"The exception clause in the TU legislation cannot be applied to our current General Secretary, this has been confirmed by legal advice that also prompted the suggested amendment to ensure that future general secretaries would be able to benefit from the clause. There will be a General Secretary election in 2023, the process has been agreed by NEC and starts in December with the advert going out. The process was freely shared with NEC, not under confidential cover."
General Secretary Election Procedure
1. Post is advertised via TUC and GFTU networks as well as to staff and members.
2. Applicants are sent an application form and an information pack, including this procedure.
3. Applicants are shortlisted by an employers’ sub-committee of the National Executive Committee (NEC), consisting of 5 members of the NEC, including the Chair and Vice Chair nominated as employers rep to JNC.
4. Shortlisted applicants are interviewed by the employers’ sub-committee to determine which of them would be able to meet Napo’s requirements, thus producing a list of “electable” candidates. This list, together with a statement from each of the electable candidates, of no more than 500 words, is then sent to NEC co-reps and to branches/sections.
5. A meeting of the NEC will consider the list of electable candidates. Each of them shall be invited to attend that NEC where they will be asked pre-submitted questions. Each candidate will be asked the same questions and will then be given the opportunity to make a statement in support of their application for candidature. The NEC will then decide which (if any) candidate it wishes to nominate for election.
6. Four online hustings events will be arranged following the NEC, these will be Chaired by members of the National Officers Group and the arrangements will be supported by the relevant Link Official for the region group and by the Office Ops Mgr for Cafcass. The hustings meetings will follow the same format for fairness:
Each candidate will make a speech for no more than 10 minutes. Following this the same questions (pre-submitted by members to the hustings Chair) will be put to each candidate with no more than 5 minutes allowed for each answer. For accessibility the hustings will continue for no more than 90 minutes.
The hustings will be as follows:
a. The North – Northumbria, Durham Tees Valley, East Coast, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, Cumbria and Lancashire, Cheshire Greater Manchester and Merseyside branches.
b. Midlands, Wales and the South West – Napo Cymru, East Midlands, Staffs West Midlands, Mercia, South South Western, Western branches
c. South East and London – East Anglia, Thames Valley, Hampshire Isle of Wight, Kent Surrey Sussex, Essex, The Four Shires, London and Northern Ireland Branches
d. Family Court Section
7. Branch meetings will then consider the list of electable candidates. The candidates will not be able to attend branch meetings. Branches will have the benefit of a report from their NEC Representative who will have attended the NEC, reports from members who attended the hustings, and the candidates’ own statements. Branches will then be able to nominate one of the electable candidates.
8. The final list of nominated candidates will be put to a postal ballot of all full members. In the event of there being only one nominated candidate that person will be elected unopposed without recourse to a ballot.
2023 General Secretary Election Timetable
16 December Advert Published
13 January Return Date for Applications
18 January NEC Employers Sub Committee Shortlisting
23-27 January NEC Employers Sub Committee Interviews
30 January List of electable candidates sent to NEC and Branches
30 January – 3 February Special NEC (online) for candidate interview and nomination process
6-10 February Hustings Week
13 February – 3 March Branch meetings to consider nominations
3 March Branch nominations deadline
8 March Ballot Commences
30 March Ballot Closes
31 March Result Announced
30 June Last day of current GS contract
1. Post is advertised via TUC and GFTU networks as well as to staff and members.
2. Applicants are sent an application form and an information pack, including this procedure.
3. Applicants are shortlisted by an employers’ sub-committee of the National Executive Committee (NEC), consisting of 5 members of the NEC, including the Chair and Vice Chair nominated as employers rep to JNC.
4. Shortlisted applicants are interviewed by the employers’ sub-committee to determine which of them would be able to meet Napo’s requirements, thus producing a list of “electable” candidates. This list, together with a statement from each of the electable candidates, of no more than 500 words, is then sent to NEC co-reps and to branches/sections.
