Tuesday 11 March 2014

The Strike - Napo Responds

In response to the numerous critical comments on here and elsewhere regarding the next planned strike, Napo HQ have sent the following email to all members today:-

In a wonderfully diverse union like ours there are as many views about industrial action as there are members.  What matters is that we can unite around a collective position.  Striking for a day and a half allows us to stage a lunchtime walk out and not simply pick our work up on the following day.  By following this with a removal of goodwill in April it will have the necessary impact on service delivery.  We have to demonstrate that the service is at the point of collapse before the formal split is made. 
 
Industrial action is always difficult.  We may have made commitments to clients and other staff on that day which will have to be cancelled- they will understand.   Service users are incredibly apprehensive about being supervised by Capita, Sodexo and the like.  Those supervised by the NPS will have the stigma of being managed by the high risk service and will face greater barriers to resettlement.
 
You might find the arguments against striking persuasive.  Here’s why you shouldn’t


“I’ll end up doing the work anyway.”  You don’t have to.  Communication will be key in this- alert your line managers that you intend to take strike action, the work will have to be cancelled.  At the last strike, a probation client wrote on a placard that the probation service helped him to read and write and they shouldn’t privatise our service.  Remember who we’re striking for.
 
“You’ve done well making your point and having a protest but it’s all going ahead so run along…”  Patronising statements like this should come with a cookie and a pat on the head.  Ignore it as demeaning rubbish.
 
“I can’t afford it.”  Some members will struggle and there will be a limited strike fund for people disproportionately affected.  More information will come in the guidance to follow.  Most of us will be able to afford it although losing pay is never easy.  Civil Servants are being cut in number and face continuous pay freezes.  The private sector seeks to slash wages to maximise profit.  Can we afford not to?


Today is the House of Lords Amendment which states that no massive reorganisation can happen without a debate in both Houses.  Tomorrow is the powerful Public Accounts Committee.  The Justice Alliance had a massive rally and the lawyers are removing goodwill.  The bidders are getting cold feet and in some areas the “competition” is barely there.  Done Deal?  Don’t think so Mr Grayling.
 
There are 71 days until the formal split.  We’ve secured delay before and we can do it again but only if we keep up the pressure and momentum.
 
Tom Rendon       Ian Lawrence
National Chair    General Secretary

30 comments:

  1. Sorry to go off topic at the top of this thread, but a colleague has brought this blog piece to my attention. It's by Jeremy Hays, a former Tory MP,now lawyer. The piece is entitled "Is Chris Graylng a Sociopath?" which I though might be a good question to ask him at one of the upcoming Trust exchange meetings.

    http://jerryhayes.co.uk/posts/2014/03/08/is-chris-grayling-a-sociopath

    ReplyDelete
  2. In short the criminal justice system is being dismantled before our eyes with the most vulnerable in our society who will suffer the most. But who will want to come to the Bar when only those with wealthy parents will be able to afford to? Some at the junior end are making do on £12k gross. All those qualifications and all that debt to be paid the same as someone flipping burgers.

    What really confuses me is why is Grayling doing this when everyone from the President of the Supreme Court to the Attorney General have warned him that this is a disaster? He won’t even consult. The legal profession have put forward alternatives which would save him the the £220m he needs. At every meeting we are told that it is all set in stone.

    At first I thought Grayling was doing this out of a mixture of stupidity and ambition. Now I am not so sure. To go down in history as the man who trashed the British justice system is hardly going improve his chances of leading the Conservative Party.

    But the other day I got a clue. I was having a drink with an eminent psychiatrist. I asked him what the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath was. He explained that the latter had boundaries and tended to be achievers with qualifications and status. He gave an example of some consultant surgeons. Then he started talking about politicians. He told me of one particular subject he had been studying with interest. ‘Pure text book. What gives it away is the fluency of repetitive lying’.
    I asked who it was.
    ‘Oh, some fellow called Chris Grayling. Ever heard of him?’
    I bought the old boy a drink.

    On Friday we went on strike. In the next few weeks we will do everything in our power within the law to stop these dreadful proposals. Too much is at stake. Grayling may be the unspeakable but we are the uneatable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Uniting around a collective position sounds good, but when only 45% of members even bothered to vote, unity is weakened. When Unison members who work alongside Napo members, cross picket lines to get into work, unity is weakened.

    It is assumed the 'removal of goodwill' will have the 'necessary impact on service delivery', but where is there any evidence for this? And what if the removal of goodwill does not bring the service to the point of collapse? Unison members are not in dispute and there is no evidence that those who did not vote in the strike ballot will not compensate for the goodwill withdrawn by collectively-minded Napo members. Let's not also forget that Napo members cross picket lines.

