« July 2008 | Main | September 2008 »
August 31, 2008
NAPO VICE - CHAIRS: BALLOT RESULT
Commiserations to Amy who came so close to winning a position.
Posted by Hampshire at 02:11 PM | Comments (0)
August 26, 2008
HAMPSHIRE AND ISLE OF WIGHT BRANCH MEETING MINUTES, FRIDAY 22 AUGUST 2008
BRANCH MEETING MINUTES, Town Quay, Friday 22nd August 2008
• Present & Apologies – In book
• Matters of accuracy – Noted that AGM minutes provided when should be Minutes of last Branch Meeting. These to be provided at next meeting and AGM Minutes agreed.
• Matters arising/Chair’s Report
Napo Recruitment/Activities discussed. AM fed back on national working party and recruitment drive to be held w/c 04/09/08. Draft leaflet available for Members to peruse and feedback requested. Any recruitment ideas to be forwarded to AM.
AM advised that changes to subscription rates being considered; to increase bandings so higher earners make increased contributions. Concerns raised that this may dissuade higher earners from joining Napo. Discussion followed.
Social event discussed and agreed that an annual social event be organized for Napo Hampshire Branch Members. TW to bring ideas and costings to next Branch Meeting.
AGM issues discussed. Confirmed that travel to Lladudno AGM this year to be by minibus due to cost constraints of alternative travel options. Minibus to be provided for AGM delegates. Alternative travel options will not be funded by Branch. TW to forward minibus travel arrangements to delegates.
Discussion regarding AGM attendance. Motion put to Branch:
THIS BRANCH AGREES THAT ANY MEMBER WISHING TO BE FUNDED TO ATTEND NAPO AGM SHOULD HAVE ATTENDED 50% OF BRANCH MEETINGS IN PRECEEDING YEAR. REASONABLE CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO SICK LEAVE, MATERNITY LEAVE AND TO NEW EMPLOYEES.
Motion carried unanimously.
Members agreed that this will be implemented as of 2008/09 year after Llandudno AGM. Agreed that any Member who does not meet the criteria and wishes to attend AGM may fund their own costs.
Integration of unpaid work into offender management discussed. TE raised concerns regarding this process and lack of training. Discussion regarding the extent of the problem – South West problem only? Similar issues in other areas of Hampshire noted. Noted that full integration to have taken place by 01/10/2008. Member has received letter with new job description outlining new role. Does not wish to sign agreement. Members feel unprepared for this role due to lack of training. Outline of historical rationale for integration discussed. Outline of recent grievance and general feelings of UPW and PSO staff discussed. Noted that some staff members have left the Service and that many UPW staff unhappy about integration of roles. Agreed that the primary issue is about staff having the necessary skills to do the work required. Noted that feedback regarding concerns to Napo Hampshire has previously been requested but none received. Noted that whole issue has been incompetently managed. Agreed that Members should be advised to continue submitting Hazard Reports where required. RM/GC/TW to put out note to Members to request feedback. If enough concern then issue will be formally taken up. Also to advise Members to complete Hazard Reports. Furthermore, Members to be reminded that unless they formally oppose new arrangements and job description, merely not signing agreement will not be sufficient.
HPA Recruitment practices discussed. Concerns regarding ‘Expression of Interest’ scheme. Vague process with no agreed procedure. No facility for monitoring or collecting data regarding DDA etc. Anecdotal evidence that sickness records have been taken into account when making appointments. Noted that new Internal Application Form being adopted – this an improvement. However, noted that Codes of Employment Procedure should be followed. Job offers should be made on best matching of competencies and duties. Sickness Management Policy must not be used in a prejudicial way.
Planned Transfer Policy discussed. RM/TW fed back on new Policy being discussed. Concerns noted regarding potential barriers to applications including vacancies arising outside of any 6 month period. Members agreed that preference should be given to following current Employment Procedure. RM/TW to bring proposals to next meeting.
Noted that HPA advertising posts with bottom of bandings detailed rather than banding ranges. Noted that this restrictive and misleading.
