Napo is aware of a number of issues that have emerged over the course of the week relating to pay, and we have received numerous emails from members regarding these. At the time of writing, most of these issues remain unresolved but we wanted to update members about what the issues are, and what progress has been made to date. There are several sticking points, in that the Trade Unions and the employer have different positions on what was agreed and negotiated as part of the three year pay deal. Its highly possible that some of these may lead to National disputes being lodged by the Probation Unions if agreement cannot be reached.
Market Forces Supplements (MFS):
MFS have been awarded to certain staff in some regions depending on the local difficulties in recruiting to the particular grade. The value of the supplements varies between these regions and it has always been the case that these would be subject to future review. Unfortunately, a great deal of confusion has arisen about the impact of the 3 year pay deal on these. The employer is absolutely maintaining that the removal of MFS on a mark time basis was explicit as part of the implementation of the pay deal.
Napo’s position is that these supplements would erode as the pay of the individuals in receipt of them increased as a result of the 3 year pay deal. However, it appears that this was not made clear to staff and the pay calculator provided by the employer did not reflect this. The trade unions are not satisfied that sufficient communications were issued to the affected staff of the impact on them prior to the pay ballot. Napo, along with our sister Unions will be entering urgent discussions with the employer to clarify the situation and we will update members as soon as possible.
Pay Progression for those promoted (this includes qualifying as a probation officer)
The employer maintains that payment of pay progression on promotion is restricted to those with six months prior service in their new role as per the 2018 pay modernisation deal, and this overrides the NNC handbook terms and conditions. This means that staff had to be in post by the 1st October 2021 in order to receive the pay progression on 1st April 2022. Again, the pay calculator did not reflect this when members used it to calculate the impact of the pay deal. The trade unions believe that this term does not apply post 2018 as a result of our joint dispute on incremental progression. Again we will be having further discussions with the employer on this issue.
Members who did qualify through the PQiP scheme before 1st October 2021 but whose formal contract was delayed are not affected by this and the employer agrees that an error has been made. Steps will be taken to rectify this as soon as possible. Napo urges anyone affected by this to make a formal complaint via SSCL so that the employer is aware.
Temporary Promotions
The employer agrees with the trade unions that anyone who has been temporarily promoted should receive incremental progression in line with their temporary role. Steps will be taken to rectify any errors and again we ask members who have not received progression to make a formal complaint with SSCL so that the employer is aware.
Unsociable Hours Payments (USH)
There is a further sticking point on the clawing back of USH payments for some staff in receipt of pay protection for annualised USH payments. The trade unions maintain that an agreement was reached with Senior Management that supersedes the mark time pay protection of those in receipt of USH payments. This is due to be discussed at the next Probation Programme Consultative Forum with a view to resolving this issue.
Needless to say, many Napo members will be extremely frustrated that yet again there have been varied and complicated issues with pay. The Napo HQ team are working tirelessly to achieve resolution of these issues as soon as possible. Please make sure that if you think there has been an error in your pay that you lodge a formal complaint with SSCL (and SOP if directed to do so). You can email info@napo.org.uk and whilst we may not be able to respond to all emails due to the high volume we are receiving, we will still be collating all the information we are sent in order to challenge the employer and achieve a resolution.
As stated in our mail out last week we will also be continuing the campaign to see SSCL removed as the payroll provider for HMPPS. Members have suffered from the impact of years of maladministration of their pay entitlements, but unfortunately Government Ministers seem unwilling or unable to take the necessary action.