Napo and Seetec

In what feels alarmingly like a re-run of the original TR process, unfortunately I suspect we are in for quite a number of fairly turgid posts over the coming months as we all try and get a grip on exactly what is being proposed under modified TR2. In this regard, Napo SSW seems to feature large, not least due to the efforts of their energetic Chair Dino Peros, together with the willingness of readers in that neck of the woods to share information. Here we have the latest info concerning Seetec CRCs, but I suspect will be of interest to other contract areas as well:-

Update for members in the Seetec owned CRCs - Joint Trade Union Bulletin

Unions make our anger about poor engagement very clear

Trade unions recently wrote to the KSS CRC Chief Executive Suki Binning. Here we set out our serious disappointment at the lack of tangible progress by SEETEC senior management following agreed actions from the earlier engagement meetings with the unions. The letters are attached to this joint bulletin and articulate the range of issues where we feel no progress has been made.

Pay

In these communications we have among other things been strongly critical of the disinformation that has been issued by some senior managers. Evidence reaching us suggests that it is being said that unions are preventing staff from getting a pay rise! This is a complete fabrication on the real picture which is that SEETEC have failed to undertake appropriate due diligence and have made an unacceptable pay offer which is both inadequate and lacks any acknowledgement of some key facts. Further news on pay will follow.

Engagement with unions

After some quite farcical events leading up to the cancellation of planned pay discussions which should have taken place on 23rd May, it has at last been possible to agree that talks on pay and the issues referenced above can now get underway on 6th and 7th June.

The unions have made it very clear that we have reluctantly made significant concessions (which have caused personal pressures on a number of our reps) to help accommodate these latest changes to scheduled talks. We now expect to see a reciprocal show of commitment from the KSS CRC Chief Executive.

As can be seen from the attached correspondence there are many areas where the level of engagement between KSS CRC/Seetec is no better than the last failing contractors Working Links. While there are many questions to be answered about exactly where all the money has gone to from their insidious and incompetent regime, it’s obviously not reached the pay packets of their former staff.

Our concerns about meaningful engagement and agreeing a programme where the unions can be treated as partners instead of a nuisance, is a situation that needs to be improved and fast. Meanwhile we are making preparations for a series of trade disputes with plans for supportive industrial action should they become necessary.

Future of Probation

All union members and prospective members will have welcomed the news of the Governments dramatic policy U-turn which will see 80% of offender management work move to 11 new NPS regions by the time that the current CRC providers are shown the door by April 2021 (latest) or sooner if there is a Labour Government in power.

While this is a victory for the probation unions it does not give us all that our members are demanding. We do not see any justification for retaining Intervention and Programme work in a so called ‘mixed-market’ and we will continue to demand:

• The total reunification of all probation work to public control
• The harmonisation of all staff on to NPS Pay rates before the ending of CRC contracts

Many as yet, unanswered questions

As members will know, the plan for OM work to transfer to Wales by December this year was announced well before the recent Government U-Turn.

This means it is imperative that the transition plan for Wales is the subject of national and local discussion to ensure a smooth transition. The unions are insisting that we be given access to the transitional board meetings between NPS and KSS CRC and that the overarching transfer arrangements for staff will be the subject of high level negotiations similar to those that resulted in the National Staff Transfer and Protections Agreement back in 2013.

The intended roadshows for KSS CRC staff about the transition plans will have no substance whatsoever without there first being a National agreement in place and we will suggest that SEETEC spend that money improving on their pay offer.

The change in policy for probation is welcome but it now means that we are in a further period of uncertainty as consideration is given to how OM work and staff are to be moved out from failing contractors by 2021.

One thing that has already been made clear to senior HMPPS and MOJ leaders is that whatever arrangements are reached on the selection criteria, the likes of SEETEC and other CRC providers must have no part in deciding who goes into the NPS and should merely do as they are instructed by their paymasters. We have suffered four and a half years of an irredeemably flawed Probation service in which all CRC Providers including KSS CRC in some aspects are implicated. Members in this or any other CRC would be well advised to trust the news coming from their trade unions as opposed to speculative comments from employers who may not even be around beyond 2020.

Join a union now!

