« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »
February 28, 2008
OUR INCREMENTS
All branches were asked by Napo HQ to seek a meeting with local board chairs to establish the area’s view on the payment of increments from 1st April in line with the pay agreement. This was in light of a statement made by the employer’s body, the PBA, that:
'The Employers have stated that their position was reached following consultation with representatives from all Probation Areas.'
We wrote to the chief officer in the first instance and he replied that it was his understanding that the last pay agreement was completed and the payment of contractual increments would be subject to the new pay negotiations. He said that HPA would be guided by the PBA.
We responded by saying that Napo's clear view is that all Areas should honour the last pay agreement. The chief officer was provided with the contents of the recent briefing paper from Napo which sets out in some detail why we assert that increments should be paid from this April and not to do so puts HPA in breach of the Pay Agreement that became effective in April 2005.’
This is how Napo sees the 2005 Agreement:
The NNC Agreement provides for a clear expectation on the part of employees that pay progression will form an ongoing and permanent feature of their pay arrangements. There is nothing in the Agreement suggesting that the current arrangements lapse after 31/3/08.
There are various references to increments in the Agreement as follows:
Para 3.4: “Within each pay band there are a number of pay points to allow pay progression in post(See Appendix C: NNC Salary Spines). Pay progression is applicable annually, on 1April.”
Para 4.7: “Pay progression, which is applicable annually on 1 April,…”
Para 4.11: “There will be a normal expectation of progression subject to satisfactory performance
Para 5.1: “There will be a common pay progression date of 1 April for all employees.”
There has been no specific response from the chief officer in relation to the above. We have been told, though, that the Board Chair, Mike Fisher, is unable to meet with this branch before the pay negotiations resume. Therefore, we can only conclude that HPA remains under the guidance of the PBA which in its turn reached its view on increments after consulting with all the areas. Ultimately this is about the employers making choices and at the moment they are choosing not to pay the increments. Wouldn’t it be justice if the unions chose to say the harmonisation of annual leave was part of the last pay agreement?
So that’s where we are at present.
Possible consequences for members:
Lower take home pay
Delaying the payment of this year’s increments will have a specific impact on lowering the take home pay of probation staff. The increased contributions to the Local Government Pension Scheme, worth between 0.5% and 0.8% for most staff, come into effect from 1 April. (This will average between £16 - £20 each month)
Breach of Good Faith
The Pay Modernisation Agreement introduced a new modernised package of pay and conditions that benefited the Employers as well as staff. Staff benefited from improved pay rates based on job evaluation, with many staff who had been previously on the maximum of their pay band having the opportunity to obtain a higher pay band maximum, albeit via incremental progression. The Employers benefited from the harmonised terms of conditions including the harmonisation of annual leave.
If the Employers at this stage threaten the integrity of the new pay bands by threatening incremental progression, then staff will rightly feel that the Employers have broken faith with them and with the spirit of the Agreement.
Morale
Probation staff are facing threats and change on many fronts. It is accepted by bodies such as the Probation Inspectorate and the National Audit Office that the Probation Service and its staff are working harder and more efficiently than ever.
The Employers are asked to consider the implications for morale if they, the staff’s own Employers, take the unprecedented step of holding back and implicitly threatening, staff’s annual increment. Such a step would clearly not be one that the Treasury had asked the Employers to take, but a step of their own volition.
Industrial Relations
We are hearing informed views that the harder line on automatic increments has been taken because of the new culture among the slimmed-down Boards, which comprise a higher ratio of members from the private sector. It’s difficult to think of a better strategy for the demotivation of staff. The calls for raising performance get louder, but concerns about the payment of salaries in line with the pay agreement does not bring about a meeting with the board chair or a clear statement from HPA as to where it stands on the payment of increments – in which direction is it seeking to influence the PBA is the unanswered question.
There will be more news after the 4th March which is when the unions and employers next meet.
