Napo very clear about our objectives on job evaluation

A 30 minute break from what is as I expected, a testing but extremely thorough E3 Job Evaluation meeting with senior NOMS management, gives me an opportunity to bury any notion that Napo has entered the appeal mechanism having already decided what the results of the job evaluation panels (that I wrote about last week) are going to be.

I rarely respond to idle gossip or rumours, but if anyone can let me have the source of the statement being peddled in some quarters as official Napo policy, that this union is not trying its best to achieve an increase in banding for the Victim Liaison Officer, then I will be pleased to investigate.

Better still let’s all save some time; and allow me to repeat what I have made clear at just about every branch AGM I have attended in recent weeks, which is that Napo's leadership group believes that the VLO banding should be set at 4. That is why I have devoted considerable internal resource into our efforts, and have helped persuade NOMS to take our issues seriously, and with the help of Katie Lomas, Chris Winters and Yvonne Pattison, have found a number of expert practitioners who have provided superb input in helping us challenge the original outcomes.

We now enter the next stage of an agreed process as part of the NNC Job Evaluation scheme where trained job evaluation panelists – which include Napo nominees who know about the jobs – will look at the revised job descriptions and job design questionnaires that we have tried to make as reflective as possible of the valuable work undertaken by our VLO Members.

We will adopt exactly the same approach for all of the other appeals that we are going through in an attempt to secure the best possible outcomes for members.

HM Inspectorate pulls no punches

Dame Glenys Stacey has certainly set out her intentions in the way in which the probation inspectorate intend to go about their work, with another highly impressive report into the provision of probation services in the Durham area https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/inspections/durhamqi/

We will be going through this to pull out the key issues that we will want to bring to the attention of the new Secretary of State as well as Michael Spurr following our recent meeting. Among other things, the report raises some interesting issues about 'on the day' court reports that tally with much of our E3 feedback.

We have already approached NOMS with our view that under E3, the court report allocation system requires reports to be allocated to either a PSO or PO based on the level of risk. But given that the level of risk is determined at the end of the report, it’s a fair question as to how the reports will be allocated on this basis if this is not determined at that point? We, and you, are concerned that reports will either be completed by staff not properly trained to do them, or that there will be lots of duplicated work, where for example a PSO starts the report process (interview etc) then realises it's not a PSO appropriate report and has to hand it over to a PO who will have to start from the beginning. This is time consuming for staff but pretty awful for clients at a critical point in the judicial process.

Practitioners will be well aware of how the Information available at court is often mixed; it can take weeks to get what is needed from police and social services and information on the availability of interventions from CRCs isn't always up to scratch either.

There is a new drive from NOMS to prepare the report where the client is sentenced even if they live in a different area. This also means that a report writer in Leeds may be completing a report for a client who lives in London and it's not easy to find out how to get information from police, social services and the local CRC to where the client's order will be managed. In the past these reports would be adjourned for a local report writer to complete.

This situation needs urgent attention from NOMS, who will not be able to say that Napo failed to bring it to their attention.

Public Service Prisons Operating Model - early responses from members

Following my invitation for direct feedback last week, it’s clear that there is disquiet amongst some members about the proposals, especially in light of the E3 1:1 meetings taking place at the moment. Until now there has been a lack of engagement with the unions on this keynote proposal which has a huge potential impact on our members for many reasons.

My appreciation to those readers who have taken the time and trouble to let me have your views. Here is a snapshot summary of some of what you are saying about the prospect of more NPS staff working in prisons:

• Prisons are generally less accessible; therefore there are fears that there is a possibility of members being managed out due to disability.
• Working hours are more restrictive in prisons, making it an unsuitable option for many staff due to work life balance issues.
• The environment is a very different one and any transition should necessarily be managed carefully and be for a fixed term.
• Some LDU clusters have no prisons, some have several, and so moving the custody work means moving staff which in turn means a huge upheaval of staff from those areas with no prisons.
• Some members may struggle with the vetting requirements for prisons.
• There is a lot of uncertainty about the practicalities of prisoners moving multiple times during their sentences. This is likely to cause workload issues for members.
• Role boundaries will have to be re-thought due to the new PSO role in the community.
• There are many questions about the minutiae of the proposals that we will be putting to NOMS during the engagement process.

Plenty to think about on this, and the myriad issues that we are pushing on behalf of members across the 24 employers we now deal with.

Elections again

We have issued reminders to members about what to do if you have still not received a ballot paper for the National Officer and Steering Committee elections (call ERS on 0208 365 8909)

It’s always your option as to whether to take part or not, but these elections are your opportunity to determine the future direction of Napo as a trade union and professional association. Whilst the objectives of the candidates may appear to be miles apart from one another, they will all surely agree on one common theme: and that is their wish that as many members as possible take part in this democratic process.

All too often those brown envelopes lie unattended on kitchen tables or the mantelpiece; so if that’s your kitchen table or mantelpiece then please take a minute or two to break that cycle