If ever there were was a need to emphasis the importance of belonging to a trade union this joint bulletin spells it out very clearly! Transforming Rehabilitation and the disastrous impacts of part -privatisation have featured large in reports from the Justice Select Committee, the National Audit Office and Public Accounts Committee, as well as the Chief Inspector of Probation.

The unions are campaigning for:

Fair pay for all
The reunification of all probation work
An end to all privatisation
A moratorium on formal action against staff for failures not of their making
Restoration of local bargaining across KSS CRC
Immediate action to reduce workload pressures
Staff to be treated with dignity and respect.
Can you afford to leave the struggle to everyone else?

Letter from Napo
Letter from UNISON
Letter from GMB

--oo00oo--

For circulation all Napo Members 

Dear Napo Members, 

Please see the attached letter the General Secretary Ian Lawrence has written to the Seetec company representative. You will read the stark continuity of the Seetec position adopts not much difference from their predecessors Working Links. The facts are as the general secretary describes and who stands very tall today post yesterdays fantastic news. Let us not be complacent the fight to save interventions from the misery and ideological failings of profit from probation's services in Privatisation continues. It is NAPOs common purpose to see the end of the fundamentally wrong flawed and failed Privatisation activity for any offender services. The Intervention reunification arguments will continue as the Private companies now have to come to terms with the reality. Case management goes back to where it can be managed properly and put public protection as the priority before profits.

The talks on the derisory Pay offer from seetec continue next week. I will keep you posted on how this goes. Ian's letter makes clear the fairly low ebb trade union relations are with the new contractor seetec as they fail to get a proper understanding on how to work productively with Trade Union relations or properly under the terms of meaningful discussions as the GS point out. 

I will post out the held over branch report shortly while we have been waiting for the reunification news. The SSW branch congratulate National Napo and all the unions and members for working through and winning part of this great outcome and important U turn on offender public protection services 

Dino Peros 
Napo SSW Branch Chair

--oo00oo--

Suki Binning, Chief Executive
Kent Surrey and Sussex CRC

12 May 2019

Dear Suki,

While I am writing this letter from the perspective of Napo, it will come as no surprise that the probation unions have serious concerns at the lack of tangible progress following the action points that were agreed between Seetec and KSS CRC senior leaders and the trade unions in Cardiff on 9th April 2019. My disappointment is profound, because despite some obvious difficulties, the meeting seemed to mark a significant step forward from the disrespectful treatment that we had become used to under the Working Links regime.

I have also expressed my concerns (as contained in the following narrative) with senior HMPPS leaders in the Probation Programme, in so far that the expected arrangements for engagement between KSS CRC and the unions is already failing to pass muster.

The unions are in receipt of your recent response to the joint pay claim, and I expect that a joint reply will reach you before our meeting to discuss this, on which we are currently trying to identify a date with Paul Giles.

Whilst I readily accept that there were a number of actions agreed upon at Cardiff and that some of these were bound to take longer than others, I must express Napo’s concern at the clear refusal (against a previously agreed action from the Cheltenham meeting) to release the 90-Day Transition Plan. Apart from a brief snapshot which was seriously short on detail, this has still to see the light of day since the Unions were first promised sight of it at the initial meeting. I was genuinely shocked to hear at Cardiff that this was not to be issued to us after all; this was an act of bad faith of the type that mirrored what we regularly encountered from the former employer.

The list below represents some examples of other actions that we had expected would have seen priority action by now. Especially as many of them have featured as legacy issues from the disputes with Working Links.

Communications

As I write, I have just received disturbing news suggesting that one of your managers has claimed during a recent staff ‘roadshow’ that secret meetings have taken place with Napo and management over an operational matter. Suffice to say I am investigating this reported incident and that the events described are a complete fabrication. Moreover, if I receive sufficient evidence to prove that the report of the manager’s comments is accurate then I will be taking the appropriate action.

I am well used to seeing off previously unsuccessful attempts by employers who have sought to discredit Napo with misinformation, and I sincerely hope that this is not another example of such reprehensible behaviour.

Of far more importance however, is the negative feedback from these ‘roadshow’ events that, as reported to me, have featured comments such as: ‘it’s the Unions who are standing in the way of your pay rise’.