Posted by Hampshire at 03:26 PM | Comments (0)
February 25, 2008
BUDGETS: BETTER NEWS
BR 13/2008
JMcK/JH
25 February 2008
To: Branch Chairs and Secretaries
CAFCASS Co-Convenors (for information)
Dear Colleague
Probation Service – Budget Increase
Napo has been informed that over the weekend Ministerial action has been taken to ensure a significant increase in the Probation Service budget.
Although we are still awaiting the precise details, Roger Hill has assured us that it is “substantial new money” from the Treasury and that the increase will be sufficient to fill all vacancies, stop redundancies and employ all TPOs.
The increase will need to be at least £40m this coming year to reverse the impact of the flat cash settlement, which effectively meant a 5% cut, and we will also need to see the size of the increase for the following two years.
It is not yet clear when we will have a statement with more information but branches will be notified as soon as we hear.
Clearly the crisis in the Prison Service and Jack Straw’s request to magistrates to increase the use of community sentences brought matters to a head. It was helped by the fact that this received a chorus of voices, not just ours, saying that Probation was also full.
I attach for information a copy of a letter I sent to Jack Straw on Friday, itself enclosing a copy of a letter I sent to the Guardian.
We have been told that Jack Straw is now assured of the effectiveness of the Probation Service and was impressed by the recent NAO Report on Community Sentences.
More information will follow, and clearly we need to see the details, but it sounds like good news!
Yours sincerely,
Judy McKnight
General Secretary
Posted by Hampshire at 03:07 PM | Comments (0)
February 24, 2008
LOCAL BRANCH OFFICIAL UNDER INVESTIGATION
A Hampshire and Isle of Wight branch official has been charged with bullying and harassing a member of senior management. We have been informed that the chief officer has appointed an investigator to carry out a formal investigation.
There have been significant differences between Napo and HPA in recent times – over, for example, the privatisation of court reports, breaches of the ECU policy, the recruitment method used for assistant directors, the sickness absence policy. We had our Napo email facility withdrawn because the chief and the board objected to our account of events. It has been restored in much diminished form.
We regard the taking of formal action against a union official as unreasonable and unnecessary. To use a formal investigation in circumstances which are essentially about disagreements rooted in policy, rather than personal differences, harms industrial relations.
As a branch we see it as unfair and unjust to isolate one of our officials in this way. We will keep members informed of developments and we ask for your solidarity.
Posted by Hampshire at 07:19 PM | Comments (0)
February 23, 2008
Posted by Hampshire at 03:27 PM | Comments (0)
PROBATION IN CRISIS
22nd February 2008
The Right Honourable Jack Straw MP
Secretary of State for Justice
Ministry of Justice
Selbourne House
54-60 Victoria Street
London SW1E 6QW
Dear Jack
Following your reported comments on the Prisons’ crisis in today’s Guardian, I attach, for your information, a copy of a letter I today sent to the Guardian Editor.
Napo welcomes your recognition of the effectiveness of the Probation Service in reducing re-offending and supports your encouragement to magistrates to consider the use of community sentences in place of custodial sentences.
The current resources crisis facing the Service however means there is a very real danger that magistrates will get frustrated when they find that Probation Services are no longer able to support all the community sentences they may seek to impose.
As stated in the attached letter, it will take some years to build new prisons. You could however have an instant impact on the viability of Probation Service provision by urgently finding the necessary resources to reverse the cuts currently in hand.
If the Service continues as planned, to lose around 500 experienced operational staff in this financial year and another 2000 in the next two years, the Service will develop a skills gap from which it will take many years to recover. This skills gap will be compounded further by the loss of current Trainee Probation Officers, many of whom are already being told they will no have jobs when they qualify.
You were the Home Secretary who took action to address the “Howard Gap” when you came to office in 1997. You will therefore understand the importance of acting quickly if another similar gap is to be prevented.
Given the current crisis in the prison capacity, please consider how you might act as a matter of urgency to prevent a similar crisis in the capacity of the Probation Service.