5. A meeting of the NEC will consider the list of electable candidates. Each of them shall be invited to attend that NEC where they will be asked pre-submitted questions. Each candidate will be asked the same questions and will then be given the opportunity to make a statement in support of their application for candidature. The NEC will then decide which (if any) candidate it wishes to nominate for election.
6. Four online hustings events will be arranged following the NEC, these will be Chaired by members of the National Officers Group and the arrangements will be supported by the relevant Link Official for the region group and by the Office Ops Mgr for Cafcass. The hustings meetings will follow the same format for fairness:
Each candidate will make a speech for no more than 10 minutes. Following this the same questions (pre-submitted by members to the hustings Chair) will be put to each candidate with no more than 5 minutes allowed for each answer. For accessibility the hustings will continue for no more than 90 minutes.
The hustings will be as follows:
a. The North – Northumbria, Durham Tees Valley, East Coast, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, Cumbria and Lancashire, Cheshire Greater Manchester and Merseyside branches.
b. Midlands, Wales and the South West – Napo Cymru, East Midlands, Staffs West Midlands, Mercia, South South Western, Western branches
c. South East and London – East Anglia, Thames Valley, Hampshire Isle of Wight, Kent Surrey Sussex, Essex, The Four Shires, London and Northern Ireland Branches
d. Family Court Section
7. Branch meetings will then consider the list of electable candidates. The candidates will not be able to attend branch meetings. Branches will have the benefit of a report from their NEC Representative who will have attended the NEC, reports from members who attended the hustings, and the candidates’ own statements. Branches will then be able to nominate one of the electable candidates.
8. The final list of nominated candidates will be put to a postal ballot of all full members. In the event of there being only one nominated candidate that person will be elected unopposed without recourse to a ballot.
2023 General Secretary Election Timetable
16 December Advert Published
13 January Return Date for Applications
18 January NEC Employers Sub Committee Shortlisting
23-27 January NEC Employers Sub Committee Interviews
30 January List of electable candidates sent to NEC and Branches
30 January – 3 February Special NEC (online) for candidate interview and nomination process
6-10 February Hustings Week
13 February – 3 March Branch meetings to consider nominations
3 March Branch nominations deadline
8 March Ballot Commences
30 March Ballot Closes
31 March Result Announced
30 June Last day of current GS contract
Amazing if anyone could get past the rigging of the nec which
ReplyDeleteas all members know is stuffed up with Lawrence cronies. The adventure around the region's and branches will be more challenging for new applicants. Followed by an election. should any other get the support from the unlikely nec cabal. Worse if no one applies the incumbent does nothing for an additional 5 year extension in a job he has been ruinous in degrading Napo members for years.
I'm not a NEC rep but a retired Probation Officer. Cant see how the NEC can be "stuffed with( anyone's)cronies" as ,unless procedure has changed radically in last year, NEC reps are chosen by local branches. If you want to stand as a Napo branch NEC rep, look out for vacancies, get someone in Branch to second you and stand. Then it's down to Branch members who gets voted to represent them and should be 2 co-reps unless things have changed.
ReplyDeleteThe rules may wander a little but it's been greatly reduced. A lot less nec than Napo hey days. The influence to coerce and get the east ride has been the top table mantra . You can see the results no protection of professionalism low pay lousy pay offers unfairly tiered workforce issues workloads you name it. The disaster will be having him again . The nec and officers group are stuffed with his supporters so there will be no change .
DeleteNot sure how healthy the branch network is, posts vacant, including NEC reps.
ReplyDeleteI am really sorry you posted this Jim. While many of your readership will be members of Napo, I dont believe for a second that every one of your well won 8 million hits were by Napo members. This blog has a very major role to play in getting the voices of gagged probation stalwarts heard, which is a crucial counterpoint to the relentless propoganda from the idealogically driven MoJ/HMPPS. Lord knows the Unions are under enough grief and struggle wreaked upon them by a thoroughly nasty facsist government.
