It goes deeper than probation as a service. What we’re really seeing is the result of society and government failing people earlier and earlier, and those failures being funnelled into the criminal justice system. When housing, mental health care, education, youth services and addiction support are stripped back, people don’t disappear, they fall forward. By the time probation meets them, the harm is already layered and entrenched.
Probation was originally built on the principle of advising, assisting and befriending because it recognised that reality. It needed people with life experience, emotional intelligence, credibility and the confidence to exercise judgement. That model naturally attracted practitioners motivated by understanding people and working with complexity, not just enforcing rules.
The current model is based on something else entirely. It treats social failure as individual non-compliance and manages risk through restriction, surveillance and recall because meaningful support has been hollowed out elsewhere. In doing so, it reshapes who the service attracts and retains. Experience becomes inconvenient. Judgement becomes risky. Longevity becomes expensive.
Instead, the system now favours staff who can tolerate high throughput, follow process, meet targets and apply rules consistently, even when those rules don’t improve outcomes. That isn’t a criticism of individuals, it’s a consequence of design. When discretion is discouraged and autonomy removed, the role no longer rewards depth or experience, it rewards compliance.
Younger people are arriving already failed by multiple systems, and probation inherits the responsibility without the tools to repair the damage. When outcomes don’t improve, the response is tighter control rather than upstream investment.
Probation hasn’t just lost its original purpose. It has been deliberately reshaped to absorb social failure while presenting enforcement as solution, and in the process it is transforming both who the service is for and who it wants working in it.
Probation was originally built on the principle of advising, assisting and befriending because it recognised that reality. It needed people with life experience, emotional intelligence, credibility and the confidence to exercise judgement. That model naturally attracted practitioners motivated by understanding people and working with complexity, not just enforcing rules.
The current model is based on something else entirely. It treats social failure as individual non-compliance and manages risk through restriction, surveillance and recall because meaningful support has been hollowed out elsewhere. In doing so, it reshapes who the service attracts and retains. Experience becomes inconvenient. Judgement becomes risky. Longevity becomes expensive.
Instead, the system now favours staff who can tolerate high throughput, follow process, meet targets and apply rules consistently, even when those rules don’t improve outcomes. That isn’t a criticism of individuals, it’s a consequence of design. When discretion is discouraged and autonomy removed, the role no longer rewards depth or experience, it rewards compliance.
Younger people are arriving already failed by multiple systems, and probation inherits the responsibility without the tools to repair the damage. When outcomes don’t improve, the response is tighter control rather than upstream investment.
Probation hasn’t just lost its original purpose. It has been deliberately reshaped to absorb social failure while presenting enforcement as solution, and in the process it is transforming both who the service is for and who it wants working in it.
Anon
Hugely powerful , poignant and very profound and will resonate with so many who regularly read this blog. Heartfelt thanks. Coinciding, with what feels like a hugely significant event occurring tomorrow. The outcome of the ballot. I recall and often post a view that tomorrow is much more than just a statement about Probations value and worth of a much maligned, marginalised and hidden service its also about its ‘essence’ and future direction of travel our vocation. With permission, I would like to share this with the 14 MP’s who Ive connected with over the past 4 months and although Ive long accepted that it wont make any difference our vocation deserves our very best efforts. My thought/prayers are with all Probation staff tomorrow and over the weekend whilst we all await the outcome. Iangould5
ReplyDeleteThanks for that Ian - this post was of course inspired by you truffling it out from January and posting on Twitter! Because my eye is off the ball most of the time now, I'm not always noticing gems like this - so am very grateful to you.
DeleteThat packed so much truth into so few words, the disease and cure all wrapped up together. The frequently ludicrous licence terms imposed at the beginning of post sentence supervision often destroy any trust between probation officer and ex offender. Probation has been set up to fail those they supervise.
ReplyDeletesox
Loving the blog piece, thank you. And sox, you're getting better & better at this!
Delete"Probation has been set up to fail those they supervise." - Absolutely correct.
I'd like to take that idea further:
"Probation has been set up to fail"
Because that's exactly how 'the system' works in these right-leaning glory days of capitalism first. A highly valued organisation is targetted, streamlined then sold on as a going concern or, if that fails, broken up & the assets sold for a profit.
In the case of probation the valued service was targetted by the political classes with access to almost unlimited public funds if the right argument was made. Numerous times they tried to get the service market-ready (noms, oasys, OMA2007, trusts, etc) & tr was the market tester, i.e. experiment how to monetise the service while keeping something in (public) reserve.
It was an umitigated disaster costing the public purse - NOT the politicians & their civil service lackeys - £1billion+. That's how shit they are at this stuff, but they just get promoted & rewarded.
Now they're trying again, only this time they know that the probation officer model won't wash, so they're using techology as the bait. Imposing expensive tech paid for (again) by the public purse means they can claim all sorts of policy 'wins', while ensuring that the probation model as it was is irredeemably flawed, thereby lining up the next attempt to go to market.
