Tagged: emails
More PCS Union And ‘Help To Work changes
> Following from yesterday’s post PCS Union And ‘Help To Work changes the following extracts come from a post on the PCS website on 25 April 2014 (link to full article at bottom of this post).
More worrying stuff….
Staffing and resources
PCS believe that there are not enough staff in jobcentres to deliver the additional work. With more staff leaving in June and beyond, workloads and stress will increase leading to longer waiting for claimants, potential for more incidents, and ill health for members. This understaffing must be addressed through more recruitment.
> None of which you need a crystal ball to work out.
Learning and Development
Districts have provided assurance to state that over 80% of staff are sufficiently trained on SR13/HtW. PCS raised specific concerns that some staff had only been sent emails or had not been trained in the English Language assessment process.
The GEC advises members not to complete the full requirements and new tasks where training has not been provided, and to make line managers aware. Seek advice from a local PCS representative if you want to raise your concerns in writing.
> So you – and the chance of you getting sanctioned – may be in the hands of a ‘Work Coach’ (snigger…) who may not actually know what they’re doing – although from personal experience that’s often the case with existing Advisers anyway. But this point may have some use in the future if you need to appeal a sanction – was the job coach qualified to make the decision to start with ? You might also point out in interviews that the PCS suggest they “not complete the full requirements and new tasks where training has not been provided”.
Extension to interview times
The project managers responsible for the SR13/HtW have stated that additional funding of 12 minutes for new claims interviews has been agreed by Treasury to deliver the additional tasks associated with Day One Conditionality and the English Language assessment. The 12 minutes was identified by a work study report of the pilot sites which is yet to be shared with PCS.
The GEC has received feedback that sites are not extending diary times by 12 minutes. The project management have stated that this would be a business decision, and although the additional funding will be allocated, Work Services management do not have to extend interview times. We have asked management to reconsider their position on this matter as it is unacceptable to expect members to complete more work in the same amount of time.
The GEC advises members to state that they cannot complete the new tasks in the same interview time, to make their line manager aware and seek PCS help if required.
Work Search Review interventions should be timed at 6 minutes. The GEC has raised similar concerns that this timing may not be adequate, nor is it currently being allocated at each jobcentre.
Delivery of interventions
PCS has received feedback that some jobcentres are proposing to conduct daily work search review whilst the claimant uses a Web Access Device (WAD). The GEC has requested that DWP make clear that this is not appropriate.
The work search review should entail challenging conditionality, and therefore has the potential to create a flashpoint. The Jobcentre Plus Environmental Guide (JPEG) sets out clear and specific standards for these interventions taking place at a desk. Not only does this give the member of staff appropriate distance and an escape route, there is also the use of a panic button as a control measure.
> Good grief ! Siege mentality or what ? If only we on the other side of the desk had an escape route.
“the use of a panic button as a control measure” has a nasty ring about it too. Maybe they should be issued with tasers or electric cattle prods too ?
Even as part of freedoms and flexibilities, minimal space and exit routes should be adhered to. Management produced guidance in November 2012 states “there are no purely design-based constraints within JPEG.”
Any changes to front of house business delivery should be supported a local risk assessment. The GEC cannot conceive it possible for a risk assessment to not identify serious risks in challenging conditionality and possibly identifying a doubt whilst stood or sat directly next to a claimant.
> So perhaps the best “escape route” would be to refuse to implement the measures that might put you in danger ? Must be something in the Health & Safety sphere covering that ?
Group Signing
Current SR13/HtW guidance states that weekly and daily interventions cannot be delivered by group session, as the treasury funding was based on individual face to face interventions.
This has now been changed within the last week to allow for group daily or weekly jobsearch reviews. The intention is still to allow for individual signing interactions following the group session.
> Now I hadn’t heard of this before… is this how they intend to deal with increased numbers of signing – stuff 50 people in a room and do it en masse ?
The GEC have asked that clear guidance is produced centrally on how these sessions will take place, including a risk assessment on the process.
Management have stated that group sessions should not be used in this way until the guidance has been produced and shared. Branches should challenge locally and escalate to national level if group signing is being conducted without the proper guidance and risk assessment.
Changing of attendance times
At the meeting on 24th April, DWP were not able to provide a clear reason for the instruction to change attendance times/days for weekly signing every four weeks.