    It is unsurprising that Napo members are wondering about the value and likely effectiveness of further industrial action. What has industrial action achieved for Napo members that has not been achieved by Unison without their members losing pay? What has Napo actually achieved in its long campaign? The wheels even seem to be coming off the framework agreement! If Napo could actually point to some solid achievements it would be easier to unite around a collective position. The only thing we have so far is a directorship in the Probation Institue and that is a poison chalice if ever there was one. But unfortunately the leadership is fixated on PI.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Have you seen the Joint Trade Union letter to CRC bidders, Jim? I got it via a colleague who's in Unison; Napo grapevine can be a little slow at times in these parts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No not seen it - any chance of emailing it or copy and pasting on here? email addy on profile page. Cheers, Jim

      Delete
    2. If I get a chance tomorrow I'll send it - though if Napo had any media nous it'd be front and centre on their website!

      Delete
  5. I'm listening to the House of Lords debate. The govt side are continually linking the Probation Institute to future improvements in standards under TR. Nice one NAPO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Amendment failed - 243 votes for & 263 against

      Delete
    2. The timing of establishing PI was real own goal that in many Napo members opinion has driven by personal ambition by those directly involved

      Delete
    3. This was always gonna be the case. The government were bound to use the PI to try and legitimise TR. Yet another own goal by Napo I'm afraid.

      Delete
    4. And NAPO thinks there is still any point in striking after today's vote. Instead of trying to fighting the inevitableihow about making sure members whichever side of the divide get a decent deal.

      Delete
    5. In defence of NAPO, they can do both - fight TR and make sure we get as good a deal as possible if it goes through. That's what I pay my subs for. I wouldn't want them to give up on either.

      Delete
    6. Link as promised

      http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/lords/todays-lords-debates/read/unknown/125/

      Delete
    7. Lord Faulks now says that crc cases which shift to high risk will be responsibility of NPS BUT intervention remains with Crc. So the 'crc is subservient to nps' pitch continues from noms, e.g. Nps pso's to oversee crc po work? More noms bollox.

      Delete
  6. As a serving Probation Officer, what would be the point in joining the PI? It doesn't provide a licence to work, so why would I bother? I have a qualification. Linked In is full of forums for sharing practice between people who aren't qualified POs..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since we're in the brave new world of TR, I'll apply private sector logic to my decision about the PI.
      I'm a PO who is bound for the CRC. There's no requirement on my future employer, whoever that may be, to join the PI, although they may well choose to do so to give a fig leaf of legitimacy to their operations. That nice Mr Grayling has already said he doesn't want to "fetter" the CRC with requirements to have trained staff. In light of this, will the PI provide me with at least £20-worth of benefit? Or £40-worth after the initial setting up period? Or up to £100-worth, if they see fit to deem me to be a sufficiently senior member? I just can't see it happening. I agree with the above poster that the timing of the PI is a massive own goal by Napo

      Delete
  7. I am despondent this feels like the end game and to be honest one we were never going to win against a thoroughly dishonest and dishonourable Minister of State. What does that say about this government that these tricks and sleight of hand tactics have been used against such a performing and loyal workforce? I am utterly disillusioned with our politicians based on this experience of Grayling, Something has to be done about the way the rich elite are taking all in our society and the demonisation of the poor.
    "Every Day I love Tories Less and Less"
    " I Predict a Riot"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The waste of it all.The loss of experience already, the loss of morale. The sheer lunacy of it. The pouring down the drain of public funds. The bureaucratic wall that will get higher and deeper and wider. The mess, the chaos. I feel angry. Every day I have to pretend I am not angry that everything is normal, read another email full of shite, press delete.

      Delete
    2. Neo-liberals ... They are the puppets of big corporations. Those in America bank-rolled Adolf Hitler and assassinated JFK. What hope have we got?

      Delete
  8. I am hearing that G4S have agreed to repay £100 MILLION to the government in relation to the tagging fiasco. What with Serco's 'contribution' and now Buddi's exit from the GPS approach, is anyone still actually suggesting the private sector has anything to pffer the existing award winning Probation services? Grayling's 'best in the business' are a shower. MoJ and NOMS are heading for the iceberg. Which private sector providers are going to climb aboard that particular ship?

    ReplyDelete
  9. In Durham Tees Valley we are very lucky to have Sir Peter Vardy leading the staff mutual to climb aboard that particular ship.....he is an expert given his experience in err, the retail car sector.........