They do not give one flying fuckity fuck about those who are directed to be supervised. They would prefer all that's done by the tags & AI; far less messy, makes monitoring & recall simple & remote. A bit like the new weapons of war, i.e. killing folk from thousands of miles away is sooo much easier and sooo less painful or concerning.
Thank you @17.57 one day I'll write the contribution I promised JIm nearly 5 years ago. Brain fog makes this hard but I'll get there one day.!
ReplyDeletesox
The MOJ has been discussing the removal of the word probation from the probation service for a time as that word harks back to a time when the service was akin to that portrayed in an Ealing or Boulting brothers film. It is one word which is causing all of the problems. The word conjours up hope….a chance for redemptive action……a chance to start again……and is the main stumbling block to the UK Correctional Agency a public/private initiative to wash away the bothersome compassionate approach, such an initiative relies in technology…..not humans….and therefore can never be wrong…..as officers are human, they make mistakes but learn from them…..AI purports to do the same but at the end of the day it is just a tool.
ReplyDeleteWe need to fight from the top to the bottom to retain that one word that promises so much but which currently delivers so little…….the current nasty approach to offending by all major parties will change and the pendulum will starts its long journey back……we need to make sure that the word probation is ready to welcome it when it does………..
It’s not the first time. The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) intended to do the same, replacing Probation Officers with Offender Managers. The difference then was the Probation Association and Probation Chiefs Association fought to retain the “probation” brand and name. There’s nobody to fight for us anymore.
DeleteI've just seen the Enforcement guide for the new security at Birminghams main office as one of the pilot sites, it has really saddened me that we have come to this. I know some will welcome this as a few Officers have been seriously injured but this is not the way to respond, it's all 'voluntary' but if the offenders refuse to be patted, searched etc then they are refused entry and need to be breached or recalled, that's really stretching the term voluntary! I hope this pilot fails, but in Probation we know far to well calling something a pilot is just a way of saying we're doing this whatever the result! Thank God I only have to get a few more years under my belt before leaving...
ReplyDeleteCan we just say this out loud:
Delete"if the offenders refuse to be patted, searched etc then they are refused entry and need to be breached or recalled"
Puts me in mind of something posted above:
"They do not give one flying fuckity fuck about those who are directed to be supervised. They would prefer all that's done by the tags & AI; far less messy, makes monitoring & recall simple & remote."
Man down t’ pub saying gmb union voted to accept 6%.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone will. No money left behind the sofa. We are at war with Russia with no one to call upon after Brexit and falling out with the US and money will have to be found to defend ourselves now. Probation will be automated.
DeleteThis is the road we’re on now.
ReplyDeleteFor staff, it means a job stripped back to process. Less judgement, less discretion, less time to understand the people in front of you. Experience stops mattering because there’s no space to use it, and new staff are pushed through without ever being allowed to properly learn it.
And yet we’re still told to show “professional curiosity” and deliver quality. You can’t strip out time, experience and autonomy, then ask why judgement has disappeared. That isn’t failure, that’s design.
For those under supervision, it means less contact, less trust, less chance of real change. Relationships are replaced with check-ins, monitoring and enforcement. Compliance becomes the goal, not rehabilitation.
And for communities, it means risk managed at distance, picked up later, and dealt with when it’s already escalated.
On paper it might look efficient. In reality it’s a hollowed-out service, where staff are reduced to process and people are reduced to risk.
I used to be proud to call myself a probation officer.
I’m not sure what we’re becoming now but it doesn’t feel like something to be proud of.
ReplyDeleteProbation Pay Offer 2025-2026
The indicative ballot on the above pay offer closed at Noon today.
75.2% of Napo members have voted to accept the offer, with 24.8% of Napo members voting to reject it. The overall turnout was 84.01%.
We have been informed that both UNISON and GMB/SCOOP members have also accepted this pay offer.
HMPPS has been advised of these ballot results. They continue to indicate that any backpay owed will be paid to staff in May's payroll run.
Napo's Probation Negotiating Committee will meet next week to review our position in respect of the current workloads dispute, including considering all available options open to us, and have further discussions on our pay claim agenda for 2026-2027. More news on these vital issues will follow when available.
Meanwhile, we would like to thank all those Napo members who have engaged in such impressive numbers, by voting as well as organising and taking part in all-member or Branch meetings, with the ballots which have been held in relation to this pay offer.
Ian Lawrence Ben Cockburn
General Secretary National Chair
Do you need to print this message? Please consider the environment before doing so. Thank you.
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail (and any attachments) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Thank you. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail message has been swept for computer viruses. It originates from Napo - the Trade Union and Professional Association for Family Court and Probation Staff. Any queries should be directed to its author. To find out more about Napo, please visit our web-site at www.napo.org.uk or telephone 020 7223 4887. Our Privacy Statement can be found at www.napo.org.uk/Privacy-Statement.
As predicted by so many for so long to so few . A royal Napo shafting if members and the agreement to change roles without details is black bag sale. Offender managers is the new title and the probation language will be extinguished . You asked for it you deserve it.
