There are "significant shortfalls" in the West Midlands probation service, inspectors have found.
HM Inspectorate of Probation undertook a review of public protection measures across the region, inspecting 84 cases.
Martin Jones, chief inspector of probation, said: "Despite strong leadership commitment and clear strategic priorities to improve public protection, the delivery of work to keep people safe was not yet meeting the required standard. Staff understood its importance however, worryingly, this was not reflected consistently in the quality of assessment, planning, and delivery."
A report by the inspectorate said its findings revealed significant shortfalls in practice across the region, with effective work to keep people safe being evident in 49% of the assignments inspected. Of the cases they inspected, most involved white men, aged 36-55, with violence and sexual offending the most frequent offence types, with concerns about domestic abuse and risk to children also prevalent across the sample.
According to the inspectorate, child safeguarding practice in the service was found to be "underdeveloped and an area for urgent attention". However, inspectors found that domestic abuse information sharing had improved as a result of joint efforts by probation and police leaders.
'Systemic barriers'
The report added that managers were not consistently identifying practice deficits and opportunities to protect the public were missed.
Recruitment was also hampered by excessive vetting delays, while pay and workloads were frequently cited as retention concerns. While staffing challenges were less acute than in other areas of the country, resourcing was found to have remained a challenge for rural areas in the region such as Herefordshire, which had acute recruitment difficulties and resulted in high workloads.
Jones said: "Systemic barriers, including resourcing, organisational complexity and insufficient multi-agency communication remained significant challenges for the West Midlands region to overcome. Strengthening the skills and improving the confidence of practitioners will be essential in ensuring the region can consistently meet its public protection responsibilities."
The report made seven recommendations, with four for the West Midlands region, including to develop practitioners' confidence and skills in the use of professional curiosity, and using challenging conversations to identify and respond to indicators of risk effectively.
There are a further three recommendations for the HM Prison and Probation Service, including to develop a national strategic approach to information sharing with police and children's services.
HM Inspectorate of Probation undertook a review of public protection measures across the region, inspecting 84 cases.
Martin Jones, chief inspector of probation, said: "Despite strong leadership commitment and clear strategic priorities to improve public protection, the delivery of work to keep people safe was not yet meeting the required standard. Staff understood its importance however, worryingly, this was not reflected consistently in the quality of assessment, planning, and delivery."
A report by the inspectorate said its findings revealed significant shortfalls in practice across the region, with effective work to keep people safe being evident in 49% of the assignments inspected. Of the cases they inspected, most involved white men, aged 36-55, with violence and sexual offending the most frequent offence types, with concerns about domestic abuse and risk to children also prevalent across the sample.
According to the inspectorate, child safeguarding practice in the service was found to be "underdeveloped and an area for urgent attention". However, inspectors found that domestic abuse information sharing had improved as a result of joint efforts by probation and police leaders.
'Systemic barriers'
The report added that managers were not consistently identifying practice deficits and opportunities to protect the public were missed.
Recruitment was also hampered by excessive vetting delays, while pay and workloads were frequently cited as retention concerns. While staffing challenges were less acute than in other areas of the country, resourcing was found to have remained a challenge for rural areas in the region such as Herefordshire, which had acute recruitment difficulties and resulted in high workloads.
Jones said: "Systemic barriers, including resourcing, organisational complexity and insufficient multi-agency communication remained significant challenges for the West Midlands region to overcome. Strengthening the skills and improving the confidence of practitioners will be essential in ensuring the region can consistently meet its public protection responsibilities."
The report made seven recommendations, with four for the West Midlands region, including to develop practitioners' confidence and skills in the use of professional curiosity, and using challenging conversations to identify and respond to indicators of risk effectively.
There are a further three recommendations for the HM Prison and Probation Service, including to develop a national strategic approach to information sharing with police and children's services.
--oo00oo--
What does AI make of this intractable paradox?
Reconciling "strong leadership" with "poor delivery" requires recognizing that a leader can be charismatic, visionary, and authoritative (strong) while lacking the operational, supportive, or strategic skills needed for successful execution (poor delivery). This paradox is frequently caused by a misalignment between high-level ambition and ground-level execution, often leading to a "leadership death spiral" where increased efforts by the leader actually hinder performance.
Here is how this misalignment can be reconciled and addressed within an organization:
1. Identifying the Root Causes
Here is how this misalignment can be reconciled and addressed within an organization:
1. Identifying the Root Causes
"Ideation Infatuation" vs. Follow-Through: The leader excels at dreaming up new ideas but lacks the discipline to execute them, moving on to the next "flavor of the month" before the first is completed.
Micromanagement: Strong, controlling leaders may feel they need to handle everything themselves. This stifles team autonomy, creates bottlenecks, and limits organizational growth.
