General Secretary Election 22

In the absence of any engagement in discussion or debate, I think we must take yesterday's extraordinarily wide-ranging blog post from the General Secretary and emailed to all Napo members as evidence of some campaigning:-
 
OMiC - What’s the real story?

A number of members have been in touch to ask about progress on the OMiC Review, expressing concerns about safety and the impact on work in the community. We have recently put together a comprehensive update following on from our analysis in March, and the full document can be seen here.

OMiC - Napo's View

Napo has been in consultation with the OMiC project team for several months. Consultation, where the employer shares their plans and the trade unions have an opportunity to make comments, is not one of my favourite communication forums, largely because my experience of such exchanges shows that no matter what the issue is the unions often warn against the gaps in planning in advance of implementation. It’s also the case that some divisional management teams then present matters as having been “agreed with the trade unions”, thus compounding the confusion.

So far our consultation has primarily been with the National Design Team, which is responsible for issuing instructions to Divisional Implementation Boards (DIBs) which are comprised of both prison and NPS staff. All of the information we have up to now relates to public sector prisons and while we are aware that discussions are ongoing with contracted out prisons we have not received the detail on this.

Is it safe?

There are still real concerns for members about safety following some well-publicised issues about prisons. The OMiC plans lack sufficient detail, leading members to the belief that this key issue it is not being considered by the employer. Assurances are being offered about the presence of alarm bells and radios but not a sophisticated understanding of the complexity of the individual work that is required with clients. In addition to the general considerations there are some members from BAME backgrounds who are currently not placed in certain offices due to concerns about their physical and emotional wellbeing. The employer must be able to demonstrate that they can meet their duty of care to staff when placing them in a custodial environment. This duty of care extends to emotional wellbeing and protection from abuse and discrimination as well as physical wellbeing.

What POA members tell me

If Ministers had any doubts about the so called Prison Reform Revolution they could well spend some time listening to prison officer practitioners who have told me of their worries, (despite the propaganda being issued by HMPPS high command fuelled by some over optimistic reporting by their Governors).

First up is the lack of “feet on the landings” as described to me in terms of insufficient numbers of staff. For despite the almost weekly claims by Ministers and their MoJ apparatchiks, meeting a prison officer recruitment target counts for diddly if the attrition rate remains high (be it from natural wastage, staff who simply cannot cope, or new trainees seeing the realities of the environment and deciding this is not going to be a very good idea).

Protecting themselves comes next, and as Steve Gillan, POA General Secretary, confirms, protecting their families as its becoming normal for prison officers to be the subject of intimidation by way of threats implied or actual against their loved ones. Throw in the elements of preventing self-harm of clients, keeping a keen eye on gang violence, the effects of radicalisation and the huge influx of Spice and other drugs or illicit material and it’s hard to see exactly how the initial rehabilitation process expected of them is actually going to work.

The paper from our officer practitioners sets out some serious issues beyond this summary and I highly commend it as source material for discussion in your workplace. Do let me have any views or questions, which I will ensure get to the right quarter without revealing identities.

AP members concerns over rotas and outsourcing

I am just returning to London having visited Napo members from Approved Premises in Merseyside today along with Napo Vice-Chair Katie Lomas. We covered a range of issues including concerns about the impact of the shift rotas on individuals and how the recently outsourced DWNC outsourcing is working out, against the expectations of the National Project leads in NPS.

Yet again, and just like the recent visit that Katie and I made to Sheffield to share members concerns about VISOR, I was hugely impressed with our members depth knowledge and total commitment to their important work. It was also clear that the issues from members, that we went there to listen to, included appreciation by them of the pressures that their managers often find themselves in when trying to respond to the demands of the new E3 driven duty rotas, and the impact of this government’s decision to press on regardless with their ridiculous decision to outsource Double Waking Night Cover to Sodexo (and OCS) - who seem to be still struggling to deliver what we were told they would.

We have given advice about how members (and that’s members everywhere by the way) should ensure that they comply with HSE Directives around shift work and how we want them to be involved in finding and disseminating best practice across the region. As always Napo stands ready to work with Divisional management towards a smooth transition to the new rota arrangements - but it takes two to tango.

Ian Lawrence 

NPS to Withdraw Circles Support

In an astonishingy short-sighted decision, NPS have decided to withdraw financial support from Circles UK. This on their website:-  

FALSE ECONOMY? 

WITHDRAWAL BY NATIONAL PROBATION SERVICE OF FUNDING FOR CIRCLES OF SUPPORT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 

I have been an admirer and a supporter from the side lines of the success of Circles of Support and Accountability (“Circles”), having been introduced to the concept as the judicial member of the Advisory Panel of Rethinking Crime and Punishment more than a dozen years ago. Before explaining my personal dismay at a funding decision which threatens the lifeblood of this vital initiative, it is timely to explain the concept; and why it is so effective in monitoring those sex offenders who have been released into the community for continued supervision by the Probation Service. 

In short, the name of the organisation accurately describes its function; and why it is so effective. Carefully selected and fully trained groups of 4 – 6 volunteers regularly meet with a released sex offender, prompting them with the active support they are likely to require, particularly after a lengthy period of imprisonment; but making it equally clear that the price of support is that the offender must be accountable to the Circle for their continued behaviour. Circles provide a range of support mechanisms to help these people form appropriate links to their community, access the services which they need, and thus help prevent further victims of sexual abuse. 

The unique strength of Circles has been its ability to harness the enthusiasm and commitment of its highly trained community volunteers; and the skills which they develop enable them effectively to manage the risk of potential harm posed by those who have once been assessed as high risk sex offenders. 

Not only was I a judge sitting in the Crown Court both part-time and full-time for 27 years, but I served my maximum 10 year term as a member of the Parole Board. In both capacities I had considerable experience not only of those whose sexual offending had caused significant harm, but of those who, following many years in custody, had been carefully assessed by professionals as presenting a sufficiently low risk to be properly managed in the community. 

The more than 600 active volunteers who form such Circles are, and for the past 10 years have been, managing former sex offenders who have hitherto been assessed as posing a high risk of harm. While objectively their risk has been sufficiently lowered to justify their release on licence if they had been serving indeterminate sentences, many such offenders are automatically released at the halfway point of a determinate sentence; and such persons are recognised to be among the most stigmatised and marginalised groups of former offenders. Those who are assigned to a Circle are often isolated, shunned by family and associates, who struggle to find accommodation or employment, and hence successfully to integrate back into the community. Circles assist not only with all these practical aspects, but in addition work with the offender permanently to change their former abusive behaviour. 