DeleteThe 75.2% didn't vote for the pay deal. They voted for the backpay hitting their account in May. That's the tragedy of this result.
DeleteWe've been in a cost-of-living vice for two years. The energy bills are still criminal and the mortgage/rent is strangling people. Leadership knew exactly what they were doing dangling a lump sum of backpay just before summer. Colleagues looked at the number, looked at their overdraft, and clicked "Accept" without reading the ‘small print’.
They've just traded the title of Probation Officer—and the professional protections that go with it—for the price of fixing the boiler or paying off the credit card bill for the kids' school uniforms.
Weak? Yes. Because it's easier to take the cash and hope the "Offender Manager" nonsense is just semantics than it is to hold the line and risk a delayed pay packet.
The sad irony? When we're all on generic Offender Manager contracts with 150% caseloads and no specialist pay weighting, that backpay won't even cover the stress-induced takeaway we'll be ordering every night.
Solidarity with the 24.8%. We saw the trap. The rest just needed the cheque.
INTIFADA
No not a acceptable that explanation is worthy but not accurate. Staff just gave up as the union led us all up the blind alley. It is deliberate and we are now totally finished when the job titles roll in and new all grades all duties hit you'll repent at leisure. Role boundaries gone only basic awareness levels and the rest is distribution and electronic tabulation. Good luck it is a stupid choice.
DeleteTo Anonymous 20:39:
DeleteYou're right to call out the "needed the money" line as too tidy. It's not just the backpay. It's learned helplessness.
We've had twenty years of Transforming Rehabilitation and One HMPPS and Target Operating Models. Every time we push back, we get a glossy consultation document, a few Zoom calls where Ben and Ian say "we share your concerns," and then an email saying "the deal has been accepted following productive negotiations."
Colleagues aren't weak. They're exhausted. They've been told the cliff edge is coming for so long that they've stopped believing the cliff is real. They think the "Offender Manager" title is just another badge on the same lanyard. They don't understand that this time the contractual language is the wrecking ball.
The union didn't lead us up a blind alley. They just held the gate open and said, "It's this or the long walk home." And 75% of people decided the long walk home wasn't worth it anymore.
You're spot on about the tabulation. When the only metric that matters is "interventions completed on the system" and not "conversation had with the human being," the job dies.
See you in the repentance queue. I'll bring the biscuits.
INTIFADA
I hear you friend and respect your gesture I'm sorry we are lost and to you. My frustration is that members follow a leader and Lawrence is a piece of crap unable to actually deliver for us on any task since he stole into the role. He has demonstrated many times his unsuitability and incompetence but the national Napo friends club of cronies do not have the skills to get rid of the idiot. Priestly is no action man either just plays the dumb waiter another full on disingenuous arse.
DeleteTo Anonymous at 00:02
DeleteI hear you. And I'm not going to defend the indefensible or the inept.
There's a particular kind of rage reserved for watching the person who's supposed to be holding the line just... pose with the rope instead. You've named it exactly. The internal machinery of Napo—the conference motions that go nowhere, the "firm but fair" statements that read like they were vetted by comms before the ink dried—it leaves a mark that the employer's cuts don't reach. That one's personal.
You feel like a mug for paying the subs. You feel like a mug for believing that this General Secretary would be different. And when you look around the room at conference, it feels less like a fighting union and more like a preservation society for the egos of a few people who've forgotten what a recall report actually smells like.
The anger is the only thing left that still works. Hold onto it. It's cleaner than the exhaustion.
We're all in the same leaking boat, even if we're arguing about who's steering it into the rocks. I'll save you a seat in the repentance queue anyway. The biscuits are on a paper plate, because obviously we can't afford china on this pay deal.
INTIFADA
The price of selling out?
Delete6% Backpay for a salary @ £35k is ~£2,100 less stoppages, so what is that in terms of cash in the bank? Maybe £1,500?
what does £1500 get you?
Deleteweekend break for 2 incl theatre in London - £600pp
1000 litres domestic heating oil
$2000 currency exchange
I've been on every picket line for over 20 years, with colleagues walking past into work. My work load waited for me when I returned to work.
ReplyDeleteI voted against the 3 year pay deal as I thought it tied us in for too long, with no idea with what the economic outlook would be in the final year.
For the current pay deal, I voted against 4% but for the 6%. When the vote was announced, many of my B2 & B3 colleagues were pleased with the result.
Maybe this was immediate gratification, but in my opinion it would have taken a consolidated period of strike action to have got the Government to even consider entering into any negotiation. I personally don't think strike action would have achieved this. More importantly, there aren't the numbers of union members to make any impact on 'service delivery '.
We are represented by the unions and collectively voted for this. We all know this, so please quit with the blame game. No-one knows another person's financial situation, and 6% with back pay could be an amount that keeps their head above water.
To Anonymous 21:21:
DeleteFair points, and I respect the 20 years on the line. I've done fewer winters on the pavement than you and my feet ache just thinking about it. You're right that calling colleagues "weak" for needing the 6% is a cheap shot from the cheap seats. No-one knows what's in anyone else's bank account.