Job Evaluation concerns discussed. Outline of recent JE Panel (16/07/2008) concerns discussed. Concerns as previously noted in Paper published on Branch website. Concerns noted regarding management monopolizing JE Panel and attempting to pre-determine outcomes. Noted that union reps refused their travel expenses for JE Panel on 16/07/2008 due to their refusal to remain at a meeting where serious concerns regarding potential corruption of process.
Members discussed passing a Motion of No Confidence in HR dept. GC/RM felt this inappropriate at this time as HR/BC have agreed to meet in September to discuss concerns.
Members discussed Motion regarding concerns about the JE Panel agreement on 16/07/2008. Motion put to Branch:
THIS BRANCH EXPRESSES ITS SUPPORT FOR ITS REPRESENTATIVE WHO FELT, QUITE PROPERLY, UNABLE TO SIT ON THE JOB EVALUATION REVIEW PANEL ON THE 16TH JULY 2008. THE BRANCH RE-ASSERTS THE COLLABORATIVE PRINCIPLES OF JOB EVALUATION AND BELIEVES THAT THE RESULT OF THE PANEL ON THE 16TH JULY 2008 ARE INVALID. THE BRANCH CALLS FOR THESE POSTS TO BE REVIEWED AGAIN AT A PROPERLY CONVENED PANEL WITH BOTH MANAGEMENT AND UNION REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT.
Motion carried unanimously.
Noted that at JE Reviews bandings can be lowered as well as raised.
Workloads discussed. Feedback on Staff Care Agreement and new WMT given. Noted that unions and management moving closer to agreement. Next meeting mid-September.
Member raised concerns regarding TQ DRR workload. Noted that an Audit undertaken by Corporate Development and Support Manager (LO). However concerns that she is not PO qualified and thus, some lack of understanding regarding field practice. Therefore, concerns noted regarding Audit findings. DRR team members have requested copy of Audit and advised that findings will first be discussed between LO, Area and Team Managers before field staff can have access. Member has seen Report and noted that Audit findings do not seem to relate to TQ staff. Noted that Audit also of Portsmouth DRR team.
Concerns noted regarding Offender Manager Operational Manager (OMOM) post. Post not advertised thus contravenes current Employment Procedure guidelines. Concerns regarding legality of this post due to no specification that professional qualification required by post holder. Concerns also raised regarding OMOM managerial position in Southampton Court Team, thus line managing qualified field staff. Noted that Area Manager has confirmed that field staff will not be line managed by OMOM but by other unit SPOs until permanent Court Team SPO appointed. However, concerns that non-qualified staff are being appointed to these posts. To be raised at next JNCC.
Pay/ECU/Car parking discussed. Pay negotiations as detailed in Napo Pay Bulletins. Some optimism although consideration being given to ballot in September for industrial action in October. Continuing issues regarding development points in particular. Noted that BC states the most recent pay deal no longer in force. Members noted that if this is the case then Annual Leave requirement should revert to previously agreed 36 day entitlement.
ECU/Car parking discussed. Members advised to not complete consultation questionnaire. However, if wish to do so then to do so anonymously and send copy to Napo Branch. Noted that management have stated they will meet with union reps in September with a view to taking proposals to the Board in October. Concerns regarding timetable – time for consultation with unions? Discussed potential proposals as inferred in consultation questionnaire. Discounted car parking scheme discussed, to be paid back to HR over the financial year. Noted that this would incur cost to staff as well as financial loss due to losing ECU.
Branch discussion regarding instigating a local dispute on this issue. Members views sought on local ballot for industrial action, ie; withdrawal of vehicles. Agreed that all Members need to be consulted on potential for action. Workplace meetings to be held to gain consensual views. Also national advice to be sought to clarify local ballot process. (RM/GC/TW/AM to action). Noted that fast response will be required once proposals received. Noted that industrial action would be considered disruptive when Board going for Trust status.
Discussion regarding ECU car parking schemes in other Areas. ECU Buy out schemes discussed. Noted that buy outs varied between £400 and £3000 in other Areas. However, noted that we must act in the interests of current and future staff who do not/would not have ECU.