Circles provision has been fully and independently evaluated; and the evaluations have demonstrated significant benefits both to the recipients of a Circle, as well as to the volunteers and the community in general. Offenders who have taken part have demonstrated a proven reduction in their risk scores; the Circle has helped them to secure suitable accommodation and employment, and to improve their emotional well-being; to form appropriate and meaningful relationships; and to pursue constructive hobbies and activities. 

Local Circles Providers have been supported through a Service Level Agreement with the National Probation Service (NPS) totalling some £256,000 annually. This very modest provision, which enables oversight of the work of some 600 active volunteers, can be contrasted with the substantial value which NPS obtains from Circles. That body is of course statutorily responsible for the management of such persons on licence in the community. 

It is objectively all too clear that, but for the volunteer support which is available through Circles, the hard-pressed Probation Service would struggle to begin to provide the degree of supervision and support which these former offenders continue to require in the community to which they have been released. 

It is against this background that I learned with dismay bordering on incomprehension of the reported decision of NPS to discontinue the funding of Circles. I understand that the immediate consequences of this decision are stark. First, Circles provision in a number of Regions, such as Greater Manchester, where there has always been a waiting list for those seeking the support of a Circle, will have to cease. Most local Circles Providers operate as small charities; and without this regular support their long-term sustainability is under threat. Second, I understand that approximately 100 Circles which were due to start up may now have to be cancelled as a result of this withdrawal of funding. The emotional implications for a cohort of former sex offenders who are ready to start their Circles, and for which they may have prepared for months, and the consequential impact on their future risk, is immeasurable. 

So let us put this financial “saving” into context. It is said that the funding of £256,000 will be injected into “the purchase of accommodation provision”. If that means literally what is stated, it is unlikely to provide more than 5 hostel places per year, since £50,000 is the approximate annual cost of a hostel place. Contrast that with the current and planned provision of at least 170 Circles per year, keeping safe an equal number of former sex offenders in the community. The task of keeping them safe inevitably includes the sourcing and maintaining of secure accommodation. Hence this budget decision makes no sense at all. The exercise of judgment is not the exclusive preserve of the judge (or even the retired judge): it can and should equally be discharged by the Executive Director of Probation, who is the relevant budget-holder. 

John Samuels QC 

A retired Circuit Judge; former Chair of the Criminal Committee of the Council of Circuit Judges; President of Prisoners’ Education Trust; judicial member of the Ministry of Justice Working Group on problem-solving courts; former Chairman of the Criminal Justice Alliance; and Vice President and Patron of a number of other prison welfare charities.

General Secretary Election 21

Hi Jim,

Just thought I should write in and clear up some mistruths and maybe misconceptions about me that I have read on the blog and have been posted on social media. Firstly it is important to always remember “A lie repeated and unchallenged becomes the truth” and I wouldn’t want your readers or those reading social media being misled either deliberately or by accident.

In relation to my political affiliations and views I have never been a member of the Socialist Workers party nor have I ever attended any of their meetings. I have given quotes to the press association in the past which were then reported in the Socialist jottings along with many other tabloid newspapers. 

To be clear I have only ever been a Labour party member and I only joined the party three years ago when I believed that there would be a change in leadership that would see the Labour party return to their roots following the defeat in 2015. Labour was promising what I can only describe as pale blue policies to make cuts but not at the level the Tories wanted to back in 2015 and before and I felt that I could not support the party during that time.

I was bought up in a very working class family with my mother working as a Secretary in London and my father a council worker for Greenwich council where he had started work as a labourer, laying paving slabs then steadily getting promoted into management roles before his premature death from Cancer at 57 years old. Both had been Labour voters most of their lives and I had developed a keen interest in following politics from a young age.

In May 2013 I stood in the Kent County Council elections as a TUSC candidate, at the time the party had been led and heavily influenced by senior trade union officials such as Bob Crow RMT with PCS, FBU, POA & NUT (now NEU) all being included as part of the National Steering committee. TUSC only required candidates to agree to a platform against all forms of cuts and anti-austerity and there were no conditions as to views on policy when out campaigning. This agreement suited me so that I could campaign freely although I was already concerned that TUSC had no real policy direction.

Soon after being elected as part of the POA NEC in August 2013 I was invited to attend the TUSC steering committee meetings at RMT HQ near Kings Cross. It soon occurred to me that TUSC was more of a campaign against cuts then it would ever be an alternative to the mainstream political parties and I began to raise my concerns. There was no real desire to come into conflict with any Labour candidate that stated that they would be anti-cuts and it seemed to me pointless to be promoting TUSC as an alternative party when they were not prepared to challenge each and every seat.

Then in 2014 whilst TUSC were making preparations for the General election in 2015, the Socialist Party offered to fund most of the TUSC candidates with in excess of £200,000 that they had made available and they wanted commitments in return for the cash. I disagreed with taking the money as it made TUSC as bad as any other political party i.e. beholden to those who fund it and I made my points to the TUSC leadership. The TUSC leadership decided to accept the money and I parted company there and then, not because I was anti the Socialist Party but because I did not agree with the politics behind the cash. I did not attend anymore steering committee meetings.

Whilst I have known some of NAPO’s current NEC a long time I have no-one “sponsoring” my campaign, writing my replies to this blog or else. I have chosen freely of my own accord to stand because I wanted to and I have campaigned on my own views, thoughts and beliefs. I guess in this case the description of being “Maverick” could then be considered accurate. I have always been one to speak out and challenge things rather than go with the crowd. Obviously this does bring me into conflict with others, especially those that have held court or power for a long time and do not like newbies entering the frame and unsettling the applecart. However once I have had my opportunity to state my case and fight for my views I can of course accept the consensus.

I would not accept that I am a ‘chancer’ though, more someone who is prepared to take a chance and fight for something worth doing rather than not bothering to fight in the first place. As I’m sure most of your readers have already established I will not take things lying down and I will always continue to state my case and argue my point, doesn’t matter how many people try to belittle me or attack my reputation I will always respond to mistruths and misconceptions.