But here's the rub, and I think you know this deep down: The 4% or 6% was never the real vote.
The real vote was on whether we consented to our evolving job role with now remote ‘check in bro f introduced and use of AI. The pay percentages were the shiny thing waved in front of us while the fine print on the back of the napkin redrew every role boundary in the organisation.
You're absolutely correct that we don't have the industrial muscle to bring HMPPS to its knees anymore. Napo's density in the NPS is a shadow of what it was pre-TR. A ballot for sustained action would have been a noble defeat. The leadership knew that. HMPPS knew that. So they played the hand they were dealt: Take the money now, and we'll talk about the workloads dispute later.
This isn't the "blame game" aimed at the member who clicked "Accept" to keep the lights on. It's grief aimed at the process. It's the slow realisation that the union accepted the 6% not as a victory, but as a dignified exit from a fight they knew they'd lost before it started.
You walked the line. You did your bit. The rest of us are just mourning the fact that the line got moved so far back that the picket is now inside the office, and we're holding placards in front of a screen that says "Offender Manager Dashboard."
Respect for the honesty. I'll still see you at the next one, even if it's just the two of us and a wet cardboard sign.
INTIFADA
Good post intifada I don't go all the way on it though. Po level supposedly able to asses are just useless here and the unions left you all blind . No one in their right mind could say yes to a job change without knowing upfront. Yet Napo have parked you on the grass no protection from what the hell next. Money eyes on 6% backdate is a fools gold and the job is over but at least it can all end soon enough and a multi task workforce will lose the officer demarcation and infighting will be gone .
DeleteTo Anonymous 23:51
DeleteI don't go all the way with you either, but I go far enough to know the ground's shifting under us and nobody's handing out maps.
You're right that nobody in their right mind votes for a job redesign sight unseen. And yet here we are, clicking "Accept" on a deal that came with a side of "we'll define the terms later." That's not consent. That's a hostage video with a payslip attached.
The PO demarcation you mention—that's the thing that's kept me going on the worst days. The idea that there was a line. A threshold of expertise. A professional boundary that said this requires a qualified officer and that can be delegated. Once that line's gone, we're all just case administrators with nicer lanyards and worse sleep.
The infighting you predict will go, sure. But so will the thing that made the job worth doing in the first place. The belief that someone with the right training and the right time might actually catch a person before they fall.
The only thing I'd push back on is the "at least it can all end soon enough" part. I don't think it ends. I think it just changes into something even less recognisable, and the same exhausted people will still be there, logging onto the same portal, just with a different logo in the corner. The infighting might stop, but only because there's no-one left who remembers what we were fighting over.
And on Napo parking us on the grass—yeah. That image is going to stay with me. Pushed onto the verge while the traffic of "modernisation" roars past, and we're sat there with a 6% thermos of tea wondering if the AA is ever going to show.
Still. You've called it what it is. Fool's gold. And sometimes it helps just to have someone else in the thread say "Yeah, I saw the glint too, and I knew it wasn't real."
Solidarity. Even if it's just solidarity in the dark.
INTIFADA
"That's not consent. That's a hostage video with a payslip attached."
DeleteIts been that way since 1999 when Ts&Cs & job descriptions were changed/imposed regularly without consent &/or sacrificed for shit pay deals:
* NPS, the new choreography
* noms
* trusts
* loss of enhanced annual leave
* reduction/loss of subsistence payments
* tr, when allocation to nps/CRCs was mandated
The senior simple serpents have a lot of power; in conjunction with whichever nutball of a minister is in charge they will ensure what they say goes. The rise & rise of romeo is proof of that pudding. (note: I suspect olly robbins wasn't much liked by someone important or he wouldn't have been pushed. He was appointed to foreign office *after* mandy was given the post & vetted... next week could be interesting. Apparently there's a 'joke' circulating in westmonster that they should replace the English Channel with starmer's desk because nothing goes across it).
Meanwhile at probation headquarters………….”right that’s the first step in getting rid of that pesky word……..probation,that’s causing us so much trouble……..”
ReplyDeleteAnd in 1907………a phone call is received……” It’s from a Mr Lawrence, he says thanks for for the past 119 years but we've finished with the word probation now, it’s been a good ride but everything must come to an end…..”
ReplyDeleteThere's the biggest problem a non functioning non fighting incapable babbling loudmouth that dimp Lawrence has to go we must start afresh with a real leadership candidate not this plastic fixer for the management Lawrence plays the playbook against us as he has every year while grabbing 100k. He is crooked beyond get rid asap. This deal says all it needs to he did nothing to arrest it . No legal case. No planning just used the committees to justify nothing to do here.
Deletehttps://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/prison-staff-pay-rise-3-5-percent-pay-review-body
ReplyDeletePrison staff are set to get a 3.5% pay rise next year, justice secretary David Lammy has announced.
DeleteOn Thursday, the Prison Service Pay Review Body published its annual advice for the remuneration of governors and operational managers, prison officers and support grades in the Prison Service in England and Wales.