This example and the stream of glossy corporate messages that are being regularly issued to staff in the face of the continuing operational issues that we have sought to raise and engage with you on, are being received with a combination of cynicism and sheer disbelief by staff. At best they appear as clumsy ill-conceived propaganda, and at worst they represent a colossal failure by senior management to recognise the difficulties being experienced by their workforce.

The above situation is compounded by the intention to issue a staff survey, which from the feedback reaching me will likely be a total waste of time and precious resources, let alone the questionable rationale underpinning the charitable donations ‘incentive’. I have seen so many employers over the years who believe that staff surveys will give them an entirely different perspective about what is actually happening on the ground, as they have mistakenly reached the conclusion that the unions are simply making up stories (we do not) or are just an irritant to be simply ignored (we are not).

As and when it becomes possible for the unions and your SLT to meet again, I would hope that it would be possible for you to prioritise that engagement as I have been doing. This will provide me with the confidence that your team will have the appropriate level of leadership in place to enable them to make decisions where necessary.

Operational Issues

When your SLT met with the unions to discuss the transition and operational plan for the former Wales, DDC and BSWG CRC’s there seemed to be a clear understanding of one another’s position moving forward. Notwithstanding the non-appearance of the 90-day plan, we did get some encouragement in respect of how we might iron out some areas of the previous dispute and we identified some key areas where work was needed to stabilise the organisation and to assist staff during this latest period of uncertainty.

Of course, there were some areas where there was a difference of opinion and no expectation from Napo that we could resolve all of the issues. Nevertheless, promises to revert on our request to be part of the Transition Board have failed to materialise, while further announcements are made directly to staff that make no mention of the positive agenda being proposed by the unions. I still await sight of the emerging transitional plan and the reasons why we have yet to be invited to the Board.

Much was made in Cardiff about going back to a traditional probation approach. This was obviously welcomed by Napo, but it was acknowledged that it will only happen with an increase in staffing an adherence to existing work measurement tools and a change to discredited and dangerous working practices implemented by the incompetent previous providers whose footprints SEETEC have inherited. This is why we suggested that local JNCC’s should be established pending consideration of the wider collective bargaining agenda. The outstanding issues over the delivery of intervention work which in some areas had seriously declined even before the collapse of Working Links, show no sign of improvement and also need to be a priority subject for discussion.

Another concern discussed in Cardiff was the status of the minimum contact specification regime where we had expected an early invitation to engage with you at regional JNCC level to monitor progress here. We still await tangible proposals and suggested dates for engagement.

In terms of the transition of OM work to Wales, I am pleased to say that engagement between the NPS, Dawn Blower and the union reps from Wales is starting to take shape. The introduction of Sara Robinson will hopefully assist in enabling a smooth transition, but again there needs to be a clarity of message here so that staff who are likely to be impacted can consider their personal circumstances and raise questions in advance of the intended transfer to the NPS which is only just over six months away.

At our last joint meeting, the issue of workloads was discussed at length. KSS CRC acknowledged that workloads are considerably higher in the former Working Links areas and that this needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. The unions proposed a moratorium for staff involved in formal processes such as absence management and capability as a result of workloads, especially in the former Devon Dorset and Cornwall CRC areas. Your SLT agreed to review all the cases, and institute group and individual stress assessments while you considered the union’s request. Since then I have seen no formal response or any such initiatives, but have learned (again by way of announcements at a ‘roadshow’ event) that our proposal has been rejected. This has caused serious anger amongst our members, especially in that area of your estate. I am due to address the Napo SSW Branch AGM next month and I am fully expecting that there will be a call for a member’s ballot for action over this issue.

Another key issue that was on the Cardiff agenda was that of estates. Your team acknowledged that some of the (now enlarged) KSS CRC estate is in urgent need of action for operational as well as health and safety reasons. Reps had identified key location issues and we expected an update from the employer so that joint engagement and inspections could take place. We still await news.

Further work is also required on the future collective bargaining arrangements that meet the needs of both parties whilst acknowledging a wide geographical area. It was agreed that pan-CRC JNC’s will need to be established for collective negotiating such as pay, but that more local forums are required to look at issues such as staffing and workloads.