Noted that Branch may incur costs if national industrial action takes place.
Treasurer’s Report. Apologies from Treasurer – unable to attend however Treasurer’s Report provided. Healthy balance. Conference and quarterly grant received. However, conference will incur significant costs.
Membership Report. TE reported 268 serving and retired Members. Noted that Branch Meeting was quorate. TE fedback letters of thanks from 2 retiring Members to Branch for support they have received and for work undertaken for Members.
NEC matters discussed. MD fedback on NEC meeting. Advised the focus was on the pay negotiations. Advised the Strategic Review on the NEC structure was put back for discussion to next NEC. MD to provide written Report to Branch. Next NEC Meeting 03/09/2008. SC to attend.
Staffing/Local issues discussed. Noted that a Member has had her travel expenses to an interview at Friary House refused. This contravenes Employment Procedure. Member advised to request again and note their right to claim expenses.
Health & Safety Report. Apologies from H&S Rep. Unable to attend Branch Meeting. Report provided. Ongoing issues include;
Fleas at London Road office – PW has held meeting with S Chambers to discuss and action has been taken.
Corrosive substances at London Road office – PW has been in touch with AMEY regarding their practices.
Incident Reports regarding both issues have been forwarded to Napo HQ.
AOB
GFTU courses available to Members. List of courses available to Members. Contact Branch for further details.
Vote for Amy. Any Member who has not yet voted for Amy Milford in National Vice Chair election please do so. Branch supports Amy Milford.
Date of next meeting – Friday 21st November 2008 at 2pm at Cromwell House, Winchester.
Minutes in Word doc
Posted by Hampshire at 03:45 PM | Comments (0)
August 23, 2008
BRANCH MEETING ON 22 JULY - JE MOTION
The minutes of the branch meeting will follow in due course but we want to make members aware that at the branch meeting a motion was passed relating to the Job Evaluation Panel that was held on the 16th July. That was the panel where Napo and Unison Reps refused to participate because of serious concerns about the manner in which the JE scheme was being managed by HR. The panel went ahead in the absence of the unions – it was a panel drawn exclusively from the management side. Three posts were assessed: Business Manager, Operational Manager Offender Manager and Public Protection Prison Manager. The first two were ‘reviews’ and the prison post was a new post.
The Branch has made it clear that they fully support the action of their Napo Rep in refusing to sit on the panel and who, as we know, was emailed three weeks later, by the HR director, and informed that travelling expenses incurred on the 16th July would not be reimbursed! The JE Scheme does not belong to HPA – it is founded on the principle of joint-ownership between management and the unions. And we, for our part, understand the meaning of ownership.
The branch motion rejects the findings reached by the management panel that sat on the 16th. That panel was not properly convened, lacked legitimacy and therefore its findings are nullities.
Posted by Hampshire at 12:28 PM | Comments (0)
IT'S THE 2003 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT, STUPID.
Prison reform has been hastily implemented, underfunded and has left record numbers behind bars, MPs said in a scathing report.
The Commons justice committee found Labour's flagship criminal justice reforms had been a "significant contributor" to prison overcrowding.
"We urge the government to address sentencing policy in a more considered and systematic way and to reconsider the merits of this trend," the cross-party committee of MPs said.
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 was the centerpiece of government plans for delivering clear, consistent sentencing. But MPs said the act had "fallen short of its aims".
The committee blamed a desire to appear tough on crime and a failure to inject sufficient resources into community punishments for a rise in short jail terms, which they said could lead to increased reoffending.
"There is a contradiction in stating that prison should be reserved for serious and dangerous offenders while not providing the resources necessary to fund more appropriate options for other offenders who then end up back in prison," the committee's Liberal Democrat chair, Alan Beith, said.
"Short custodial sentences are very unlikely to contribute to an offender's rehabilitation; in fact, short custodial sentences may increase re-offending."
Vulnerable groups such as women, young people and the mentally ill were found to be particularly susceptible to being imprisoned even though "their needs could be dealt with both more effectively and more appropriately in the community".