Responding in the House of Commons, Lammy said he accepted the body’s recommendations in full.
The award will deliver an increase of at least 3.5% of base pay for all eligible prison staff between operational support grade and governors (bands 2-11), with a targeted focus on the lowest paid.
Staff in the operational support grades (band 2) will receive the 3.5% increase in addition to the automatic National Living Wage increase that comes in on 1 April. They will also continue to receive a temporary increase at 25% of base pay until publication of the 2027 report whilst work to agree an appropriate permanent approach to “unsocial hours working” is finalised.
The award will be paid by the end of June, and will be backdated to 1 April.
Lammy said that due to tight public finances, the Ministry of Justice will fund the award from existing budgets, which may impact other spending plans.
“Prison Service staff are some of our finest public servants,” Lammy said. “The role that prison staff play in keeping communities safe and supporting rehabilitation is crucial.
“Accepting these recommendations in full reflects our commitment to ensure that prison staff are able to continue delivering this essential frontline service. This also recognises the unwavering dedication of our prison staff, whose work is largely out of view of the public, but is vital for those under their care and to keep the public safe.”
Lammy said the approved recommendations are also “expected to further stabilise the recruitment and retention position in the Prison Service”.
The PSPRB report said recruitment "appears to have relied heavily on overseas applicants in recent years" and warned that "given changes to the skilled worker visa rules, the Prison Service will not be able to rely as heavily on recruiting staff from overseas".
"Therefore, looking to the future, there needs to be a sustainable pipeline of applicants from the United Kingdom especially given the level of vacancies and the planned expansion of the prison estate," the review body said.
The Home Office has granted a temporary exemption to the immigration rules for foreign nationals working in UK prisons in a bid to head off a potential staffing crisis. The exemption lasts until the end of the 2026 calendar year.
The PSPRB report also noted that retention "remains fragile, with considerable numbers of staff still leaving the service within their first 24 months of joining".
‘Insulting’ – prison officers union responds to pay award
The Prison Officer’s Association hit out at the announcement, accusing ministers of “nauseating hypocrisy”, noting that MPs will receive a 5% bump for the same period.
Steve Gillan, general secretary of the POA, said: “A 3.5% increase in prison pfficer pay at a time when inflation is around 3% and we have a cost of living crisis is a kick in the teeth for our members.
DeleteIt is nauseating to see MPs on almost £100,000 a year being awarded a 5% increase and our members, with all the dangers and stresses they face carrying out their duties, receiving just 3%.
“This shows once again how detached the political class is from workers who live in the real world, not the Westminster bubble. The POA will redouble our campaigning efforts to ensure prison officers are valued and rewarded for the work our members do.”
The union had sought a 6.3% rise for staff at pay bands 2 to 5 "to repair and correct years of real-terms losses, rebuild morale and support staff retention" in its submission to the pay review body in November.
Mark Fairhurst, national chair of the POA, said the award would “do little to raise the standard of living” of prison staff “who are struggling with ever increasing energy, fuel and food costs”.
And he said the pay review body and ministers were “living in cloud cuckoo land” if they believe the award will help with the recruitment and retention crisis.
He added: “Let me be clear, if prison officers in England and Wales had their industrial rights restored, I would now be balloting them for strike action over this insulting award.”
Is NAPO affiliated to the Labour Party ? If so, can members try to get it to disaffiliate ?
ReplyDeleteWhat is your point Napo is not affiliated to the tuc as it costs money so no chance of the labour party although it attends conference and masquerades for imaging . Napo is a sham.
DeleteIt is interesting that most probation officers who probe check verify and evaluate everything on their desks or what they hear cannot seem to manage the union process or the errant suggestions of competency in the union boss. Why is there a blind spot on this man anyone.
DeleteThe point is that if it was affiliated to the Labour Party, and members aren't happy about the status quo, they could push for it to disaffiliate, as there's no point being joined at the hip to an anti worker/imperialist party, and some of the funding they get would dry up.
DeleteNapo isn't the only union to be failing. Look at how the likes of Unites Sharon Graham acts, or even Mick Lynch, who said some mildly strong words about the state of things, but then advocated voting Labour.
quick re-visit to AI... read an account in a us paper about a company ceo who was so committed to tech he fired a team of quality assurance (QA) staff & replaced them with AI because it could do the same job far quicker & at a fraction of the cost. The AI bot had a hallucinatory moment & imposed a discount code on all products that rendered them all $0 retail. Then... the ceo asked if someone could call the sacked QA team leader to see if he would help trouble-shoot the problem... for free!?!
ReplyDeletenote to employer: if the cobbler or lamey ring after I've been made redundant by JusticeAI, don't bother giving them my number.
And Probation is still waiting on a pay rise from previous years and Lammy throws 'junior' staff under the bus about the numbers of wrongly released. There are two P's in HMPPS and it's about bloody time the Probation one was not treated like the lackey afterthought and dumping ground it continues to be. Prisons are in no position to exert primacy other than it being a populist move to get votes. Although the death penalty brigade are still disappointed year after year and flogging hasn't been brought back. ARNS sounds like fun. Was it misspelt and should be ARSE?