Lack of Psychological Safety: Strong, dominant leaders can create a fear-based culture where employees are afraid to report mistakes or voice concerns, leading to hidden failures.
"Cement Mindset": The leader believes they know everything and stops seeking growth, training, or feedback, while ignoring the operational realities of their team.
Disproportionate Focus on Strategy over Execution: The leader focuses on high-level vision but fails to provide the "execution-level" detail needed by their teams.
2. Reconciliation Strategies
Shift from "Push" to "Pull" Leadership: Instead of pushing for results through micromanagement, the leader should focus on creating a "pull" environment—inspiring and motivating teams by fostering a, vision-aligned culture.
Implement 360-Degree Feedback: Utilize 360-degree feedback to bring awareness to the leader about how their strong, dominant behaviors are limiting, rather than enabling, team performance.
Formalize Accountability Structures: Reconcile the gap by setting clear, measurable goals and holding regular, structured check-ins that focus on "lead indicators" (progress) rather than just "lag measures" (final results).
Encourage "Respectful Dissent": Foster a culture where team members can safely challenge the leader's decisions, preventing costly mistakes.
3. Structural & Cultural Changes
Focus on Development: Provide coaching to help the leader transition from a "doer" to a "multiplier" who empowers others to deliver.
Align Incentives with Delivery: Ensure that the leader's incentives are tied to successful delivery, not just the articulation of a vision.
In summary, this scenario is reconciled by recognizing that "strong leadership" is often just "passionate direction," and it must be coupled with "systemic discipline" to deliver results. If the leader is unwilling to change, they may need to be moved to a role more suited to their skills, or "forced" to adopt better operational habits.
Micromanagement: Strong, controlling leaders may feel they need to handle everything themselves. This stifles team autonomy, creates bottlenecks, and limits organizational growth.
Lack of Psychological Safety: Strong, dominant leaders can create a fear-based culture where employees are afraid to report mistakes or voice concerns, leading to hidden failures.
"Cement Mindset": The leader believes they know everything and stops seeking growth, training, or feedback, while ignoring the operational realities of their team.
Disproportionate Focus on Strategy over Execution: The leader focuses on high-level vision but fails to provide the "execution-level" detail needed by their teams.
2. Reconciliation Strategies
Bridge the Gap with "Operational" Leadership: Pair the visionary, strong leader with a "doer" (e.g., COO, Project Manager) who excels at implementation, structure, and accountability.
Shift from "Push" to "Pull" Leadership: Instead of pushing for results through micromanagement, the leader should focus on creating a "pull" environment—inspiring and motivating teams by fostering a, vision-aligned culture.
Implement 360-Degree Feedback: Utilize 360-degree feedback to bring awareness to the leader about how their strong, dominant behaviors are limiting, rather than enabling, team performance.
Formalize Accountability Structures: Reconcile the gap by setting clear, measurable goals and holding regular, structured check-ins that focus on "lead indicators" (progress) rather than just "lag measures" (final results).
Encourage "Respectful Dissent": Foster a culture where team members can safely challenge the leader's decisions, preventing costly mistakes.
3. Structural & Cultural Changes
Redefine "Strong": Shift the definition of strong leadership from simply being "commanding" to being "supportive and empowering".
Focus on Development: Provide coaching to help the leader transition from a "doer" to a "multiplier" who empowers others to deliver.
Align Incentives with Delivery: Ensure that the leader's incentives are tied to successful delivery, not just the articulation of a vision.
In summary, this scenario is reconciled by recognizing that "strong leadership" is often just "passionate direction," and it must be coupled with "systemic discipline" to deliver results. If the leader is unwilling to change, they may need to be moved to a role more suited to their skills, or "forced" to adopt better operational habits.
--oo00oo--
Key Stages and Causes of the Leadership Death Spiral
Initial Overwhelm & Mismanagement: The cycle often begins with new or stressed managers trying to "do it all," leading to broken processes, lack of prioritization, and micromanagement.
Loss of Trust and Credibility: Leaders stop acting as mentors and focus on theory rather than practice, creating a disconnect with their team.
"Half-Delegation" Trap: Leaders assign tasks but fail to provide necessary context or authority, leading to inevitable failure and frustration.
Cultural Decay: A "blame culture" emerges, where negative feedback becomes self-perpetuating, resulting in low morale and disengagement.
The "Firefighting" Mode: Instead of fixing root causes, leaders focus on desperate, short-term fixes, which causes further, deeper, dysfunction.
How to Break the Cycle
Prioritize Ruthlessly: Stop trying to fix everything at once and focus on core, high-impact tasks.
True Delegation: Empower employees by providing them with both tasks and the context required to succeed.
