Friday 14 June 2019

Latest From Napo 189

According to Napo, the centralised civil service-controlled HR and payroll arrangements are still not working properly, which doesn't bode well for further changes coming down the line:-  

Another SSCL screw up

Napo members have been contacting HQ worried after receiving demands from NPS payroll for historic overpayments to be returned. These overpayments range from a few hundred to several thousand pounds and date as far back as the creation of the NPS in 2014.

Napo is of course challenging this latest systematic failure of the computerised HR and payroll system. Given recent announcements about the future of probation, Napo are in the process of preparing a comprehensive case to present to ministers arguing zero confidence in SSCL and the NPS being able to cope with any of the many complexities that arise from the proposed transfer of CRC staff into the NPS at the ending of CRC contracts.

Given the scale of this issue, Napo have issued guidance on what to do if you receive an overpayment demand.

If you are not yet a member of Napo but encounter this problem we are willing, as part of the collective nature of the dispute, to be flexible around our usual rules about not representing someone who joins with an existing problem.

If someone fills in the questionnaire and joins Napo then we will progress their case alongside others in the same position. However, you must join Napo immediately for us to progress a questionnaire and we will review the level of legal support we can afford to support for members who had not taken out our “employment insurance” by joining Napo prior to the overpayment demand arriving.

--oo00oo--

Advice to members regarding overpayments made by the NPS

Over the last weeks many members have informed us that they have received demands from the National Probation Service, via their SSCL HR service provider, for monies relating to alleged historical overpayments. These overpayments range from a few hundred to several thousand pounds and arise from a period stretching back to the creation of the NPS in 2014.

Napo is challenging this latest systematic failure of the computerised HR and payroll system. Being able to pay your staff properly is the most basic requirement for any employer and it is both incredibly frustrating and worrying that the National Probation Service still cannot provide a stable, safe payroll service. Given recent announcements, Napo are in the process of preparing a comprehensive case to present to Ministers arguing that no-one can have any confidence in SSCL and the NPS being able to cope with any of the many complexities that arise from the proposed transfer of CRC staff into the NPS at the ending of CRC contracts.

The scale of the problem is still emerging but is clearly significant. Accordingly, we will be asking Ministers for an amnesty on overpayments. The NPS have resisted such suggestions citing arguments about public money needing to be recovered – taking no account of the public money being wasted managing the fallout from this failing system.

However, whilst we argue for this and for a safe and stable future service we are acutely aware that members need Napo’s advice and support in responding to the failures in the existing provision. The following advice aims to do so.

As well as following the advice below, any member with an overpayment demand are also asked to fill in the attached short questionnaire to help Napo make sure the NPS have your case and are progressing it.

WHAT TO DO IF YOU RECEIVE AN OVERPAYMENT DEMAND

 A. Ask SSCL to prove the money is owed

The overpayments seemingly arise from past payroll errors. However, no-one can be confident that SSCL’s calculations and records are now correct. We have seen examples where they have been unable to present a consistent account of what someone was paid; why it was wrong; and how they have calculated the overpayment. You are entitled to an explanation before you can agree to any monies being taken. This is a legal right.

Therefore, we advise that you:
  • Acknowledge receipt of the request but ask for a full breakdown of how the overpayments were accrued with an explanation for each variation to your normal wages;
  • Ask for copies of your actual wage slips from these periods (to cross reference against the ones available at the time if you still have them) to double check that what they say they paid you was correct;
  • Challenge any discrepancies; payroll errors or changes they do not explain clearly;
  • Keep doing so until there is a clear record that looks safe and factually correct.
Notify your line manager of the problem and ask if they will support you if you need assistance. Keep a copy of both this request and their reply.

B. Ask about any errors or correction that maybe needed before any safe and final amount for any overpayment can be confirmed

In some cases it is clear that SSCL have not recorded important information. For example, if a line manager had exercised their discretion to waive sick-pay reductions these may not have always been recognised by SSCL and could account for the alleged overpayment. They may have wrongly calculated your sick pay, as we know the SSCL computer has struggled with NPS staff having a different sick leave calculation period than other HMPPS staff. Any questions you may have relating to such possibilities should be raised and answered before any alleged overpayments are recovered.

Further, all members impacted should ask for written confirmation that all deductions taken from pay at the time are also correct and/or identified before any overpayment plan is finalised. This will include potential adjustments to PAYE tax and NI contributions. You should ask if your employer will, as part of their contractual obligations under PAYE resolve any necessary adjustments with HMRC prior to any alleged overpayment recovery, so that you can know your full financial position prior to reaching any agreement with the SSCL.You should also specifically ask them to confirm that both your employer and employee pension contributions are correct and if not that any rectification has been made – again before any overpayments are recovered. In most cases, your pension should not be impacted as the employer is under a legal obligation to make up full contributions whenever someone is on reduced salary due to illness, maternity leave, etc. However, if you opted for part-time work and continued to be paid at full pay this could be an issue. Asking will force the employer to check – and we are aware of errors that have taken place in recent months.