The MPs also criticised a "deeply unimpressive" review of sentencing by Labour peer Lord Carter that they said was based on "wholly inadequate" consultation.
But Carter's report was "a missed opportunity for a fundamental consideration of problems with sentencing and provision of custodial and non-custodial facilities in England and Wales", the MPs found.
Link to full report:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmjust/184/18402.htm#evidence
Posted by Hampshire at 12:21 PM | Comments (0)
THE POINTLESSNESS OF CURRENT ANTI-DRUGS POLICY
Julian Critchley, former civil servant who ran the Cabinet's anti-drugs unit, has described government anti-drugs policy as pointless.
"I joined the unit more or less agnostic on drugs policy, being personally opposed to drug use, but open-minded about the best way to deal with the problem," he wrote on the blog. "I was certainly not inclined to decriminalise. However, during my time in the unit, as I saw more and more evidence of 'what works', to quote New Labour's mantra of the time, it became apparent to me that ... enforcement and supply-side interventions were largely pointless. They have no significant, lasting impact on the availability, affordability or use of drugs."
He is reported as calling for decriminalisation of drugs and described the current 'tough on drugs' policy as 'pointless.'
'Studies showed the market was already almost saturated with drugs, he said, and anyone who wished to purchase the drug of their choice could already do so.'
The arguments in favour of decriminalisation seem very clear:
1. A large drop in crime with drugs available freely on prescription
2. Better control of addiction
3. Better health for drug users
4. A reduction in drug-related prostitution
5. Better employability for drug users.
“I recall a conversation I had with a Number 10 policy advisor about a series of announcements in which we were to emphasise the shift of resources to treatment and highlight successes in prevention and education. She asked me whether we couldn't arrange for "a drugs bust in Brighton" at the same time, or "a boat speeding down the Thames to catch smugglers". For that advisor, what worked mattered considerably less than what would play well in the right-wing press. The tragedy of our drugs policy is that it is dictated by tabloid irrationality, and not by evidence.”
Posted by Hampshire at 11:58 AM | Comments (0)
August 20, 2008
SUPPORTING TPOs IN FIRST APPOINTMENTS
Several Trainee Probation Officers who qualify this year and expect to take up posts in October will be faced with demanding and expensive journeys to work. Many have been allocated posts in the north of the Area, despite living in Southampton and Portsmouth. They are being told they must stay in these posts for two years minimum. They face daily commutes of 100 miles – at their own expense.
Firstly, where the ‘two years’ comes from is unclear, but what is clear is the first paragraph in the codes of employment which states:
‘All job vacancies, whether as new appointments to the Hampshire Area of the National Probation Service, transfers or promotions, are likely to offer some opportunity to a candidate which is not present in their current position. This may be financial, developmental or of special interest. Therefore on that basis, opportunity to apply for any position should not be denied to any applicant who meets the mandatory criteria (e.g. CQSW/Dip Social Work for Probation Officer posts), regardless of personal factors, e.g. race, gender, age, sexual orientation or degree of physical ability. (Paragraph 1, Diversity Policy, Strategy and Codes of Employment for Service Delivery and Employment of Staff)’
That seems fairly clear: if a staff member sees a job opportunity and they wish to apply it would be a breach of the codes of employment to block an applicant. This is about equal opportunities, about diversity and these are not subservient to the catch-all of ‘operational reasons’ which these days gets lazily wheeled out when management have no other rationale. Why does management never give as much attention to life-work balance?
Secondly, we recognise there may be recruitment and retention issues in the north of the area. There is a means of tackling these issues - through Market Forces Supplements which are intended precisely for this type of situation - they are payable where market pressures have otherwise prevented the Probation Board from being able to recruit or retain sufficiently qualified or experienced employees at the normal salary for a job of that weight.
Additional payments may not ease the stress of long commutes, but they will at least not oblige staff to spend thousands of pounds annually just to get to work. As this Area was able to pay management consultants £96,000 for advice which was well within the wit of HPA, we would argue that urgent attention should be given to paying market forces supplements in the North, rather than passing the financial burden onto staff alongside the strain of undertaking daily round trips up to 100 miles. HPA should support staff in positive financial ways – interest free loans are not the solution – a market forces supplement may well be the fair way of balancing the needs and interests of employer and employee.
