N27-2016

N 27/2016 NNC Reform

The future of National Collective Bargaining for Probation - members to decide

Overview

Currently the pay and conditions of NPS and CRC staff are decided by national negotiations which take place at the Probation National Negotiating Council (NNC) for staff on pay bands 1 to 6 and at the Standing Committee for Chief Officer Grades (SCCOG) for pay bands beyond. The NNC/SCCOG negotiating machinery was protected in the NNC/SCCOG Staff Transfer and Protections Agreement which governed the transfer of staff to the NPS and the CRCs in 2014 as result of Transforming Rehabilitation.  The NNC and SCCOG have continued to operate for the two years since the staffing split.

However, the probation unions were advised by the NPS and the CRC owners in late 2014 that they no longer believe that NNC/SCCOG is fit for purpose anymore because:

• NPS is a civil service employer which is bound by the Treasury and by civil service policy and procedure
• The CRCs are now privately owned separate bodies which want to develop their own approaches to future pay and conditions.
• The CRC owners do not want to sit around the same negotiating table and have to share commercially sensitive information with their competitors during pay talks.

As a result, since late 2015, the NPS and the CRC owners have been exploring with the unions the possibility of reforming the current negotiating machinery. These talks have taken place under the auspices of the NNC/SCCOG and reports have been made to Napo's Probation Negotiating Committee and the National Executive Committee.

In essence, the employers want to disband the current NNC/SCCOG machinery and allow each employer to set up its own local negotiating body with the unions to negotiate future pay and conditions, including the annual pay award.

Joint Union Response

In response to the employers the probation unions put forward a counter proposal to protect the NNC/SCCOG in January this year. At the same time, the unions recognised that the role and remit of both the negotiating bodies would have to change to reflect the realities of the post share-sale environment for both NPS and the CRCs.

In summary, the joint union proposals were for:

• NNC/SCCOG to remain as national bodies with jurisdiction over NNC/SCCOG Handbooks and national collective agreements
• CRC participation at NNC/SCCOG to be refreshed in line with post share sale environment
• NPS to create a Joint Negotiating and Consultative Committee (JNCC) to enable formal negotiations and collective agreements to be reached between NPS and NPS trade unions. This will mirror the existing arrangements in each of the CRCs.
• NPS JNCC and CRC JNCCs to be given latitude to amend NNC/SCCOG terms and conditions by local collective agreement.
• Balance between national and local agreements to therefore be opened up for local negotiation and agreement
• NNC/SCCOG Joint Secretaries to remain available to arbitrate over NNC/SCCOG agreements, management of change procedures and local disputes as necessary
• Probation Consultative Forum (PCF) to be opened up to the CRCs as full participating members

These proposals indicate that the unions were willing to allow local NPS or CRC joint negotiating and consultative committees to amend the NNC/SCCOG terms and conditions, but only by local collective agreement.

In April the unions followed up these proposals with confirmation that any change to the NNC/SCCOG negotiating machinery would have to be put to members for approval. We also pointed out that there would be significant resource implications for employers in reforming the negotiating machinery.

In particular, we highlighted our expectation that employers would have to put the following in place first:

• Effective employer level joint negotiating and consultative committees (JNCCs) to enable proper local negotiation to take place and reach agreements. Where appropriate, agreed Cross-CRC Forums for issues that span a block of CRCs owned by one company.
• Trade union side representation on new JNCCs/Cross CRC Forums to enable all recognised unions to be fully represented across all NPS Divisions and CRC employer areas
• Sufficient facility time to enable the trade unions to play a full role in local bargaining
• Training for sufficient trade union representatives to play a new expanded role in the new landscape
• Travel and subsistence to be available at the employer’s cost for trade union representatives to attend meetings
• A professional forum which would allow for dialogue on probation practice issues between the NPs and CRC representatives

The simple point we made here was that the NNC/SCCOG machinery traditionally saved local employers a considerable amount of money by conducting single table bargaining. This would change in any proposed new system and would lead to cost implications that employers would need to give the unions assurances over, prior to us putting any proposals to members for their agreement.

The employers responded by asking the unions to confirm if we were prepared to allow individual employers to negotiate the annual pay rise with the unions locally. The unions indicated that we would have to put this to members as part of the eventual proposals that emerge to reform the negotiating machinery.

Napo's position

Napo's Probation Negotiating Committee subsequently agreed to enter talks with the NNC/SCCOG employers on a national collective agreement to reform the NNC/SCCOG machinery in line with the joint union proposals submitted in January. The Committee agreed that the following principles and elements must be included in any such new collective agreement:

Principles

• Any change to the current national collective bargaining machinery will require a national collective agreement at the NNC
• The NNC Handbook will need to be updated in advance of any changes in line with recent agreements since 2014 to form the minimum standards for any local negotiations going forward
• Any local change to the terms of the NNC Handbook must be by local collective agreement only
• Napo members to be consulted on the proposals and these to be debated at AGM

Elements of a potential collective agreement

• Existing trade union recognition agreements to be confirmed:
  • Napo and Unison for staff in NNC pay bands
  • Napo and GMB/SCOOP for staff in SCCOG pay bands
• Facility time and trade union facilities to be put in place to support the new bargaining arrangements
• New collective bargaining structures:
  • Employer level JNCCs, or Owner level JNCCs
  • Formal trade union sides with lay member representation
• Dispute and arbitration machinery available via ACAS
• Management of legacy (NNC handbook) issues:
  • Via NNC Joint Secretaries
  • Up to date NNC Handbook and NNC circulars  library to be published on-line for ease of access
• Variations to the NNC Handbook can only happen by local collective agreement

Current proposals

Following these discussions the employers have now submitted proposals to the unions for consideration and these are attached as Appendix A to this circular. Members and Reps are asked to study these carefully in advance of the forthcoming AGM.

Also attached in Appendix B are the proposals from NOMS for a Joint Negotiating Council for the NPS, a disputes resolution process for the NPS and a draft constitution for the Probation Practice Forum for both the NPS, Community Rehabilitation Companies and unions.

Negotiation over Pay

The NPS and CRCs also want to move away from a single national pay deal for NPS and CRCs during 2016 and allow the 2016 pay rise to be negotiated at local level. Napo has not agreed to this at this time, because this would have to be put to our members in the context of any proposals to reform the existing national pay agreement.  Moreover, Napo is insisting that employers must recognise the NPS pay settlement as the minimum standard for commencing local annual pay negotiations at pan-CRC level.

NPS has already started talks with the probation unions over reforming the NNC pay and grading structure for the NPS only. Napo believes that these talks could potentially be widened to include the CRCs as well to ensure that we have a level playing field on pay going forward.

Conclusion

We are asking your local Napo representatives to be alert to any attempts by CRCs to implement local bargaining structures to replace the existing national collective bargaining machinery. Until Napo members have provided a view at the AGM about the proposals for reform of the machinery, CRCs should be reminded that the current national negotiating arrangements will continue.

The NNC employers would like any new arrangements in place by 1 November, which is realistically the very earliest that any changes could take place, and as these would have to have been agreed by the unions in advance of this date, it is possible that there could be unavoidable slippage to this timetable.

Any queries about the contents of this circular should ideally be directed to info@napo.org.uk  via your Napo Branch and your link Officer and Official

Yours sincerely

Chris Winters            Ian Lawrence

National Co-Chair     Napo General Secretary