Yours sincerely
JUDY McKNIGHT
General Secretary
The Editor
The Guardian,
119 Farringdon Road
LONDON EC1R 3ER
22 February 2008
Dear Editor
The Probation Service is Full
Jack Straw’s praise for the work of the Probation Service, (22 February), and his appeal to magistrates to use non-custodial sentences instead of short-term prison sentences, is welcome, but needs to be backed up by the necessary cash and resources.
Not only are prisons full, but the Probation Service is also full. Cuts in Probation resources mean that many Services are struggling to fulfil their statutory duties.
This position is set to get worse over the next two years as the Service is losing approximately 500 qualified staff this financial year and around 2000 more in the next two financial years. Trainee Probation Officers, whose training costs are £76,000 each, are being told they will have no job when they qualify.
The imminent loss of skilled and trained staff from the Probation Service is set to lead to a major skills gap from which it will take many years to recover.
It takes years to build new prisons, but if Jack Straw moves quickly to reverse the cuts, the Probation Service skills gap could be prevented and the Service could very quickly stand ready once again to provide the full range of community sentences.
Judy McKnight
General Secretary
Napo
Posted by Hampshire at 02:47 PM | Comments (0)
February 17, 2008
INCREMENTS - OUR CONTRACTUAL RIGHT
Web log of Napo's general secretary
February 15, 2008
Annual Increments
The Probation Service Employers have indicated that at the March
National Negotiating Council, (NNC), they are likely to say that, instead of paying increments in the normal - and agreed - way from 1 April, they intend to hold them back and include them in the 2008 pay negotiations. They accept that they are a contractual right and have said that when it is agreed how much the increments should be, they will be then paid retrospectively from 1 April 2008.
I have been personally outraged by the possibility of this ploy which keeps a little more money in Probation Areas budgets for a few more months, at the expense of Probation staff.
This is the not the way for our Employers to raise morale and win the hearts and minds of staff who have never been performing harder or more effectively, despite the uncertainty generated by the constant changes and reforms.
This position has not yet been formalised, and we still hope that Probation Areas might change their mind before the NNC meeting.
We have therefore sent a briefing to Branches asking them to meet with Probation Area Chairs to put the case for increments to be paid in the normal way.
If the Employers don’t budge, we might well need to consider industrial action this year.
I still hope that it won’t be necessary, but members will need to consider if it is right to sit back if the Employers were to act in such a shabby way.
Here is a copy of the Briefing sent to Branches
Posted by Hampshire at 02:42 PM | Comments (0)
February 16, 2008
PROBATION TRUSTS
We are going to hear a lot about probation trusts. The word ‘trust’ has become common in recent years: think of NHS trusts and primary care trusts. In all the talk about the failed Noms (and Noms has failed disastrously and expensively – failed in its mission and its vision, but it was a nice little earner for a while) there was the idea of probation trusts. The reason why probation boards must mutate is because the environment has changed. The public environment has been marketised, not quite a Macdonaldisation, but an environment in which the buzz words are choice and competition. And the language is the language of business, not the language of public service, public good. As we have tired of hearing: private is better than public – it delivers, it’s more efficient, it gives value for money. This, of course, is more to do with assertion than evidence. We all know that saying private is better than public is an ideological statement. Northern Rock being bailed out by the taxpayer is one part of the reality, which stacks up against other failures, such as Railtrack. And, of course – the 1.5 billion wasted on Noms!
The fact is the public services have been ‘infected’ with the dogmas of the market – that’s the reality. You may believe that private companies deliver better service and value than public services, but anyone who has had recent experiences of dealing with the private utilities may differ. The truth is NHS trust hospitals have not transformed the health service – the standards have not changed that much and it remains risky going to hospital for fear of MRSA, etc, or being held for hours in an ambulance outside an hospital because A&E won't let you in until they are sure they can meet their 4-hour target. So much for choice! There is no choice in a system that is operating at full capacity and there is no role for real commissioning when, as in the prison and probation systems, demand outstrips supply.