ReplyDeleteBloody brilliant lol
DeleteWhat about this rise ? Should have consolidated it to about 9/10%
DeleteWell ARNS is at the ARSE end of Oasys, the repetitive malignancy of a risk took, so yea…
DeleteInteresting to hear kuensberg on bbc podcast, discussing the olly robbins dismissal, commented that romeo (& her mate, cat little) knew about the vetting decision on mandy but they didn't tell the PM immediately because of some civil service code about the sanctity of security vetting:
ReplyDelete"A team of Cabinet Office officials accessed a highly secure portal last Friday to review UK Security Vetting conclusions on Peter Mandelson... it then became clear to them that Olly Robbins had been presented with the conclusions of the UKSV process by a senior Foreign Office security official (who has since left the Foreign Office)... Robbins had not necessarily seen the full details of Mandelson’s vetting, only the conclusions... an ally of Robbins points to the 2010 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act which states that ministers do not have powers over national security vetting."
But in other news: "Govt source says the fact Antonia Romeo and Cat Little discovered what had happened, took advice then told Starmer shows it’s possible for civil servants to bring vetting issues to ministers’ attention. Understood that Romeo and Little are highly respected by No10."
As anyone who has experienced her 'at work' will testify, that girl knows how to game any situation, ingratiate herself to power & throw anyone she chooses under a bus. Probation never stood a chance.
I voted no.
ReplyDeleteNot because the money doesn’t matter, it does, but because this doesn’t feel like a pay rise. It feels like a trade-off, and I’m not convinced people fully realise what’s being traded. This isn’t just 6%. It’s agreement to keep moving in a direction that’s already changing the job into something else.
The role feels like it’s being stripped back, less time, less judgement, less real engagement, replaced with process, monitoring and pressure to manage risk without the space to actually understand it. And yet we’re still asked where the “professional curiosity” has gone, as if it hasn’t been engineered out.
That’s what worries me. Because once you reduce a role to something more standardised and process-driven, you don’t rebuild it you manage it, you control it, and eventually you justify paying less for it.
So this isn’t just about now. It’s about what this job becomes, what it’s worth, and whether it’s something experienced people will stay in.
I don’t blame anyone who voted differently, people have to get through the month. But I do think we need to be honest that this wasn’t just a pay decision.
I used to be proud to be a probation officer.
Right now, it feels like we’re watching that role being slowly dismantled and I’m not sure how much longer I want to be part of what replaces it.
This a good post and yet it has been spelled out many times before.
DeleteWhat should have happened is the Napo Lawrence should have stated no strings this is annual pay round 12 month too late plus.
That pay is separate agreement locked onto our terms . That have breached the good faith pay arrangements and that is standalone. It should never been put to members with strings the man helped the reforms he has done so every time he has rolled over. This union used to proudly fight its own battles and win. Lawrence has won nothing in role.
aye, I'd suggest its neither a pay rise nor a trade-off.
DeleteIts a pay-off.
hmpps have leveraged a coup. Again.
Previous include ledger's capitulation of annual leave entitlements & subsistence rates for the shittest of 3 year deals.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/684fe83106337b7382f79e4f/NAPO_AR21_2024.pdf
For y/e 31 dec 2024:
* napo income is £1.3million of YOUR money from 6,135 members @ just over £200/year (average).
* gensec receives ~£120,000 in salary & pension
* remaining napo staff cost ~£650,000
The y/e 31 dec 25 data isn't available as yet.
Staggering pay for such a small union with a man who is completely stupid to the trade union side of work and demented as to how important probation was. That union doesn't even have an office base it's all virtual staff have been fiddling at home for years time to look into napos legitimacy we need a real union to protect us.
DeleteSimple saying thank you for your courageous share 8.55 there really are no words just care/acknowledgement about how it has left you and I guess many others feeling. I hope there will be others that are able to speak their truths to power. Sharing very best wishes to you and all those you work alongside. Iangould5
DeleteIndeed Ian it's a good post a pay off made me sad tho
Delete"We'll be back stronger and with even more conviction" Lawrence said in 2025. So what did he mean by that? Why are people handing over hard earned money to a these crooks.
ReplyDeleteDid he really . What context please. 8 don't get involved in conferences but where does he come from or speak out for probation. Just lip service I guess.
DeleteNapo conference 2025 - Napo magazine on line.
Deletehttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69de51a2961ff0ba6bff8e4b/Releases_in_Error_from_1_April_2025_to_31_March_2026.pdf
ReplyDeletePublished 15 April 2026
Monthly Numbers of Release in Error incidents
April 2025 - 11
May 2025 - 21
June 2025 - 22
July 2025 - 20
August 2025 -14
September 2025 - 22
October 2025 - 19
November 2025 - 16
December 2025 - 8
January 2026 - 8
February 2026 - 10
March 2026 - 8
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-prison-and-probation-service-spending-over-25000-2025
ReplyDeletealways worth a look to see how many £millions of taxpayer cash goes out each month
updated april 2026 - presumably to reflect what comes with the 6%:
ReplyDeletehttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69de6838961ff0ba6bff8e5e/probation-professional-register-pf.pdf
Blaming the union when probation is full of subservient , docile , robots with no academic standing now plays into the hands of the employer and keeps your position down
ReplyDeleteKeep breachin
Keep breachin
DeleteYou really know nothing of trade union activity or what it's basic functions are. Napo have a leader who does not want to lead properly. He angles deflection to members choices whilst never opening the process to proper legal challenges. He avoids proper confrontation by putting a list argument to members because he won't lead the proper rejection and that's why Napo fail. Blaming members is the wrong way around the issues. The tip table all complicit partly because they are just that probation officers. They are a small group and early are they able trade unionists. Lawrence got rid of the able reps panel and the real old school talent aided by po non trade unionists the least able members who helped him sink us.
The past 5 chairs all chosen all brainless.
Keep breaching keep recalling take your low status out on the punters
ReplyDeleteI think you been breached and your chip is a bit heavy . Do you want to share it see if it was unfair. Hurting are we. Couldn't follow your licence or order properly. Perhaps had a drink too much and couldn't be bothered. Possible no compliance felt like your own rebellion. Awe poor you !
DeleteKeep breaching may not just be a nom de plume but the watchword in the new regime post pay deal !
ReplyDeleteGood point but colleagues don't breach to take out frustrations on clients it's a rotten suggestion.
DeleteI have seen many gleeful at the thought of breaching a difficult client rather than having to deal with the presenting issues ,…
DeleteOk of course there will be some bad practice but the idea of keep breachin saying it like we all do it is just an unfair attack. I accept some bad apples will do bad things but I try very hard to avoid all breaches . It's a rarity for me at least not the norm. I know the pressures on us make it attractive but we have the skills .
Deletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crl1717r0zwo
ReplyDelete"A Bolivian man serving a sentence in a Nottinghamshire prison died in hospital after contracting tuberculosis (TB), an inquest has heard.
Alvaro Mendoza Sillerico had been at HMP Lowdham Grange since January 2021, and died on 18 November 2024 at Nottingham City Hospital.
A jury at Nottingham Coroner's Court was told on Monday the prison had multiple cases of TB diagnosed in late 2021."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce357w24nwlo
A prisoner with "a history of drug misuse" died at a "volatile" jail, an inquest jury has concluded.
Patrick Maughan, 50, died after collapsing in a different prisoner's cell at HMP Lowdham Grange in Nottinghamshire on 17 November 2024.
"The prevalence of illicit drugs at the prison was recognised as being a major problem at Lowdham Grange,"
It aint going so well in the prison system either.
20.40’s tone sums up the empathy and understanding of the new robots did your training cover trauma informed practice et al ?
ReplyDeleteYour misreading it. There is some frustration at the suggestion we keep breaching when we don't. That push back at 2040 was a defensive line against the negative of breach. Your attacking the wrong post.
Deleterats eating rats - just what hmpps hoped for.
DeleteYes bad all bad 18:17 will end up doing what is easier I suspect. How did we arrive here hopeless.
DeleteThe culture stinks your not social workers but poorly paid police
ReplyDelete*you're
DeletePetty . Pedantry this low brow is what let's probation down had you applied some circumspection to wider issues there might have been a realistic opposition.
DeletePetty? No. Devil is in the detail. Language is a powerful tool so should be treated & used with respect.
Delete"had you applied some circumspection..."
Circumspection is the quality of being cautious, prudent, and wary of risks, requiring careful thought before action to avoid danger or mistakes.
ah, yoda, how nice to see you back on the blog it is.
DeleteThis blog can be a bit tedious in the micro picking and defence of nonsense or irrelevance the readers understand.
DeleteMuch more poorly paid PCSO wages !
ReplyDeleteYet another day of frustration with IT systems. Install the update and then an hour of calls to get it to work with the assistance of an IT operative. I could have done it quicker myself it was a basic issue, but I don’t have admin permissions! I think the glitches are self inflicted by IT to keep themselves in a job! The paperless office what a load of tosh, I am sure the software is updated from a dodgy fire stick! The VPN is an absolute shocker as well, I now log my working hours with IT issues included and reflect it in Delius entries and reports!!
ReplyDeleteDecember 2025:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2lvwkpdg0yo
"An MP has secured a ministerial meeting to discuss urgent action to protect probation officers, after a constituent told him she was "frightened for her safety at work".
In response, Justice Secretary David Lammy confirmed that the Prisons Minister would meet Miller for a discussion."
Did that meeting happen?
