Saturday 24 September 2022

Up Yours!

I see the Victim Commissioner has had enough and plainly stated what we all know to be true:- 
"It is no exaggeration to say that the criminal justice system is in chaos."
The Rt Hon Brandon Lewis CBE MP
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

23 September 2022

Dear Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice,

The Victims’ Commissioner is the pre-eminent independent voice for victims. The role is to champion the interests of victims at the highest levels, to influence policy, legislation and practice on the ground. It is a unique and unrivalled office that delivers real and lasting change for victims of crime and I am immensely proud of the achievements secured under my tenure.

As you know, my first term as Commissioner was to end this June. In February, your predecessor informed me that he intended to open the post to competition. I was strongly encouraged by him, in public and in private, to apply. This was a perplexing duality: I was not to be reappointed (as my predecessor was), but I was at the same time actively encouraged to apply. Nonetheless, as suggested, I applied in good faith.

At the request of the former Lord Chancellor, I also extended my term by one month. At the time, the long-promised Victims’ Bill was finally emerging and in need of much improvement. My office had carried out a dozen victims’ roundtables and sent in abundant recommendations to officials but little of that work was reflected in the Bill. It was therefore vitally important to me that the Victims’ Commissioner make representations to the Justice Committee and I was happy to extend for this reason.

An important part of my role is access to ministers on behalf of the people I represent and serve. Prior to this year, we have made progress for victims largely through the responsive attitude of previous Secretaries of State. It was notable that the former Lord Chancellor had not met with me once since February. The lack of engagement from the top at a time of great upheaval for victims reflected poorly on the Ministry of Justice’s priorities and the government’s approach.

Early in July, I was phoned by officials and brusquely informed that there would be no appointment from the recruitment process after all. Subsequently, I sought and received assurances from the Ministry of Justice that I had in fact been an appointable candidate. Nevertheless, the recruitment exercise was still to be aborted and rerun. Months of additional uncertainty were heaped on an already disrupted and destabilised office and my excellent staff. Once more I was urged to apply. Once more I was asked to extend my term – this time until the end of the year. With the Victims’ Bill still in draft, I made arrangements as best as I could to stay until at least 30 September and to consider any further extension in due course.

Asking me to re-apply given that two opportunities to re-appoint me have already passed and my office is no longer given much access to ministers seems more a ploy to keep me in place as a nominal post-holder in the short-term than a genuine invitation. Coupled with this, the Victims’ Bill remains inadequate and the ‘British Bill of Rights’ so severely threatens victims’ human rights that it undermines what little progress the Victims’ Bill is set to bring. I am told the Bill of Rights is set to return in some form and that its withdrawal was only temporary.

Further, little has been done to effectively tackle the enormous and catastrophic backlog of cases, particularly in the Crown Court where the most serious crimes are tried. This has exposed victims of these crimes to intolerable delay, anguish and uncertainty. It is no exaggeration to say that the criminal justice system is in chaos.

This downgrading of victims’ interests in the government’s priorities, along with the side-lining of the Victims’ Commissioner’s office and the curious recruitment process make clear to me that there is nothing to be gained for victims by my staying in post beyond the current extension. As such, my term will end on 30 September.

I want to underline how significant this role is in driving forward much-needed change for victims. As Victims’ Commissioner, I have shone a spotlight on the dire state of rape investigations and prosecutions. I secured new privacy safeguards against intrusive and excessive requests for personal mobile phone data in rape investigations. I successfully campaigned for rape victims to pre-record their evidence and cross-examination, sparing them years of anguish awaiting their day in court. I continue to push for increased protections restricting the disclosure of victim therapy notes and third-party victim data. And I have maintained pressure on agencies to increase their shamefully low charging rates. I urge you to reaffirm the government’s commitment to the ambitions of the rape review to drive charging rates back to 2016 levels by the end of this Parliament.