    ReplyDelete
  10. Now every one of us are well and truly shafted what are we going to do? Take it like good compliant workers or fight the bastards? All uprising start with discontent which turns to anger followed by fury and a reign of terror.

    From the years of "you have never had it so good", built off the backs of the dead of two world wars, back to the normal run of history. The rich bloated elite forgetting that the others are human in their grubby lust for profits and power.

    It's been a bad day with the near privatisation of the NHS and Probation and the death of Bob Crow an old school class worrier, I've had better.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lords agreed today that MoJ and unions have resolved their differences and achived agreement over new TR arrangements. So what basis the strike?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't understand that comment - is that correct - what was actually said in Lords about resolving our differences? About to go on shift in AP, does anyone know if this is correct please? Why are such lies being told?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These extracts are from Lord Faulks in the Lords yesterday:

      "First, there is the crucial issue of engaging with and supporting those already working in probation—what the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, described at Report stage as “taking people with you”. We are working closely with probation trusts to make sure that probation staff have the information and support they need while these changes take place. We are committed to treating staff fairly during this period of transition. I am pleased to say that we have reached agreement with the trade unions and the employers’ side over a national agreement for staff transfer, which will protect the terms and conditions of staff transferring to new rehabilitation companies or the NPS."

      "The noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, referred to engagement with the unions. I did grimace slightly because there has been agreement and complete liaison with the unions. Officials meet regularly with the unions—every two weeks—through a specially established forum devoted to discussing the reforms. Alongside the meetings with the forum—which is our formal engagement body—fortnightly meetings with the unions have taken place since September to look specifically at our pensions proposals. Trade union officials have attended a number of workshops, training sessions and meetings with programme officials to look at specific elements of our reforms. Informal discussions have also taken place on a regular basis and negotiations over the national agreement on staff transfer always took place with a departmental representative in attendance. Ministers have regular meetings with unions every eight to 12 weeks."

      "It is difficult to understand why there is apparently—so the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, says—discontent among the staff, because a deal has been negotiated with the unions. We have been undertaking negotiations with probation trade unions and the employers’ representatives over a national agreement for staff transfer that will protect the terms and conditions of staff transferring to the CRCs or the NPS. Probation trade unions and the Probation Association, which represents trusts, ratified the national agreement on staff transfer on 29 January 2014. Trade unions have also withdrawn all local trade disputes. The national agreement offers a very good deal for existing staff, and demonstrates our commitment to fairness by going much further than we are legally required to do. Staff will transfer to the new probation structures with their existing terms and conditions in place. The additional protections set out within the agreement include a guarantee of employment in the new probation structures from 1 June 2014, no compulsory redundancies for a period of seven months following share sale and an enhanced voluntary redundancy period of up to 67.5 weeks. Alongside our negotiations, the programme has put in place a dedicated consultative forum for effective engagement with trade unions and employers’ representatives. We will continue to engage closely with trade unions and employers throughout the transition to the new probation structure."

      So its there, in The Lords, in hansard, in black&white:

      National agreements, all ratified by unions & employers - Guaranteed employment at point of transfer - no redundancies for up to 7 months post share sale (new to me, that) - up to 67.5 weeks' redundancy (despite claims its been withdrawn by NOMS) - all local trades union disputes withdrawn - union officials involved at least fortnightly since September 2013. What basis a strike?

      Delete
  13. It is quite legitimate for it to be said that differences have been resolved – at least the substantive ones around continuity or service, etc

    Isn't this why the framework agreement was signed? Like it or not, Napo has signed up to TR and the Probation Institute, just as Unison have though the latter is not striking nor calling strikes against TR. When you think about it , it is odd to sign an agreement and then continue striking.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have notified managers I will be on strike. Remind me someone if I am aiming to get Grayling to stop what he is doing or merely donate my share of £2m or so to trust budgets in my unclaimed wages. Maybe I'll feel better but at this point I suspect it will identify our weaknesses.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The clue's in the name. Cannot understand why many join a union then feel it's an option not to participate in a democratic decision to strike.

      Delete
  15. I am a fully paid up member of the NAPO union , I have canvassed many people away from the office and sadly my unscientific straw poll would suggest there is NO appetite for the strike. Too little , too late is the response from colleagues.
    As i am just watching a programme on the Miners Strike of '84 and I can see many similarities.
    Arthur was proved to be right , but there is still no deep mine collieries of any significance....it took 30 years for him to to be vindicated - I hope we do not have to wait that long,Margaret Hodge may yet turn out to be our last ally in this sad debacle and so NAPO needs to reconsider its approach to the TR agenda.

    ReplyDelete