There are some voices, and they have been heard in probation, that rhapsodise about cutting costs, getting the service cheaper (value for money?), working the staff harder. And the premise is: if we don’t do it someone will come along and do it cheaper. There you have the justification for the sweatshop! Competition can make us all more brutal. At least in this country we have the minimum wage, which is something the private sector never wanted. The minimum wage is about values, ethics and fairness. The terms and conditions of employment of probation staff were not God given, but achieved by your predecessors – hard fought for and we should fight hard in their defence when they are being attacked. ECU is a case in point; and the line the employers are taking in relation to the payments of increments in April is cynical. The paymaster can always withhold pay. The worker can always withhold labour. This is the essential nature of the relationship, unfortunately, in the current climate.
Now probation faces it next ‘great leap forward’ into trusts. We may be punch drunk from hearing about Noms and being told how essential C-Nomis is, but all that’s history. The show must go on, you must be enthusiastic about probation trusts – it’s the only show in town. And if you are not with us on this, then you are against us, against delivering a better probation service. Well, let’s hope there is a mature discussion about what becoming a probation trust is going to mean in real terms and why it matters.
We will hear much more about trust status in the months ahead. There are documents attached to this note that detail the ‘freedoms’ that will be given to 1st wave trusts, and they don’t amount to that much at this stage and as you can see in the other document there is a wish list for trust freedoms – and among them is a wish to see an end to national collective bargaining on pay.
HPA has not engaged in any formal discussion with Napo on their application for trust status, which is disappointing. We trust they will sooner rather than later, as we have several curiosities’. We would like to hear about the advantages and disadvantages of becoming a trust; we would like to know what is meant exactly by 'business-focused/oriented trust’(see the download on 'managerialism'); we would like to know whether it will affect pay structures, we would like to know how much will be spent on ‘becoming a trust’, on the rebranding of Hampshire Area; we would like to know, in the event of trust status, who will be in charge. At a time when members are seeing their allowances eroded because HPA must make ‘saving’ by cutting allowances, then in the interests of transparency, we should know how much is all this going to cost.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with public sector reform or change. But what does the probation service really need? The National Audit Commission was closer to the truth than any rhetoric about trusts is likely to be. It noted:
“The commitment of Probation Staff to their challenging and important jobs was clear in all the local Probation Areas we visited, but high case loads impact negatively on the motivation of Probation staff and may undermine the quality of offender supervision’
And this is all about resources. In all the talk of high ideals and trusty ambitions you are not likely to hear much about resources. No, you will just be told to work harder and perform better. The truth is we are underfunded and overworked, but that’s like saying the emperor has no clothes on.
Posted by Hampshire at 10:07 PM | Comments (0)
February 14, 2008
INCREMENTS - EMPLOYERS RENEGE
You should have expected to receive increments in your pay packet from the 1st April, but you won't, because the employers have decided not to pay increments, even though they accept that there is a contractual right to increments from 1st April. This is what was meant to happen as a result of the last pay agreement that Napo members voted to approve:
‘Once staff have been placed within a pay band, each year, on 1 April, they will move up the pay scale through incremental points within the band, until they reach the band maximum.’
What they are now saying is that increments must form part of this years pay negotiations. Apparently the employers nationally consulted with all the probation areas.
The Branch has written to Barrie Crook, chief officer, seeking an answer to the following question:
Is Hampshire Probation Area going to ensure that the current agreement on incremental progression is honoured with effect from 1 April 2008?
This is your money - it's your contractual right.
In the meantime, like episodes from Life on Mars, you will be regaled with briefings about mission statements, visions and values in the dash for trust status – but there will not be mention of pay or the erosion of your terms and conditions. In the real world it's your bank statement, not mission statement, that's makes the difference. We need to make pay 'on message', defend our terms and conditions and not be distracted by corporate visionaries promising a better future...
In April, as a result of the pension changes, on average about £16 to £20 more will be taken in deductions from your pay packets. That’s what would be called a lose-lose situation. There will be more information available in early March when Napo's NEC next meets.