Focus on Communication and Empathy: Actively listen to the team and rebuild trust by being consistent and transparent.
Address Root Causes: Shift from "firefighting" to addressing the underlying issues, rather than just treating symptoms.
Bravo! Please send this to McEwen so he can have a reason to start getting rid of all these excellent leaders starting with Kim and working his way swiftly down to the regional Heads
ReplyDelete"True Delegation: Empower employees by providing them with both tasks and the context required to succeed."
ReplyDelete"Empower employees" means ensuring staff have appropriate skills, training, resources & remuneration BEFORE allocating tasks, while 'context required' means a safe, secure & positive environment in which to work.
Jim, your invaluable blog has shown time & time & time again that NONE of those conditions exist in the current probation-sphere.
Elsewhere they call it the Death Roll: How Probation Leadership neutralises staff
ReplyDeleteThis is how probation leadership too often operates.
A Crocodile’s death roll is a brutal survival tactic. It follows a clear pattern:
1. Clamp – Lock the jaws. Control is established.
2. Twist – Spin violently. Disorient the prey.
3. Submerge – Drag underwater. Remove oxygen and strength.
4. Tear – Rip apart resistance.
5. Stillness – Once weakened, the struggle ends.
In probation, the pattern can feel uncomfortably similar:
• Clamp → Tight procedural control, relentless monitoring, disciplinary processes that hang over people for years.
• Twist → Micromanagement and constant reform that destabilise experienced practitioners.
• Submerge → Labelling professional challenge as negativity or resistance.
• Tear → Isolating outspoken staff and fragmenting teams.
• Stillness → Docile, compliant workers who stop questioning poor policy and stop innovating for better outcomes.
On paper, the system appears orderly. In reality, professional judgment, creativity and moral courage are suffocated. Our future probation is not “ours”.
The pattern replicates upwards. Officers manage risk and metrics to satisfy line managers and Heads of PDU seperate through deputies. Heads of PDU defer to Heads of Operation. Heads of Operation align with Regional Directors. Regional Directors answer to senior civil servants and the Ministry of Justice. Senior officials serve ministers. From manager upwards, each becomes a crocodile; the higher the rank, the more perfected the death-roll technique.
Each layer fawns upward and presses downward. The pressure travels one way; the silence travels the other.
The result is a staffing and performance crisis that even HM Inspectorate of Probation now reports on — while operating within the same architecture of scrutiny and control. Targets intensify. Oversight expands. Fear embeds. The roll continues.
Frontline staff are left with two ways to break the cycle: open rebellion or exit. In the absence of credible union protection, many have chosen the quieter form of resistance — leaving.
Until fear is replaced with trust, and compliance with professional respect, probation will not progress.
quick nod back to lammy's desire to fuck up the YJS:
ReplyDelete“Exceptional progress” made at Bridgend Youth Justice Service, rated ‘Outstanding’ following inspection... Bridgend Youth Justice Service (YJS) has received an overall rating of ‘Outstanding’ following an inspection of work with children and victims by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation.
So the incompetent wannabe deputy pisspot thinks by getting his grubby mitts on YJS will *improve* matters? YJ staff need to be afeared; lammy's mission is to dumb everything down so that probation & prisons look like they're doing okay.
romeo's appointment has been eclipsed by so many other news stories but... You must remember this...
ReplyDeletehttps://probationmatters.blogspot.com/2021/01/failure-rewarded.html
Tuesday, 5 January 2021
Failure Rewarded
Some fantastic news to start the New Year off! This from Richard Ford's Twitter feed yesterday:-
Antonia Romeo, senior official involved in Transforming Rehabilitation project which semi privatised probation service, is named as new permanent secretary at Ministry of Justice.
Ms Romeo insisted NOMS had a business assurance board designed, she said, to “give me, the senior responsible officer, the assurance that this is going to work and isn’t taking on any unnecessary risk.” Unfortunately it didn't quite work out like that.
In 2014 Ms Romeo said of the project: “My job as senior responsible officer is to make sure we deliver the benefits of the programme. We need to really understand what’s going on – and there are no prizes for not listening.”
The semi privatisation project has since been reversed with all probation coming back under state control after former chief inspector of probation described scheme as "irredeemably flawed".
_______________________________________________________
the magic roundabout, the revolving doors, the privilege of privilege, entitlement is as entitlement does, etc etc
And THIS is why the blog is such an important series of documentary.
addendum - several articles from civil service world
Delete“At its heart, leadership is about people and creating the conditions for them to thrive” (but you have to have a heart to know what that means).