I have consistently advocated for the victims’ sector at the highest levels, most notably ensuring emergency funds were directed to support services straining under the extraordinary pressures of the pandemic. Furthermore, I have spearheaded important research in much-neglected areas such as fraud, online abuse, and the rights of families bereaved from homicide abroad. This research has instigated much needed change. The Victims’ Bill must build on this and afford my successor the authority to make recommendations and compel relevant authorities to respond.

It has been an honour to represent victims’ interests during a period of immense and unprecedented challenges, most notably COVID-19. While the pandemic is abating, the criminal justice system has only sunk deeper into crisis. A strong, independent Victims’ Commissioner has never been more important. The role must not be allowed to lie dormant like the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner.

I am grateful to the former Secretary of State, David Gauke, and Prime Minister, Theresa May MP, for appointing me to this role. I pay tribute to the professionalism and dedication of officials and of the victims’ sector who work tirelessly to improve the position of victims. And I pay thanks to those Justice Secretaries and multiple Victims’ Ministers who have worked in good faith with me during my tenure.

My contract ends on 30 September. I seek no further renewal and will leave my post on that date.

Yours sincerely,

Dame Vera Baird KC
Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales

73 comments:

  1. About time someone said it how it is - FUBAR.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Acting up, interim, temporary, contract, all mean you can go at any time. The job wasn’t in the bag and the probably want to appoint a crony instead. Stop complaining and move on. The CJS is a shit show, look at probation who screw people over jobs all the time, so don’t be surprised we’re all being screwed over and over. The government doesn’t care about rehabilitation, justice or victims, that’s why the probation service is being taken over by the prison service.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re Anon 24 September 2022 at 09:28

      "The CJS is a shit show, look at probation who screw people over jobs all the time,"

      S/He seem not to fully appreciate the difference at being appointed by a Government to do a unique national job on behalf of the nation to being appointed to a position within a section of a Government agency to fulfil a position in a particular location, similar to such positions being filled elsewhere many times over.

      She was appointed by one Government and remains in place within a new Government - A Government that has had several months to plan its first actions - it has managed to get a financial plan announced - what Dame Vera is doing on the Nation's behalf is highlighting how low the criminal justice system in England and Wales, is in the Government's priorities.

      Whereas those of us who understand it, up close, know just how basic it is to national stability - think back to the role it played in times of civil disturbance and rioting as well as major disturbances within the CJS - the first of which I recall was in the summer of 1986 when Prison Officers withdrew goodwill and about 10 prisons rioted within about 24 hours - (I was in the gate at Horfield Gaol about to commence a special visit for which I had travelled from Essex waiting with the family visitors for that day to be admitted - when we were collectively ushered out.)

      As I stood in the nearest public phone box - calling into my office - trying to work out my best next action, I looked over that Bristol Prison and saw smoke rising and the first fire engines arrive.

      A functioning Criminal Justice System is critical but gets ignored within the media within the yah-boo of the clickbait generating - he said - she said stuff.

      What responsibilities do those of us actually “in the know” have towards preventing deterioration of social stability and how should we go about it?

      Dame Vera has published an open letter.

      Delete
    2. “ my first term as Commissioner was to end this June. ”

      It was always a temporary job.

      Delete
    3. Being appointed to a position by government and applying for that position is a very important distinction.
      It was the very reason that saw Nick Hardwick step down some years ago as prison inspector.
      He was then appointed as chair of the parole board.


      https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/29/prisons-inspector-nick-hardwick-interview?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16640997091273&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fsociety%2F2016%2Fjan%2F29%2Fprisons-inspector-nick-hardwick-interview

      'Getafix

      Delete
  3. I think Vera Baird has always "said it how it is" - as Anonymous at 24 September 2022 at 07:21 states.

    It seems to me she is simply saying she is not going to commit any more of her time to the role.

