The MoJ have a cunning new plan to cement their control over the Probation Service and change its culture from the top, rather than the traditional but tedious route from the bottom. 9 months as a PO then 10 months as an SPO. What's the problem? Can't be that difficult a job can it? Read and weep.
Read the Justice Leaders Prospectus including articles from our senior leadership team.
Join our unique new leadership scheme
Justice Leaders is an opportunity like no other. This pioneering, fully immersive, four-year graduate leadership scheme, will prepare you to make a positive, lasting impact on countless lives.
Mixing cutting-edge learning and intense real frontline experience, it’s a highly innovative and challenging scheme. We are looking for people with a degree level qualification and real-world experience, who are passionate about making a difference to the lives of others and are excited about embarking on a new career as part of the first ever cohort of Justice Leaders.
You will gain in-depth training and vital exposure within Prison, Probation and Youth Custody. We will work together to develop your leadership skills, equipping you to inspire, mentor, coach, and influence others. You will study for a bespoke Masters qualification and graduate from the scheme as a senior operational leader in our organisation.
We are giving you the unique opportunity to use your skills to transform the justice system and shape an entirely new era in our service.
The path to leadership
Justice Leaders is an exciting, brand new fast-track scheme that spans the whole of Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS). It is the first of its kind to develop future leaders in operational offender facing roles, with the ability to work across Prison, Probation, and the Youth Custody Service.
HMPPS carries out sentences given by the courts, helping people lead law-abiding and useful lives, both while they are in prison and after they are released. We support people in our care on their road to rehabilitation through education and employment.
Over four years, you will experience a diverse variety of exciting placements across Prison, Probation and Youth Custody while completing a bespoke Masters qualification. These placements will provide a foundation for your future leadership roles. You will help to improve the experiences of people moving through the system, bringing about positive change through your inspirational attitude, engagement, and commitment to making a difference to the lives of those in your care.
Placements & Scheme Structure
Years 1 and 2
The first three months of the scheme are spent experiencing the journey of somebody moving through the criminal justice system. You will spend time with the Police, Courts, Prison and Probation.
During this time, you will also complete your seven-week Prison Officer Entry Level Training. This is the operational training required to become a Prison Officer and includes a combination of practical and theoretical learning on everything from personal protection to identifying people at risk of self-harm.
You will then go on to spend three months working in a prison as a Prison Officer. In this role you will develop your understanding of the prison system, building confidence and working directly with prisoners. Expect to encounter people from all walks of life and perform a wide range of roles as a key worker – from keeping the prison safe and secure to helping vulnerable people through a difficult time in their lives.
The next stage of the scheme will involve 17 months of varied work across Prison and Probation. During this time, you focus on completing the Professional Qualification in Probation (PQiP) element of the Masters and learning how we support people as they complete or serve their sentences in the community.
Years 3 and 4
At the end of two years, you will sit a Career Development Panel. This will be an opportunity to discuss your progress and to choose whether to specialise in Prison, Probation or Youth Custody.
At this point the pathways diverge and offer different kinds of experience and training over the following two years. However, all participants pursue the same Masters qualification.
Masters Qualification
The HMPPS Justice Leadership Masters is a bespoke new qualification created specifically for the Justice Leaders scheme to develop the first cohort of future leaders with the skills and experience to work across HMPPS. You will study a range of topics such as safeguarding in childcare, risk management, rehabilitation, protecting the public, critical thinking, understanding crime and criminal behaviour and leadership.
Youth Custody
Prison Officers who work in the Youth Custody Service are called Youth Justice Workers. Working with Children is a specialism and so requires specialist knowledge. The new Masters takes several of the most salient modules from the existing qualification that Youth Justice Workers must complete.
Support while on the scheme
We understand the pressures of undertaking such an intensive period of development. We will ensure you are well supported in both your operational work and your academic learning.
You will be offered several career development panels during the scheme. This is designed to be a supportive process, which gives you an opportunity to discuss your ambitions, progress and how you can make the most difference in your career.
To ensure you get the most out of Justice Leaders you will be expected to be proactive, taking ownership and responsibility of your personal development. There will be mentoring and coaching available from colleagues and managers, and you will also have the support and guidance of your line manager and the central Justice Leaders team.
Salary
YEARS 1 AND 2
National/Outer London/Inner London
£27,121 £21,693 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
£30,488 £24,689 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
£32,244 £26,111 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
YEAR 3
YEAR 3
£37,276 £30,453 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
£40,536 £33,116 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
£42,236 £35,234 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
Probation Career Pathway switch at year 3 + 4 months as below: £37,276 – £37,174 (basic salary + marked time balance of £102) Additional London Allowance (where applicable) of £3,889 = total pay £41,165
YEAR 4
£37,276 £30,453 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours £40,536 £33,116 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours £42,236 £35,234 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
YEAR 4
£37,276 £30,453 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours £40,536 £33,116 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours £42,236 £35,234 basic salary + additional allowances for additional and unsocial hours
Probation Career Pathway £37,276 – £37,174 (basic salary + marked time balance of £102) Additional London Allowance (where applicable) of £3,889 = total pay £41,165
ONCE OFF THE SCHEME
Candidates will be required to apply for their chosen role through fair and open competition. Where successful, those who are pursuing the prisons career pathway will have their pay calculated as a promotion from Band 3 under whichever prisons pay on promotion policy is in place at the time. If this results in lower pay than in year 4 of the scheme, the necessary upward adjustment will be made to ensure no detriment. Because there are no recognised grade equivalencies between prisons and probation, those pursuing the probation career pathway will be placed at the pay range minimum for the role successfully applied for. If this results in lower pay than in year 4 of the scheme, the necessary upward adjustment will be made to ensure no detriment. Staff then becoming subject to either the prisons or probation pay awards (depending on chosen career pathway) annually.