Agreement has still to be reached on the harmonisation of KSS and Working Links policies and Napo has made our view clear; we stand by the terms of the National Staff Transfer and Protections Agreement and any attempt to depart from that are simply non-negotiable. I also stated that I believe this longer-term discussion will have to wait until we know what the future landscape is for probation going forwards; one that may look markedly different from that we are in now.

It may be that this letter elicits further views from colleagues in Napo’s sister unions on these issues and any others not covered here and I genuinely hope that we can start to see tangible signs of progress on the foregoing. As you would expect I am under some pressure to convene a trade union side meeting to explore the possible options around regional and or collective disputes if we cannot move forward.

After nearly four years of being in such a position with Working Links it is a scenario that we could all do without, and I hope that you will agree that our time and energy would be far better spent in meaningful engagement with a view to reaching agreement.

I look forward to your reply and a suggested programme that unions and the employer can jointly work towards achieving within the existing term of your contract.

Yours sincerely

IAN LAWRENCE
General Secretary 

Napo at Work in the South West 14

Branch Report 17
May 2018

Dear Members,

Since the last report in March and the Labour motion to Plymouth City Council, the City is now Labour controlled post the May elections. This could well see an amended or new motion and a return to that forum on the state of things so far on the model and public safety issues we assert Working Links present.

Pay Issues

Members will be aware, excepting those at the top of their grade, that all staff are entitled to an annual incremental pay rise which is contractual. This is not a luxury or an option and the contract holders are obliged to pay the sums on time from the payroll at the end of April. Already May, yet it is unlikely members who are entitled to the increase will see it until the end of June.

Napo on the 24th April attended a special meeting with the General Secretary Ian Lawrence and our Unison colleagues. The approach was made by Working Links to talk about pay issues. To our surprise it became a meeting on the continued finances. The subject has now become controversial as the meeting generated a series of exchanges given our rising concerns. Before formal letters could be drafted the General Secretary had agreed to confidentiality pending a further meeting. The further meeting was promised to include the Directors of Working Links including at least 4 of them. At the meeting on the 24th April the unions heard a lengthy presentation by Finances Director. While part of this was on pay, which is important to improve our members working terms, we were concerned at what was stated that sort of detracted the point. Pay claims are expected to be lodged annually as part of the national arrangements. The long running and continued dispute with the Working Links model, the structures, and the failings on workloads and health and safety are all part of the continued mess of the Working Links way. However, finances have now become the dominant issue.

Members will also be aware of the joint circular that was sent out to all staff on the 3rd of May 2018 and copied below.

JTU 14-18
Dear Colleague,

The recognised Trade Unions across the three Working Links CRCs met with senior management in London last week. This meeting was separate from the ongoing dispute with the employer and was an exploratory discussion around pay and reward and the relevant financial issues.

It was agreed that the parties would meet again at the earliest opportunity, and that the following joint statement would be issued by the employer and Unions today. More news will be issued by your union representatives as soon as it becomes available.

Joint announcement from the Probation Trades Unions and Working Links on behalf of the DDC BGSW and Wales Community Rehabilitation Companies

To: All staff in DDC Wales and BGSW CRC’s

The Probation Trades Unions and Senior Working Links Management met last week to explore the prospects for establishing some continuity in talks about pay and reward, contractual incremental progression and the areas which the unions would want to take forward as part of a future pay claim.

It had been previously established that these talks would be independent of the ongoing dispute between the parties.

The employer reported that they are currently involved in talks with the MoJ and explained the work that they are undertaking as a result of the recent findings of the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee. This has led to some reassessment by all CRC contract holders around future funding streams and their capacity to meet the costing implications of the unions likely pay claims.

It was agreed to establish a series of further meetings at the earliest opportunity where Senior CRC Management as well as the directors of Working Links would meet with an equivalent number of union representatives to exchange information on a range of issues relevant to future pay and reward. Further announcements will be made as soon as more news becomes available.

Once the broad information of that meeting was made known to members, and given the seriousness of the implications contained as stated to the Unions, I was tasked by the General Secretary with responding directly to the new justice lead Ms D Blower and lead of the Wales part of the Working Links held contract.