    The latest from what is in some ways a new Government

    (maybe we should identify Government's by Prime Minsters rather than Political Parties - after all the role of PM is virtually an electived dictatorship subject only to the UK laws and established International treaties)

    Do we allow the chaos of the criminal justice system in England and Wales to continue to deteriorate or as professional participants do we find ways of uniting with others who are prepared to force action from UK Parliament to get it into a safer state - and if so how?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Tax cuts will please one or two* senior government officials - spreadsheet available here so you can look up your favourite civil servant or department:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1050762/senior-officials-150k-2020.csv/preview

    * when I said 'one or two', I meant more than five hundred who are earning £150,000+ a year

    80 earn vast sums at DfT under the organisational heading of 'Network Rail'; another 40 for HS2

    50 at DHSC work for "NHS England Improvement"

    60 are in the Cabinet Office

    4 are listed in MoJ - but these are figures from 2020, albeit they've only been released this year, so they won't take account of the recent expansion of wealthy officialdom under Strong White Romeo.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From Twitter:-

    "Only this organisation could say negative feedback is positive engagement lol!!! Whatever happened to the lip service consultation last year when shock horror the most dissatisfied group were POs..,, that’s right nowt happened !!!! Except increase in caseloads."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So nobody should complete it then. But many will.

      Delete
  6. Short, off topic, but some relevant observations I think.
    I can't help but also think its advocating more of an Advise Assist and Befriend approach by the prison service!

    https://insidetime.org/ex-governor-criticises-offender-management/

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A former prison governor has criticised today’s jails for failing to reform prisoners, monitor their progress and prepare them for release.

      John Podmore said a shortage of experienced prison officers and lack of contact time meant that staff were not getting to know or understand the prisoners – making it difficult to offer accurate risk assessments to the Parole Board when they come to be considered for release.

      Podmore – who was a governor of Brixton, Belmarsh and Swaleside prisons, and is now a professor of Applied Social Sciences at the University of Durham – was giving evidence on the parole system to MPs on the Commons Science and Technology Committee.

      He told the hearing on September 7 that the job of HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) should be to manage prisoners throughout their sentence and prepare them for release “so that when they get before the Parole Board, there is sufficient evidence, it is scientific, it is interrogated, and the parole board can properly assess it”. He added: “I don’t think that is happening at the moment.”

      Podmore told the MPs: “We need skills and competencies within HMPPS whereby people get to know their prisoners. If you listen to prisoners, if you read Tweets or blogs from prisoners or their families, one of the biggest problems is they don’t see their Prison Offender Managers, they don’t see their Community Offender Managers, or if a report is presented to the Parole Board it is presented by someone who has only met them once in a 20-year sentence – or that they have had three or four offender managers in prison or in the community over the past three or four years.”

      He said that it was crucial that prison officers should have the time to familiarise themselves with the prisoners they work with, but added: “Now, because of the turnover of prison staff and the inexperience of prison staff, there are fewer and fewer people in prison who are really getting the opportunity and the training to really get to know their prisoners.”

      In support of his claims, he read out to the MPs a finding from an HM Inspectorate of Prisons report on HMP Onley, published this month, which said: “The Offender Management Unit was in most cases providing little more than piecemeal support, and prisoners said they rarely heard from their Prison Offender Managers.” Inspectors also found that Onley suffered from high staff turnover and that prisoners were often not let out of their cells to attend work, education or training. Podmore said these were typical failings in Category C training prisons.

      He also questioned the effectiveness and secrecy surrounding accredited Offending Behaviour Programmes, the psychologist-led courses which prisons rely on as evidence that prisoners have lowered the risk they pose to the public, saying: “The science around OBPs – I and my colleagues have challenged it, but we don’t get very far. It’s a bit of a closed door.”

      Delete
    2. .. another one that struggles to use the correct title. John, it’s Probation Officer and we have the “skills and competencies”. Stop rubbishing probation with this HMPPS propaganda.

      Delete
    3. Its the playbook of Choreography, Trusts &TR all over again - very public briefing against probation staff & tasks in a clear bid to legitimise the cultural & organisational vandalism committed by highly-paid wonks in MoJ, aided & abetted by craven probation directors whose souls (should they have them) are wholly owned by the shameless, amoral & vainglorious fallen angel, Romeo.

