Published 27th August 2014
The de-professionalising of the 107 year old probation service
The Probation Service was founded in 1907 to help rehabilitate offenders in the community and assist them in making changes to their life. Since then the Service has significantly developed both in terms of its evidence based practice, doing what works to reduce re-offending and developing the professionalism of its staff. To qualify as a probation officers you must complete a degree which specifically focuses on working with offenders to reduce crime and to protect the public along with in house training that takes a total of two years to complete. It is for this reason the Probation Service of England and Wales is revered around the world as the most successful model to reduce re-offending, protect the public and rehabilitate offenders. In 2011 it was awarded the European Gold Award for Excellence, one accolade normally reserved for the private sector; and by 2013 all 35 Probation Trusts were given a performance level of good or excellent.
However, on 1st June 2014 the Secretary of State disbanded these Trusts in favour of a National Probation Service and 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies, which he intends to sell off later this year.
Staff were asked to choose which organisation they wanted to work in, despite not knowing the full implications of their decision or who their future employer may be if they chose the CRC. Some were assigned to the CRC by a Random Assignment Process, a likened to “pulling names from a hat”. Only now are they realising the full impact.
On 1st June the different organisations came into existence and immediately every single probation officer in the CRCs was stripped of their professional standing. No matter how many years’ experience they had - in many cases 20 years or more - they were told they were no longer able to carry out their duties; no longer able to write risk assessments or manage high risk of harm cases; no longer able to attend Multi Agency Public Protection meetings and no longer able to advise Courts with sentencing (the main role of the original Court missionary).
No other profession has been stripped so quickly of its role and standing in a community. Years of dedication to a profession that they love being taken away from officers in just 24 hours has left Napo members angry, upset and totally demoralised and they are now voting with their feet.
Our Members thoughts:
Ms R - "I have been a fully qualified Probation Officer for 11 years. During that time I've managed high risk of harm offenders, written pre-sentence reports for Court, written Parole reports and attended Oral Hearings (held in prison with a parole board to determine if a prisoner can be released or moved to open conditions). I lost all my high risk cases after the 1st June. One such case had a parole hearing due while his new officer, who has known him 10 weeks was on leave. Having held the case for over 12 months I agreed to attend on behalf of the NPS officer so that the hearing could go ahead. The Chair of the parole board said to me ‘you no longer have the capacity to assess risk and you will have to leave’. The prisoner will now have to wait at least six months for a new hearing date, his was really upset and I am left feeling really angry that Grayling as striped me of all my professional standing; effectively unqualified me over night."
Mr W – Has been assigned to the CRC. When one of his cases was returned to Court for breach of his curfew he was not allowed to write the report and was asked instead to provide a progress report so that NPS officer could write a proposal. "I've resigned to take early retirement - which is rather sad as I have a lot to offer for another five years at least. 20 years’ experience including PSR writing, sex offender and substance misuse specialisms - GONE. I have so much admiration for colleagues whose case loads are going through the roof as officers are redeployed to patch up short falls. I made clear in my resignation letter - for what it’s worth - that the reason for my decision was antipathy to TR."
Napo the Probation Union says:
“Our members that have been assigned to the CRCs feel that they have had their professional qualifications taken away from the overnight, while their colleagues in the NPS are struggling to cope with workloads and demand. It is a total shambles and staff morale is at an all time low. We are deeply concerned that this will only get worse if the CRCs are sold off to private companies who want to make a profit, not pay for highly skilled staff.”
Questions you might wish to ask
- Why are the skills of qualified probation officers no longer valid in the publically owned CRCs?
- How many staff have resigned from the service in 2014?
- How much will the MoJ have to spend on training new officers to replace those already qualified that have been put in the CRC or have left the service?