Monday, 26 October 2026

Revisit

Just recently this forum has moved at a cracking pace and on a number of fronts, but in the process I think much tends not to register, so on occasion I think it's useful to revisit:-

Original comment listed in the article raises a number of very valid points, especially around inexperienced practitioners becoming SPOs. Seeing this happen with astonishing frequency, meaning that when practitioner's go to discuss case issues they aren't able to answer or have an idea who they could contact to clarify. We are compounding a dangerous situation, with the inexperienced leading the inexperienced.

****
Corporate bullying has become much more subtle in recent years with them adapting a lawfare type approach……present a problem and you are the only one, with it…or so you are told…..ask an inexperienced SPO to make a 50/50 decision and most will have to ask their manager or ask you to ask them….we live under constant threat of capability proceedings or if we work to our hours, we are somehow letting the side down, probation is fuelled by goodwill, remove that and who knows what would happen……..

****
"Local delivery is important, but structures alone won’t restore the profession. That requires leadership which values experience, encourages constructive challenge, understands frontline realities and recognises that professional expertise is not confined to those occupying management positions."

And therein lies one of the biggest hurdles - getting those with authority & influence to accept that centralising, privatising & re-unifying probation services was a total fuck up. This requires 'the centre' to openly admit that their raison d'etre was - and is - not just flawed, but built on years of lies, fabricated evidence & abusive practice.

It all followed on from the initial decisions to centralise in 1999 (new choreography), impose central control (noms), embed privatisation in law (OMA2007) and the subsequent ideological lunacy of 2013/4 whereby noms/hmpps intentionally targetted existing experienced staff & threw hundreds overboard. Why? It was essentially an attempt to remove &/or manage the discontented, the nay-sayers & those who voiced concerns: "take the money or we'll manage you out with nothing."

Using public funds (£80+million provided by the Cabinet Office) they facilitated a mass redundancy scheme (money the CRC owners misappropriated in most cases)... a scheme the unions signed off on, then in a fit of delayed guilt felt they ought to go for judicial review, realised they were hoist by their own petard, & hastily withdrew:

"• In February 2015, NAPO (the trade union and professional association for family court and probation staff) instituted a judicial review challenging the legality of the government's Transforming Rehabilitation contracts for the 21 community rehabilitation companies (CRCs).
• NAPO subsequently withdrew the judicial review and was ordered to pay the substantive costs of the legal proceedings."

****
The dialogue and subsequent comments says it all. Probation has become a poisonous, ‘them and us’ organisation. It will never recover what it previously delivered. The OFPS guarantees that PO’s will be sat delivering the Janet and John supervision model forever, using proscribed supervision sessions developed by people with no probation experience. I have the privilege to be able to evidence different roles completed such as community, resettlement, custody, IOM and a specialist role. A lot of those up the greasy pole do not have that experience and look at people like me as a challenge and threat. I am no threat I don’t want to progress I have enjoyed my probation experience. I have experience of managing at another organisation took a redundancy package that meant I was comfortable and able to take the pay drop to become a PO. I have previously had experienced SPOs and Senior Managers. 

But things change and we work in a change environment. Unfortunately though it has not changed for the best, TR messed it completely and now we have SPOs and Senior Managers with no V or HROSH case management and hate it when their decisions evidence that limited knowledge, especially in the MAPPA arena, not understanding parole processes or registration for specific offences. It is embarrassing at times when you see a COM or POM advising them of their errors. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time in probation, the highs the lows and the occasional conversation at the shops with people that I previously supervised both in the community and custody on community orders and licence. I don’t know if the new generation will have that experience or even make it passed ten years.

****
Re Probation has become poisonous. I posted this earlier on the post Our Future is Local.“The comments posted above just shows that HMPPS continues to operate with impunity. Two years after the Rademaker Review was completed we still have no change. Nor will there ever be.”.

In 20 something starting in PS, the working environment and the incompetence of managers was something of a culture shock. Got worse when I moved across to Sentence Management. Toxic, toxic, toxic. SPOs could talk the talk, but didn’t walk the talk. When challenging a SPO on how I was to achieve all the mandates of the National Standards with my caseload and not been given the required time to complete certain training without a caseload, the SPO actually said to me that National Standards was Probation myth and legend and didn’t exist. This was a SPO who spent his most of his day scouring the internet for news, properties on the market, sourcing companies to do renovations for his house, finding ammunition for his personal vendetta against former CRC SPO and the list goes on. This happened each and every day he was in office until his appearances in office eventually became an occasion to celebrate. I took great delight in getting an electronic copy of the National Standards and sending it to him saying here we go, not a Probation myth or legend. A lot of blustering later but no apology.

I do acknowledge that a lot of the PDU culture is down to the leadership (or lack thereof) at PDU level. The ‘Queen Bee Syndrome’ can be very prevalent in some PDUs. Yet other PDUs have wonderful and inspired leaders. These are the exception. Is a shame as the bad grapes should never have been promoted to ACOs. God only knows how they do the selection criteria.

I still cannot understand to this day as to how they (SPOs) knowingly are complicit in overworking and whipping staff (idiomatic metaphor) to achieve the performance metrics. They know it is impossible within current staff shortfalls of at least 25%, unmanageable caseloads for a 37 hour week forcing uncompensated overtime for those officers whose motivation is intrinsic. This, stagnant pay, as well as withholding of CBF and extensive delays of annual pay awards are systematic exploitation. It amounts to constructive wage theft and moral injury. The system is only functioning by extracting unsustainable amounts of emotional and physical Labour from its ever dwindling remaining workforce. There is no gratitude. Only bullying, coercion and control.

****
Let’s bust the myth, there is no leadership in the PS, nothing that would be recognised by those who have leadership and management qualifications of which I am one. They even have leadership courses but again no really recognised qualifications. One of my former colleagues said that they promote the incompetent as a result the organisation fails, you can read as many policies as you want if you cannot interpret them positively then as a manager you have failed, do as I say is not management, because I am telling you to is not management, I was told you had to do it this way is not management. Leaving your team members to face an SFO because of your incompetence is not management. So no leadership and no management equals probation currently and all the experienced POs leaving.

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous25 October 2026 at 12:08

    “I’ve recently heard of retired and former heads of PDUs and senior managers returning as SPOs through the SPO returners scheme. What message does that send in remploying bullies, tyrants and yes-men when the profession needs renewal?

    At some point, we have to stop recycling the same leadership and expecting different results. Clear out the top shelf, issue eviction notices to those occupying the ivory tower, and start again with people who bring fresh thinking, courage and a genuine commitment to change.

    The pressures and challenges facing probation are not detached from its leadership. They have developed under many of the same faces and voices presiding over successive blows to the profession. And where is the space for a genuine diversity of age, gender, race, experience and ideas?

    Probation does not just need leaders who speak out. It needs different leaders, prepared to challenge the status quo and rebuild the profession rather than simply manage its decline.”

    ReplyDelete