      Its beyond reprehensible. But in the current climate of rats eating rats, unlikely to end anytime soon; & certainly not for the next few years.

      Delete
    4. And bear in mind the extent of fabrication & lies that 'the establishment' is prepared to present as 'truth' in order to achieve their wishes, the smearing & destruction of little ol' probation aint nuffink by comparison, e.g. Corbyn, covid, partygate, TR - or any number of deceptions & distractions.

      These aren't conspiracy theories - they are proven acts of lying, deception & fraud with horrendous implications &/or consequences for many. And for over a decade they've all have been successfully carried out with impunity.

      We've been Trump'd & post-Johnson we all think "its all perfectly normal" - remember? It was Jenrick's own phrase that he & others repeated time after time after lies & corruption were exposed.

      Its NOT normal. Its criminal, the sort of behaviour we, as probation staff, have been trying to challenge & change for over a century. But now we have to accept that lies, fraud, deception & acts of corruption for personal gain are ok... sell out your buddy to protect yourself, screw over your staff to kep your management salary, bend to the wishes of corruption for £££$$$'s.

      It has a stench all of its own. And its everywhere.

      Delete
  7. Police, prisons, charities, everyone except probation is adopting probation’s advise, assist and befriend’. Probation has instead become an enforcement and monitoring agency. Something is very wrong!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probation need to reclaim the professions essence and stop the role becoming further over-professionalized. Dumping napo in the process would also be a good idea. Maybe take a leaf from Deliveroo drivers book by trying to create your own union, one thats actually for and by the workers, not union bureaucrats who are just there to manage discontent and take managers and the establishments side.

      Delete
  8. “one of the biggest problems is they don’t see their Prison Offender Managers, they don’t see their Community Offender Managers, or if a report is presented to the Parole Board it is presented by someone who has only met them once in a 20-year sentence – or that they have had three or four offender managers in prison or in the community over the past three or four years.”

    Actually what a crock of shite from Jon Podmore. Probation worked very well until the prison service elites he represents ran probation into the ground. Get the prison service off our back, get rid of the civil service thumb on our forehead and probation will work very well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wish you were right but the cultural change of the staff is too dramatic now. The senior management are the worst of the social change that led us here and they have 10 years yet to go. They are self righteous self important and not capable of actually returning to what the training used to be about. They are the vile greedy Thatcherite self entitlement arrogant bunch sharing food pictures of how simply and grand their lives are. Boring do some real work it's like old hags of probation who made sure it was destroyed by them.

      Delete
    2. "The cultural change of the staff is too dramatic now".

      I think that's exactly right. Probations problems are not just external, they're embedded within the service now.

      I read the following yesterday from a prison officer, but I think many of the issues they raise could also relate to probation.

      https://www.penalreform.org/blog/a-social-service-of-great-importance-recognising-the/

      'Getafix

      Delete
  9. Can’t believe unions just accepted the sh*tty probation pay offer. Worst pay offer in the entire public and justice sector, yet the majority voted for it on union recommendations. I’m done with unions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whilst I think napo are worse than useless, it wasn't the union that voted to accept the pay offer - it was your colleagues.

      Delete
    2. No no the union Napo dodged their leadership role. Lomas Lawrence said the best that could be achieved and over to you. Rather than lead us to proper collective action and one voice in solidarity. Napo cowardly weak and incompetent.

      Delete
  10. News just in. We voted for the probation pay offer like the circus monkeys we are. Now we get peanuts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alot I assume are looking at the short term benefits as they won't be sticking around.

      Delete
  11. Three Year Pay Offer Accepted

    Following closure of the Probation Unions’ ballots on the three-year pay offer, the results are as follows:

    Napo ​​​66% accept / 34% % reject

    UNISON ​​64% accept / 36% % reject

    GMB SCOOP ​94% accept / 6% reject

    As a result of the respective trade union ballots, the Trade Union Side (Napo, UNISON and GMB/SCOOP) has accepted the pay offer on behalf of members.