In my experience far too many people make noise and then when elected they fall into the trap of following the consensus, this will never be for me and although I’m fully aware that this approach is littered with stress, frustration and sometimes disappointment it is the only way I know how to operate when it comes to tackling the big issues.

I hope that this clarifies some points with your readers Jim and thanks again for continuing to post my jottings.

Kind Regards

Mike Rolfe

General Secretary Election 20

As we know, our current General Secretary doesn't acknowledge this blog so I'll take the following from Napo news published yesterday and circulated to all members by email as evidence of a bit of campaigning on his behalf:- 

That Times article – Are the CRC contracts going to be terminated early?

Members may be aware of an article published in 'The Times' newspaper yesterday in relation to the CRC contracts and the possibility that they may be terminated two years ahead of schedule by Ministers due to the ongoing failure of the Transforming Rehabilitation programme. As you would expect, I was able to establish contact yesterday morning with the author of the article Richard Ford, to check out the degree of certainty behind the report.

At this stage, Napo is not able to verify a story that in some respects is encouraging, but which is also highly speculative. Napo has a responsibility to ascertain the facts before raising members’ expectations unreasonably. I aim to use our close connections in the MoJ and in CRCs to establish the full picture as we approach the summer Parliamentary recess.

What is clear is that this story not only reflects the fact that Napo members in the NPS and CRCs have suffered the abject failure of the whole TR project, but also highlights one of many options we ourselves have been campaigning for, in what we obviously all hope is the beginning of the end of privatisation.

I will update members as soon as we know more about whether what has been reported becomes a certainty. What I can confirm is that many CRC members have been in touch to say how some providers have been falling over themselves to publically deny the scenario in the Times article while it is common knowledge that they are engaged in critical talks with the MoJ!

Napo working in Parliament

Meanwhile Napo will continue the campaign in parliament. The following and somewhat timely questions have been tabled on our behalf by Liz Saville-Roberts MP Plaid Cymru for next week’s Justice Questions session.

Asked by Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) Asked on: 13 June 2018
Ministry of Justice : Community Rehabilitation Companies 153415
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the timetable is for the next steps in his review of privatised probation services; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) Asked on: 12 June 2018
Ministry of Justice : Community Rehabilitation Companies 152825
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what preparations he has made to safeguard essential services in the event of a Community Rehabilitation Company (a) running into financial difficulties, (b) going into administration and (c) wishing to terminate its contract.

As pressure mounts on CRCs and with the possibility of an early end to the contracts, Napo will be briefing parliamentarians and the Justice Unions and Family Court Parliamentary Group to put further pressure on the Government. I have already written to the Probation Minister, Rory Stewart, demanding to know what is going on behind the scenes and seeking an urgent meeting. We will also be re-establishing our contact with the senior leadership in the Labour Party and Richard Burgon’s Justice team, who have pledged to work with us and other partners in mapping out the new vision for Probation.

Members will not pay the price for TR

Most importantly, Napo will defend our members and their jobs, despite whatever may emerge from the current Probation System Review and the Justice Select Committee’s awaited report. It is our member’s (and that includes manager members) in the CRCs and the NPS who have worked so hard to maintain professional standards in the face of adversity and to keep Probation from collapsing entirely. That is why I am reminding NPS leaders daily that we must see a start to meaningful pay negotiations before we commence legal action over a pay system that is inherently gender discriminatory.

This union remains ready to work with everyone to rebuild the service and shape the future, but we will not hesitate to expose a deeply flawed social experiment. Napo will ensure that our members are not blamed or used as scapegoats for what is a systematic failure based on political ideology that has wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money.

Ian Lawrence
Napo General Secretary

--oo00oo--

Meanwhile, we are well aware that our current General Secretary appears to have made a conscious and some would say cynical decision not to engage in discussion or debate and has sought to frustrate the efforts of the contender Mike Rolfe by not supplying dates for possible branch meetings. 

In addition, news now reaches me that several branches were hoping to organise a teleconference debate next week, but again the General Secretary has stated he is not available for any of the three suggested dates. I understand the contender signalled he could manage any of the dates, despite also having a full time job. 

In the circumstances I think it is a reasonable conclusion to draw that the incumbent candidate is seeking to stifle open discussion and debate and therefore members must take this into account when deciding how best to cast their vote. 

Interestingly, the following graph shows how there's renewed activity on the blog as a direct result of the Times story breaking on Thursday. Yesterday's blog post achieved over 1,000 hits, double the normal figure and for the second day running the daily total has been over 3,000. 



--oo00oo--

Footnote

Oh dear, looks like our General Secretary is so rattled he's resorting to personal abuse. Thanks to the reader for spotting this Facebook exchange:-

MoJ Admit TR Failure

Yesterday the Times published an old-fashioned scoop that confirms what we all know, namely that Chris Grayling's Transforming Rehabilitation has been a complete disaster. The contracts are to be terminated early, probably by agreement, because we also know that despite being 'bunged' more cash, the CRC's aren't making any money no matter how many staff they continue to shed. 

Although coyly described as a leak by the MoJ, it's a big story because it's really the first sign that the government know it's all been a disaster and I suspect are wanting to test the water with the brilliant idea of just making the contracts bigger, thus attracting the likes of Serco and G4S, Serious Fraud Office investigations not withstanding.  

Coming at the same time as Dame Glenys Stacey confirms her days as HM Chief Inspector are numbered, it would surely be reasonable to expect Napo would be on the front foot with an incisive Press Release in response? But no, just the usual bland soundbites:-

"Big story in Times adds to speculation about fate of CRC Contracts. This is one option being looked at as part of the ongoing Probation System Review. Critical period for Probation, thats why we need a GS who understands the issues." Ian Lawrence on Twitter

Probation firms’ contracts will be ripped up

Contracts for the part-privatisation of the probation service are set to be cut short after a barrage of criticism over the way companies monitor offenders.

Ministers are looking to terminate the contracts in 2020, two years early, after concluding that they are unlikely to work. The decision was made after it was disclosed that some offenders were monitored with one brief telephone call every six weeks.

Chris Grayling launched the scheme as justice secretary in 2015 to encourage innovation and to reduce re-offending. The state-run probation service was split into 21 community rehabilitation companies (CRCs) that were given seven-year contracts worth £3.7 billion to monitor low to medium-risk offenders.