Posted by Hampshire at 06:14 PM | Comments (0)
February 11, 2008
PROBATION UPDATE: FROM ROM TO DOM
Probation Service - News Update FROM GENERAL SECRETARY
There have been a number of developments on a range of issues in recent days.
I will be issuing a circular to branches but here it is in a draft form:
1) MoJ Restructuring
Attending the Prison Service Conference last week provided a few more insights on what the restructured NOMS might mean for the Probation Service.
Information received included:
• "New" NOMS will be an agency from 1 April 2008;
• The plan was to promote the Prisons Service and the Probation Service rather than NOMS;
• The aim is to get rid of duplication of civil servants at national and regional level; the aim is to save £20m in NOMS - including regional offices - over an unspecified time;
• The aim is to replace commissioning which, we heard, is more suitable when demand does not outstrip supply, with contracts and SLAs, (Service Level Agreements);
• There will still be a role for some competition;
• The new regional structure will be based on collapsing Prison Area Managers with ROMS into one office by April 2010; the new regional boss will be known as a Director of Offender Management, DOM; in the meantime in Wales the current DOM will manage prisons and in London the ROM will go, leaving the Chief Officer to run Probation and the Area Manager to run Prisons;
• Under Phil Wheatley as Chief Executive, prisons and probation staff will work to a Chief Operations Officer, who will probably be Michael Spur;
• Under the Chief Operations Officer, Chief Officers will report to Roger Hill as Director of Probation; (clearly some aspects of this governance model still need addressing, as under Trusts, Chief Executives are supposed to be line managed by the Chair of the local Trust rather than NOMS);
• Centralisation of the current NOMS functions will mean Probation Human Resources, (HR), will merge with Prisons HR.
Whilst the new structures are clearly still very much at a developmental stage, they seem, subject to ensuring that the Probation voice and presence continues to be heard loud and clear, to have the potential for providing a more rational structure than the previous NOMS.
Napo will continue however to make the case for ensuring that the Probation voice is not lost in the new structures.
2) Workloads
We have held various meetings to take forward the workloads issues in the light of the AGM resolution calling for industrial action if workloads are not addressed.
PACU have now agreed to convene a seminar with Union representatives along with the Employers and a selection of Chief Officers to identify action that could be taken to reduce workloads.
Phil Wheatley, at last week’s Prison Service Conference, also acknowledged the current workloads crisis facing the Probation Service., and spoke of the need to urgently address costings issues for the Service. He also said that priorities needed to be determined at the centre, and that any other action would jeopardise public protection.
The recent National Audit Office report on Community Orders is also helpful to our workloads campaign, recognising as it does the growing workloads problem for the Service.
In Para 4.3 it states:
“The commitment of Probation Staff to their challenging and important jobs was clear in all the local Probation Areas we visited, but high case loads impact negatively on the motivation of Probation staff and may undermine the quality of offender supervision.”
Branches will be kept informed of the outcome of the Seminar which is planned to be held prior to the March NEC meeting.
3) Training
A more detailed circular is being issued updating on developments on training, and the fact that Ministers are now considering whether the development of the new training qualification, originally planned for introduction this year, should be deferred for another year.
We have made representations to the effect that if the new training arrangements are deferred, then it is important that there is no training gap. In addition to ensuring another cohort of TPOs, it will be it will also be important to address the training needs of PSOs.
4) Cuts
I will soon be circulating a further letter sent to David Hanson on a range issues including the impact of cuts on the Service.
5) Pay
Joint Secretarial discussions are being held this week on our pay claim and on the issue of increments. A further report will follow.