ONCE OFF THE SCHEME
Candidates will be required to apply for their chosen role through fair and open competition. Where successful, those who are pursuing the prisons career pathway will have their pay calculated as a promotion from Band 3 under whichever prisons pay on promotion policy is in place at the time. If this results in lower pay than in year 4 of the scheme, the necessary upward adjustment will be made to ensure no detriment. Because there are no recognised grade equivalencies between prisons and probation, those pursuing the probation career pathway will be placed at the pay range minimum for the role successfully applied for. If this results in lower pay than in year 4 of the scheme, the necessary upward adjustment will be made to ensure no detriment. Staff then becoming subject to either the prisons or probation pay awards (depending on chosen career pathway) annually.
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"It’s a poor joke. - just proves that the HMP s leadership are only interested in their own careers, big salaries & don’t give a fig for front line staff - but it’s what we now expect from these numpties."
It is all prison focused in my view. It's not a step, but a leap towards HMP community.
DeleteI've read a few articles recently from America explaining the difference between probation officers and parole officers. There's obviously some overlap, but parole officers are paid much less then probation staff.
As I read today's blog these are the thoughts that struck me.
Is this a precursor to creating a defined distinction between probation services and parole officers?
Is it a precursor to the creation to the role of a generic criminal justice officer where someone can be deployed anywhere within the CJS from office based probation in the community, to prison officer walking the landings? Or anywhere else that HMPPS directs?
I also wondered what NAPOs response might be, because those that take this route might be confused as to whether to be a member of NAPO or the POA.
'Getafix
Poa all the way gtx . They are sucking Napo dry . Recently Napo seeking a mandate sto join after check off. Poa won't split new managerial staff.
DeleteWe need to survive back independently and clear role job descriptions. This latest all things to all people could not be understood by the grossly out of whack managerial views
Sorry, I don't see a problem with this scheme.
ReplyDeleteI wish I could say, when are they going to learn that fast-tracks don't work in front line? Its not like supermarkets where the front line job is simple, Nor is it like a graduate scheme with a top accountancy firm where virtually everyone does it and it teaches you in depth knowledge of the job and then you work front line junior rank for a good period of time.
But then I realise it does work for they/them.
They are recruiting ambitious recent 20's graduates or older entrenched "yes" woman and men who will be willing to push staff past breaking point to protect and enhance their own careers. They will not be willing to turn to the higher ups and say that can't be done.
But let’s be honest, many of the current crop of leaders went through the Probation training (CQSW, TPO, PQF Etc.), through the ranks and are still entrenched yes people who are willing to push staff past breaking point to protect and enhance their own careers and are not be willing to turn to the higher ups and say that can't be done.
So as stated at the beginning, I don't see a problem with it.
Everything is wrong with it. There are already far too few people in management with experience of sharing the service users journey from beginning to end: it's barriers, it's injustices and the rare enough successes. Those managers can not, in that time, accrue the sensitivity needed to make marginal decisions of risk escalation and recall; the will not have to write the parole reports on the most complex cases which they will have to countersign; they will have too few opportunities to hold child protection and DV cases such they they can have meaningful authority if the multiagency meetings they must attend. Most significantly, they will never have to do all of those things at the same time in a context of constant change and increasing bureaucracy, meaning they will not be able to empathise with us when were struggling most. Fully endoctrinated into the MOJ brainwashing, they certainly won't push back on more insidious and damaging changes for us or our charges.
DeleteLayer into this the fact they will inhabit roles that would otherwise be filled by experienced officers and they their rapid escalation will see them paid massively more than a qualified PO with the same number of years in service and this is nothing less than a slap in the face.
Seagulls: aka fast-trackers: they swoop in, steal, make a lot of noise, shit all over the place, and then swoop out again
ReplyDeleteWhen Probation was a profession, it took you four years to get qualified, for heavens sake. We are ruined if this is to be the regime. And the relentless engulfing of probation into the prison system goes on apace, as it does in this. So distressing.
However, let me, now on annual leave, raise a glass to all the troopers out there in probation who are slogging on, being kind, seeing the good in people everyone else has given up on, building on whatever good they find. There is an awful lot of us here doing just that. The poverty and inequality is Dickensian. So: Happy Christmas and may the downfall of this government bless us all
Pearly Gates
It is as if those who are dominant now in the probation world in England - maybe a bit less so in Wales are trying to rewrite or ignore the history and discipline that underpinned probation work in England and Wales at least until the late 1980s.
ReplyDeleteAlthough "Social Work" was not then an acknowledged discipline or way of working from the dawn of the 1907 Probation of Offenders Act in 1907 - it was social work practice and business methods that advanced the profession incrementally throughout the 20th century.
Such advances had probation effectively taking on the work of NADPAS -(National Association of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies) under the Roy Jenkins’ reforms of (I think )1966/7 having by then also incrementally moved into being the “go to” agency for the domestic courts to call on to advise about private family welfare disputes (and some public one's with Guardian Ad Litem work and occasional Independent Inquiries of contested Local Authority work in wardship type cases).
Social Workers - from Felix Biestek to the Family Therapists like Arnon Bentovim and Sex Offending Treatment workers inspired by such as Baroness Faithfull became the main way of practise amidst eclectic individual and personal ways of functioning - all dependent on the client/worker relationship.