    Large Number of Members Vote to Reject Offer

    Although all three union ballots were in favour of accepting the offer, a third of Napo and UNISON members voted to reject the offer and indicated their willingness to take industrial action to seek to improve it. The ballot outcomes should therefore give the employer and Government no comfort. The offer was seen by many members as falling well short of the original claim that was jointly submitted by the unions. It is inadequate in terms of the current rate of inflation and the huge increases in energy costs that our members face this winter.

    Next Steps

    The unions have advised the employer of the ballot results and have urged them to do everything possible to achieve a pay out in October salaries. Whilst a majority of members have voted to accept the pay offer, the consultative exercise demonstrates that there are still many issues on which urgent remedial action is required such as:
    • Workloads
    • Stress
    • Further attacks on the Profession by way of the Secretary of State single intervention in Parole Board hearings
    • ‘One HMPPS’ proposals that represent the biggest threat to the independence of Probation since the ill-fated Transforming Rehabilitation programme.

    All of these challenges will require a robust approach by the trade unions going forward. This is why it is important for all staff in Probation to join a trade union. More news on the pay out of year one of the offer will follow as soon as possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now we have to accept that lies, fraud, deception & acts of corruption for personal gain are ok... sell out your buddy to protect yourself, screw over your staff to keep your management salary, bend to the wishes of corruption & pocket £££$$$'s.

      It has a stench all of its own. And its everywhere.

      NB: the £ is now worth 5% less than it was when the ballot on pay opened.

      Delete
    2. The devil is in the details. Number of votes cast? Number of members?

      Delete
    3. Napo ​​​66% accept / 34% % reject

      UNISON ​​64% accept / 36% % reject

      GMB SCOOP ​94% accept / 6% reject

      Not hard to work out which union all the managers belong to.

      Delete
    4. Let’s enjoy the extra coins we are going to get next month. Many people out there struggling so this is much needed. Those who are not happy with the deal, could donate their coins to a local charity. I’m happy.

      Delete
    5. Anon 13.45 & 14.20 if staff felt really strongly about the pay deal they had the opportunity to join a union and vote. If like my office, staff complained a lot about the pay deal but were quite happy to let others make the decision for them.

      Delete
    6. The GMB are looking after a small very small bunch and they do not field a real official to represent anyone.

      Delete
  12. I’m saddened but not surprised that the pay offer has been accepted. There has been no leadership for years and sadly, as has been pointed out before, you do not win wars without fighting battles. First you fight the small ones and you gain in confidence and then you work your way up to the big ones, wages terms and conditions etc.
    The top table must surely look deep into their souls and accept that it is just not good enough and the situation is likely to get worse. Time to go for Lawrence et al I think.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This has to serve as a wake up call for the unions that pay, other than the derisory entry levels of band 2 and 3, isn't the pressing issue.

    Workloads, working practices, unwieldy and discriminatory recruitment, stress, organisational culture, stress, lack of professional recognition externally, more stress, loss of professional independence and identity, creeping control of prisons and distancing from local services, no cpd, no progression opportunities within probation or elsewhere. None of these get any more acceptable with more pay and need to be the focus of a meaningful campaign of their own.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The result of the ballot is an accurate reflection as to the rock and a hard place the employers and unions presented us with. However, we are the union and the demographic has changed significantly in recent years, young people just starting out have bought houses and cars (and there’s nothing wrong with that) and the prospect of standing forlornly outside a probation office in November/ December while fellow staff waltz in is a hard one to take . The battle is lost but don’t let any weasel words from management convince you that this has been a good deal...in other news, I started to do the survey today until I realised that rather than a generic area survey it’s now an office specific one I’ll pass thanks

    ReplyDelete
  15. All the harping on about the fact we've had real terms pay cuts since 2010 has switched people off. Look around your offices, most colleagues were in school in 2010.
    Yeah, if you've been at the top of the payscale since then you've been hard done by This deal was never realistically going to address that and most of us will have been hoping to just get close to the top of the scale. Now, not only can we get to the top of the scale, the top band goes up by nearly £4k. Result.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Don’t do the survey. The best way to express your contempt is not to do the survey. Don’t do it

