generally lower paid", I did not mean to infer they have lessor skills; in fact, I made a point of saying they are no more or less trained than us to deliver the work in their allotted fields. By de-professionalising probation and commissioning out aspects of the work which I derogatively described as "farming out", they have been able to allow such work to be paid at far lower rates, with far less employment or pension rights, in the name of "charity" or "third sector" work. Obviously they tried to do this also with CRC, who (alongside NPS with reliance on PSO), were allowed to employ "responsible officers" or such like, to do the same work, again at far less pay. So we should all be worried, unless as others have stated we re-claim the professional ground and not accept that, as 2254 seems to, taking a one-dimensional view about "buying bedding".
DeleteI for one feel very privileged to be working for what is still a public service, with (in comparison to many) a good rate of pay which includes other benefits such as a good pension, sick pay, fantastic holidays and generally good employment rights and stability, not to mention job satisfaction. I had the choice to work in the private sector (which I did for many years as a graduate) - had I stayed there the pay may well have been better now, but without all the other benefits mentioned, and the work and employment culture sucked; targets and QA and monitoring existed in insurance too, worse so. What I lament in probation is that we measure the wrong things and place too much emphasis on whether X or Y was done, rather than the meaning behind those things, and the constant "referring out" worries me greatly.
As for 22:54 your comment has sickened me. I can think of a hundred different reasons why "buying bedding" and "accompanying someone to a medical appointment" should be done by the PO and not a third party. Using these opportunities to see the person in the "real world", how they operate, teaching and practicing new skills, gaining confidence - you think sitting in the office allows that? not to mention all the millions of reasons I mentioned in my original post about taking someone to a free theatre event. If you really think "buying bedding" is all about the bedding, then I really fear for your service users and what they can possibly gain from you sitting in your office with the pontificating and derisory attitude you have displayed on this blog.
Get over yourself 00:32. How easily some people are "sickened". To be repulsed by straightforward debate, and then to leap to such personal criticiism, raises questions about your own temperament and judgement. The role of the Probation Officer doesn't exist for your own gratification in watching people, in real time 'practising skills and gaining confidence'. And yes, the seeds of these things can be sowed in your dreaded 'office' and always were - then and now. Along with your "hundred different reasons" and "millions" of reasons that you apparently mentioned earlier, you might want to factor in the 45 other people on the caseload who are overlooked or can't reach me on the phone in a crisis while I take another afternoon out in the deeply meaningful pursuit of buying bedding. Perhaps before throwing accusations of pontificating around, you might just take care not to pontificate?
Delete2 Feb 2021 - 108,013 loved ones lost to covid-19
ReplyDeleteThat's 31,000 lost since 1 Jan 2021 using UK govt measure
Or
112,660 loved ones lost since 2 March 2020 using the more accurate ONS 'excess deaths' figure
Some comparisons to give a sense of scale:
Cheltenham 116,000
Eastbourne 104,000
Chester 80,000
Wrexham 66,000
Woking 101,000
I recall a drive to recruit and work with volunteers back awhile, pre TR. It created more work in trying to organise it than it achieved positive outcomes. If the organising of volunteers is outsourced and monetised it will be one of two things: highly bureaucratic with lots of vetting, training, etc, or cheap and very dodgy:
ReplyDeleteMany many moons ago... I started my probation journey as a volunteer. It was an in-house project with a Probation Area, overseen by a senior manager. After three months' intensive training & clearance I was allocated to work with an inner city team where any of the POs in the team could submit suggestions for work they would like me to undertake with their cases. The volunteer manager would oversee the suggested tasks & select what they felt was possible/appropriate. The most common work involved taking family members to see cases incarcerated in prisons beyond the reach of a day return on public transport. Any direct work with a case was supervised by or very specifically laid out by the PO, with very clear instrutions.
DeleteI had direct access to & supervision by the senior manager running the project & if there were any concerns about a situation I was removed from the task & thoroughly de-briefed.
The project ended after two years when the senior manager took another role & no-one else applied for the secondment. I suspect it was also an expensive project. I don't know how many other volunteers were involved.
It was certainly as intense as my training placements and prepared me well for my career.
I dread to imagine what the 2021 version will be like.
A 'deal' after four years of negotiations, £billions of taxpayer funds thrown away, families torn apart.
ReplyDelete"Brexit: Boris Johnson says trade deal is his Christmas present for the country"
"Boris Johnson says Brexit deal has settled UK's Europe question"
"PM hails ‘jumbo, Canada-style’ agreement and says Britain has taken back control of destiny"
"FINALLY DONE Boris Johnson hails ‘new beginning’ as Brexit deal becomes LAW"
"Brexit deal done: Boris Johnson confirms UK-EU free trade deal"
Its a complete triumph of self-determination. Or is it?
"Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove will be representing the UK government in talks with the EU Commission's Maros Sefcovic and Northern Ireland's devolved administration. He said a three-month grace period with lighter enforcement of EU rules should be extended beyond March... Mr Gove has also asked the EU to examine its decision to ban the import into Northern Ireland of some items like seed potatoes, and the UK wants the Irish government to be able to negotiate a deal with the UK to remove barriers to pets being taken across the Irish Sea... According to a copy of a letter sent to the European Commission on Tuesday night to outline the changes it wanted made.
The UK would want these exemptions to stay in place until 1 January 2023."
"As the UK is now a separate country, it is not allowed to transport live shellfish (e.g. mussels, oysters, clams, cockles and scallops) to the EU unless they have already been treated in purification plants. But the UK industry says it does not have enough tanks ready and the process can slow exports, making them less viable."
"There have been problems, especially with the likes of fish, meat and cheese, which need more checks and paperwork such as health certificates. In some cases, the food is either not leaving the places in the UK where it is produced, or rotting at border posts for several days. The government has set up a £23m fund to help compensate fishing firms for their losses."
Brexit means... in the absence of any 'actual' brexit deal The Good Ole British Taxpayer will have to sell their kidneys to cover for the incomepetence of this fuckwit government.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/the-consolidation-of-the-brexit-right-7071278
DeleteIn other news
ReplyDelete“Get it all on record now,” said Eisenhower. “Get the films, get the witnesses, because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say this never happened,”
How the fuck can this situation with the Uighurs be allowed to continue?
These accounts could be from Nazi death camps:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55794071
I thought the world powers had agreed they would never allow such grotesque programmes of torture & killing to happen ever again?
A resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on November 1, 2005 determined that International Holocaust Remembrance Day will be marked annually on January 27 and that "The Holocaust, which resulted in the destruction of one-third of the Jewish people, will forever be a warning to all of the world's nations against the dangers of unjustified hatred, racism and prejudice."
"After years of blooming Israeli-Chinese commercial relations and the awarding of a string of port and mass transit projects to Chinese building conglomerates... For Israel, the opportunities abound. Chinese construction companies are expected to bid on upcoming infrastructure projects in Israel ranging from light rail to 5G telecommunications networks. And the Chinese are expected to invest billions of dollars in Israeli technology ventures in the coming years."
"The International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust is a time to mourn those who disappeared and to reflect upon the choice of the individuals and governments that allowed this genocide to unfold. It is also a call for vigilance and for action, to address the root causes of hatred and prevent future atrocities from happening."
How close are the links between 'homes' for asylum-seekers, 'homes' for 'offenders' and detention centres? Quite close, it seems... remember BASS?
Delete* In the UK we also use 'camps' to 'house' people. The UK government inists they are NOT detention centres:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/03/police-filmed-carrying-asylum-seeker-into-kent-barracks-against-his-will
"Police filmed carrying asylum seeker into Kent barracks against his will"
* Luckily we have an independent judiciary:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/03/asylum-seeker-cannot-remain-at-kent-army-barracks-court-says
"Clive Sheldon QC, sitting as a deputy high court judge, on Tuesday ruled that the asylum seeker had made a strong case that the accommodation was inadequate for him and that the “prison-like” conditions and risk of contracting Covid-19 while there made it wholly unsuitable."
* But in the neoliberal UK it's mandatory that someone makes a packet in the process. Remember Clearsprings, who purported to provide bail addresses at one time?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/03/firm-running-asylum-seeker-barracks-in-kent-stands-to-make-1bn
"Clearsprings Ready Homes, owned by Essex businessman Graham King, runs Napier barracks in Kent, where hundreds of asylum seekers have told of poor conditions and going without heating and drinking water ... Government disclosures show that the company has two 10-year contracts worth up to £1bn to operate asylum accommodation in Wales and the south until 2029... Clearsprings has been managing homes for asylum seekers or offenders on bail for much longer."
Who runs BASS?
At first a company called ClearSprings had the contract for BASS. "PSI 29/2007 introduced the Bail and HDC Accommodation and Support Service (BASS) currently being provided by ClearSprings Management Services to enablemore prisoners to be granted bail or Home Detention Curfew." - 2007
"Critics have condemned the practice of using a private firm to run bail hostels after it was revealed that the company's contract may be terminated." - 2009
The BASS contract was then provided by Stonham from 2010 until June 2018, and NACRO from June 2018 onwards. As the contracts overlapped, there may be a small number of duplicate referrals. (2020)
"Parliamentary records from Hansard show that Clearsprings has been running asylum centres since at least 2000, when it was described as “profiteering” in the House of Lords by Lord Greaves."