Posted by jmcknight at February 11, 2008 08:59 AM
Posted by Hampshire at 09:29 PM | Comments (0)
February 09, 2008
EMAIL THE BRANCH IN CONFIDENCE
Posted by Hampshire at 07:17 PM | Comments (0)
CAR PARKING
This item was placed on the agenda for our planned meeting with HR on 08/2/08, but the chief officer, Barrie Crook, cancelled the meeting. Napo has upset HPA again by submitting written objections to the minutes of our meeting with HR last December. We have ‘trust and confidence’ issues with HR arising, in part, from the ECU debacle and the continuing mess of the sickness policy which is still resulting in unfair treatment and wrong guidance.
We don’t know when HPA will decide to meet with the trade unions again. Last July the chief officer removed car parking from the negotiations on ECU and promised that a separate review, involving the unions, would take place last autumn. It never took place and HPA have shown no interest in the subject since. There is a supposed deadline approaching at the end of March. Those members who have already lost ECU now face the loss of car parking permits. It is of note that when it comes to gaining trust status there will be roadshows and briefings but when it’s about the erosion of terms and conditions – silence.
Another Area whose decisions resulted in some staff having ECU withdrawn agreed to pay, as a goodwill gesture, all the parking costs for those staff who agreed to continue to use their cars for business purposes. We did ask HPA to follow this example, but they declined.
Had the meeting with HR taken place as planned we would have asked:
How many staff and what grade of staff are likely to be denied parking permits?
Were any staff promised car parking permits at interview?
How many staff receive free office parking?
Are you intending to impact assess the proposed changes, in relation to disability and other equalities issues?
Are there any health and safety risks associated with the proposed changes?
Members who believe that at their job interview they were given an undertaking that they would have their parking paid will need to consider a grievance route.
Members who choose to adopt casual user status and who show through their mileage that they are on course to reach the annual 500 miles threshold should apply now for ECU.
Members who are obliged to cease using their cars for business purposes should ensure that travelling time for business purposes is acknowledged by their line managers as the ECU policy makes it clear that time is a consideration that must be part of any judgement about efficiency. We will resist any extra hours of work being piled on members by default.
We trust that HPA will meet with the unions as soon as possible to address what is a very important issue to all those members affected.
Posted by Hampshire at 07:02 PM | Comments (0)
NATIONAL DISABLED STAFF NETWORK - CONFERENCE 17-18/03/08
The National Disabled Staff Network
Working to remove institutional barriers and empower disabled staff and service users in NOMS, the Probation Service and CAFCASS.
Conference 17 – 18 March 2008
Disability Equality – The Reality
Hayes Conference Centre, Swanick, Alfreton, Derbyshire
The speakers at this year’s NDSN Conference include Helen Edwards, Director General for Criminal Justice and Offender Management Strategy, Christine Lawrie, Chief Executive of the Probation Boards Association and Judy McKnight, OBE, General Secretary of Napo.
The Conference is open to all on the first day when in addition to speakers there will be a range of workshops covering a variety of topics including Reasonable Adjustments, Equality Impact Assessments and Sickness Absence/Disability leave. The second day is reserved for disabled staff.
The Conference will provide invaluable support for Areas in respect of their own Disability Equality Schemes and the requirement to evidence the ‘genuine and influential involvement’ of disabled people.
Chief Probation Officers are being requested to support both Managers and disabled staff to attend and to publicize the event. NOMS is meeting the cost of the Conference but Areas will be asked to meet the cost of travel to the event.
Further information about the conference can be obtained electronically from:
maria.lenn@london.probation.gsi.gov.uk tel: 020 7740 8556
Contact details for NDSN Co-Chairs:
David Quarmby: quarmby@ntlworld.com tel: 07736 087019
Desiree Leete: desiree.leete@devon-cornwall.probation.gsi.gov.uk
tel: 01392 861538
Posted by Hampshire at 06:08 PM | Comments (0)
PSO CONFERENCE - 21/05/08
6 February 2008
TUO 04/2008
JL/CG
To: Branch Chairs and Secretaries
PSO Forum Members
Cc: TUO Committee
Officers and Officials
NEC Co-Reps
Dear Colleague,
PSO Conference 2008
I am writing to inform you of the arrangements for this year’s PSO Conference.