    ReplyDelete
  17. I wish unions, in the interests of openness and transparency, would provide voter turnout figures. It can seem at times that unions prefer to keep members in the dark, I've checked all three union websites, to no avail.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Regular readers are well aware that quite some time ago I decided to introduce comment moderation in order to weed out the deliberately inflammatory, libellous, boring, unintelligible or just inappropriate contributions. It's not possible to edit contributions, but I've decided to copy, redact and paste the following as an example of what usually never sees the light of day:-

    "Too late the Lawrence legacy is damage irreparable. He is xxx xxx xxx knowledge and has not had the appropriate experience in dealing with management conflict. He has a flair to show off hide his xxxx appearance by standing. Blah stories he's borrowed and embellished himself in others victory. He had serious commitment to xxxx in his time which may have been on par with his awful attempts to xxxxx xxxxxxx and xxxxx his card as well as his xxxxxxxx xxxxx in any direction. He has been xxxxxxx a xxxx and a xxxxxxx xxxxxxx fool but he has blamed dodged and hidden from everything as the elected officials are not capable of managing him. Our mistake in having such pathetic collusion from the once proud NEC now a gaggle of acolytes. Napo members collectively conned yet unable to evict this cuckoo. It is his election next year and I will stand to help us rid Napo of him. A cardboard picture will do a better job but now is our final chance with any luck he may walk as he is retirement age. Whatever let's shove him over and start a rebuild Napo with integrity campaign."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim - what’s the point you’re making with this. Are you saying it’s inappropriate or just nonsense?

      Delete
    2. Well clearly this contributor feels strongly about the ability and suitableness of the current General Secretary and I suspect submits stuff regularly that I do not publish. The message I suppose is FFS word things more appropriately or I just bin it.

      Delete
    3. However things are worded it will not suit all. I do not want to see potential valuable message lost by a debate on a few edited but what reads like a few choice words.

      A small union paying 100k plus per annum should expect an awful lot more than what memberships are alluding to here. Whether the general sec of Napo remains in post next year will not be decided by this blog's postings. Grammatically well worded for the snobs or toffs or not. What should decide it is the appalling records of failure loss and how this stacks up against his ballance of success .
      The problem as it appears is, should no other candidate come forward the continuance is certain. There is no scope to depose the candidate as no longer suitable as this will need to be managed in other ways. Indeed there is only 1 route to properly change the leadership and the defacto napo spiralling spectacular decline and that is for members to vote in a new general secretary should they be considered suitable from the application process. The current impression I get from this reading is the bar is very low.

      Delete
  19. The miserableness on this blog. We’re getting more money next month and people on here moaning. Get a grip. 3% is good for the small clout we have in the public sector. I feel valued and welcome my pay rise. We do this job for a reason. Not money. Go join a bank if you just want money or sign up to one of the detached duty offers. Be grateful. Be humble. Only you can change your situation. This deal that’s PO salaries to over £42k. The higher bands to over £100k. It’s good all round

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. I agree. Go on Detached Duty if you’re wanting more money! #Greedy

      Delete
    2. Stop this dumb “we don’t do it for the money” nonsense. We wouldn’t do it for free and the cost of living crisis means it’s going to get tight for us all.

      Delete
    3. Anon 06:17 Very naïve to suggest people don’t do it for the money, if I didn’t need the money I’d volunteer! Ok, maybe choosing this career path wasn’t totally driven by finances, but it did play a part and I don't think it was an unreasonable expectation that we would’ve kept pace with the likes of police/ social services etc which we haven’t. You’re clearly in a fortunate position where the cost of living isn’t going to have a big impact on you!

      Delete
    4. 19.45 is acting like they want a shot at the Title. I’m no richer or poorer than you but I see the glass half full and not half empty like most of the dross on here. I’m happy with the deal.