The response from the lead of justice in an E-mail dated the 3rd of May 2018 included a challenge to what had been understood by the unions in the meeting. However, when a contract holder declares they want to exit the contractual agreement that can only trigger a particular response from the unions in order to secure all posts held by our memberships. There was no alternative explanation for what had in fact been offered. For members following the current situation I have copied in the correspondence below.

Dawn Blower Head of Justice Service
Working Links CRCs

3rd May 2018
Ref Meeting 24 04 18 London Unison building

In Confidence
Dear Dawn,

I am writing in my capacity as the Chair of the SSW branch of Napo. I have specific responsibilities to the members under all terms of their employment contracts. I am particularly concerned given the release of certain pieces of information from yourself and Mr R. Patel finance director of Working Links.

In order for Napo within the DDC area and the General Secretary for the regions to undertake appropriate actions, we seek that you make available certain pieces of data and material which relates directly to the total number of the Justice staff employed. How many of these in each of the CRC areas, the basis of their employment contracts whether they be Justice appointed under working links terms or NNC terms. Full time, part time, and sessional post holders. Those engaged on contracts Pre 2013 and who will be subject to the appendix B protected terms and conditions. If you are considering early retirement offers to assist the reductions of risks and voluntary redundancies to mitigate the seriousness of the situation.

Whether at this stage you’re contemplating potential redundancies and to understand that I wrote to Mr Wiseman on the 10th of April 2018 and copied to yourself

“However, our records indicate the last formal position of Working links and your own notice was that you would not be withdrawing section 188 notices. In fact you issued an update which notified an amended position and the last recorded file entry from yourself is dated 3 February 2016.”

Given the above quote from that letter and your dramatic announcement that had nothing to do with pay talks, it can be of no surprise to you that we require reassurance on the future security and protections of the jobs of our members. That, you will adopt formally all the appropriate requirements incumbent upon the contract holders and that you will notify the recognised Unions immediately, at risk measures for staff within the employment of the DDC area, become contemplated. You will need to reassure us that you will undertake notices to the appropriate authority should any DDC staff be placed at risk. You will need to publish in line with our terms and conditions the appropriate redundancy procedures for DDC staff.

Also where other engaged staff from the Working Links companies who may be at risk but will not be covered by DDC polices and could not be job slotted or transferred into justice area work. Whereby vacancies have to be ring-fenced for original transferred staff only. This follows the formal assurances that you gave the Unions when it was raised in the meeting.

I am sure you will be aware of the fact that the information required in this letter is a standard entitlement in these circumstances.

Although this is SSW branch correspondence you should treat this as the model letter for all Working Links controlled contract areas.

Yours sincerely,
Dino Peros Napo SSW Branch Chair.

This letter clarifies the union’s position as we understood their news. Effectively Napo is seeking to ensure what was clearly reported in the presentation and in a question and answer process from the Finance Director for Working Links, they actually did want to find ways to end the contract. To be fair, and not wanting to generate a who said what exactly debate, what was certain enough that the current arrangement of underfunded CRC costs could not continue on into the future. The risks of loss were too great and while the key arguments of financial borrowing service fees and credits continue the talks with MOJ shall be decided by the end of June.

In that news then there will certainly be no pay increase talks and this encourages a dissatisfied work force when you consider that other CRCs have already done significant deals in other areas. The response to the letter by e mail from the lead of Justice Working Links followed on the 03 05 18 below.

Subject: RE: Dawn Blower letter for information ref contractual notice 02 05 18

Good afternoon Dino

During our meeting on 24th April we were clear there were to be no reductions to CRC staff and I would be disappointed if the message to staff from unions was anything different to that. For absolute clarity:

CRC staff have not been put on notice of redundancy and there are no plans to do this. I trust this is welcomed.

This includes CRC people working within Corporate Services whose roles remain and they will now work specifically on CRC business except in a few cases where they may straddle both CRC and Employability services.

Should there be a situation where CRC staff positions are at risk at some point in the future then this would be raised with the unions. I stress again that this is not the current position.

There is no plan to "slot in" employability staff at risk of redundancy to CRCs although they will of course be eligible to apply for vacancies and we would welcome applications from our colleagues provided they meet the skill set requirements.

