Register for updates and to access restricted/members content
GFIE: Government Initiative fails on Ex-Offenders Jobs
Going Forward Into Employment (GFiE)
The National Probation Service reveals its true colors regarding the employment of ex-offenders.
The National Probation Service is unwilling to set an example.
A disappointing reply to the ex-offender with initiative.
FOI response reveals unsatisfactory statistics
The government provides a pathway to employment for Civil Service positions specifically aimed at individuals who have recently been released from prison with a criminal record. This Gov. initiative, called Going Forward Into Employment (GFIE), is designed to assist those transitioning from incarceration to the workforce.
They feature a .gov website that includes information about GFIE jobs and specifically mentioned a Community Payback Supervisor. (pic above right) A few months later, that same job role was advertised in London. Craig, (not his real name), who was recently released from prison, saw this job listing and applied.
Competing alongside others in the everyday job market, he successfully landed the position after completing the online application, written assessments, and an interview with two local managers.
He was thrilled to receive a job offer. However, later, the Probation Service changed their mind upon finding out that Craig had a criminal record, something that Craig had never attempted to hide. At that moment, the UK National Probation Service remarked
"These behaviors are not aligned with expected behaviors for any person wishing to work with HM Prison & Probation Service" (below)
Craig had been employed for 32 years. Prior to his time in prison, he was with the same company for two decades. He possessed transferable job skills and substantial experience to fulfill the role of Community Payback Supervisor. The two probation office managers who interviewed him clearly believed in his qualifications, as he was offered the position. Unfortunately, he lost it due to having a criminal record.
The HMPPS identifies their values as
"Purpose" (Justice matters), "Humanity," "Openness," and "Together".
They clearly showed no effort to rehabilitate people through employment or assistance in stopping re-offending.
The GFiE program has strict rules about which 'TYPE' of Ex-offender can apply for GFiE Jobs. Craig was eligible to apply for GFiE roles, and the GFiE department confirmed this. After doing some further inquiries but only getting rude responses, he pieced together the true situation with GFiE roles. They had to be 'specially' advertised on 'GFiE', and then the applicant went through a 'Special GFiE' application process.
Craig had taken the difficult route,
Applying alongside the general public,
Submitting an application form and completing the competency-based questions connected with the Success Profiles G-Framework which the Civil Service currently uses.
He then had an interview with 2 managers at the Probation Service and again presented adequate responses to competency-based questions requiring examples of lived experience.
At the end, Craig got the job.
Unfortunately, he was not aware that he could only apply for that exact same job if it is advertised through GFiE. The GFiE process is,
Submit CV
Write a seperate paragraph stating why you want the job
All applicants via GFiE are then guaranteed an interview
Acknowledging that he was not chosen for the role, Craig sought further information. One might think that the PROBATION service would put more effort into helping the employment of ex-offenders, but sadly, that is not the case.
Earlier this year, he submitted a Freedom of Information request.
The truthful reality that an ex-offender had competed against the general public and emerged victorious was of little to zero consequence. He had metaphorically "filled out the incorrect form," rendering everything invalid.
UK Civil Service at its best.
Over a span of two years,
More than 1500 Community Payback Supervisor positions were established.
Sadly, only 14 of these roles were available to ex-offenders. (less than 1%)
The purported ‘flagship’ role that supposedly breaks down hiring barriers failed to make even 1% of its jobs available to ex-offenders.
Curiously, the agency tasked with that 0.9% hiring decision is the National Probation Service, which oversees rehabilitation initiatives.
They employ fewer than 1%
does this imply they believe rehabilitation is effective for less than 1%?
The initial response from the PROBATION service was viewed as rather disrespectful and dismissive and this reflects their stance on their reluctance to employ ex-offenders.