The 21 services run by CRCs will be reduced to about 14 and new tenders will be issued to run the bigger probation areas, The Times understands.

The Ministry of Justice said: “All options remain on the table.”

It comes as Dame Glenys Stacey, the chief inspector of probation, has decided she will stand down next year at the end of her three year contract. It had been hoped she would seek an extension of her contract.

Dame Glenys, 64, was at the centre of controversy earlier this year when she agreed to take on a review of farm inspection expected to take up to two days a week from March to December this year. Her departure is not linked to the impending shake-up of the probation service.

--oo00oo--

Statement from Chief Inspector Dame Glenys Stacey

Dame Glenys Stacey will be stepping down as HM Chief Inspector of Probation at the end of her current term. She is not seeking a re-appointment. Dame Glenys was appointed as Chief Inspector in March 2016 on a three-year fixed term.

Dame Glenys said: 

“It is so important for those receiving youth offending and probation services and for the wider public, that providers and government are held to account for the quality of those services. HMI Probation plays a pivotal role. 

I am delighted that the inspectorate is now able to play its full part in driving improvements where needed to these important services, so that people can have complete faith in community sentencing, probation supervision and the careful work done by youth offending teams. 

We have introduced new ways of inspecting, underpinned by new quality standards. Organisations providing youth offending and probation services will now be rated by HMI Probation, just as schools and hospitals are rated by Ofsted and CQC. 

In many ways, the job I set out to do is done. HMI Probation has grown into a capable and respected organisation, with a strong senior management team, and people can be assured that the inspectorate will continue to do excellent work.”

More details on the appointment of a successor will follow.

--oo00oo--

Interserve staff received this email:

'Dear all'

An article has been published in todays Times which is about the national CRC contractual discussions that are currently ongoing between CRC providers and the MOJ. Cathy James, senior contract manager with the Directorate of Community Intervention at HMPPS has asked Interserve to share the following lines with all probation staff. She is also sharing the same correspondence with all NPS and CRC staff.

1. the article is based on a leak and does not reflect agreed Govt policy
2. The MOJ is in commercial discussions with CRC parent organisations. Those discussions are ongoing and no final decisions have yet been taken on our future plans for probation.
3. Our priority is to ensure operational stability for the probation system so that staff can continue to focus on the important work they do to protect the public, rehabilitate offenders and deliver the sentences of the court.
4. As and when ministers develop proposals about future changes to the probation system, there will of course be proper engagement with staff, trade unions and stakeholders.

If you receive any questions from the media or other sources about the future of CRC contracts and the probation system, you should direct them to Stephen Hallmark, Interserve Comms Manager.

--oo00oo--

Editor's note

This blog received 3,000 hits yesterday, confirming it's still the 'go to' place whenever a probation story breaks - cheers.  

General Secretary Election 19

Hi Jim,

Thank you once again for posting my responses and thoughts during this campaign and also finding my video via facebook. I realise not everyone will be supportive of this medium for interaction and that outsiders will also be able to view everything that is written. To be honest I want those employers that Napo members work for to read these jottings as they will be clear about what will happen next if I am successfully elected as your GS and I’m pretty sure that they will be hoping that is not the case, especially those that have had to deal with me across the table previously. 

They will know and understand that when I set deadlines then I am a man of my word and expect a realistic and fair deadline to be achieved. For instance I will not be fobbed off with the continued promise of “future talks on pay”, often with a carrot held on a fishing line just in front of our noses, continually keeping us from the prize but with the promise of “constructive talks shortly once we have ministerial approval”. If trade union leaders have not spotted this annual trick by employers, especially NPS, to avoid addressing the issues then we really are in trouble. 

The senior leaders of any organisation are put there as a ‘buffer’, in NPS’s case they are the ‘buffer’ between you (members) and the minster in charge, and you must step out of the cosy talks mentality believing that these senior leaders are really trying their best to resolve our issues on pay, workloads etc…unfortunately you are playing right into their hands, that is their job, to make you believe they are responsible and listening to your concerns with care and compassion whilst taking their bonuses and bumper salaries annually without fluttering an eyelid.

My comments on seeking clarity with regards to financial information has been questioned, especially about being able to obtain information from Napo with regards to the General Secretary remuneration package and some have suggested that I have shown my inexperience or made an error as only a public body need to respond to such requests and that I am somehow not paying attention to detail. 

I would urge those who believe this to perhaps spend a little more time reading TULCRA 1992, the legislation that applies to trade unions in the UK. If you read TULCRA you will realise that Trade Unions have statutory duties to supply financial information to members annually, explicitly with regards to remuneration packages of General Secretaries, and upon request must allow members sight of financial information. Please see extracts from TULCRA below to assist those members better in understanding;

30 Right of access to accounting records.

(1) A member of a trade union has a right to request access to any accounting records of the union which are available for inspection and relate to periods including a time when he was a member of the union.
In the case of records relating to a branch or section of the union, it is immaterial whether he was a member of that branch or section.

(2) Where such access is requested the union shall—

(a) make arrangements with the member for him to be allowed to inspect the records requested before the end of the period of twenty-eight days beginning with the day the request was made,
(b) allow him and any accountant accompanying him for the purpose to inspect the records at the time and place arranged, and
(c) secure that at the time of the inspection he is allowed to take, or is supplied with, any copies of, or of extracts from, records inspected by him which he requires.

(3) The inspection shall be at a reasonable hour and at the place where the records are normally kept, unless the parties to the arrangements agree otherwise.

(4) An “accountant” means a person who is eligible for appointment as a [F1 statutory auditor under Part 42 of the Companies Act 2006].

(5) The union need not allow the member to be accompanied by an accountant if the accountant fails to enter into such agreement as the union may reasonably require for protecting the confidentiality of the records.

32 A Statement to members following annual return.

(1) A trade union shall take all reasonable steps to secure that, not later than the end of the period of eight weeks beginning with the day on which the annual return of the union is sent to the Certification Officer, all the members of the union are provided with the statement required by this section by any of the methods allowed by subsection (2).

(2) Those methods are—

(a) the sending of individual copies of the statement to members; or
(b) any other means (whether by including the statement in a publication of the union or otherwise) which it is the practice of the union to use when information of general interest to all its members needs to be provided to them.