The circumstances are not as you describe and whilst we do not wish to withhold information there is no obligation to provide this. Happy to discuss what might be helpful at the next meeting on 15th however we are agreed that we will be keeping talks separate from the on-going dispute and will be keen not to stray in to these areas as per the current agreement.

I hope the above clarifies the situation and provides reassurance. Your interpretation of the information we shared isn't a true reflection of what was discussed and I do not expect any suggestion of CRC redundancies to be shared with our people, as there was no suggestion of this.

Thanks

Dawn Blower
Cyfarwyddwr Prawf
Probation Director

While this response was a reassurance and a small rebuttal to the bigger finance issues coming to surface in the earlier talks it did not go far enough to satisfy the unions concerns. When any company reports no money and no prospects on pay with delayed incremental entitlements while in many other parts of the contract areas there has been a cost spending reductions bulletin. In Working Links controlled areas many staff have just not been paid and many usual payments are all being held up. It is not surprising many staff become increasingly concerned. Obviously to re-engage the issues I followed the e mail with a second formal letter. It makes the position clear and the responsibilities for Companies in Contract with the MOJ that in fact they are not allowed to end their contracts. If this is a discovery to you reading this it is a real concern to think that the figures paid out to Working Links in their annual accounts is breath-taking when you look at the administration fees. I doubt there are any real losses just a less than desirable higher end profit margin than was understood in their clamour to grab at contracts. Despite this they could not realistically be allowed to leave for at least another 12 months from the agreed dates of the termination MOJ controlled process so the picture really is bleak.

I never heard Working Links whining or bleating when they waded in and altered members’ financial terms as they cut down their entitlements to a severance trick. Ok to be fair all those takers were volunteers. More fool them then and the arrangements are outlined in the management of CRC plans. You decide.

Dawn Blower Head of Justice Service
Working Links CRCs.

8th May 2018
Ref E mail response

Dear Ms Blower

Thank you for your reply to the letter dated 3rd of May 2018. I am surprised at your coverall response without substance or detail considering the seriousness of the facts put to the unions by yourself and the Working Links Finance director during the meeting of the 24th April.

In relation to any staffing reductions, the unions welcome such a reassurance but it was made clear neither you nor Working Links would be in a position to make any forward lasting decisions. For your clarity, at no point have I indicated a view that there would be staff reductions. I have a responsibility to ensure all members receive assurances that their jobs will be retained. You say

“CRC staff have not been put on notice of redundancy and there are no plans to do this. I trust this is welcomed"

Your statement is welcomed, however, you must appreciate the contradiction you go on to make.

"Should there be a situation where CRC staff positions are at risk at some point in the future then this would be raised with the unions."

It is the trade unions’ responsibility to ensure you have been approached in writing and to seek to guarantee protection of member’s jobs.

Having such a meeting on 24th April, claimed to be based on pay and rewards but which turned out to be a financial forecasting meeting where it was announced in fact, Working Links want to terminate or exit the contract based on the finances and profits.

What this means to us, is in your own current role under Working Links auspices any assurance will be worth nothing in a little over six months’ time, providing you follow the exit contract requirements. The threat that members will be at risk cannot be ignored for this reason. Working Links have to reconcile roles and the separation of the CRCs duplications and cross dependencies in jobs and other major strands.

Critically, financial issues that your Finance Director stated meant that you were not able to hold meaningful pay talks. In fact colleagues had asked if you could make the current pay bill. With these concerns and what is obviously a lack of genuine and full information from yourself, the notion that you assert that staff will not become at risk is just not credible.

Our understanding of staff employed under Working Links adjusted contracts within justice services, and who have less than two years employment, could well be dismissed, without any entitlements to a redundancy payment. Therefore, at no cost to Working Links and with reduced need to consult the unions to some degree. Save to say you still have to consult meaningfully on the procedures to be adopted in relation to such a process. This has been raised in my letter. You have ignored the critical questions.