That may not be the whole business of monitoring as exampled by tagging and overseeing approval of the places where a supervisee might frequent - but it is nonetheless the backbone of the work that had probation officers entrusted by the judiciary and convicts alike as a body of people who will work with clients so as they take personal responsibility in order to live effectively and minimise the damage they do to others.
I was told when I was being assessed in 1972 at the University of Liverpool, regarding my potential to work in ways parliament required of probation officers, that at the conclusion of my two year intensive academic/practical training I should be "beginning to ask the right questions" - I think Clare Morris meant of myself, the clients and the courts who at the time set the conditions of the orders (parole, voluntary through and after care and statutory post release license supervision of then under 21 year olds). It was a further 12 months before I was confirmed as a competent probation officer and thus routinely allowed to take on parole license work and submit reports to courts and the parole board without the prior approval of a senior colleague.
To be sure - a recruit will be able to take on the administrative tasks in two or three years - but not the subtleties of working with every type of convict and supervising others to do likewise after so brief a period.
I was genuinely learning about the client relationship for at least the first twenty-five years of my service and still adapting my style until retirement.
It really seems as if many babies (understandings of practice) have already been thrown out with the bathwater - what will be left of the benefits that understanding and using social work, can give work with convicts, once what is in train becomes established?
When I reflected on what I wrote – (19 December 2021 at 09:27) I realised I made no reference to serious or what in my early probation days were often termed “dangerous” offenders.
DeleteI recall reference to the work of Sir Leon Radzinowicz informing my learning. He founded the Institute of Criminology at Cambridge and was also involved in the early stages of the Parole Board (if my memory is correct). I sought out a reference and came upon this timely article commenting on the whole change in direction of probation, which I found a good read.
“Evidence versus politics in British probation” by
Peter Raynor published in Forensic Science International: Mind and Law. 2020 Nov; 1: 100029.
Published online 2020 Aug 6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7409932/
Highlights
Delete• Twenty years ago, the Probation Service in England and Wales was widely regarded as world-leading.
• Since then it has been weakened by a series of politically driven and poorly evidenced changes.
• A badly flawed and ideologically driven privatisation programme implemented in 2015 has done serious damage.
• The recent decision to end this failed programme is an opportunity to redesign better.
Sadly it hasn't.
Delete"It is, of course, encouraging to see a bad policy decision reversed by considering the evidence; this does not always happen. However, the new Probation Service faces a considerable task of reconstruction and recovery, and discussions are still continuing about exactly how it should be organised and managed. Many commentators favour a greater degree of local involvement in governance with the restoration of some judicial input, not just central control by civil servants in London. In addition, practitioners and their managers need to be able to focus on the development and use of evidence-based skills, informed by what we already know about how to promote rehabilitation and desistance from offending. The coronavirus pandemic has shown that Government spending on public services is necessary and unavoidable, and there is less political clamour to shrink the State and hand over services to private enterprise. However, the post-Covid world will be short of money, and criminal justice will have to compete with other strongly justified demands for public expenditure. Perhaps the most important lesson learned from the rise and fall of British probation is that there is no magic bullet to bring about a step-change in the effectiveness of probation services: development needs to be gradual and incremental, and informed at every step by evidence and evaluation rather than ideology."
DeleteNo chance!
DeleteEvidence and evaluation plays second fiddle in today's ideologically driven world.
DeleteIf evidence dosen't fit or suit the base paradigm of a particular ideology its simply not accepted. It becomes a debate that's tirelessly revisited and discussed, never ending, whilst the dominant ideological viewpoint sets about doing what they want anyway.
I believe in rehabilitation as a concept. But rehabilitation as a concept has been largely phased out in exchange for a model that seeks to control behaviour rather then change it.
That's clearly seen by the dominance of the prison service in HMPPS. The prison service is not just changing the ethos that should underpin probation, it's extending the notion of control and discipline over rehabilitation beyond its walls into the community. I find that disturbing and counterproductive with regard to reducing reoffending.
SFO inquiries for example are never about what the supervising officer has done to rehabilitate and mitigate the prospect of reoffending by an offender, it's ultimately about what steps they had taken to control the offenders risk of reoffending. Evidence is less important then adherence and compliance to the mechanisms imposed by the dominant ideological viewpoint.
We're going ever further down the route that America has already traveled, disgarding evidence in favour of ideology. They haven't done so well with their CJS system and reoffending methinks. They don't concern themselves with evidence any more. They no longer trouble themselves with ideological arguments about "what works" they threw the towel in long ago, and decided "nothing works".
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/rehab.html
'Getafix
Bloody union should be doing this sort of Criss check and debate conflicts. This blog has been doing the debate on behalf of the void created by the deliberate abandon of any challenge by the Napo structures that are so obviously lacking.
DeleteResponding to 'Getafix' and Anon 19th Dec 2021 at 19.18.
DeleteWE .... are The Union ..... or could be!
We need to move by small steps and not drown each other with more ideology and/or argument and defensive It's your/their but NOT my FAULT assertions!
Furthermore.
DeleteProbation Officer Work/ Social Work is the practical application of the art and science of enabling others to undertake what is possible for the benefit of what is advantageous for individuals and wider society with regards to personal behaviour(s).
Get real Andrew you make some good points but we all know Napo is completely partisan to the interests and innabilities of its own narrow viewpoint of the general secretary. Our professionalism has paid the ultimate price as we our members failed constantly to manage Napo and because we take what we are told . We don't enforce proper control. The appointed officials of the elections are there for themselves and rarely has there been anyone of significant ability to challenge. When there is they are promptly sidelined.
Deletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/news/no-christmas-tipples-for-770-alcohol-tagged-offenders
ReplyDeleteLet's put a bloody sobriety tag on our fucking ministers.
DeleteThis scheme may be the only available pathway for some of the excellent PSO's we have in our office to progress. Time and time again they have unsuccessfully applied for PQUIP, I can think of 2 or 3 in my office who should already have progressed to PO and then SPO if the playing field was fair.
ReplyDeleteMaybe but it excludes non grad if you read it carefully.
DeleteIt's incredibly naive to think this will be more accessible than pqip or the incoming PSO fast track to pqip?
DeleteIt's a perfect example of everything wrong with the scheme.
DeleteChange the service anyway you want, turn it into anything you like, just so long as it affords the opportunity to some for personal progression.
The massive increase in PSO's in the mid 1990s to cope with the underesourced changes to parole system from the 1991 Act of Parliament and the failure of Labour and us in Napo and Unison to deal with it from 1997 is part of the problem.
DeleteThe history of the problem re PSO's then known as Ancilliaries - plus the later introduced Community Service Order Officers (I am not sure of their precise initial title - we had them in Merseyside and in Essex which I left in 1988 - I was in ILPS from 1989 and the CSO system there was rather different to either Essex or Merseyside) - was all problematic - probably reaching back to the ending of the Direct Entry training scheme - run by the Inspectorate (i.e. Rainer House trainees) is all involved.
We wanted (us in Napo) to be fair to our experiencied colleague PSOs who were already being abused by salary and responsibility by the the 1980s and compeltely failed - the politician's not understanding probation or social work just wanted lots of it and cheap and to look tough on crime.
Hence WE - or my generation of probation officers contributed to the probem - I and at least one other (I shall not name him) predicted from 1991.
Oh dear ancillaries were around from dot. Their were four pay grades for the staffing not exclusive for them. A to d and the gaps were incredible everyone in d made up to aco money. Obviously ancillaries mainly in the lowest a band. The divisive issues on pay fell around the po qualification . There some specialist jobs for no po staff in bands d and c for the highest paid CP staff . Not supervisors. The differential.to.supress PSO pay has always existed by the downgrading from the I credible pay naivety of po against collegiate working staff. Work is work time is time pay is pay. The job evaluation scheme has been abused by the lack of talent in the union to implement fair job assesment on task not role
Deleteevaluations. Downgrading of all staff and pos then follows this simple snobbish and foolish subjective attack on other workers. Incompetantly presided over by Napo.
A contact at SSCL has let me know the rebanding of RWs has not been processed in time for majority of RWs.
ReplyDeleteJust in time for Christmas...
some UK covid data
ReplyDelete90,629 positive tests on Tues 21 Dec
(on 15 Dec 2021 it was nearly 103,000 in a day, but no-one reported that very widely did they?)
On Tues 21 Dec 2021, 172 people died using the UK govt's within-28-day criteria
The UK govt don't think there's any need for any further measures to be taken to address the spread of infection, i.e. just get a jab & party on, dudes!
But look what marvellous things they've done for the cheese & wine industry!!
Almost 120,000 positive tests reported today in the UK
DeleteMany thousands more say they "just have a cold" - runny nose/sore throat/ headache symptoms are the same as omicron, but they either haven't taken a covid test or they've used the nasal-only LFT which doesn't register the omicron as readily as the dual throat/nose test. So the real figure is considerably higher.
The deaths of loved ones continue at a heartbreaking rate; 147 today. UK has plateaued at around 1,000 lost souls a week. Our govt think that's entirely acceptable, party on!
Its clear that Hospitality trumps Hospitals and that the crushingly callous 'herd immunity' policy is being passively enforced through non-action.
Our children are the mules, and in Jan 2022they will return to schools who, despite their pleas, will be without adequate ventilation, without adequate PPE & without adequate arrangements in general. Long covid in young people is starting to be recognised, documented & understood to be causing significant problems.
This govt's actions are criminal. It is negligence in public office. It may be state-sponsored GBH, or even manslaughter.
Yet they continue to draw their publicly-funded salaries, benefit from their shareholdings & party as if nothing untoward is happening.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041628/HMPPS_Annual_Report_and_Accounts_2020-21.pdf
ReplyDelete"Included within the table above is a commitment of £2.4 million (March 2020: £16.1 million) and £8.5 million (March 2020: £16 million) relating to fee for use and payments by results elements of the contracts with community rehabilitation companies which are based on a predicted volume of offenders, changes in which will result in a corresponding increase or reduction in the amount payable to community rehabilitation companies. The table also includes a commitment of £92.1 million for the cost-plus element of the community rehabilitation companies’ contracts, replacing fee for service (March 2021: £243.7 million) in December 2020. The contracts are being terminated in June 2021, hence the decrease in liability."
ReplyDeleteContracted probation services (community rehabilitation companies) 2020/21 = £411,040,000 (2019/20 = £403,122,000)
ReplyDeleteremuneration totals:
Jo Farrar
2019/20 = £175,000-180,000
2020/21 = £200,000-205,000
Includes a bonus payment for 20/21 of £10,000 & £15,000
Amy Rees received a similar bonus
"During 2020/21, the highest paid director’s remuneration band increased from £160,000-£165,000 to £175,000-£180,000 and the median total for staff has increased by £1,503."
Phil Copple (director of prisons) has accrued an annual pension pot of £65–70K plus a lump sum of £140–145K.