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/27/have-we-reached-peak-neoliberalism-in-the-uks-covid-19-response/
ReplyDeleteHave we reached “peak neoliberalism” in the UK’s covid-19 response?
DeleteWith government–backed furlough schemes in use, and additional funds flowing to the NHS like no time since 2010, it might not initially seem as though the past year represents the height of neoliberalism in the United Kingdom. Instead, the intervening hand of Westminster has been harvesting the magic money tree for NHS funding. Government prime-time news conferences on epidemiology, infection prevention, and vaccination might seem to be a vindication of the importance of public health, and a recognition of the primacy of the NHS. However, how the government has reacted to covid-19—the decisions taken on privatisation and outsourcing—build on previous defunding and reorganisation of public health and local councils, and represent an acceleration of the involvement of market forces and neoliberalism in the health service, and in social care.
Large swathes of the UK’s response measures to covid-19 have been outsourced at great expense—and with little evidence of any subsequent efficiencies as neoliberalism’s proponents claim should follow. Many of these contracting debacles have hit the front pages, including Deloitte’s contracts for managing drive-in testing centres and laboratory services; Serco’s role in the underperforming “NHS test and trace” service—including reports of 500,000 leaking, contaminated vials; DHL, Unipart, and Movianto for various contracts—delayed, partially unfulfilled, and involving a complex web of disjointed subcontracts—related to the provision of personal protective equipment (PPE).
The consequences of these outsourcing processes include inefficiency, waste, lack of oversight, poor lines of accountability, and failure to generate and consolidate timely and useful information. For example, in June it became clear that Lighthouse laboratories, a company contracted to provide covid-19 tests, was turning around test results in three days, when the NHS labs were doing the same tests, and turning around results in as little as six hours. Moreover the BMA asserts that the Lighthouse lab tests were of inferior quality to the NHS standards. There were also serious contracting woes in Deloitte laboratories, which did not have to share relevant data with Public Health England or local partners. These are serious and expensive failings.
Many of these companies, with links to cabinet ministers, their spouses and friends, and Tory party donors, have benefited from bypassing the traditional tendering processes. The onslaught of conflicting interests, cronyism, and the appearance of pandemic, private-sector profiteering in the government response to the covid-19 pandemic has been described elsewhere.
It may seem as though this conservative government is in fact moving away from neoliberal tenets in the short term. However, in the longer term, we have ample reason for concern. There were warning signs, just before the second lockdown, that the government’s willingness to pay is dwindling. Although the furlough scheme was renewed on the strength of the epidemiological evidence that led to a national lockdown, the showdown between the regions—in particular Greater Manchester—and the Treasury was a warning sign of things to come. Chancellor Rishi Sunak has warned public sector employees of pay squeezes. Also, we can consult precedent. In a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats after the 2008-09 global financial crisis, the Tories implemented austerity policies that we now know had severe health impacts on the poorest in society, reversing the trend towards increased life expectancy and plunging families into poverty.(24,25) Many, including The BMA, argue that the position of the underfunded NHS entering the covid-19 crisis has contributed to the explanation of why the UK has been particularly hard hit compared with its peers in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
DeleteThe perils of underinvestment in public health infrastructure—and the perils of underinvestment in the health of a country’s inhabitants – have come to the fore in the pandemic. The USA has served as a cautionary tale. With fragmented, privatised, and underfunded public health services, the country was not protected by its wealth; if anything, the neoliberal ideologies that have led to tens of millions in the world’s wealthiest country to live in a state of insecure access to largely employment-tied healthcare options meant that covid-19 has incurred catastrophic expenses—both economy-related and health-related—for millions across the country.
A spokesperson for Boris Johnson in June ruled out a return to austerity to pay for the pandemic response, but this was before the second wave. Moreover, the other fiscal and monetary measures that could be implemented to pay for covid-19 borrowing—wealth taxes, rises in income taxes, printing more money, or in fact borrowing more while it remains inexpensive to do so, in order to spend our way out of the coming recession—are unlikely to be popular with the current British administration.