      Delete
    5. Not sure which title you’re referring to, was merely referring to the fact that the impact of the cost of living impacts on everyone differently. After a 10 year pay freeze a pay offer well below the rate of inflation is not what I would consider a good deal. You’re right, we don’t just do the job just for the money and there’s a lot of good will shown by colleagues who work over and above their contracted hours. For employers not to properly recognise those efforts is disappointing. Finally, I would say that insulting your colleagues by calling them ‘dross’ takes complete credibility from your argument. Perhaps you should go back to trolling on Twitter. Enjoy your half full glass.

      Delete
  20. From Twitter:-

    "The 'Top Table' now see themselves as politicians... as such it is a them and us situation.. as is the case with these vile Tories, they literally couldn't care less about the service..."

    "I think plenty of others have done the same equation and concluded they don't have the heart for it. Shit deal, as you say. I voted to reject the deal, as did my wife, and I'd have willingly gone on strike. But I can't deny there's not a large part of me that looked at the result y'day, with one eye on the current cost of living, and thought 'thank god for that'."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www-unison-org-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.unison.org.uk/news/2022/09/government-handing-taxpayers-money-to-rich-friends-while-public-services-suffer/amp/?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16642606784554&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unison.org.uk%2Fnews%2F2022%2F09%2Fgovernment-handing-taxpayers-money-to-rich-friends-while-public-services-suffer%2F

      Delete
    2. https://www.pcs.org.uk/news-events/news/pcs-launches-strike-ballot-150000-civil-servants

      Delete
  21. It’s not a good deal ! And it’s not greedy to want fair pay!

    ReplyDelete
  22. From Twitter:-

    "I’m no longer a PO but yes, the deal is poor yet union members voted it through. Strike is pointless - work to rule is the way to go. Don’t work over your hours, don’t cover anyone else’s work, Parole / OASys targets will be missed. Too late this time as it was voted through…"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frankly I think it's nuts for any public sector service to accept a 3% pay deal in todays unstable economy and high inflation rates and interest rates climbing.
      I also think such a poor settlement may be damaging to recruitment and retention of staff, so the settlement might also come with an increased workload over the next couple of years.
      It's interesting to note that Unison made no recommendations to its members in probation on accepting or rejecting the deal being offered, but instead pointed out any attempt to increase the offer would require significant industrial action.

      'Getafix

      Delete
    2. I agree. Napo and Unison made “no recommendation” about a piss poor pay offer. They have no credibility or clout.

      Delete
  23. The deal is poor as the average probation officer is a 30 something non union member criminology graduate from the university of toy town who as no fight in them

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that kind of patronising tone is precisely what will alienate our colleagues and deter them from becoming active

      Delete
    2. No it’s the problem of the unions that should do better to attract, retain and support members. Probation unions are rubbish and that is why many do not join.

      In my office I’ve never seen a union rep nor heard anything positive about the local reps or unions.

      Both Napo and Unison are probation unions in name only. I doubt GMB even knows what probation is.

      Delete
  24. From Twitter:-

    "I do wonder if the technical issues with the vote also played a part. Having to re-register blah blah to vote again is likely to have had an impact on people who are stretched time wise anyway and perhaps were on the fence."

    ReplyDelete
  25. From Twitter:-

    "So why didn’t we get a recommendation? We got a statement saying that HMPPS were being honest! Really!! Now we get a statement saying 36% of members can not be ignored by the employers?! Really! Cake and eat it! What % voted ?? 33yrs as a member under threat."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the Comms is the GS saying 36 cannot be ignored he is just illustrating how thick he continues to be. Having accepted the vote outcome the employers will do exactly that and ignore any other votes as lost. It is a clear majority and 2 would have done it. Lawrence talk is just that he thinks we are stupid . Time is up for this clown we have all had enough of his do nothing really gabble.

      Delete
  26. A three year pay deal may turn out to be a stroke of genius on the part of the unions. There was talk in the media today of actual public sector pay cuts over the next two years with former Treasury Minister Lord McPherson predicting things will be worse than in 1931, such is the perilous state of the nation's finances.