Take a look at Page 79 - "Five significant personal data-related incidents were reported to the ICO during
2020/2021. All five have come back with no further action required."
There were *only* 6,000+ breaches involved...!
The bonus payments referred to above are ***in the bracket of*** £10k to £15k; my error in phrasing. It is not two payments to each person.
DeleteHowever, it is still irksome when many probation staff have not received a penny due to them.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/senior-officials-high-earners-salaries?utm_source=98fb08cd-4c52-4085-b256-0ccb3f6f41f1&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate
DeleteList of senior civil servants and senior officials in departments, agencies and non-departmental public bodies earning £150,000 and above.
Where has money for probation staff gone?
Delete"The Ministry of Justice’s former permanent secretary received an ‘exit package’ of more than £250,000 when he left the post last year, the department’s annual accounts reveal.
Sir Richard Heaton received £262,185 for ‘loss of office’ upon his departure – on top of at least £125,000 in salary, fees and pension-related benefits for 2020/21, according to the MoJ’s annual report and accounts to 31 March 2021.
Heaton left the MoJ in August 2020 after five years as permanent secretary and was replaced by Antonia Romeo, formerly permanent secretary at the Department for International Trade, in January this year.
Richard Heaton
Heaton was paid £262,185 for ‘loss of office’
The MoJ’s accounts also reveal the department received a £72.1 million bill from HM Revenue and Customs for tax and national insurance liabilities arising from errors in assessing the employment status of contractors between 2017/18 and 2020/21.
HMRC found that the MoJ had been ‘careless’ in its application of the off-payroll working rules, according to the report, and imposed a penalty of £15m.
Nearly £100m spent in relation to HM Prison and Probation Service’s development of a new case management system as part of the electronic monitoring legacy programme was also written off, the report states.
HMPPS ‘concluded that the public interest would be best served by ceasing the development of the case management system rather than continuing to invest’, causing £98.2m to be included in the financial statements as payments ‘which will not result in future benefit to HMPPS’."
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/former-moj-chief-gets-250000-exit-package/5110998.article
Published in Dec 2020:
ReplyDelete"The latest figures show Department for International Trade perm sec Antonia Romeo secured a rise that boosted her pay bracket by £10,000 to £170,000-£174,999. The increase closes the gap between her salary and that of DIT chief trade negation adviser Crawford Falconer, who did not get an annual rise. However his pay is still considerably higher at £265,000-£269,999.
Department of Health and Social Care chief medical officer for England Chris Whitty has had a considerably higher-profile year than would have been the case without the coronavirus pandemic. The same is also the case for chief science officer Sir Patrick Vallance, whose home department is BEIS.
Whitty’s salary band of £205,000-£209,999 is a clear £30,000 ahead of DHSC perm sec Sir Chris Wormald’s £175,000-£179,999 range."
Nothing seems to have been released in 2021 as yet...
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/news/article/prison-and-probation-service-spent-almost-100m-on-case-management-system-only-to-scrap-it
ReplyDeletehttps://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/former-moj-perm-sec-received-260k-compensation-when-he-left-the-role-last-year
When probation staff were pushed out, their nationally agreed settlements were stolen by the private sector - something the government endorsed:
Andrew Selous Assistant Whip (HM Treasury), The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice:
"Under the enhanced voluntary redundancy scheme opened in advance of the transition of the Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) to new providers, probation staff were able to apply for voluntary redundancy on the basis that they would leave the service by 31 March 2016. The total cost of these redundancies was £16.4m. All remaining Modernisation Fund monies were awarded to CRCs. Redundancy funding was allocated pro-rata to CRCs based on their size and estimated future staffing requirements.
As stated in my answer to questions 900, 898, 902 and 901, we have no plans to reclaim any monies allocated to CRCs from the Modernisation Fund; and consequently there have been no discussions with CRCs about this. Contract Management Teams are embedded in each CRC, closely monitoring how all monies are used and robust processes are in place to ensure all expenditure is correctly spent."
When probation staff were pushed out, their nationally agreed settlements were stolen by the private sector - something the government endorsed:
ReplyDeleteNo no that is wrong. Any staff facing compulsory dismissals would have had the entitlements paid in line with the 67.5 weeks max. Over 55 got unreduced pension by way of compulsory redundancy.
Voluntary redundancies where posts were identified as of at risk staff could and some did take the full offer . However under 55 had no pensions so wouldn't take it. Or some didn't want it and were either redeployed or forced out.
The deal was then diluted to encourage volunteers and undermine the scheme. The offered reduced terms to anyone and under the voluntary aspect refused to pay the difference for unreduced pensions as it was a voluntary application. This get around was what Napos super lack of intelligence unit had failed to work through full case examples. The contractors had a field day cashed in and then laughed in the unions faces. I am aware as a beneficiary there were just a few tenacious able reps who managed well and thwarted management's attempts to swindle some and many but a real threat to legal action saw the attempts dropped and payments made. The real pity is the union nationally fought for no one.
Yes I echo some of that but from something said to me was the redundancies volunteers or the reduced contract purchasing which is what it became. Were only of real profit as the closed posts and kept the salaries by non recruitment. Vacancies were managed by changing the work responsibility levels and then overloading. The bigger geography led to IT supervision on mass. Now I realise carrying 50 vacancies a year when the original bids were based on more staff drove profits up but put services in crisis. It worked out around 24 vacancies is approx a million pounds Inc pensions annual leave sickness and national insurance at base 40k. 2 million for 50 vacancies and the redundancy deception makes you wonder why Napo failed to appreciate the scandalous public risk issues based on stolen salaries. Vacancy management I mean. I wonder how much the working links bankrupted owners stole in total. Charletons no just thieving despicable white collar crime. No justice they should have been up for embezzling and false accounting
DeleteIts more nuanced than that. The Trusts selected the staff they wanted to keep in NPS & made them compulsorily redundant early on so they could (a) pocket the full package & (b) transfer to plum jobs in NPS. They are the payments Selous spoke of totalling £16.4m. The Trust Chiefs were already handsomely wedged up to obscene levels so they would not impede TR.