Was anything agreed/decided?
https://www.parallelparliament.co.uk/mp/calum-miller/debate/2025-12-16/commons/commons-chamber/oral-answers-to-questions
T7. Miller: My constituent is a female probation officer in the early stages of her career. She came to my surgery last week because she is scared for her safety at work. Three weeks ago, her colleague in the Oxford probation office, who was following guidelines put in place following a similar attack in Preston in July, was stabbed multiple times by somebody on probation. Will the Minister meet me and my constituent to discuss extending the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018, which already covers prison and custody officers, to probation officers?
lammy: The hon. Gentleman will have seen the announcement that I just made on whole-life orders. I will of course ensure that the Prisons Minister meets him. We will do everything we can to keep our probation officers safe.
??? ***the Prisons Minister*** ???
Meanwhile, back in Aug 2025:
https://insidetime.org/newsround/review-safety-for-probation-officers-demands-chief-inspector/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2wwvvjy45o
ReplyDelete"Nottinghamshire Police was "reluctant" to investigate how many times staff inappropriately accessed images and footage after the Nottingham attacks, an inquiry has heard.
he force became aware there had been inappropriate access to the case and digital evidence the day after the attacks.
A district commander contacted the PSD on 14 June 2023 after becoming aware one of her officers had looked at the incident log without a legitimate purpose.
Members of the PSD agreed they did not want to take steps to look into the matter.
The hearing was told a volunteer officer with no involvement in the attacks investigation (who self-reported) was made the subject of an accelerated misconduct hearing in December 2023 after viewing material from his home and placed on the police barred list.
A front counter worker was also dismissed after she was found to have accessed information
Court workers also inappropriately accessed information about the case following the attacks in January 2024. HM Court and Tribunals Service deemed access by seven officers serious enough to refer it to the police.
Amy Holmes, the interim director general for the chief operating group of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), told the inquiry she could not detail what information was accessed due to an ongoing police investigation.
The inquiry heard seven probation service officers were identified as having accessed the information.
HM Prison and Probation Service found four of those officers accessed files legitimately, but three did not have a legitimate reason to.
It was deemed by the probation service and the Ministry of Justice's data protection unit that the breaches were not serious enough to warrant further action."
Oh, so three probation staff who had no reason to access data relating to an horrific multiple murder & attempt murder incident escaped "further action" ?
Howso?
Hidden away in the footnotes while Farage spouts about benefits being unaffordable.
ReplyDeleteAmazingly, the accounying errors only ever benefit one side.
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15759435/Bibby-Stockholm-asylum-barge-operator-admits-overcharging-118m-erroneous-billing-Home-Office-others.html
does anyone know if the mileage rates are part of the pay deal?
ReplyDeleteDon't be silly different arrangement. You'd have thought Napo would have put an immediate interim claim rate variation while prices have exceeded any clear inflation rate. That would be too much expecting them to have any sense. We will end up subsidising journeys.
DeleteUnderstood it’s separate — it was just a genuine question, no need to be dismissive
Deletesadly the blog is now riddled with nonsensical &/or abusive comments. I'd wager that mileages & any other subsistence claims will either be frozen or disappear in the new climate of technology takeover - no need to be driving or staying late anywhere - just hop on a laptop or use dial-a-prison.
DeleteI think that is a very likely prediction ed.
DeleteLengthy but interesting read published on the probation institute website.
ReplyDeleteIts interesting because it raises and asks questions about the 'cultural and organizational mindset' of today's probation service.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ec3ce97a1716758c54691b7/t/69e7ba1156008f2712758013/1776794134396/Kyle+Hart+-+ETGP+Dissertation+2026.pdf
'Getafix
A quick flick through the introduction and conclusion suggests the dissertation gestures at the right problems of staff shortages, bloated caseloads, and the drift toward risk management and tech but ultimately who is going to read 133 pages. By dressing up capacity-driven compromises as “structural pressures,” it sidesteps the obvious: probation is being hollowed out and repurposed to manage system strain rather than deliver rehabilitation. It reads as HMPPS-endorsed, safe, descriptive, and overly deferential to the status quo, avoiding any serious challenge to funding, workforce conditions, or the political choices driving decline. In the end, it’s a dissertation, not a policy intervention, and it shows: it adds little beyond rehearsing what’s already known, while reinforcing the sense that these insider Cambridge postgraduate pathways that are restricted to management opportunities, are detached from frontline reality and far less relevant than they assume. A bit audacious to be publishing it as if it meaningfully advances the debate, but hey ho.
DeleteAsking here as there isn't really another forum or site to do so, when did the pay point progression get tied into future pay negotiations/pay remits for the year?
ReplyDeleteThe fa t that we won't automatically step up to the next pay point but instead have to wait until the pay remit is released is ludicrous, as it once again means us being hit for extra tax etc when they backpay it.
I think it was hidden in the small print or not published from the start, however because we were in the three year deal, and therefore got our agreed rises on time during that period, it only came to light last April that it was linked and we would have to wait. It is far from ideal, including that it counts towards the increase as 1) agencies like dwp have staff that go in at the higher rate (im thinking work coach at circa 30k versus pso at circa 26/7k) we have to wait for the raise over the length of the scale and 2) if you are at the top of the scale you get a lower % because the scale take a load of the budget whereas if it wasn’t then we’d all get a higher %
ReplyDelete