In relation to legacy and full rights of protected staff you had no idea where the remaining contractual period will be passed on, other than a suggested return to Authority. Resale was ruled out and it was spoken of as the return to public ownership by your Director. Will you now categorically state what will happen to the staff who are outside of any protected legacy appendix B arrangements? What assurance can you provide for their jobs to be taken forwards after Working Links exit? It is only under a termination by the Authority whereby they would pay dismissal costs as stated

"redundancy payments for employees of the Contractor that have been or will be reasonably incurred by the Contractor as a direct result of termination of this Agreement;"

If you do not have sufficient finance currently for your obligations, then how can you manage the pay claims and other financial information above which extends beyond what you told the unions in April? What evidence have you to support any funding streams to exit on the required contractual terms? Keep in mind the contractors of the CRCs have no contractual basis by which you could exit the arrangements without all liabilities being settled.

The Contractor shall have no right to terminate this Agreement at law or under the terms of this Agreement.

This is the situation. Either Working Links retain as an obligation, or indeed is it Aurelius who should respond to this question?

In good faith the General Secretary extended a period of confidentiality whilst talks would start on the finances situation and how the membership should rightly have a pay claim met as well as the legal incremental entitlements.

However, despite the small and limited responses that were given to a series of important questions at that meeting, on the 1st of May the management released significant details of the finance situation to all staff. This reflected much of what was said to the unions and prior to the agreed joint statement publication. It upset many members who expressed concerns over the future viability of both Working Links and to the jobs they do.

You went on to state

There is no plan to "slot in" employability staff at risk of redundancy to CRCs although they will of course be eligible to apply for vacancies and we would welcome applications from our colleagues provided they meet the skill set requirements

What is clearer now is that you acknowledge in fact Working Links staff are at risk of real redundancy. Those staff on notice of risk can now apply for a DDC justice job or reasonable alternative redeployment. On what lawful redundancy process are these potential redeployments being offered? Why have you not consulted the unions on the process you intend to use? You will potentially now put DDC contracted staff at risk themselves in the short term. This cannot continue. We again ask what legitimate procedure are you engaging staff to DDC? It is inconceivable that you would not know that some Working Links staff have been offered alternate roles in DDC, without any process, in the past four weeks. This fact makes your claim above just not true.

We appreciate your attempt to reconcile concerns quickly, however your response is misleading and does not give me confidence that you will consult meaningfully, or release appropriately required information. These are not usual times however the rights to information to protect our members for negotiations is an obligation.

Yours Sincerely,
Dino Peros Napo Representative.

I am not expecting a response to this. There has been none to date. Membership shall be comforted to know that NAPO are continuing to ensure the protections are well managed and that all posts in justice Probation are ring-fenced to secure all staff protections should the continuing issues generate an influx of Working Links staff many of whom have received their consultation notices for redundancies.

The Meeting of the 15th May 2018

This was only scheduled for the unions because we were promised it would include the directors. Mr Bell the architect of the Working Links way. By the morning of the meeting in London all the reduced trade unions sides were present but by the 11th hour all the promised directors except the Financial Director had all bailed out. Mr Bell had only managed to make a tele-conference call. Claiming the rail fare was too expensive and that despite all the millions in the Working Links Aurelius accounts recently published that we are supposed to agree attendance is an option. There was some minor aside discussion on whether not attending is discourteous to the Unions and to the staff we are focused to represent protect and ensure you get the best terms and conditions. Mr Bell did not in his physical absence appear quite as on message as those present but you decide.

During the meeting we heard the contract holders state the same old same old. Their side offering nothing new whatsoever. Even worse nothing from Mr Bell that made the journey worth anything to anyone. Nonetheless we did establish the “in Confidence “arrangement was now ended and this report is as candid as it can be. There was some exchange on their desire to continue with the contract albeit dependant on further talks with MOJ. Coded speak for we are trying to get yet more money to run an unsafe model of offender management. They wanted a principled union agreement to assist that process. While we remain in dispute on the many issues this something the SSW branch could not support. The bottom line for them, Working Links, is that they realise their impossible situation they have placed staff. Less pay, poorer working conditions, fractured working structures, a general decline in morale and well being of many members. Disputes, grievances, and inappropriate use of disciplinary procedures at an unprecedented record high and still climbing. Hardly the recipe for a successful working partnership. The truth is they seem oblivious to the issues as they only want to talk about getting more money from the MOJ.