Equal opportunities cannot mean that a situation is tolerable where many employees receive thousands of pounds in subsidised travel while others are forced into situations where they must fork out thousands to get to work. Hampshire is one of the largest probation areas in the country and we need a strategy that provides a level of support that is coherent and fair. It took HPA a long time to come to terms with the costs of travelling across water and opportunities for career development; now that HPA sees it as operationally necessary to require staff to travel great distances across land it should cover the high costs involved – by investing in staff.
Posted by Hampshire at 06:57 PM | Comments (0)
August 19, 2008
SULTANS OF SPIN
On the 10th May, through this site, we encouraged members to send a model letter to the chair of the probation board about the disgrace of the non-payment of increments. Some of you did and he replied that, given the long delay he would make some supportive representations - a move in contrast to the chief officer's earlier position of saying the increments needed to be re-negotiated as part of a new pay agreement.
And now we can read the sophistry in the latest briefing from the chief officer. The fact is the employers have not honoured the payment of increments. They are becoming adept at denying members their basis pay increases.
And by the way, the use of the word 'consultation' in the briefing is loaded. The more important word is negotiation. When it comes to cutting travel budgets HPA will be expected to consult and negotiate with Napo. We need to maintain solidarity to fight their proposed cuts.
On another note, interesting how the HPA briefings are becoming more graphic, colourful and thematic - just a shame about the spin!
Posted by Hampshire at 03:01 PM | Comments (0)
August 15, 2008
PUNITIVE SANCTIONS
Napo and Union representatives attended a Job Evaluation Panel on the 16th July. We had an initial discussion and then decided not to be a part of the panel. The panels are intended to be jointly owned with equal representation. Both union representatives have since been told that HPA will not pay their travelling expenses. This is quite unprecedented. We held serious concerns about the operation of the panel and could not, in light of those concerns, sit on the panel. We could not reconcile sitting on that particular panel with our duty to represent the best interests of our members.
Had we sat on the panel our fares would have been paid.
So, in response, though retaliation seems more apt, our expenses have been blocked. We will brief members further at the next branch meetings.
This download will explain the basics of JE to those unfamiliar with it's methodology.
Posted by Hampshire at 01:22 PM | Comments (0)
August 09, 2008
MEMBERS' BENEFITS
Legal Services
As a Napo member, you and you family have access to a range of legal sevices. "Family" here means you, your partner, including same sex partner, and children, unless otherwise specified. Please help us speed up your application by putting your membership number on your application form.
Personal Injury If you are involved in an accident or injury at work, we can take legal action on your behalf. This service is for members only.You can download the application form PI from here.
Road Traffic Accidents
If you need to take legal action following a road traffic accident, download form RTA1 from here.
Free will writing and reduced price conveyancing.
Napo's solicitors, Thompsons, operate these schemes directly. For wills contact 02072 900000 and for conveyancing ontact their Plymouth office for further information on 01752 660700.
Free legal advice on non-work related issues. You are entitled to one free legal consultation on any matter outside your employment.
Posted by Hampshire at 12:51 PM | Comments (0)
August 06, 2008
NAPO NATIONAL VICE - CHAIR: VOTE FOR AMY MILFORD
You should all, by now, have received a letter from the Electoral Reform Services. This is not junk mail! It contains your ballot paper and the candidate's election statements for the posts of National Vice Chair.
There are six candidates standing for the three vacant posts, one of whom, Amy Milford, is a member of our branch and has been nominated and supported by our branch. This note is to encourage you to vote, first and foremost, and secondly to encourage you to use one of your three votes for Amy.
When you read the statements you will see that Amy has been active in Napo, nationally and locally, since she joined the service as a TPO in 2002. At present, she is a JNCC rep for our branch, Co-Chair of the national Trade Union Organisation committee, and a member of the national Professional Committee. Her views and plans are laid out in her statement; please read this and if you have any questions feel free to contact her by email.