(3) The statement required by this section shall specify—

(a) the total income and expenditure of the trade union for the period to which the return relates,
(b) how much of the income of the union for that period consisted of payments in respect of membership,
(c) the total income and expenditure for that period of any political fund of the union, and
(d) the salary paid to and other benefits provided to or in respect of—

(i) each member of the executive,
(ii) the president, and
(iii) the general secretary,
by the trade union during that period.

In respect of specific questions with regards to my qualifications as a trade union rep I have completed stage 1 TUC representative, Stage 2 TUC representative ”stepping up”, POA Branch Official Training (TUC accredited), TUC Leading change, first part (didn’t complete this course as instead of going to Boston in the USA October/November 2016 I was in urgent talks with the Secretary of State and HMPPS hierarchy over health and safety in Prisons which resulted in industrial action). 

Qualifications are important as is continued education but working in the role is where the true experience sets in. I have obviously not previously worked for Napo and will need to learn Napo’s rules and constitution inside out as I have learnt the rules of my previous trade union inside out. Using the policies that are specific to the individual organisation based around primary legislation is the key to having a firm grip on understand and organising the functioning of the trade union, as is knowledge of relevant legislation with regards to Trade Union activities.

Whilst I have always accepted that I will need to learn more if successful in this role I am certainly not inexperienced, neither am I lacking in knowledge of the relevant legislation's and rules appertaining to Trade Unions, their legal and statutory responsibilities to members and in making returns to such bodies as the Certification Officer.

Kind Regards

Mike Rolfe

Napo at Work in the South West 15

We must briefly move away from the General Secretary election debate as other important matters need covering, such as the ongoing Working Links dispute. As usual thanks to the reader for sending me the latest news and watch out for another response from Mike Rolfe which I intend publishing later today.  

NAPO SSW Branch report update June 2018 

Dear Napo members and Unison,

Firstly a quick thanks to all those members attending this years very successful and enjoyable AGM. The brief annual report from AGM is attached although I will not be circulating the Branch Chairs opening address. You can draw your own conclusions.

In the news and attached is a document submitted to Companies House by an undisclosed name on behalf of Aurelius. Using their full name for the first time Sigma and the usual Limited. What is interesting about the notification registration is that it was lodged on the 8th of June. We all know it has been reported that ongoing talks with MOJ and Working Links are due to settle in June according to the chief financial officer incidentally named on the final declarations pages. The fact the document has been lodged is a clear signal (some might call it a bonfire) in the middle of the Working Links way arrangements.

This debenture is loaded with legal jargon and what looks like a classic “Yes Minister" mouthful but it lays out a clear ownership entitlement and money claiming legality that effectively reads like the shirts and probably all the rest of the clothing of Working Links could be coming off. The only debtors protected in the process or I should say given priority is those on wages. The rest is fully controlled by the Aurelius clutch on the remaining monies and everything else. Working Links way is to drag out some spokesperson and may well offer it is usual practice nothing to worry about and customary for these sorts of things. We wait to see. However the terms Chargors being Working Links places them as :-

A company or person who grants a charge or right in security in favour of some other person or company known as a chargee

The charge is effectively the Lender and that is Aurelius. They are a long way from being described as the helpful profit investing supporting friend that has helped reshape the Working Links Way portfolio. In fact it looks more the prediction of the end of the line will fast approach as the investors relentless drive for their cash driven profiteering end will drive any small limping company under sooner or later. We hope for the sooner and that scenario is well catered for in the document termed the Debenture. There are many interesting sections and in particular my old favourite the ARSA has a place in the Service Agreement top of page 4.

The implications to my mind at least is the MOJ will most likely have to be asking along with the Parliamentary accounts committee where did the excess of 4 Million disappear to last summer? We all know not 1 penny found its way to any section of the services. We know this as we were officially told that all that monies was to sustain the spending already made. It was a different story when we read the 2017 accounts of Working Links hiding under clauses to not declare actual profits. Whatever the issues become which are starting to unfold none of this paints a happy picture for Working Links. I know many of our members will be reaching out extending their sympathies for the Company and the Working Links way wont we all?

Anyway for this brief publication and the debenture report let me have your views. My thanks go to our usual sources for citing us early on this development.

The one reassurance I can give is that wages are at the top of any list as debtors before the Aurelius creditors earmark everything else.

On the NAPO General Secretary Elections the ballot is out and you have your chance to make a difference to providing a mandate please ensure your vote is not left in the office as leave approaches fill them in now.

Dino Peros Napo SSw branch Chair. 

--oo00oo--

Chairs AGM Report SSW Branch June 2018

Welcome Members, 

To your AGM South South West Branch with what continues to be the most intransigent of employers Working Links and Aurelius. 

⦁ Backward in all staff related matters.
⦁ Backward in terms and conditions
⦁ Backwards in fair to staff practices
⦁ Backwards in policies procedures and justice.
⦁ Backwards in delivering best services. 

We can tell you what they are not backwards at, looking constantly for more money seeking to reduce any costs irrespective of the damage to anyone else. Clamouring for more cash from the MOJ. Being secretive about their real profits and most of all great at misinformation, blaming everyone else for the delays in your entitlements to a percentage pay increase and while claiming the unions hold up your rewards. This is simply just another Working Links lie we have endured this year. Not the first time and certainly it won’t be the last. 

A few years back 2016 we talked of their desire to make more money from crime than any bank robbers in history. Sadly the government agenda has facilitated public funds for Working Links to cash in on. Inferior services calculated targets and real loss of genuine quality public services has seen the growth in a false market place that has the contractors now crying foul as they realise the public monies gravy train is stalling as the Parliamentary accounts committee has said this free flow of cash has to end. 

The recent cuts to travel overheads bill paying has seen this years Working Links claims of being a progressive company into a local contract of farce and crisis. 

Poorest IT still not centrally linked a contract requirement and far too many drives up a Working Links cul-de-sacs none of this was declared in the their 2017 roads map rubbish. Sadly this year has seen the Working Links way cut their own staffing and urgently redefine exactly where the government funds actually go and to start to ensure that the money actually pays for CRC staff. Something NAPO SSW branch has well reported its concerns over the years.