Despite this Working Links were informed by Napo, and they accept the realisation, Working Links have no power to rescind , end, or terminate, give any notice, in any walk away ideas from their toxic management and attitudes to a contract they have with the MOJ. It means we are stuck with them until the MOJ realise the future is not likely to develop anything and this is well evidenced by the failing metrics of the rising repeat and offender caseloads. The Finance Director painted the best picture he could from the failing caseloads figures.

We had already informed Working Links Senior management of the likely imposition on their failing and appalling case management model that deals with caseloads via telephone call. Regular branch report readers will recall the origins of the dispute with Working Links started over their obviously distorted in house certification process by Innovation Wessex. The small internal company that was supposed to check on quality and performance then verify a safe model. This was disputed as they were internal staff funded by Working Links doing whatever the paymaster required.

Napo objections to that model have all been borne out to date. The failing metrics and the Parliamentary Accounts Committee making some direction on the way things have continued, downwards. From here it is now confirmed that the working models will need to be changed to include minimum actual offender and officer face to face meetings. The Working Links model on workloads and staffing does not provide anywhere near enough staff for this new arrangement. Not to mention a whole new training programme and that of the minimum time we should see some skilled Probation Officer facility back into the caseload. Last point on this work issue is that of the required workloads for the full OASYS. Simply put all members should resist incalculable workloads

Napo is on record in branch reports and correspondences seeking early explanations when we were in the JNCC meetings about where the Justice budgets were to be spent. It was made clear to Napo in the recent meeting that some of the pressure on the Working Links spending has been for them to satisfy the Paymaster MOJ\PAC that all the staff being for or funded by public monies actually pays for the justice staff. I suspect the 4.23 million pounds additional payment Working Links received last year was not well regarded by the PAC inquiry as we discovered not 1 penny had found its way to support frontline staff. It had most certainly been reclaimed into the privateers, bank accounts. Can anyone honestly see the MOJ bankrolling another barrow full of cash without stipulations or a clear plan of spending? I don’t.

The point is that since the notice to define the staffing and who gets paid for what where and how, the Working Links response was to put their other contracted staff on immediate redundancy notices for consultation. What might the average Clapham Omnibus passenger deduce from that turn of events?

It struck a chord with me as it was this branch that raised questions and concerns in 2014 that the monies should only fund DDC staff who actually work in the DDC area. It was our fear that in fact Working Links would syphon and funnel monies to external parts of their other company activity. In fact it has now been admitted during that meeting justice monies public services monies has been directed to funding Working Links Middlesbrough other staff who deliver some back office functions for the CRCs. How much work and the detail remains to be examined and for what costs. Whether the reductions in DDC in light of this could be justified when you add the costs of the redundancies \ severances that were made.

Following this through we need to understand the costs of spending which now impacts on their flawed calculations. No further money and no prospects of more cash from the MOJ means a funding bail out nightmare. Napo starts to ask where has the money gone? Is all the spending and previous bonanza of funding staff cuts been lost in inappropriate refunding streams to external staffing? Now that the PAC have asked difficult questions has the stewardship of Working Links now put the whole of the CRC at some risk for which they are not telling.

So back to Pay. The news is there is no reward on offer as they claim no money. The accounts do not bear this out in an assessment of the books although Working Links continue to hide the real profits and losses in a coverall clause under the Aurelius parent company accounts on profit. One point noteworthy of their administration costs shown as a loss of upwards of a million pounds each year to run a CRC. Really? Come on really?

There we are then arriving at a place whereby the Contract holders have known all the time that incremental pay is due on the April 1st start date and pay should be adjusted but when it comes to staff pay entitlement they hold onto your money to pay off the bank loans and interest. When it comes to a pay increase oh look no money for the Workers. When it comes to anything like the terms and conditions of decent and fair treatment Working Links policy is to avoid change and pretend things are not as they really are. On that members continue to reject over work do not provide continued goodwill. Deliver your contractual obligations only. Ensure you maintain your terms and we will continue to support you. All credit to members who have steadfastly stuck by the principles and protections of their employment rights and we will continue to support those ends.

Dino Peros Napo SSW Branch Chair.