If you have not yet received your papers, please contact Chivalry Road (Napo HQ) on 020 7223 4887. The most likely explanation is that you have not given the membership section a new address, especially if you have changed offices in the last couple of years.
A NATIONAL VOICE FOR HAMPSHIRE NAPO MEMBERS IN THESE TROUBLED TIMES WITH OUR LOCAL LEADERS CAN ONLY BE AN ASSET!
Posted by Hampshire at 07:03 PM | Comments (0)
August 05, 2008
RECRUITMENT: DISABILITIES
The Codes of Employment, mentioned in the note posted earlier today and also in the posting of 11th July, also refer to the Guaranteed Interview Scheme – this guarantees an interview to disabled applicants for a post if they meet the essential criteria set out in the job specification. Napo has been contacted by members who worry if they have a chance of an internal opportunity because they may have taken disability-related sickness absence. Our view is that if external candidates with disabilities are guaranteed an interview it would be unreasonable to deny internal candidates the same opportunities. Therefore, we advise any candidate who has a disability to make this clear should they apply for an’ internal opportunity’ In fact the application form should be showing some sensitivity in respect of disabled staff. We have heard of members being denied opportunities for a whole host of reasons and we therefore ask you to contact Napo if you feel you have been unfairly treated. An important paragraph in the codes of employment is the very first one, which says:
‘All job vacancies, whether as new appointments to the Hampshire Area of the National Probation Service, transfers or promotions, are likely to offer some opportunity to a candidate which is not present in their current position. This may be financial, developmental or of special interest. Therefore on that basis, opportunity to apply for any position should not be denied to any applicant who meets the mandatory criteria (e.g. CQSW/Dip Social Work for Probation Officer posts), regardless of personal factors, e.g. race, gender, age, sexual orientation or degree of physical ability’
‘Opportunity to apply for any position should not be denied to any applicant who meets the mandatory criteria…’ It could not be clearer.
We have asked for an equalities impact assessment of the application form that is currently being used for internal jobs. We do not accept that medical information should be used to sift out applicants at the short-listing stage.
The Guaranteed Interview Scheme:
Posted by Hampshire at 08:53 PM | Comments (0)
SHORT-LISTING FOR JOBS
This note should be read with reference to an earlier entry on this site - Expressions of Interest, 11th July. There are two downloads here - the pro forma issued by HPA for staff to complete if they wish to apply for an internal opportunity. You will see the form says your medical records will be checked:
'We will make a check on your medical records (which are held with HR) as part of the short-listing process'
The second download is an extract from HPA's Codes and Conditions of Employment which is an excellent policy, well- informed by diversity considerations. The extract describes how short-listing should operate and in the final paragraph says:
The “previous convictions/medical declaration” questionnaire will be retained by the Personnel Unit until the panel is in a position to consider whether or not an offer of employment should be made to a particular applicant. Matters relating to previous convictions or medical conditions will be considered by the Personnel Officer in consultation with line managers, appropriate specialists (e.g. Occupational Health Adviser) and the individual concerned.
Napo's reading of this is that medical information, for example, should not be used to sift at the short-listing stage. It may be relevant to consider this information if an opportunity is being offered (and then in the context of a discussion), but not before.
Napo will be asking for this pro forma and short-listing process to be impact assessed in respect of equalities. We advise members with any concerns about this recruitment process to contact their Napo representatives.
Posted by Hampshire at 11:28 AM | Comments (0)
August 01, 2008
TRAVEL ALLOWANCES AND PARKING
In response to representations from members who wish to reply to the questionnaire regarding travel allownances and car parking, if members wish to do this we suggest they return the questionnaire anonymously and it would be helpful for collective bargaining purposes if copies (again, anonymously) could be sent to Napo Chair, Probation Office, 52 Isambard Brunel Road, Portsmouth. PO1 2BD.
The next branch meeting will be held at Town Quay on Friday 22 August – at 2.00pm.
Posted by Hampshire at 11:39 AM | Comments (0)