It is taking place on:
Wednesday 21st May 2008
10.00am to 4.30pm
at Friends House 173 Euston Road, London NW1 2BJ
The title of this year’s Conference is still to be confirmed. However, speakers and workshops will be addressing the newly developed training arrangements for probation staff and a forum will be provided for members to raise issues arising at their workplace and discuss ways of resolving those concerns.
This Conference is open to all members of a PSO grade, including hostel members, regardless of the Band in which they are paid. Branches are asked to pay the travelling costs of members attending - lunch and refreshments will be provided.
Further details and a registration form will be provided in due course. In the meantime Branches are requested to bring this Circular to the attention of PSO members and ensure they are aware of the date of the Conference.
Any questions regarding this Circular should be addressed to me or Cynthia Griffith at Chivalry Road.
Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Ledger
Assistant General Secretary
Posted by Hampshire at 06:06 PM | Comments (0)
February 08, 2008
CAR HIRE: NAPO ADVICE
There is no agreement that Napo members will fill the tank up at their own expense and you should not need to anyway as it's a full tank which is likely to cover most journeys.
Members cannot be compelled to fill the tank after usage. Aside from the compulsion issue, you may not be able to afford it and the current 'finance expectation' seems to be based on the assumption that everyone has disposable income all the time and can happily wait over a month before being reimbursed through expenses. And what are those who cannot afford it suppose to do? Plead hardship? Submit to means testing? Apply to the Edridge Fund? It really is an amazing assumption that members are expected to bear the cost. Ironically you are expected to fill the tank, but if you need lunch, for example, during your prison visit, you won’t get any subsistence!
This passing of the burden to staff may make for easy administration, but it's unreasonable to do this at the expense of members. It is for HPA to devise a system that does not place yet another demand on members. And there are other ways.
Napo has made its position clear on this in past formal meeting with HPA.
The car is required to arrive with a full tank; make your journey and return the car. If Finance wants you to fill the tank get the money in advance from petty cash, but do not feel obligated to fill the tank at your own expense. And if any member feels institutional pressures to do so, please let Napo know straightaway. If HPA want to stop you using hire cars because you cannot refill the tank, then let them provide taxis instead. But do not feel compelled to fill the tank at your own expense as, in our view, HPA are acting unreasonably. They never agreed their guidelines with the Unions and remember: they are only ‘guidelines’, they are not legal tenets. Next time you get a note from Finance, to save time, 'cut and paste' this advice back to the sender.
Posted by Hampshire at 08:39 PM | Comments (0)
February 06, 2008
SICKNESS LOTTERY - JOINT STATEMENT
Last October we agreed a Joint Statement with HPA in an effort to improve the management of sickness absence and to bring local practices in line with nationally agreed principles of fairness and diversity; and to make decision-making about referral to unsatisfactory absence procedures part of a judgment and not a reflex to hitting the 12-day trigger. Below, you can see the note issued by the chief officer last year and you can download a copy of the statement. The way the policy operates remains unfair, not least as some staff are still being automatically referred to formal stages merely on the basis of triggers. There remains a determination by HPA to mix up short and long-term absences – and to count retrospectively. As it operates in Hampshire you could have a period of sickness absence dealt with under the long-term procedure and then if within the next twelve months you have a single day sickness you could be referred to formal procedures. I think that’s tantamount to double jeopardy – a principle that is meant to safeguard a person from being judged twice. But it’s the same with retrospection! And the Impact Assessment? – still waiting… The policy implementation remains unbalanced. We need firmness and fairness in the management of sickness absence. If you are told that you are going to be referred to a Stage 1 on the basis of hitting the 12-day trigger, please let Napo know and we will ask HR to examine the referral in light of the Joint Statement on sickness management. We believe automatic referral is a breach of the agreed policy; and we believe such a practice runs the risk of being insensitive to diversity and other considerations. (Paragraph 80 - sickness management policy)
Message from Barrie Crook, Chief Officer: 23/10/07
"Staff will be aware that there have been ongoing discussions between NAPO, UNISON and management on the implementation of the new sickness policy.