DeleteStaff who had been transferred to CRCs were promised no redundancies, in fact the word was opportunities & riches aplenty & as such they were denied access to the EVR scheme when they put their hands up before the 31 March 2016 deadline.
The private companies then issued redundancy notices as early as July 2016 but refused to acknowledge the pre-existing EVR arrangements, saying they didn't have to honour them. Selous' words support that: "Redundancy funding was allocated pro-rata to CRCs based on their size and estimated future staffing requirements... we have no plans to reclaim any monies allocated to CRCs".
Napo passively declined to take this on by doing nothing, saying nothing & watching staff drown.
The CRCs then embarked on a campaign of bullying, threatening & cajoling, usually on a 1:1 basis, with no witnesses.
My own personal experience was with the soft-talking 'CEO' walking up the stairs: "We don't want your sort (i.e. experienced expensive POs) so take the voluntary package or we manage you out - there'll be plenty of opportunity. At least this way you get something."
They already knew they were pocketing 60% of the allocated monies, so they were 'aving a giraffe.
Napo's silence gave me no confidence.
So 67.5 weeks' pay became 27 weeks' pay for hundreds of unwanted staff. And the lying, thieving scumbags are no doubt still laughing their socks off.
Napo must have been complicit in this callous arrangement, otherwise the 7-month no-redundancy clause would never have existed. It was a chums' charter, a deal between Napo & MoJ to expedite the TR disaster which meant Napo - the probation trade union organisation - had entered into an agreement that was intended to shed large numbers of staff, and as a consequence they couldn't then be seen to be going back on their 'word' & fighting the MoJ/CRCs over EVR; hence the court case was dropped & an embarassed silence hung over eveything.
Not exactly why one pays one's subs, is it?
Yes I take your point it is nuanced I did not see the reappointments of senior management after redundancy as you say but accept there were some recalled as advisory new temps. The clause to cut staff after 7mths is one of the most outrageous Napo collusion hiding in plain sight. It is a failing that a union offers agreement to sacking staff its own members. There should have no such arrangement other than to accept voluntary measures only with a compulsory enhanced package. The problem is Napo members POS PSO whatever do not realise their employment had good terms. Undersold by Napo who given their leadership has very little knowledge to do such a job.
DeleteIf I remember correctly there were tales of one particularly unpleasant, disingenuous character in the north-west - Robinson? - who took the CRC shilling, misled staff for months with promises of streets paved with gold, then (presumably realising what a clusterfuck it all was) made a cowardly (but probably well remunerated) exit the day before the CRCs took ownership on 1 Feb 2015. No doubt he handed over to someone equally deluded & eager-to-please their paymaster, someone with no qualms about shafting probation staff.
DeleteI imagine these low-life forms were the result of the NOMS Trust experiments where ego, ambition & a burning desire to 'please The Centre' trumped what we might now refer to as 'traditional probation values'. These faux business minds were let loose as TR was dumped upon us - and look what a total fucking shambles those "excellent leaders" made of it all.
Still, we can only gaze in wonder from afar as Romeo, Farrar, Rees et al achieve millionaire lifestyles funded by the taxpayer - while ordinary frontline probation staff wait year after year, hoping for some crumbs from their paymasters' heavily laden table.
And, sad to say, the Certification Officer was not remotely interested in a complaint about Napo throwing its staff to the wolves when they signed off on the TR terms & conditions, nor about their silent collusion with the MoJ & CRCs stealing their members' EVR.
So as this year comes to a close & you're now all cosily tucked up with HMPPS as steerage-class civil servants, don't expect anyone to come to your aid. Napo won't exist for much longer & the incumbents will slip away with handsome payouts having fulfilled the MoJ's wishes.
Romeo is back for a reason...
... its been said before...
"In HMPPS, no-one can hear you scream"
Happy New Year everyone.
Whoa let's not name or localise it might upset someone. I have some idea but not as brave as you.
DeleteThe managerial following sell out of probation was in the pipe for years. You only had to see the decline in the fiddled recruitment culture. 4 sections 250 words max and a subtle massaging of interviews they were choosing this group years back. Indeed Napo just adopted a similar process . This odd endorsement never actually questioned what was wrong with previous process.
All it did was manipulate the selections which all they wanted. The certification officer was what exactly? The issue has never been reported on. There is a member action on this blog search that defeated Napo and read like a clear corruption of their leadership. I cannot find any other.
I am guessing here that any holding to account of Napo would have to have broken some governance rules or law to be taken forwards to a formal process? Anyway there was a lot wrong with the Napo leadership then and it remains free to date to continue.
I heard that all the recognised union headquarters officers and officials knew about the new leadership scheme
ReplyDeleteThey probably helped devise it.