We are approaching a year into the UK pandemic, and we are in the middle of a third UK lockdown. It is not inconceivable that we might have been in a different place had the government built on our public sector capacity in contact tracing and public health when this pandemic began. But instead of wallowing in counterfactuals, we make three recommendations for the way forward. Firstly, it is not too late for public sector capacity to be strengthened in lieu of neoliberal outsourcing. Secondly, effective and accountable contracting and tendering processes should not be circumvented in favour of cronyism Thirdly, a transparent communication style, the hallmark of trustworthy public institutions, could be embraced by this administration.
There's an article from the Irish Times about the positive values of advise assist and befriend,
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/celebrating-a-century-of-the-probation-act-1.993011%3fmode=amp
There may also be an interesting read about the contrast between AAB and a more punitive controlling approach if access can be gained or the book found.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2012.00839.x
'Getafix
Boris reveals his explicit sense of entitlement:
ReplyDelete"Boris Johnson has defended visiting a Scottish vaccine plant despite a coronavirus outbreak at the site, saying “no one is going to stop me”"
The Daily Record reported that Johnson’s visit to the Valneva factory took place 24 hours after a public health investigation which found 14 coronavirus cases – about one in eight of the workforce.
Delete*** Valneva’s chief financial officer, David Lawrence, said Downing Street had been informed ahead of the trip.***
Johnson said he had not been made aware of the outbreak “before or since” the visit to Valneva. “It is my job to visit every part of this country, nothing and no one is going to is going to stop me...” "
Rumours of a bit of a spat between Johnson and Starmer when leaving the chamber after PMQs.
Deletehttps://www.politicshome.com/news/article/pmqs-boris-johnson-keir-starmer-spat
BBC website:-
DeleteSir Keir Starmer has said he was "wrong" to describe Boris Johnson's claims he backed the European Medicines Agency as "complete nonsense".
Mr Johnson accused the Labour leader of wanting to stay in the agency, at Prime Minister's Questions. This was angrily denied by Sir Keir. Reports the two men continued the row afterwards were played down by Labour.
But the party has now issued a statement to say Sir Keir had "misheard" the prime minister. Sir Keir thought the PM had "falsely" accused him of wanting the UK to be part of the EU's vaccine scheme, which the party said was not the case. But it acknowledged that the Labour leader had previously expressed support for the European Medicines Agency.
Fuckwit News
ReplyDeleteA woman has been fined £10,000 for a "blatant breach" of Covid restrictions after a birthday party attended by more than 30 people was broken up by police... "How do you expect a 20-year-old girl to pay £10,000 for this?" she said, adding: "It's not worth £10,000."... Another person can be heard telling officers that "we've been bored and we want to have fun".
test & trace hardon continues to cover her tracks & avoid the truth being traced, this time at the Commons' science & technology committee:
ReplyDelete* Harding told the Commons science and technology committee on Wednesday that NHS test and trace was on track to reduce R... Greg Clark, chair of the committee, pressed Harding on why she had failed to publish evidence for the claim, noting she had told the public accounts committee last month that the assessment would be published “soon”... Harding expected it to appear in the next couple of weeks... Clark said: “For an organisation for which the watchword should be speed, this doesn’t seem to be a feature of your disclosure of the evidence.”
* Harding was further pushed to defend the business case she put forward in September for an extra £15bn for NHS test and trace... Harding told MPs that test and trace was “not a single silver bullet” and that “We’ve seen the new variants emerge, which was something that none of us were able to predict,”... Jonathan Ashworth, shadow health secretary, pointed out that scientists have long warned of new variants as the pandemic unfolds... Harding clarified that she was referring to when new variants would emerge. “I don’t think any scientist in the world would sign up to a date stamp of when particular mutations are likely to occur"..."
So, same old shite, different lying toff with an excuse for every occasion: "We're Never Wrong"
https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/03/test_and_trace_not_waste_of_money_dido_harding/
DeleteThe committee's chairman, Conservative MP Greg Clark, pressed Harding on the Test and Trace system's failure to mitigate a second wave and national lockdowns. He pointed out that the business case for spending £15bn on Test and Trace was the avoidance of a second national lockdown and the associated economic and social costs that come with it.
Harding responded: "It is impossible for Test and Trace to single-handedly fight the disease"
The total spending on NHS Test and Trace is expected to be £22bn, with £7bn yet to be allocated.
MPs also probed spending on consultants by the Test and Trace system, which a Parliamentary answer published in January revealed had reached £375m, covering 2,300 individuals working for 73 suppliers.
* Harding confirmed that the average spending PER CONSULTANT was £1,100 per day."
They are having a gigantic fucking larrrffff!!!
Ha-fucking-ha, tee-fucking-hee
Nonsense to betray you have to be in some form of relationship beyond a professional function. Hardly a contribution of meaning.
ReplyDelete