"The job I’ve got here is fantastic. But I think there’s a lot of road ahead. And I think there are a lot of really great jobs on that road. I’m just hopeful at some point to luck out and get one... One of my many faults is that I don’t career-plan. You never know what opportunities are going to come up." (you don't have to when you're so well connected; but you'll have no understanding of that).
"No-one joins the public sector for the pay, really – few people would. It’s for the purpose and the mission." (except you get paid shitloads AND fiddle your expenses, although you did pay some [£30,000] back when caught).
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/in-depth/article/leadership-flexible-working-and-board-games-antonia-romeo-in-her-own-words
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/excellent-choice-six-excab-secs-back-antonia-romeo-pick
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/i-will-stand-up-strongly-for-the-civil-service-antonia-romeo-delivers-message-to-officials
If the model is wrong, the ethos is wrong, and the direction of travel is wrong, then any inspection report on probation is only identifying the failings within a system that has already gone wrong.
ReplyDeleteErgo, fixing all the failings identified by the inspector, only serves to help an already broken system to keep on travelling in the wrong direction with the wrong model and driven by the wrong ethos.
Unrelated, this from Inside Time. It may give Jim some encouragement to keep up his tireless pursuit of something better and the policy changes that so desperately needed.
https://insidetime.org/ray-says/the-moj-look-on-their-works-and-despair/
'Getafix
NAPO members vote NO! “With a hugely impressive turnout of 83.46% of voting members, 88.97% voted to reject the above offer with 11.03% voting to accept.
ReplyDeleteThe Probation Negotiating Committee is meeting this afternoon to determine our next steps, including moving as quickly as possible to ballot on industrial action”
News just in:-
ReplyDelete"Napo members resoundingly reject 2025-2026 Probation Pay Offer. Our election scrutineers CIVICA have now provided the result of the indicative ballot that has been taking place between 4th to the 27th February 2026. With a hugely impressive turnout of 83.46% of voting members, 88.97% voted to reject the above offer with 11.03% voting to accept."
Come off it nafo Percent of what figure voted to accept the shit offer and how thick are these 11 percent. Big turn out exactly how many is big a percentage is a distorted figure and the employers will exploit that any as taking off 11 percent puts it around a real 77 percentage anyone correct me please packet maths .
Deletenapo ar21 declares 6,242 members in Great Britain as at Dec 2024... I'm assuming the NI members operate under a different system seeing as its probation service for England & Wales.
Delete(6242 x 83.46%) = 5,209 turnout
(5209 x 88.97%) = 4,634 in favour
(5209 x 11.02%) = 574 against
Does that seem about right?
https://www.napo.org.uk/news/facts-arent-myths
DeleteTHANK YOU 1727. That is a helpful look at the way people are thinking and clearer than % calcs. 1659 get over yourself this a post blog not an O level English class. Try not to be critical and more the very helpful 1727. Remember is just a blog and the odd quick post on a phone punctuation mistakes won't hurt .
DeleteDon't know where to start correcting you @16:36. It's just your usual hostile, unpunctuated rant. I can maybe signpost you to a decent OPD practitioner if needs be.
ReplyDeleteWell said Anon 16:59!
DeleteSuch a hugely important outcome and although Im not sure of what words to use, Im so hugely proud that you have chosen to stand your ground and send an inexplicably clear message to your Employers and Government and Ive shared it with all those MP’s Ive tried to connect with (70) Iangould5
ReplyDeleteDASO now a band 4
ReplyDeletehttps://www.napo.org.uk/news/jes-appeal-outcome-daso-role
DeleteFollowing the recent JES appeal process, we can confirm that the DASO role has now been evaluated at Band 4.
DeleteWe recognise that this will be welcome news for those in the role and reflects the evidence submitted through the appeal process regarding the scope, complexity and responsibilities of the post.
We are mindful that not all roles undergoing JES review or appeal have resulted in similar outcomes. We know this continues to be a source of frustration and concern for many members, and we remain committed to supporting all colleagues through ongoing JES processes to ensure fairness, transparency and consistency.
If you have any questions about your own role or appeal, please contact your local representative for advice and support.
JES Appeal Outcome – DASO Role
Myth 1: This means DASOs have been given a “pay rise.”
Fact: JES is a job evaluation scheme. It assesses the role – not the person. The appeal outcome means the evaluated banding of the role has changed to Band 4. It is not a discretionary pay award or bonus.
Myth 2: This means DASO roles are “more important” than other roles.
Fact: JES does not rank roles by importance or worth. It measures factors such as responsibility, decision-making, complexity and impact. Different roles can score differently without one being “more valuable” than another.
Myth 3: If one role has moved band, all similar roles will automatically move.
Fact: JES decisions are based on the specific evidence submitted about a particular role. Other roles would need to go through their own review or appeal process with supporting evidence.