DeleteSo what ? They may well have seen a blue print out of courtesy but that don't make an issue. Recruitment is not a term the unions have any negotiation rights . The employers only have to recruit under prevailing legislation and pay lip service to the equalities requirements . Napo while they have many faults are not responsible for this implementation. Of course they should have produced a 50 reasons document as to why not recruit this way. Experience time served in the field and maturity are all factors. This new service is not interested in staff just pure doctorine of managers who will not question direction for all staff to deliver whatever the pressure. A dictator in the 40s constructed this sort of regime. The problem Napo have is an incredibly immature and genuinely inexperienced leader who is surrounded by followers who think they are dependant on his favour. This is because Napo has allowed it's accountability structure to become absorbed by the top table. Awful bunch of low renters. No wonder unionism is waning.
DeleteSo if all the recognised unions (UNISON, GMB and Napo) knew about this scheme then why did it not occur to them to consult their members? Whether they supported it or had concerns why have none of the unions published their position regarding this scheme? The level of arrogance apparently demonstrated here is breathtaking. I read on here many people accusing one particular union of many things but all the recognised unions attend several high level meetings a week where a number of matters are presented to them and the expectation is they will give an initial view, summarise the main points, communicate and consult with elected branch officers/members, and then give a response to the employers. What has happened is that none of the unions are bothering to follow that process. In some cases the first local union leaders are hearing about what’s going on is from the employers. The question then has to be asked is that if the democratic consultation systems within unions are not functioning then what is the point of unions?
ReplyDeleteI know a little about this . The other unions unite and unison. Unite only represent middle and upward managers. They don't consult be assured their representative is not there to say anything. Unison do not stop anything as they represent all grades and cannot be seen to lock people out of opportunity . Napo think they are the negotiators but in truth Ian Lawrence is looking for knightood or more likely a seat in the lord's for services rendered. Not for the members but for the moj. He won't get either naive foolishness .
DeleteIt always seems to me that Napo are like New Labour, UNISON are like the Liberal Democrats and GMB are like independent Tory. We are never going to see Napo not collude with the establishment, UNISON will jump on any convenient bus and GMB are the managers. What hope for your ordinary hard pressed member on the frontline? From what I can see Napo HQ is populated by those intent on furthering their civil service careers and a GS that is useless and doesn’t care as long as he gets his pay off.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely yes GMB are incredible they literally do not have any clout never raised any issues because managers don't deal with anything properly.
DeleteJust wanted to borrow a bit of Jim's blog to say that the Tory herd immunity policy of 2020 has now been implemented by stealth, i.e. as a result of govt inaction in response to omicron; not that it will work for some considerable time to come - if at all - and many, many thousands more will die or endure long-lasting, severe health difficulties.
ReplyDeleteThe personal ambition of a handful of utter arseholes, fuelled by the greed & ignorance of hundreds more arseholes, has led to a massive loss of human life in the UK.
It mirrors the self-same ignorance & greed that has led to the loss of so many essential public services, including the dying gasps of the NHS you can hear.
last seven days' covid data from uk dashboard:
Delete21 - 134.022 cases testing +ve
22 - 132,017
23 - 114,646
24 - n/a
25 - n/a
26 - n/a
27 - 98,515
7-day avg = 68,457 because there was no published data for 3 days & no catch-up data
By contrast:
Last seven days' uk covid data from Johns Hopkins University:
21 - 89,022
22 - 105,330
23 - 122,448
24 - 121,371
25 - no data
26 - no data
27 - catch-up data = 318,699
This gives a 7-day av = 108,124
I have no explanation as to why the daily figures are so different.
But I do NOT trust the UK govt data; not least because they are liars & self-interested loons.
I agree for sure. It makes us realise 20 years or so looking at profits. Neglecting NHS funding. Pfi labour crap . Tory managerialism and privatised selling beds off. The lock downs come because the healthcare has been neglected. Boris builds rail line idiot when 1000s of new beds spaces hospitals and colleges for doctors could have stood. Humanity the loser under Tories always.
Deleteomigosh, what's this I see?
Delete"On 28 December 2021, 129,471 new cases and 18 deaths within 28 days of a positive test were reported in England and Wales."
This excludes Scotland & Northern Ireland.
Could it be its getting worse? Surely not? The herd immunity pogrom should have sorted that, shouldn't it?
@17.57 does it really matter how many cases there are when Omicron is so mild? There could be a million cases a day but if the numbers being hospitalised or dying remain stable then what more can the government realistically do? The NHS confirmed yesterday that only 20% of the numbers in hospital with COVID were actually admitted due to COVID. And 90% of people in ICU are unvaccinated which is obviously their choice.
DeleteYes, 07:41, it DOES matter - there are more than 67 million reasons, but here are some of the more obvious ones:
Delete* as many experts have pointed out, even a small proportion of a very large number is still a large number.
* Stopping the chain of infection is important, because even if omicron is mild for you, other people may not be so lucky.
* breaking the chain also reduces the risk of further variants
* When people test positive for COVID-19 they must then isolate. With Omicron being so transmissible, numbers of positive cases are rising steeply, resulting in more and more people being off work.
* if the public holds onto this “milder” narrative, there is a risk that people become complacent about regular lateral flow testing, mask-wearing and ventilating indoor spaces.
* It may even lead to fewer people taking up the booster vaccines. This will then result in further cases and an increase in hospitalisations and deaths.
* this is not about individuals. This is about the population...
... something the UK ministers can't seem to get their blockheads around; something that a few hundred backbench MPs can't get their thick heads around, hence they're holding 67 million people to ransom.
To date New Zealand has reported 13,986 confirmed coronavirus cases and 51 deaths since the beginning of the pandemic, according to government health data.
DeleteCompare that to another island nation - 12.3 million confirmed cases & more than 171,000 deaths per UK govt data.