    ReplyDelete
  27. My biggest concerns with the probation pay offer are this. 1. We just accepted a 3% increase dragged over a few years which has already been trumped by the rise in inflation. 2. By the time we hit 2023 there’ll be a public sector pay freeze that cheats us out of most of it.

    ReplyDelete
  28. What message does it give our employers that we accept a deal where the truth was hidden by headline figures? Pay band changes conflated with a pay deal and locked in for 3 years at the same time inflation is running at 10% and going up.
    Employees have clearly replied “you can do what ever you like to us- rolling over now”.
    How long before the directives start flowing from on high with the employer’s thumb firmly on employee foreheads?
    I’m tired and have lost respect for myself -having to turn up for work every day after this deal was accepted. Of course I understand why it was a yes vote.The employers manufactured the situation after 12 years of just a 1% pay rise in one of those years- then this offer.
    If you are not valued and are struggling financially for over 10 years you get what you can.

    See you in the office tomorrow where we can hope for a £40 voucher for “going above and beyond” or in old talk “making a difference” by continuing to work more hours than you are paid.. oh hang on you don’t get vouchers for that...
    ...Still looking for my self respect....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really don’t get it. Well I do, people want something more, anything. Managers, unions, reps, all worked together to send the message that 3% was the best we could get.

      Inflation is currently running at 9.9 per cent and interest rates are the Bank’s only lever for reducing it which look to double monthly mortgage payments and maybe rent prices too.

      The fact our 3 main unions made no recommendations while pointing out the pitfalls of rejecting the pay deal is a real concern.

      3% is embarrassing. I’m in a union and I didn’t vote for the pay deal. For me probation unions no longer exist. I can’t justify the paying subs any longer.

      Delete
  29. Attended the probation race survey event today. I think Amy ‘crisp white shirts’ Rees was the headline speaker.

    Bunch of white senior managers again telling me about how they’re going to address racism and discrimination.

    Bunch of black and Asian union reps again telling me about how they’re going to address racism and discrimination.

    I cringed through this event. Couldn’t help but think these clunky presenters represent the same unions and managers that just conned me into a 3% pay rise for being overworked and underpaid in an awful working environment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meanwhile, Royal Mail workers to hold 19 days of strike action

      Delete
    2. The difference 07:48 is 19 days of Royal Mail strikes will seriously inconvenience the public and lead to huge lost revenue. Whereas probation could go on strike for 19 days and nobody outside of probation would notice a thing.

      Delete
    3. A union is only as strong as its members it makes me laugh when people on here bemoan NAPO for being in ineffective , the majority of probation staff are 30 something anti trade union individualists , that’s why the union as no power it depends on the members having some guts ie
      RMT
      Postal workers
      Dockers
      Why are they getting or will be getting three times as much increase as us ? Because they are not supine robots

      Delete
    4. The maritime dismissal at p and o ferries went down well as it was legal from a contractual point of view. The same may well happen to postal workers as sacking staff who now work for private company and sold to a European owner can do the same as any other. Dismiss on mass rehire on new terms. The postal staff had shared or cashed up but it's the same as giving away your terms.

      The part about doing something on racism it does exist in the service and definitely from deep within Napo. The problem is they don't have the knowledge to manage anything well. Napo have a bones in their closet.
      The appalling pay settlement is a scandalous failure to lead members by fear of upsetting employers. You can't see the rail workers fearful of leading members so this government propose a law change to weaken unions to nothing.

      Delete
    5. “A union is only as strong as its members”

      This quote really doesn’t apply to Napo.

      If the union officials are shite it won’t have any members or strength.

      Delete
  30. May as well join civil service union instead.....
    https://www.pcs.org.uk/news-events/news/pcs-launches-strike-ballot-150000-civil-servants

    ReplyDelete
  31. https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/barrister-strike-uk-prison-government-b2177092.html?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16643659275341&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fhome-news%2Fbarrister-strike-uk-prison-government-b2177092.html

    ReplyDelete