Myth 4: This closes the door on other appeals.
Fact: It does not. Members in other roles still have the right to seek advice and pursue appeals where there is evidence that factors have not been properly assessed.
Myth 5: Napo is only focusing on one group of members.
Fact: Napo supports fairness and consistency across all roles. Where evidence supports a case, we will back it. We are equally aware that many members have not seen positive outcomes and we continue to challenge inconsistencies in the wider JES process.
What This Outcome Does Mean
The DASO role has been evaluated at Band 4 following appeal. The decision reflects the evidence presented about the scope and responsibilities of that role. It reinforces the importance of robust, well-evidenced appeals.
What It Doesn’t Mean
It is not a general pay award.
It is not a comparison exercise between roles.
It does not prevent other roles from seeking review.
Napo is continuing to engage with the employers in respect of the ongoing review of all roles
Well done then to Napo getting the pay rates up on the duties of role. Good news deserves praise and encouragement. Good luck on the pay dispute I hope you see this through for all members. Great news for the Daso post holders well done.
DeleteReally that says it all
ReplyDeleteNAPO need to get this result flowing through the Guardian, DM, Telegraph etc as they are looking for any stories to hammer Starmer with, alongside the next batch of early releases, new sentencing bill and Jury Trials being curtailed it all helps to increase pressure on HMPPS to get the pay sorted swiftly
ReplyDeleteSo now a DASO earns the same as a Qualified Probation Officer.
ReplyDeleteIt was already hard to justify a VLO being paid at the same rate, but now a DASO as well?
I’m genuinely shocked. What is the value of a professionally qualified role like a Probation Officer if unqualified roles such as DASO and VLO are graded at the same level?
On that basis, Probation Officers should be Band 5 and Senior Probation Officers Band 6 across the board, and not just those working within the NSD.
Positively, union members have made it clear that the 4% pay offer was unacceptable. After the bombarding of messaging suggesting the offer was worth 6.8%, it wasn’t, and “the best we can get”, it’s understandable that trust and respect has gone. When a new offer comes forward, it will need to be meaningfully higher than 6.8% to be taken seriously. Anything marginal simply won’t address the strength of feeling that’s been expressed. 12% is the figure.
For reference:
https://www.napo.org.uk/news/jes-appeal-outcome-daso-role
https://napomagazine.org.uk/napo-members-resoundingly-reject-2025-2026-probation-pay-offer/
What frustrates me is that they can find the money to increase both VLO and DASO roles to band 4, and backdate payment to the original claim date but cant pay experienced qualified officers enough, and sell 4% as a “good deal”.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I should’ve never applied to qualify after being a PSO and applied for a VLO or DASO instead. Not to take away from the amazing things they do in these roles, but the pressure, complexity and responsibility is not comparable.
It's completely comparable in the critical elements of scheme in a job evaluation process. Your problem is you either don't understand an evaluation process which measures tasks or your of the view that doing a modern po day job which is boringly scripted and administrative monitoring is somehow superior. Po job may well need more money but subjected to assesment the current role won't be rated any higher than band 4. That's not to say that other complex roles although different don't warrant band 4 aswell. Different roles at similar levels is common in industry . People need to respect other jobs than constantly snide over trying to downgrade or denigrate other workers. Work is work they spend the same time at the desk. Make the case for po upgrading than attack hard working others staff. When the victims get protection the distinctions between po and vlo is clear and it was decided long ago by management way up top that po supervisors of offenders don't make good vlos . Vlo protect pos fall into their training and get it all wrong. You supervise offenders you need compliance so leave the vlos alone
DeleteHow would you know, have you been a DASO or VLO?, and to say they are unqualified is again untrue
ReplyDeleteNo, but I was a PSO for 10 plus years with a degree, and my only way to progress to get paid more money was to do yet another degree to become a PO. I would’ve needed the same qualifications to become a VLO and DASO but would receive the same pay now without doing the degree, VQ and added scrutiny to pass.
DeleteAs I said, I don’t take anything away from their role but you could go into a role as a VLO or DASO with no degree and as I have seen, very little prior experience in probation, DA or victim work, as a PO you can’t, you need a degree, and experience within PQIP as a PSO to get there.
Front line community case management (PO and PSO) should get a premium rate/bonus etc to encourage staff to stay and not seek to move roles ASAP.
Delete21:09 actually I do know exactly what is required and what they do. I have not been a DASO or VLO. I can also read the job descriptions which do not require ANY qualifications.
DeleteI can also read the Probation Officer description also at Band 4 which states very clearly what is required
If Probation Officer requires: You must hold a Probation Officer qualification or be a qualified Probation Officer. In addition, successful candidates must hold the following: PQF Honours Degree/Graduate Diploma and Level 5 Diploma in Probation Practice; or Diploma in Probation Studies; or Diploma in Social Work (Probation option); or CQSW (Probation option).