We have continued to see the decline in the published Thematic reports on many CRCs activity and we have now heard of plans to seek to put back into Wales at least public ownership of case management at some point soon we hope. We have the news that all offender based case management is now to return to some period of time whereby cases are actually seen. Face to face, this work will cost time and money. The Working Links stripped back case management model, using just call centres will likely now have to go south. We all hope Working Links and their ways, will subsequently follow. 

SSW Branch remains strong committed to working with Ian Lawrence the national General Secretary of NAPO. Congratulations to him having won the NEC nomination to move forwards on his campaign for re–election this summer. In combination with Ian Lawrence GS we have our support in the region from Wales and BGSW and to Unison all areas in the ongoing dispute for your 

⦁ Workloads weightings employee care
⦁ Terms and Conditions
⦁ Health and Safety
⦁ Pay
⦁ Accommodation
⦁ Seeking negotiations on Work case management model.
⦁ Job security 

Members will have seen the Branch reports that we provide as soon as we can as issues come light and to some point of reporting. However with Working Links constantly changing its senior managerial line up it is difficult not to wonder who they are going to field next as all their people seem to disappear rather quickly. 

Recently being announced that the new leader for all the CRCs has a probation background we see this as a signal that they may have understood the government concerns and placed a better skilled leader than we have experienced so far. Though it is too early to call in truth I suspect they will have their hands tied to the continued rubbish we have experienced to date. 

The continual brain drain of skilled experienced knowledgeable Probation Officers has seen too many exodus Working Links and their way. In 10 months we understood that as many as 10 POs had left the Working Links regime and more recent news, another two have joined in that flight. 

I would have hoped, as many of our members tell us, the Government should have taken hold of these failing contracts well before now, sadly the collusion to keep the CRCs limping home to end of the unlikely to be renewed contract period might be the only way to save their remaining reputation for what is increasingly becoming another government public services negligent farce. By the way has anyone ever seen a real contract manager who knows what that actually means? 

The indication from Working Links themselves this year is worth noting again and their desire to quit before contract time ends is welcome news and we have reported on this, the only difficulty is that WL are not able to quit their toxic contract. Foolish arrangement to be in really and they have to fund the costs to get out should they try. All said I cannot see the government bailing them out this early even though the remainder of the contract is now on a declining curve. NAPO looks forward to assisting in the acceleration of the contract ending should this become a real potential. 

On some positive news Napo has a lot to look forwards to. Plenty going on nationally although I have mixed views on the real state of the union our GS is here to tell us some of the important developments for both CRCs and NPS. On NPS issues the branch NPS Vice Chair will be reporting all progress on those arrangements for the last 12 months. 

The local Branch NAPO SSW has seen our media campaign continue with reports In local newspapers TV and in particular our Local Plymouth campaign to see a council motion passed on Public safety about the Working Links failing Model which is part of our dispute. Gladly we look forwards to the returning face to face case management but have yet to engage Senior management on discussions of a less risky supervision model. Despite the motion being lost by a few votes. 

The branch supporters continue to fight for your terms indeed many of our members have been abused and constantly face the attacks from the management using policy and procedures to bully harass and victimise staff into forms of compliance to new task and more work without adequate agreements or protections. This NAPO branch support all its members who have been strong and resisted this adversarial management doctrine and send this continued message to them. We will defend our member’s terms and conditions despite their inappropriate tactics and not before too long, we’ll be there ready to open the door as they both exit and take their shoddy employment practices with them.

As the Chair of the NAPO SSW branch I remain proud to lead NAPO members. Proud of our members’ ability to remain in post and resist the management pressures. Proud of all those members coming forwards to take part in the branch and I am grateful that our memberships continue to challenge and defend your terms and conditions whatever it takes!

We remain a credible strong branch proud to continue our dispute as long as we continue to receive the fantastic support we have had in our well attended branch meetings over the last year. Members, we thank you for that and long shall we continue to work together to protect our terms our Union and continue to try and save and restore what was once our great service. 

NAPO thanks the executive and activists for their sterling work this year they all know who they are and what they do. In solidarity we look forwards because together we are stronger. If your not in a union and reading this Join Napo now!

Dino Peros NAPO SSW Branch Chair.

General Secretary Election 18

Hi Jim,

Thanks for posting my responses to questions which were written late last night. I guess with people casting their votes as we speak the election will definitely draw out supporters on either side that will contribute and formulate arguments to suit their favoured candidate on this forum and via any potential outlet as is the nature of any election. The art of spin is never lost in such circumstances and I appreciate that there will be people that will vilify me via this forum who are supporters of IL as there will be my supporters that will seek to vilify IL. 

All that I can say is that I would rather voters focus on what they want to see achieved by Napo for the next 5 years and make their own informed choice from the information they have garnered for themselves. I do not take offence to being criticised via this blog and actually quite enjoy it as it certainly helps stimulate debate and in turn assures me that Napo members do care immensely about their future and that they desperately need something positive to cling onto rather than the feeling of continued decline…it seems clear to me that there is a lot of division and that intelligent arguments are being posted for either side of the debate. 

I would say however that written posts do not always give a detailed account of knowledge and experience and writing lengthy blogs to ensure you have covered all avenues can sometimes seem cumbersome in itself unless every casual observer bothers to read the post in great detail. This is why I would have preferred being put to test in front of members at each and every branch face to face, however that has not been possible and I have welcomed the fact that I can converse via this blog with Napo members on some level. 

I similarly do not see this as unprofessional and I have nothing to hide from members or indeed the employers as I firmly believe that we should be upfront about what we are going to do next and what we want to improve the lives of our members. As chair of the POA I had no hesitation in speaking out and stating what would happen next should we not be treated with the respect and dignity we deserved, even under the threat of imprisonment and sequestration of my personal finances; the same will apply if I am GS of Napo and I will be forthright in trying to achieve the desired outcomes. I see no sense in playing any unnecessary political games and I am a pretty straight talker to anyone who knows me.

Perhaps towards the end of my blog last night I should have provided more detail in my final paragraph with regards to the departure of any incumbent GS, but for a couple of reasons I felt a simple explanation would suffice. I had in fact sought clarification of the contractual position of the incumbent GS from a Napo NEC source before submitting that post last night and I was informed that in this instance the contract expires with no form of compensation, redundancy or indeed severance pay. 