"New Zealand has reported its first community exposure to the Omicron variant from a person arriving from the United Kingdom earlier this month. The recent international arrival reportedly returned a positive result on day nine of their self-isolation period but had previously returned three negative tests for Covid-19 while completing seven days of managed isolation at a facility in Auckland"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/29/new-zealand-reports-first-community-exposure-to-omicron
@12.10, I'm afraid I completely disagree with you as follows:
ReplyDelete"as many experts have pointed out, even a small proportion of a very large number is still a large number" - no, 80% of hospital admissions are people in hospital WITH Covid, not BECAUSE of Covid. The NHS figures from yesterday confirm in the past week there were just 45 hospital admissions directly caused by Covid.
"Stopping the chain of infection is important, because even if omicron is mild for you, other people may not be so lucky" - over 9/10 people seriously ill with Covid are unvaccinated which is their choice
"breaking the chain also reduces the risk of further variants" - it is accepted by scientists that each and every one of us will have had Omicron by mid Feb. It's impossible to stop, any measures would only delay things.
"When people test positive for COVID-19 they must then isolate. With Omicron being so transmissible, numbers of positive cases are rising steeply, resulting in more and more people being off work" - that will be fixed by removing the requirement to isolate, scientists yesterday were talking about lifting that by Easter.
"if the public holds onto this “milder” narrative, there is a risk that people become complacent about regular lateral flow testing, mask-wearing and ventilating indoor spaces" - but it is milder, you can't pretend it's not just so people behave differently. And testing and masks will become obsolete in a few months once everyone has had it.
"this is not about individuals. This is about the population..." - within the next couple of weeks, everyone who wants a booster will have been offered the opportunity. The vaccines have been an incredible success. We're now in the end game, Covid will become endemic and we can all start to get back to normal.
WE'll have to disagree. I would argue that such a blinkered view, one which mirrors the tory herd-immunity approach, is dangerous.
Delete"numbers of positive cases are rising steeply, resulting in more and more people being off work - that will be fixed by removing the requirement to isolate"
Dangerous because you are only looking at the UK with its privileged access to vaccines courtesy of govt targetted spending.
* Will they continue to target spending as much on vaccines for four or five or six doses each? No.
* Will there still be people who don't want the vaccine? Yes.
* Will the virus remain stable? No.
* Will we still have open borders? Yes.
* Will the virus continue to circulate & mutate? Yes.
* Could that have been mitigated? It could have, but that window has been closed by those who say "its only mild, it's endemic, we can all get it & be ok".
The failure to mitigate the initial spread amongst the elderly, the frail & children/young people was criminal. It ensured fast & wide circulation - again, the result of the dumbass herd-immunity policy.
The virus was always going to stay once it had arrived. There was an early opportunity to 'get on top of it', reduce the rate of transmission & reduce the rate of it developing variants pre-vaccine. To contain & manage the new covid would have been easier if the initial global response had been public health led, as opposed to being driven by personal & political gain.
"80% of hospital admissions are people in hospital WITH Covid, not BECAUSE of Covid. The NHS figures from yesterday confirm in the past week there were just 45 hospital admissions directly caused by Covid."
DeleteA doctor writes:
"Today's Guardian front page:
In which @BorisJohnson orders the NHS to magic up beds in hospital gyms & carparks - while introducing zero public health measures to try & arrest the Covid filling our hospitals."
4,000 additional beds - with staff from where? - for the 45 new covid cases a week? Really???
Perhaps you could explain this away for me?
Delete"A total of 512 children were admitted to hospital with #COVID19 in England in the week leading up to Boxing Day, figures have revealed"
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-more-than-500-children-admitted-to-hospital-with-coronavirus-in-england-in-week-to-boxing-day-12505306?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
As for the greed-led approach:
"While British billionaires have sat back and raked in a staggering £290m a day during the pandemic, the average household will see a £1,200 hit next year."
Some might say "it is accepted by scientists that each and every one of us will have had Omicron by mid Feb."
DeleteAnd with no public health strategy in place:
"Official [UK GOVT] figures show the UK has recorded 332 COVID-related deaths and 189,213 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period" 30/12/2021
Some proper facts from a proper scientist can be found on twitter here:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1476616293822390280
Its an excellent read.
Or *actual* data here:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/COVID19actuary/status/1476603552193724417
Good post 1210 thanks. It is the whole sum not a few parts let's see if they get it. Just aside Ghislaine Maxwell guilty and now facing serious jail. Not so far back her old dad robbed the newspapers pensioners he fell of the boat. Her boyfriend tops out or was he despatched by the president's men. Now prince Andrew may have a lot to say if she finally squeals. She will appeal but after sentence imposed time for horse trading. It would be good justice to Andrew face responsibility for the allegations of proven. Justice for all Inc rich spoilt elitist culture. The poor the ambitious the young and naive are not sex fodder for perverts. They are subject to their rights of protection under the law. That applies to us all and you Boris incompatent cheese and wine trite.
ReplyDeleteCan you blame one man . The cabinet and their party is split. The views on here can be polarised as we read above. That's the trouble as things move in a daily basis the new have out driven the old. The previous practices now defunct. The stakes are all high as long as the victims are someone else the policy owners will always feel ok.
DeleteSame as UK sentencing first. If she is going to cough she might have done it than face a trial . Too late for plea deal now. Sentence has to be on the guilt verdicts. Sex traffic madam molester and organising rapes of minors is not going to look pretty . Prince Andrew these are your friends accompanied you in socialising. If we get friendly with clients we get hammered. What will anyone be saying to the royal mellingerer.
ReplyDelete