ReplyDeleteI am a Napo member. Fresh from AGM. I have had a day to cool down from the natural and healthy euphoria of being one amongst many of like mind and mission. Its healthy and heady to spend time with comrades who have fought tooth and nail through TR and the omnidhambles that has followed. It is absolutely counter productive to air perfectly natural views about the rights and wrongs of internal union politics - and boy, every Union I have ever encountered is busy on that front- internally, but please Heaven, not on a blog that is outward facing and read by politicians, academics, those who have a vested interest in hobbling the Unions, and of course, people who might, if not completely off-put, join a Union, and if they did, would achieve so much for themselves and Probation..
Its entirely counter-productive, self indulgent and politically naive, at a time when we urgently need to be politically canny.
Those of you/us who wish to do this, and we should, lets do this around some private e-watercooler.
I remain a daily reader and occasional contributor. I admire you hugely Jim, and am gobsmacked by your contribution to the Probation cause, so please take this as constructive criticism. Yours aye
Pearly Gates
15:12 - seems you're basically asking for secrecy, not transparency and openness. Napo is a trade union, not an arm of the secret service. We need more public accountability, not less. Public understanding of what goes on already relies too much on the whistleblowers and leakers of this world We need people saying what they think, speaking truth to power. Napo has too much secrecy as it is. I think it disgraceful that they refuse to disclose details of the recent pay ballot. Wishing to close curtains to keep out prying eyes, means keeping members in the dark. We should be promoting openness in public life, not seeking to stifle it.
DeleteI usually agree with your post pearly but not this. The open debate is very much needed on here. It was Napo who tried to close this fantastic blog the only true record. The membership need to appreciate the decline this GS has allowed in without any proper response. The lost terms the loss of Napo reduced to operating from a po box in a garage than its once campaigning bouse hq. It is a joke no member would or could feel proud . The annual charade talking up but nothing will be done. Only a change of government will bring fresh optimism. The current Tories will attack us more but there will be nothing from Napo to protect us. This blog illustrates the history of the failing incumbent and should we get any other candidate they could not be worse than the current inadequate performance to date.
DeleteIs it just me shocked at the scapegoating of the first black chancellor dismissal in record time by truss to keep her job. Or the covert new chancellor who is likely to be the man now calling the shots.
This conversation is going to polarise between those who want to fight an internal factional crusade in public, and those who want to actually sort something out. Sounds depressingly familiar
DeleteOh ? Faction which exactly ? The discussion arose from an obvious and incredible attempt by the incumbent getting the benefit of an extended post at around 8k per month. It becomes clearer by discussion he has no entitlement to clause as explained by Peter Robinson . The question is the general secretary should have understood this fact. Why did he allow Napo members to run an attempted personal benefit when he should understand these rules. It takes the AGM to derail this scam and that is what it looks like. Do our members really deserve anymore of this self interest.
DeleteActually-it was made clear that should this amendment pass that it would not apply to current GS
Delete"Those of you/us who wish to do this, and we should, lets do this around some private e-watercooler."
DeleteLuckily Mr L & co felt confident/arrogant enough to run the "let me stay even longer cos I'm worth it" gambit in public at conference.
Luckily? Yes, because they were rumbled & the motion delayed.
Would Pearly G - or anyone - have been quiet if such a motion had been completed in private & slipped through quietly?
I would fucking hope not.
Anyone bothered to ask what the Certification Officer's view is?
I’m not convinced that race or colour has anything to do with the sacking of the chancellor.
ReplyDeleteArrogance and incompetence were factors along with a desperate need for the current PM to maintain office as the alternative will see the torrid in the wilderness for years, but hey, that’s politics.
I’m not sure that many of probations black or ethnic staff have much in common with Kwarteng, reputedly worth between £800,000 and £1.2 million and we need to look to other quarters to find things which unite us, such as wages terms and conditions.
Perfectly agreeable comment I could have simply said she should have gone as well given the chancellor had put together a plan she had requested given her campaign promises.
DeleteThis post goes some way to settling the dust kicked up by CA3. It is in two parts (which is the "Chapter" and which the "Verse"?) A statement and the detailed process of the forthcoming General Secretary elections. The source of both elements is rather obscurely given as a "reader".
ReplyDeleteSome questions appear to remain however.