Unfortunately as others have posted I do not have sight of this contract and can only rely on the information I have been given as factual in this instance. I have had a vast experience in contractual issues so I would not want readers of this blog to assume that my knowledge in this area is limited, hence why I was able to successfully defend myself against the POA, their appointed solicitor from Thompsons and separate Counsel from Deveraux Chambers at the Certification Officer in March of this year when indeed the POA sought to ban me from future POA National Office positions following the General election last year. 

This was in fact a contractual and rule based argument the Certification Officer responded to in my favour. Similarly I have represented many colleagues pulling apart Grievances procedures, disciplinary hearing procedures and the like by reading the 'small print' contained within policies and employment contracts and I pay great attention to detail when I have access to such information. I’ll repeat that I do not have sight of the actual contract in this case but contract law is clear and if I am informed that there is no allowance contained within this contract for compensation, redundancy or severance then I must accept that as being a true position. 

Personally I think it would be abhorrent to offer such severance pay as some have suggested within previous blogs in any fixed term contract and I would not expect to receive any such pay in similar circumstances, but as I say my information is that this is not the case. I’m sure that members would be able to confirm or deny this position quite simply by requesting an answer from the Napo NEC or via FOI as I have sought to do.

I would think it only fair and right that I expand further on why I fully believe that if successful in this election I should take the time to fully explore each and every issue, concern and complaint of Napo members in each of the representative areas and in full. Firstly I do not see this as a weakness as others have alluded to, actually more of a strength; anyone who believes that they have all the answers before taking a step forward would in my opinion be severely deluded and no matter how much I could potentially be harangued for an answer I will not rush to make a decision or commit to a course of action without all the facts and a detailed flavour of various member opinions. 

Let’s not forget that there is an entirely elected body, your NEC, to determine how best to deliver wishes from members via AGM motions. It should after all be the members of the union with the relevant expertise and the knowledge that set the policy of the union, then it is the role of the elected Officials to spend their time working out how best to achieve those policies set by members. Ultimately the role of the GS is to be the outspoken or intelligent voice of these policies to ensure good media coverage of issues and to build and influence change with employers, MPs and / or Government ministers. Obviously this is only part of the job but in relation to setting policy it should be the members that set the agenda. Imagine if this was the other way around and that the Napo leadership ignored all AGM motions and set the policy as they see fit, if members did not agree with that position then it would not take long before there was an unhealthy relationship between members and leadership and this can only mean one thing the decline of the union and its membership.

To clarify it seems that some who have posted in this blog do not see any alternative candidate as fit for the role unless that individual can hit the ground running with detailed knowledge of all issues concerning Napo members, detailed knowledge of how to operate and run Napo as a successful and healthy union and detailed knowledge and ability to undertake all the roles and responsibilities necessary to run Napo. That is not a realistic instant position for anyone and having not had the opportunity to spend the last few weeks being able to meet with members and being given the opportunity to have complete access to Napo and its sensitive internal information I am having to source all information for myself and from members that have chosen to engage directly with me, should I be successfully elected then I know that this position would quickly change. 

Napo is a union, unions are built from collective voices not just one voice and no-one should expect anyone to be able to achieve all the things that Napo members want without working collaboratively with the NEC, Activists, members and sometimes other interested partners. I would urge members to vote with a realistic acceptance that time is needed for any new GS to establish opinion and take forward policy. Of course the choice is entirely yours if you seek for a change in leadership or to stick with the incumbent and you will vote accordingly.

I’m of course used to offensive posts and personal attacks as it does come with the territory with any public or leadership role, however my experience of being personally denigrated in public is that those that oppose your views and opinions have started to lose objectivity when the debate stoops to personal insults and you will not find me entertaining this level of debate. I’m happy to be proved wrong and I am happy to debate issues in any forum as I will stand by my views and experience of leading a trade Union. 

My record in this area speaks for itself and within the last 5 years from NEC area rep to National Chair I was able to bring about positive changes for members, those who view me of incapable should really consider my record, if it really speaks of someone who is incapable or someone who has a proved track record of negotiating improvements…I think most voters will be interested in the fact that members feel that my leadership at every level has led to their benefit, defence of their rights and employment and improved position as a result of successful negotiation…I have never been complicit in the decline of my members’ terms, conditions, safety or else and will do all I can to ensure that this is a continued theme for Napo members.

Kind Regards

Mike Rolfe

--oo00oo--

Editors note

I notice that Mike has produced a video addressed to Napo members and it can be found here:- 

https://www.facebook.com/803725106487474/videos/817021478491170/

General Secretary Election 17

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the questions via the blog. Please see my responses below;

1: I stood in last year’s General election for the variety of reasons not purely due to having political aspirations but to actually try and offer something in terms of voicing the issues and concerns for the many supporters I have accumulated from the POA era and also locally fighting for issues within the local constituency, however if I was successful I would be committing to the full 5 year term. Whilst I don’t think you can 100% guarantee to sticking the full-term out due to potential unforeseen instances, ill health etc…at 40 years old I still have much of a career ahead of me and I would understand that Napo members would need to know that I would be committed to the job, which I can assure you I would be. 

2: I am a team player, but my team would most definitely be the wider membership who is the people I would feel most responsible too. I have never made decisions based purely on my own view of things, in fact I will listen to a variety of public and personal opinion before setting my own message based on what I have heard and recognise for myself. I do however realise many people will be looking to set agendas and influence decision, I think I am pretty good at understanding people and foreseeing potential pitfalls, so I won’t allow myself to be led down a path that would upset, disappoint and lose faith for the wider Napo membership. Whilst you rightly suggest I would need to learn much to fulfil the role of General Secretary, I am a quick learner and if successful I fully intend to spend the early days in the role ensuring that I travel the length and breadth of the country spending time in workplaces with members understanding the issues not only for Probation (NPS & CRCs) but also the court staff and the Probation Board Northern Ireland.

3: Yes I have weaknesses and I definitely enjoy working with a proactive team that are happy to take work on and complete it to a high standard. If I know I’m better served either through shortage of time, or not having the necessary skill set I am happy to delegate; however I do expect all work to always be of a high standard. I do not enjoy turning up for meetings without the facts and figures, I will always check over work to ensure it meets the standard as ultimately the reputation of Napo, members and the profession is at stake if the work or brief given is poor.