Anyone who by being overpaid thinks that SSCL will have recovered more Student loan repayments than was necessary can also appeal to the Student Loans company – and can inform the SSCL of the need to do this before beginning any repayments so that you know your full financial position before agreeing to a repayment plan.

C. Consider the reasonableness of the proposed repayment and challenge this if needed.

The SSCL will propose how much they want to recover from you over what period to make up for any alleged overpayment. Once you have gone through A and B and can be sure the alleged overpayment was made you can still challenge the fairness of any recovery and/or the reasonableness of their proposed recovery schedule.

They cannot take any monies off you until you have specifically agreed for them to do so. If they do so this would be a potential illegal deduction of wages and you should immediately contact Napo so we can help members challenge this in the courts if necessary.

There are several examples we have already identified where we have challenged the reasonableness of any recovery. This is especially relevant where someone has retired since the alleged overpayment and have no income other than their pension to make a repayment.

Likewise, if the case relates to an alleged overpayment that is now more than three years old we would argue it is not reasonable to ask for a recovery now.

Equally, if you were aware of a potential overpayment at the time and can evidence that you raised a concern with the SSCL / your line manager / HR and they offered reassurance or said that payments were correct you should use this now as evidence of a lack of confidence in the current claims; as well as evidence of your employer frustrating your contract by not paying you properly and fairly. Napo can advise in these specific cases directly.

In cases where a member was on maternity leave when the alleged overpayment took place and/or has reduced hours the legitimacy and reasonableness of the alleged overpayment can also be challenged.

In all of these cases, Napo cannot guarantee that a challenge would be successful in removing the alleged overpayment but by presenting such challenges members can delay the repayment process and increase the potential of the NPS changing their collective position whilst the challenges take place.


D. Challenge to make sure the alleged overpayment recovery plan is fair and affordable

Napo believes that no repayment, even if fully explained and legally justifiable, should be more than 5% of disposable income. Nor do we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover money for an excessive period of time as members should not have the consequences of their employers errors impacting upon them for a prolonged period.

These two benchmarks may not however be compatible. For example, in one recent case the overpayment for someone who had significantly reduced their hours was several thousand pounds and using the 5% rule could have taken almost a decade to pay back. The threat was that any amount unpaid if and when they left would have to be recovered in full – meaning they could be tied to the NPS which of course is itself potentially illegal. In that case the alleged overpayment was greatly reduced, after Napo’s input, to accommodate some fair and reasonable recovery.

You are entitled to negotiate a reasonable recovery plan and one must be agreed before any monies are taken. The evidence you are asked to provide to support your case in negotiations should also not be intrusive or compromise your own data protection rights.

Any costs incurred in relation to addressing the alleged overpayments can also be accounted for and set against the claim as it should not cost you anything to help them rectify their error. This will include all mobile phone calls to the SSCL (charged at premium rate so use work phones and time where at all possible) and potentially compensation if you have had to use your own time (e.g. you’ve retired or are on sick or maternity leave).

NON-MEMBERS

If you are not yet a member of Napo but encounter this problem we are willing, as part of the collective nature of the dispute, to be flexible around our usual rules about not representing someone who joins with an existing problem.

If someone fills in the questionnaire and joins Napo then we will progress their case alongside others in the same position. However, you must join Napo immediately for us to progress a questionnaire and we will review the level of legal support we can afford to support for members who had not taken out our “employment insurance” by joining Napo prior to the overpayment demand arriving.

8 comments:

  1. If there not in a Union tough

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thus spake the spirit of collectivism

      Delete
  2. Hence my point

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's not just pay that shared services muck up, they don't seem to know the law in terms of employment legislation. I'm surprised they don't have numerous claims for discrimination, constructive dismissal, unfair dismissal etc!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right there ! Don’t seem to really know the Attendance Management Policy well, the Equality Act and reasonable adjustments- ie threatening warnings when someone is off due to reasonable adjustments not being put in place

      Delete
    2. Yes, clueless but playing with our jobs. Wonder how many that's happening to?!

      Delete
  4. In those cases where an overpayment was apparent (being paid full-time after going part-time) and it wasn't reported by the employee, then they have only themselves to blame.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They also have a reasonable expectation that their pay will be calculated and processed properly. Yes they should have reported it, but manifestly they do not have "only themselves to blame".

      Delete