Wednesday 8 November 2023

A Quart Does Not Fit a Pint Pot

Ok this has been going on for some time now and the argument has distilled into a war of words between POs and SPOs - the latter effectively wringing their hands and saying 'we care, BUT basically have to carry on following orders and allocate more work'. This is a fucking disgrace and what compounds it is the silence from unions; HMPPS Permanent Secretary; Chief Probation Officer; Justice Select Committee etc etc etc:-

“But then you allocate “your staff” more work the very next morning. How caring!” Where do you suggest the cases go instead? Cases continue to get sentenced, are they meant to stay unallocated, how would you feel as a victim of crime if that was the case?

******
What magical solution do you suggest for when there are no staff left to do the job? Victims and their families want justice through staff having the capacity to actually do the job. They aren’t getting justice when we have 15 people coming in a day, and only have time to spend 10 minutes with each of them because then we have their case notes to write up, referrals to do, oasys to update, phone calls to make to social services, housing, courts, police, safeguarding checks, MAPPA and MARAC updates, breaches, parole reports and hearings, emails, teams calls, staff supervision and the bloody list just keeps on going. All the while being micromanaged by incompetent SPOs that have no idea what they’re doing, to within an inch of our lives. We see cases for long enough to ask if they’ve been arrested and check they’re still living where they should be, and to give them another appointment. We don’t do any meaningful work with them anymore. There isn’t time. 

So what do you suggest? Allocating to overwhelmed staff until they collapse under the caseload isn’t working. A lunch break that doesn’t involve cramming food in our faces while we continue typing would be nice once a week but it doesn’t happen. There. Is. No. More. Capacity.

******
I would suggest the minimal work that is being delivered [to] such over- allocated cases is not justice for the victims, not delivering what the Court intended at sentencing, letting down those we supervise and causing harm to staff. I suggest our senior managers/ excellent leaders do what the prisons do, say very publicly Probation is at capacity and the plans we had to fix this have not worked. If the glass is full any intelligent person would stop pouring!

******
Under the Health and Safety act 1974, the employer has a duty of care to its staff, and we have a duty of care to ourselves, to ensure that we have a safe working environment. To protect ourselves we need to call in sick and report stress on the portal, and request stress risk assessments to be recorded and reviewed. If managers do not follow this process then the Foreseeability Notice that NAPO created, should be used more frequently as a preventative measure. My understanding is that the organisation / employer is data driven, and we need to provide this evidence to NAPO for them to present and and challenge at meetings, so they can address the workloads, trauma and stress within the organisation.

--oo00oo--

As far as I can see, in order to protect the health and well-being of staff, according to law drastic action of some sort is the inevitable direction of travel here. Staff are leaving in droves; going off sick; suffering PTSD; prospective new recruits being dissuaded; staff increasingly confiding in me or contributing anonymous accounts on the blog, all in direct contravention of civil service directives and code of practice. This is going to continue until there's a bloody big public row because any sane person knows things can't go on like this. You cannot get a quart into a pint pot.   

11 comments:

  1. Have to ask why the government feel it appropriate to keep funnelling damaged people, the clients, the POPs, the punters, through such a broken system?
    Surely, the last thing anyone would want to expose someone with a chaotic lifestyle to is a chaotic system?

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
  2. local government workforce have accepted the 2023 pay offer, seven months after it was made. Two of the three unions, Unison and GMB, have agreed to the pay deal, while Unite is continuing to take industrial action in some councils. The pay rise is £1,925 for all staff.6 days ago
    https://www.lgcplus.com › workforce
    Unions

    ReplyDelete
  3. The probation service has devolved completely. It’s essentially a circus and the monkeys have the keys to the lions cage. The staff are all just waiting to be eaten alive.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Everything looks to be tickety boo in the North East according to Twitter:-

    "Fantastic staff conference 2day. Abt 860 colleagues attended & heard from our new AED, some key stakeholders + what they value about probation, local news stories from around the region with some very dodgy camera work!! Lots 2 be proud of #DoingTheRightThing #Northernstars"

    " So good to see everyone and hear some genuine good news stories from around the region at the first North East all staff conference. Enjoyed listening to Helen Judge our new AED and all the other speakers. #northernstars #doingtherightthing"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Superior orders, also known as the Nuremberg defense or just following orders, is a plea in a court of law that a person, whether a member of the military, law enforcement, or the civilian population, should not be considered guilty of committing actions that were ordered by a superior officer or official.

    On one hand, a person who refuses such an unlawful order faces the possibility of legal punishment at the national level. On the other hand, a person who accepts such an unlawful order faces the possibility of legal punishment at the international level.

    On the basis of Probation Service Instructions Vs health and safety, duty of care, employment tribunals and general morality, I do not think SPOs should be overly confident that asking crumbling POs over 110% WMT “Where do you suggest the cases go instead” is a defensible position. My response would be, go ask your Head of PDU and RPD “Where do you suggest the cases go” and stop giving them to me!

    / Probation Officer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This has been asked to head of service time and time again and we are told the red operating model allows things to be stopped. The reality though as a PO is that there is little you can stop doing if you still want to continue safeguarding. Any higher than heads are nowhere to be seen and unavailable

      Delete
  6. The argument between practitioners and SPOs demonstrates exactly what senior management hope for, people arguing amongst themselves so they can deflect and ignore the problems.

    The pressure on SPOs to meet targets, performance and to allocate cases is ongoing and they are subject to the same performance and capability plans if not meeting/doing these as a practitioner. Where are the unions in supporting who can say no these tasks and who this should fall too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, senior managers hope SPOs keep a lid on the problems and remain complicit and know most will because they are too stupid to know any better or because they want to sit at the SLT crony-table.

      Delete
  7. 100% is at full capacity.
    101% is over full capacity.
    Anything above 100% is professional suicide. The work cannot be managed safely, either for staff or for offenders. It puts the public at risk. It puts staff at risk. It’s too many plugs and not power supply, waiting for a full-scale blaze. It’s an SFO in the making and people - the public we all try so hard to protect - are either maimed beyond ever being able to return to their former lives, or they die. Those are the cold hard facts of over-allocation.
    Every case that commits an SFO is blood on the hands of whoever over-allocated to staff. Not the staff managing the case.
    #factsnotfiction
    #holdmanagerstoaccount
    #nothinglefttogive

    ReplyDelete
  8. Could someone ( anyone) tell me what has been formally agreed with our unions ( it’s not just NAPO) as an acceptable workload for FT PO and PSO? It seems to be such a moveable feast and so is a PPs work hence the starting point here should really be the WMT and how on earth has something so flawed, not used as intended / agreed was ever imposed / agreed ( I am unsure which of those the current model is). So, as well as complex tiering for cases ( people we supervise, remember that they are people) with issues that we all know will change during time of supervision, it measures the reports we are allocated ( eg PAROMs) but it strikes me it really isn’t fit for purpose given when anyone exceeds 100% ie full capacity, PPs appear to be told it’s a guidance for allocation only and “we all know that a higher tolerance is agreed when needed”. I think there is a real issue of SPOs being able to make decisions outside this and that’s when staff are over burdened and their health and well-being knowingly ( but never acknowledged) placed at risk. Yes, SPOs have discretion eg phased return to work cases, where they use the WMT to evidence this reduction, but they can’t have it all ways. They can’t use it to evidence good HR compliant behaviour then justify significant excess over that 100% figure by the ‘ I’ve got to allocate these to somebody’ minimising statement. Which of us understands the WMT sufficiently when you consider its importance to the current debate?

    ReplyDelete