4: I want Napo to survive as an independent trade union; small unions are the best for tailored membership representation and I do not like the big business approach of larger unions at times. In fact these larger unions and the inactive TUC seem happy for the managed decline of trade union membership without any effective response. Smaller unions seem to have followed suit dutifully overseeing the managed decline of their own organisation but without the funding to survive for the long-term. This I believe is because they are too scared to take risks without the wider trade union movement protection, however this is short sighted and the larger unions just keep consuming the smaller ones in the process which if you consider this carefully is a very effective way to create a monopoly of trade union membership. The managed decline seems to work on the premise that at some point soon there will be a Labour friendly Government that will help recover union membership and restore the trade union movement to its former glory. Unfortunately this is rather wishful thinking, even if the current Labour leadership retains power and successfully wins at the next election there are still many pale blue Labour MPs within the party that once in Government would then start to push their agendas to the fore once again, creating many obstacles. There would be no ideation of merging Napo with the POA or any other trade union from my perspective and one that I would not be bringing to the table. 

In response to other questions posed on the blog;

I do still agree with my comments in the Guardian newspaper and it will be your expertise and knowledge of your profession that Napo should be seeking to achieve and support. I trust that AGM motions past, present and future that will help set the message Napo and the GS role will take forward.

As I’ve said in previous posts, I have my initial views on some of the more specific questions posed and from what I’ve read. However I would be at a disadvantage giving definitive answers to questions without access to the information that has not been issued for wider publication. Also as I have mentioned in answer to question number 2, I like to take time and consider various opinions and absorb all information available to me before shaping my answers to best suit the message for the Napo membership. There will most definitely also be AGM motions on some of these topics which will set Napo policy and therefore I don’t want to fall foul of this before potentially being successful and taking over as your GS, but to keep with the spirit of being open, honest and transparent I will give a response without trying to compromise these potential pitfalls I have spoken about.

1: Napo opposes the privatisation of Probation and therefore understands that some members will want the CRCs to fail and for Probation to be renationalised ASAP, however this is now a very complicated situation which won’t be fixed overnight. Napo has many members in the CRCs and will need to increase this membership in order to drive the narrative on the wider issue of the future of probation. What Napo cannot afford to do is demonise the workers in those private companies and rather should focus on attacking both the business model, factual evidence such as HMIP reports and gain the necessary statistics to support the case for a renationalised Probation Service. Using the press to cultivate public opinion and then ultimately place great pressure on the Secretary of state and other responsible ministers will be the best course of action to achieve the results the Napo membership desire.

2: I have read the PI 03/2013 on VISOR, which was originally used as an acronym for Violent and Sexual Offenders register, but now is the name of the database that is owned by the Home Office for use by the Police and security services. Probation Officers are expected to create and manage VISOR records which contribute to cases of MAPPA level 2 & 3 Offenders. It would seem that the introduction of this PI in 2013 was the catalyst for change in clearance levels and gave the authority to prevent qualified individuals from being able to undertake roles that they are qualified to fulfil but not security cleared for. I would obviously like to look into this issue in detail and understand what steps if any have been taken to resolve this issue since the PI has been in existence and mandatory actions since 2013.

3: There are no guarantees when pay rises will be achieved and the Government and employers could continue to watch the decline of the Probation and court Services without any intervention on pay. However if successful in the role of GS and if initial discussions prove fruitless or that we are being fobbed off with the promise of future talks on pay then I would definitely be advocating industrial action. This would need to be a carefully constructed process building up, whilst engaging via the media to the public and also ensuring that our message would be consistent with all members of Napo in the various different employments, i.e. NPS, CRCs and for court staff. Unfortunately everyone will need to understand that you do not see change without fighting for it and giving it all your energy, similarly unity of the membership will be key as will being in for the fight for the long-term and not giving up at the first hurdle. I do genuinely believe that if the narrative is controlled amongst other interested organisations, ministers, Napo activists and the message is sound and fully supported then mounting pressure applied consistently and for a prolonged period will achieve results.

4: Napo member subs generally are quite consistent with other trade unions both domestic and abroad, however as stated in other posts I would be open to reviewing all areas of union business and also using some of my previous accountancy experience and qualifications to look at other potential options, which could include looking at the feasibility of lowering subs to increase membership. 

5: As the incumbent GS has been recently speaking at the probation institute and on reading previous blogs that mention the Probation Institute I assume Napo wants it to become the successful ‘centre of excellence’ for professional registration that it was intended to be. However, I note that many members see it as having failed in its objective and therefore just an expensive quarterly magazine. This is an area that I would definitely like to engage more widely with the membership on before giving a view on what Napo should adopt as its future view of the probation institute.

Finally I understand some members believe that replacing the current GS would be an expensive process. I hope that this is not a ploy to try and gain votes almost by financial intimidation. Contract law is quite clear and when you come to the end of a fixed term contract you are not entitled to compensation or redundancy. Compensation would only be paid to employees on a permanent contract as per the rules I have read and seen and I’m sure any of the NEC would be able to confirm this position for members who contact them. The previous pay-out to a former GS was due to early termination of the contract.

I will continue to try and answer questions as they are posed, however please remember I am still working full time in a Prison Establishment without available access to the internet or this blog.

Kind Regards

Mike Rolfe

General Secretary Election 16

Yes I know you couldn't wait for the next election special, so here it is - a few questions I'd like to pose to Mike Rolfe. They are straight off the top of my head in order to try and stimulate a bit of discussion and I'm sure he'd welcome more if readers care to submit them.

Before you ask, there's little point in posing questions of Ian Lawrence because he doesn't even acknowledge the blog. Sad, but a fact. Incidentally, it's simply outrageous in my view that he is able to stifle meaningful debate by not providing any suitable dates to appear at branch meetings as under union rules, all candidates have to be present.

Questions to Mike Rolfe

1. Seeing as you stood as a candidate in the General Election last year, is it correct to assume you still have Parliamentary aspirations and could simply be 'off' should another be called any time soon?

2. Given the absence of knowledge regarding probation, are you a team player able to listen, learn, take advice and possibly even direction from practitioners at all levels within the profession and union?

3. Are you someone who is comfortable in recognising your weaknesses as well as strengths and hence able to delegate meaningfully to suitably experienced colleagues in appropriate circumstances?

4. In some quarters there is a suspicion that you might have an agenda that includes the short to medium term aim of the union possibly splitting and/or merging with another. Is this an unwarranted view?