I am pleased to say that a joint statement has now been agreed that addresses the issues that were causing most concern ie:
• how absences are 'counted back' within the policy
• how absences over 21 days are counted within the short term part of the policy
• the status of the policy
• the operation of the policy: in particular the level of discretion of a line manager in calling a meeting under Stage One of the policy when a trigger point has been met (please note there are some important changes here which you may wish to familiarise yourselves with)
• impact assessment of the policy
I hope this statement will clarify issues for staff: if you have any queries, please address them to Christine Straw, Director of HR, in the first instance.
Posted by Hampshire at 08:41 AM | Comments (0)
February 03, 2008
WORKPLACE BULLYING: SEEK NAPO ADVICE
Posted by Hampshire at 05:46 PM | Comments (0)
PROBATION CUTS:PETITION: Please click on the link and add to the Downing Street petition.
"The government claims to be 'tough on crime', yet has placed the Probation Service on a 3 year flat cash budget, meaning the Service receives exactly the same budget for the next 3 years and does not allow for annual pay increments or inflation costs. This is resulting in staff redundancies and recruitment freezes; the result of which is likely to be the compromise of public protection. The Probation Service needs to be staffed and funded to an adequate level in order for offenders and the risks they pose to be properly supervised and monitored. At a time when Probation workloads are increasing with more offenders being supervised within the community (particularly in view of the prison overcrowding crisis) it makes no sense to restrict the Probation Service in such a way. Help to ensure you and those you care about are protected from crime and its effects by supporting this petition for the government to review their decision on Probations budget." http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/probationbudget/
Posted by Hampshire at 03:19 PM | Comments (0)
February 01, 2008
NAPO NEWS: WORKLOADS, NOMS, SICKNESS POLICY
WORKLOADS: We had meetings earlier this week to discuss the new workload weighting tool and the revised staff care agreement. They are both critical policies that to be effective must work together - two sides of the same coin. The two meetings were useful and whilst we are not yet at the point of reaching agreement, both sides to the discussions are more or less traveling in the same direction. We are content to see the proposed model piloted and that will be undertaken in Southampton, Portsmouth and Havant, but this is because we want to see what data it gathers and we will want to hear from members whether the feedback they receive on their workloads reflects the working reality. We need to emphasise that the tool being piloted has not been agreed with the Unions. It's a pilot that will hopefully aid developments and discussions - towards agreeing a final version. The tool records; it's the staff care policy and procedures that manages the workload information and seeks to ensure there is a match between workloads and resources.
NOMS: It is difficult to know what to say about the latest twists in the sorry tale of NOMs. How many times can it be reincarnated? Four years on from the Carter Report and the heady days of metamorphoses, the only thing that has really been going through the repeated birth agonies is NOMs. It is estimated that NOMs has cost 1.5 billion since 2005 - Napo says the NOMs budget has risen 556 per cent since 2005. NOMs employ 1600 staff and it's difficult to see what benefits frontline services have gained from its 900 million administrative budget. Against these inflated figures the probation service faces 12 per cent cuts over the next three years.
The new head of the 'restructured' NOMs is the former director general of the prison service. Whitehall sources are saying,’ its game, set and match to the prison service.’ The ROMS will be merged with area prison managers; there are reports that the purchaser-provider split for the probation service have been further downgraded, and that end to end management may not apply to all offenders. But all is bound to become clearer once the mud settles.
SICKNESS POLICY: This is a reminder that it is in your interests, whether short or long-term sickness absence, to get advice before agreeing to arrangements with your employer. You can get advice from HR if you are unclear about something, though you should always ask for written advice. We hear of cases where members go it alone and in simple cases that may be all fine and well, but it never does any harm to seek advice beforehand. If you get into a pickle or regret agreeing to something down the line then you may well find yourself with chickens coming home to roost.
Posted by Hampshire at 05:52 PM | Comments (0)