… So surely if Domestic Abuse Safety Officer (DASO) and Victim Liaison Officer (VLO) roles requiring ZERO QUALIFICATIONS are paid at Band 4, then Probation Officer which requires a professional qualification and is the CORE ROLE of the Probation Service must now be paid at Band 5.
No sorry that does not follow . If you train as a pi fine then the job specs and salary are clear. Other equally graded differently qualified either formally or skill acquired are rated in jes. The bottom line is the po is no longer that job to what it was. Regulation direction and a closed outcome determined by a scripted process leaves no room to calculate or be a decision maker. Jes grades many facets of a role and your po status is equal in pay to other jobs it's as simple as that . Jes graded roles are worth the same as the job levels achieve the pay grade scores. Maturity and ability to appreciate pay grades are there based on the role formal assesment and not your own set of personalised beliefs.
DeleteYou don't need to be a genius to be a VLO or a DASO or a PO. You could do all of these jobs without any degree and just the ability to read and write to an acceptable standard. AI will write Delius, Oasys and likely parole reports going forward and probably lay out templates of questions for interviews with offenders. Soon you will be able to ask chat GPT if you should breach or recall and they will assess all the data in the system and give you an answer then write the reports for you. All you will have to do is check everything and the sources being used by AI to make sure they have not misinterpreted anything.
DeleteVery true sadly
DeleteIf VLOs and DASOs are now band 4, then surely COMs should be band 5? Making the COM role band 5 would surely help with recruitment and retention and stop the exodus of COMs to POM roles too. Has a review of the COM role specifically ever been done? In my view, COMs hold a greater level of responsibility, risk and professional accountability than POMs, and their roles are more complex and stressful than prison roles. Even qualified POMs don’t offer risk management plans or an opinion in parole reports now, and their contributions in parole hearings are minimal. When things go wrong, they are never blamed.
ReplyDeleteYou are confusing a Probation POM with a prison POM
DeletePOs are band 5 in the NSD, another structural anomaly !
DeleteAnd POs have to go to university and get in debt which has to be paid off throughout their working life along with a mortgage, bills, kids etc. VLO's and DASO's only need a few GCSEs which is nothing academically and they have no debt!
DeleteYou make choices.
DeleteAll grades need a qualification from Po, PSO, Programmes, Bail, DASO, VLO, to EO. We all need to be on this so called Professional Register in order to practice. So a new pay deal is in order.. I am generally shocked at how this process works for evaluation as we all have stressful roles and different elements of responsibilities. But we all derserve to be treated with respect when it comes to pay.
ReplyDeleteAll these critically written slanted against equally graded work is boring and your not being objective. Despite JB posting the explanation at 1747. There are many roles that may not need anything in terms of higher education but the role may need something other than a generic qualification which is the same as all po. It doesn't illustrate what's is required to be a good vlo because it is not training staff to be vlos. However the anti vlo pay group grading are not appreciating different work has similar responsibility and under the jes has been rated at grade 4 because the job demands and knowledge would have scored highly over a specialised area or knowledge with heavy job demands in those areas. Jes won't be interested in anything in qualification unless the job requires it. That won't mean much if the scope of tasks Re limited to specific outcomes. Unfortunately for po there is very little that is not defined anything outside or in discretion won't give frequent. Try and get to grips with scheme and adjust tilthe over expectations.
DeleteBoring, 03.27
ReplyDelete607 you support pay jealousy do you. Grade protection is preserve of one group the po . It all says pay reduction if your not qualified in the po status then your work is not as valuable. Work of equal value is paid at band 4 so get over yourself elitist self righteous shite that is boring . Go get the po job evaluated like the vlos fought for and now the DV staff appeal. They all are worthy of the grade. Snobbish attitudes are what sunk probation grow up.
DeleteRattled your cage
ReplyDeleteNot at all rattled cage and boring comments are so intensely intelligent responses you would have thought hard to arrive at trigger commentary. Just accept the reality some jobs are valued by what the jes has determined. A po qualification means you can do the job they want not what you want. That pay scale is published and applicant apply for it. They vlo roles whatever else are different jobs. Which don't require a po skill set simple. Belief your role is worth more is nonsense to a properly managed jes assesment. You got to appreciate pay bands reflect different job demands and not subjective jealousy.