They have denied that there is policy intent to ‘frustrate claimants off benefit’; they will provide PCS with clarification on why the guidance exists. Branches are asked to send in examples of local instructions which direct advisers to change times more frequently without reasonable logic.
> I would love to see the official interpretation of “reasonable logic” – more scary perhaps is the implication that the PCS might actually accept an explanation as reasonable logic, and thus tell members to enforce it.
Pilots
As reported in DWP/BB/069/14, the GEC were not consulted at all on the pilots in Bradford, Cardiff and Poole. DWP have apologised for this lack of consultation, and will be providing the evaluations for our analysis.
Management have stated that increases in footfall were managed through changing office layout, and there was no increase in incidents on the pilot sites. PCS has expressed concerns that the pilot sites may not have implemented the full measures, and therefore the findings may invalid.
> Just wait till everywhere is doing it ! I suspect it may take more than just moving the furniture around
There is more – i think these bits are the ones that affect those of us facing daily signing directly, but you might want to check the full article at the link below, and comment if you read anything differently.
North East police and councils tapping into phone calls and emails
The region’s police forces are snooping on phone calls and emails 53 times every day, it has been revealed – triggering an investigation.
The surveillance watchdog has raised the alarm over forces using powers to tap into communications data far too often, warning privacy may be at risk.
And it announced an inquiry into whether there should be stricter curbs on the police and other law enforcement bodies – to ensure snooping is not an “automatic resort“.
A report to Parliament revealed that forces in the North-East and North Yorkshire tapped into communications data a staggering 19,444 times in 2013.
The highest total was recorded by Durham police (6,218), followed by Northumbria (6,211), North Yorkshire (4,058) and then Cleveland (2,957).
Authorisation is granted to uncover the “who, when and where” of a communication, such as who owns the phone, or email address, or computer IP address.
The police also learn who that person was in contact with electronically – but not what was said in that communication.
The powers are granted under the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa), which the Coalition altered after protests, to curb excessive spying.
His report concluded: “It seems to me to be a very large number. It has the feel of being too many.
“I have accordingly asked our inspectors to take a critical look at the constituents of this bulk to see if there might be a significant institutional overuse.
“This may apply in particular to police forces and law enforcement agencies who between them account for approaching 90 per cent of the bulk.”
Nationwide, most communications were tapped into to “prevent or detect crime, or prevent disorder“, followed by “emergency, to prevent death or injury“.
Durham Police mounted a strong defence of its use of covert tactics, arguing almost everybody now used a mobile phone and the internet.
The force insisted it “takes the privacy of individuals seriously” and that every application under Ripa is considered by a senior person independent of the investigation.
Detective Superintendent Lee Johnson said: “Some individuals in society have no consideration of the rights of others and commit crime and make use of phones to enable the commission of the crime.
“When identifying the location of a missing person, a wanted person, or how a phone has been used in the commission of a crime, it is now an important investigative tool to make use of call data in locating someone, or proving their criminality.
“The public expect the police service to make effective use of tools available to them to protect vulnerable individuals in society, or identify offenders and bring them to justice.”
And Home Secretary Theresa May backed forces, saying: “Communications data is vital in helping to keep the public safe: it is used to investigate crimes, bring offenders to justice and to save lives.”
The annual report also listed many local authorities which snooped on phone calls and emails last year, including York (80 times) and Redcar and Cleveland (69).
However, a spokesman for Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council said its high figure was explained by its regional role coordinating ‘Scambusters‘ trading standards crackdowns.
In fact, only one of the 69 authorisations listed in the watchdog’s report was actually carried out by Redcar and Cleveland, he added.
Similarly, a spokesman for York City Council said its high figure was the result of its similar regional role in tackling ‘e-crime‘.
It said it applied through the National Anti-Fraud Network to identify those behind the telephone numbers they were investigating, but not the content of the messages.
Colin Rumford, City of York Council’s Head of Regional Investigations, said: “We make applications through the National Anti-Fraud Network to identify the people and organisations behind telephone numbers that we’re investigating as part of our sizeable remit to work for the national trading standards e-crime team, the regional trading standards Scambuster team and local consumer fraud.
“None of the applications relate in any way to the interception of messages between individuals.”
All fire authorities and ambulance services in the region reported that they did not use the powers.
Source – Northern Echo 10 April 2014
UNEMPLOYED IN TYNE & WEAR 