If legal advice was instrumental in forming the proposed amendment, then why was the debate in Eastbourne not informed? What initiated the consideration of a 30 year old statute this year? Why was the NEC not fully aware of how this would apply to any future General Secretary? Why the rush to amend the Constitution at a time when the full implications were not clear (as evident from the vague introductory paragraph on the order paper and equivocal arguments in debate?)
The poor timing seems responsible for an outbreak of conspiracy theory on the 2023 election which patience in addressing an issue which is probably at least 5 years away, would have avoided. It would help if the context and detail legal advice that was obtained was published to the membership, or at least the NEC, if possible. The prospect of cancelling a future election is self-evidently a serious step which requires greater clarity and understanding that events surrounding CA3 indicate is presently the case. A cautious estimate would indicate that the NEC has at least 5 years to sort this out. 10 years if a future General Secretary has not previously worked for Napo. If this suggestion returns to AGM then hopefully the NEC would be more ready. As the King might say "Dear oh dear"
The process of conducting the election is the same or similar to that deployed in previous years. Although provided in clause 12d of the Constitution, I still have some misgivings about the dominant role of a caucus of 5 NEC members in determining "electability" and confining the nomination and election stages to those they select. On a more controversial note, is not the eligibility of an incumbent to stand in the election phase assured by clause 12c which states an incumbent's eligibility for election (some tension between clauses 12c and 12d?) If the subcommittee effectively block's an incumbent's access to the full election, might this amount to a dismissal of an employee? I am simply posing the questions.
Good points but there is some advantage to the incumbent . I suspect he will attempt to run on as long as the funds support his ridiculous salary. That said the contract ends so why have a general secretary at all he has not been remarked as a good public speaker with any influence. He certainly has proven to be a useless negotiator . All said I think he knows running on until funds are depleted he will be asking for the 250k redundancy dividend that will be an entitlement should they need to make him redundant. Safety first end his contract in June and recruit an alternate type of administrator. Another few years of this guy is just turkeys voting for Christmas. He still has done nothing on a national workloads campaign for all tasks under health and safety . Get rid save ourselves.
DeleteIt is convenient to blame the woes of members on the GS. It not as though members care much about the leadership of the union: in the last two elections the turnout has hovered around 20 percent. We don’t know how many voted in the recent pay ballot, but as the figure has been withheld it’s probably because it was embarrassingly low. What is any GS to do with a membership that has no spirit of solidarity? It can seem that probation staff expect their terms and conditions to be protected, and pay increased, without doing anything to this end. There’ll never be a need to hire agency workers to cross picket lines into probation offices, because many probation staff are quite prepared to cross of their own accord. How can anyone lead workers who make a virtue out of going their own sweet way? That’s probation: a house divided, and always looking for scapegoats.
ReplyDeleteI think it is his complete lack of any challenge lack of intelligent defence lack of member support he should realise a weak leader is a weak union. Absolute gross waste of members money.
Delete"That’s probation: a house divided, and always looking for scapegoats."
DeleteQuite an accurate observation of many who have made it into senior roles; not so fair on those who have genuinely entered the role (not so much a profession these days) with idealistic dreams of 'doing good'.
The sharp-practice cynics have gradually taken advantage & control of the probation environment, engendering disharmony, encouraging divide-&-rule, playing staff off against each other, taking the piss out of the union/s & holding up staff as sacrificial lambs as & when it suited them, making & publicising the scapegoats, publicly crucifying selected individuals to frighten the masses.
I moved from a cut-throat industry into probation & it was, for the first few years, pure joy to be in a supportive & 'safe' environment. Then along came the MBAs, the Trusts, the wannabe-CEOs & their acolytes. It all turned to the same crock of shit I thought I'd escaped: naked ambition, throat slashing, greed & ego.
No coincidence that this was when the union lost its mojo, when we had to cope with the grotesque events of The Benny Hill Experience aka Ledgergate & all the pisspoor nonsense that followed.
Its a sad litany, the end of days for a once noble profession built upon the desire to advise, assist & befriend others.