DeleteI don’t think it is “snobbishness” that is triggering POs discontent - more a reflection on how the “COM” role is neither financially or psychologically rewarding . I am a probation POM and I would actually like more responsibility for my cases and would want to do parole reports , licence conditions AP referrals etc as I know my cases - the responsibilities are set to over burden COMs under OMiC . However what is coming next no one knows yet other than it will be the “custodial sentence management” model - I have concerns about the progression model which is unlikely to have much input from OMU . I expect that I will be required in the community and it is not the responsibility of this that I am anxious about , it is the increasingly prescriptive, formulaic and process driven practice. Ironically I get to use “old school” skills, my professional judgement in the prison environment and less admin - more relational work .
ReplyDeleteOn this you have my absolute support and concerns. I want an old school structure. Officers set their appointments with the client. They agreed a social contract of joint case management the client had responsibilities and the officer exercises intelligent discretion. Home visiting meeting partners children and encouraging adults mature decision making. Officers had real authority over breach and recall . Clients engagement was focused and forgiving at times to build a relationship of trust respect and compliance to reform. Officers were highly skilled in the art of soft voice no need for a stick. Officer levels had resources welfare funding rent support schemes bus fares and often food and clothing support. Grant applications time to support education development even classes or re schooling. Officers selected in collaborative ways to develop the individual to more than themselves by intuition and personable support goal setting achievements at miles stones and recognition. Officers multi function multi tasking and flexible approaches saw them juggle plates across multiple disciplines and teams. Officers managed risk based on sound personal knowledge of the client or calculation of rewards versus risk. On a level that we do not see today. It has been taken from officers and ruined their role. When teams of officers got together they developed strategic community based support structures for people. Day centres existed for baseline support services which despite what anyone says these were extremely cost effective while supporting services were at the centre the reduction in repeat offending was immense. These skills intuition freedom to determine direction of supervision were the cornerstone of great officers delivering on the job. Those skills were taken for granted because it's difficult to justify officers who achieved with tons of charisma while others achieved in great networking or 121 office. The point is officers really had this flexibility to make life affecting changes for the betterment of all.
DeleteTaking officers to a closed outcome target driven time limited computer led admin task with completely controlled timings and direction is not the same autonomous role. It is a hybrid of deception to what you really should be free to continue with proper case load numbers. Officers had reporting days and often trailing off orders reduced appointment all built into seeing some amazing work. Settings today make officers a frontline target and not seen as a befriending agent to help people.itbis a great shame the talent pool is there but the role is locked up in restrictive narrative. I am sorry to harp on but the job has been defined in this tight costing where the management want the most for least. A complete waste of highly rateable people where the role of the job restricts completely the skills which could be used to much greater effect. The pendulum will swing back some day yet now we wait. However the pay dispute is our only best current chance to fight for our value even though they don't use the skills.
I totally echo these points. I am also a Probation POM and have suggest we take on more responsibility for the cases we hold - all parole reports, oasys, mappa referrals, AP etc and be responsible as we know the cases we work with.
DeleteIt’s a shame when POMs want this but as always, the people on the front lines are never listened to. I don’t know if it’s just our area but we are now having resettlement POs that are in the community but will take on all elements of pre release; Parole reports, accommodation referrals,
ReplyDelete, pre release oasys and hold reset cases. The cases will then be moved over to their COMs a few weeks before release. Our cases that met the criteria are being moved across asap, which surely means they are trying to reduce Prison Probation POMs /resettlement PSOs in prisons roles even further.
I think the PO role needs to be re evaluated . I know of POs who are now looking at applying for VLO roles - as much as I respect what they do it is not at the same level / responsibility etc as the PO role, and so it’s now attractive option now it’s a band 4 and less stress etc . I’m sure PO’s will look at the DASO role now . It does cause some upset that myself and PO colleagues trained hard to qualify , to move up a band from PSO and now have to keep a professional registration and be paid the same as a VLO and now a DASO. In other professions a qualification would mean pay at a higher level- for example teaching assistant to a teacher , or social work assistant to social worker . If the qualification is not recognised / valued then what is the point when you can earn the same without . PSO will now think why bother to train when they can earn more and increase by band by going to a VLO / Dasso role . This does not help with the recruitment or retention of PO role . Again just wanted to say this is not against those that work in VLo or dasso role
ReplyDeletewhat they do it is not at the same level / responsibility etc as the PO role,
DeleteAgain this sort of comment gives me the impression you don't have any assesment skills. Jes has scrutinised the roles on paper and in job descriptions a companied by required evidence. If you do not understand the jes scheme you won't be able to appreciate how job activity required knowledge and demand or intensity of the activities is score then graded totaled and paid. You could say in my opinion . However the evaluation scheme of many other collegiate trained staff say your wrong and you just are. They are not the same roles but they share role demands that grade them. This commentary is what probation officers couldn't open a can of coke cola without argument . It is exactly why you are all so stuffed up by the moj.
My assessment skills are just fine Thankyou . I have read about the JES process as I had discussed with my union rep for the COM role to be
DeleteLooked at . Yes they are different roles , but the ‘knowledge’ , ‘role demand’ and intensity’ of the role of a VLo or Dasso is not at the same level as that of a PO. Despite them being all band 4 . It would be good to benchmark the roles against each other. The role of a PO is more - demanding - risk assessment / managing high risk offenders face to face/ attend parole hearings / manage recalls / completing reports, assessments and having to offer analysis and recommendations / hosting multi agency meetings / safeguarding / responsible for rehabilitation / dealing with trauma daily/ prospect of SFO etc etc whilst having to keep a professional registration along with knowledge of risk management for a generic case load ( all Types of offences ) knowledge of court / prison / rehabilitation/ housing /multiple victims / safeguarding /IOM, policy etc etc- the responsibility for victims / public / future victims and offenders themselves who often have high needs. So when breaking it down Into demands, activities etc the PO roles is quite considerable . Also , We are being ‘ Stuffed up ‘ not by our own doing but by an employer who does not want to recognise, value or reward us compared to other HMPPs / civil service roles- despite us doing an ‘extraordinary ‘ job !
On jes then 13 subject areas for assesment.
DeleteScores rating over 400 approx maybe 430 something achieve a level 4 anything below is a 3 . It is a long way to next level 5 based on responsibility and decision making over long to medium term so 5 is out of the question po jes simply cannot grade you there unless there is a massive shift in managerial duties and required tasks. You claim to have the scheme whether your assesment is right I'm not confident or convinced by the way you glaze over the reality of a marking scheme based on what the job demands are. This just part of the jes process and it is robust. In the 13 areas the max scores range from a max of 10 in some and around 20 in others. The margins are measured to an agreed score and moderated by checking scores and the evidence provided. Assesment is about good robust calculation based on the factors being measured. Constant rejection of the judgement drawn is your problem your jealousy your sense of superiority when in fact you have to learn to appreciate differently qualified or experienced people do a job that achieved the threshold for the band. Po grade is another a panacea for all roles if anything it's a pigeon hole if qualified for that role that is what you should be doing. The only thing is non qualified untrained staff cannot be a po and that is how it is. I do not disagree with that.
Listing a brief of activities won't register a jot on scores without an evaluation of demands frequency and emotional or intensive job demands . Most pso could list those descriptors in their day jobs these days. Probably admins too. You are qualified to be a po not a job analyst and boy that shows in your assertions. Being this wrong and dogmatic doesn't demonstrate your ability to make good assesments . It is snobbery grade elitist jealousy. Whether the employers respect the staffing I'm not sure it is that at all but if you all present like you do it might be a reasonable response from them.
Correction scores to-date
DeletePay Structure: The scheme supports four main pay bands (A, B, C, D) based on job evaluation scores.
Band A: Up to 613 points
Band B: 614 to 734 points
Band C: 735 to 879 points
Band D: 880 and above
Process: New or revised job descriptions are evaluated by trained assessors, involving employer and union representatives (Napo, GMB, PBA).
@00:44 lol no I’m not a job analyst Thankyou and no I havnt swallowed the JES handbook ! I listed some job responsibilities to highlight how the demands / emotional toil etc etc which other roles don’t have. I’m not here to draw out a long detailed argument re Jes - god who has the time and this isn’t the right forum. I’m just a PO who wants to be fairly rewarded for my role and the demands etc etc of it. As I said In my comments I have nothing against my VLO colleagues ( love them ) and who when discussing this have agreed that the role of PO is more demanding etc . You accuse me of being jealous and superior - this is definitely not the case ( people who KNOW me would say I’m far from being any of these ) but about fairness of pay etc. I also believe that PSO should be paid at a higher band as well given their roles and support my fellow PSO colleagues with this . It’s a shame that people can’t come on here and post their views and for people to respond and counter argue respectively - but instead you see the need to be nasty in tone, personal In making assumptions and accusations and quick to put down . Perhaps this is a forum you feel you can put down others ( PO’s ?) and feel superiority yourself in some way?
DeleteYou are putting others down in superiority by claiming through a lot of etc etc etc like we are supposed to agree in favour of something not said. What nonsense is this . You won't accept a scheme that's agreed by all used and certified a rate of pay for staff in different jobs. You need to understand the simple logic your role may score very well almost but no over the banding score for grade 5 while the vlo and other may just cross the line by a few marks. However they are graded in the band 4 stop putting staff down. Try and appreciate simply that as long as pay climbs for all staff your group can capitalise on this assimilation and seek a further lift. I responding defensively for the other grades as your sarcastic tone and snide inference dickens many of us reading your polite put downs.
Delete