Following the outcome of the indicative ballots organised by Napo UNISON and GMB on the 2025-2026 pay offer, the Unions were invited to meet with Lord Timpson and HMPPS CEO James McEwen on Monday 9th March.
Since then, extensive negotiations with senior officials have taken place and have resulted in an improved but conditional offer of a 6% increase to pay and allowances, the continuation of talks on the future of the Probation Service and a joint review of future arrangements for pay, in particular the Competency Based Framework (CBF). Your Probation Negotiating Committee have been meeting regularly to receive reports from your Negotiators.
The latter stages of this process has been facilitated by the involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Timpson and the TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak.
Position of the Probation trade unions
The Joint Statement sets out the factual position that has been arrived at via these negotiations. We have been advised by our sister unions UNISON and GMB that they will be recommending acceptance of the offer.
Napo will now be presenting the offer to our members following confirmation from the parties that this is the best position that can be achieved through negotiation following HMPPS’s rejection of a counteroffer from Napo for an 8% increase, as requested by your Probation Negotiating Committee (PNC), on the basis that no further money was available from the Government.
The pay offer is accompanied by conditions, specifically; a commitment to workload reform and commitment to a negotiated pay review process
It is now for Napo members to decide on the merits of the offer. We will present a factual account of how we have arrived at this position and allow our members the opportunity to vote for it.
Commentary
The improved headline offer of 6% has come because of the tremendous response from our members who roundly rejected the previous 4% offer by a huge 89% majority in a ballot result that was unprecedented in Napo’s recent history. As stated above, Napo did our best to seek further improvements but this approach was rejected on the basis of the current economic situation and the fact that the new offer is among the very highest within the civil service in this pay year which, unlike a current offer in another government department does not come with a requirement to agree material changes to contractual terms and conditions.
This is the best offer available through negotiation. If members decide that the offer is unacceptable then, as has been made clear throughout the pay campaign, it would require a sustained campaign of industrial action to try and convince the government to return to negotiations where any outcome would be uncertain. In making their decision on the likelihood of such a campaign succeeding, members will want to take into account the Government’s decision to reject our counter-offer, the limited impact of other such campaigns elsewhere in the public sector, as well as their own financial situation.
If members vote to accept the offer of 6%, the employer has indicated that the pay uplift would be paid in May 2026 and backdated to April 2025.
Members are invited to read the various documentation attached in advance of balloting arrangements and consultative meetings for Napo members. Details of which will follow at the earliest opportunity.
The final decision to accept this offer rests with Napo members.
110 responses
This is still an insult given the excessive workloads and poor staff retention
It really is an insult, I hope probation colleagues will continue to reject this terrible offers. 8% minimum !
Insulting. Continuing to be undervalued and overworked.
Do not roll over and take it. Reject reject reject.
I certainly will be. Unless we take a stand nothing is going to change.
THIS!!!
Considering our 2026 pay rise is due in a few days, perhaps 6% for April 2025 AND 6% for April 2026 would be fair?
No chance. We will be lucky to get anything. Just watch. We either fight now or accept defeat
Do we have any news on this year’s offer?
Hi Graham, just to confirm, negotiations for 2026 have not yet begun. Members will be asked to vote on whether they accept or reject the 2025/26 pay claim that has been under negotiations since last year.
I think it would be very reasonable to ask for another 3 year pay deal which would see an increase of 6% for last year, this year, and next year.
Can anyone clarify, if we accept and I’m on pay point 2, I will move to pay point 3 in April (through CBF) and receive 12 months back pay for pp1 and then one month for pp2 if we get the uplift in May?
Hi there, We will holding member meetings shortly where these questions and more can be answered. Please look out for an email next week that will haave dates and times
it is outrageous that the probation service is still being compared to other government departments and comments like “among the very highest within the civil service in this pay year” is not acceptable, how many civil servants from these comparable government departments have been killed, stabbed or assaulted in the past 12 months? how many are exposed to or receive the same level of verbal abuse to those of us who work in the probation service?Being one of the highest is not acceptable we should be receiving the highest increase!
Would we then get a 2026-2027 offer?
Negotiations for 2026-27 will commence in due course
But would that be an offer of any significant amount? As a service whenever we have had any uplift to write home about we have then been punished for several years by being given 0.1% repeatedly. ‘Stay in your lane’ type response. I would welcome 6% for 25/26 but not at the expense of 26/27 and beyond being negligible poultry and insulting figures.
What does due course mean? This offer of 6% is last years pay rise, are we going to have to wait another year for this coming years pay rise?
I’ve been saying this for a while now . Admin staff should be band 3 PSO band 4 PO band 5.
Admin staff are seriously under paid the amount of work they have to do does not reflect I there pay.
PSO are seriously underpaid and PO too. Criminal justice departments are one of the lowest paid . WHY i ask ?
I totally agree with you. Am hoping the unions will actually agree for this in 26/27 pay deal.
The work that we do is seriously undervalued and underpaid.
Beyond a joke
In this current economic climate, and with all that is happening around the world, it may be time to accept this offer and move forward.
You may not be able to afford to pay your mortgage, out fuel in your car or heat your home/water with the state of what is going on currently… everything is set to continue to rise…
So isn’t that the point of 12%? An increase in line with inflation, the cost of living and other similar professions that earn far more. 6% reflects none of this!!
And let’s not hear any of that “we don’t do this job for the money” nonsense, because very few of us can afford to live on pennies.
Exactly!!!
Band 3 in the DWP is £27,849 so this should be the same across the board for all civil service employees. Then increase as SEO, HEO levels accordingly
I would like more detail on the below, what does the employer mean? More details please on what the workload reform would be and a pay review process.
“The pay offer is accompanied by conditions, specifically; a commitment to workload reform and commitment to a negotiated pay review process”
Hi there, We will holding member meetings shortly where these questions and more can be answered. Please look out for an email next week that will haave dates and times
Personally, I will reject the offer and would suggest that an 8 % settlement would have been a meeting half way’ scenario!
However, I suspect with the prospect of 6% backpay over 12 months will result in an ‘accept’ majority in the indicative vote.
At least we’ve shown them to be the liars they are and given them a bloody nose!
Hello,
At the end of March 2025, my salary was £26,475. It then increased to £27,670, with this rise backdated in June 2025.
Based on the information provided, can you confirm whether my salary will now be backdated to £29,330 (from £27,670)? Additionally, subject to successfully passing CBF, would I then progress to the next pay point of £30,687 year 26/27?
I’ve been with the service for over 7 years court admin then June last year PSO started on £26.475 so if this pay deal goes head then the first point of pay will be 28k with the 6% pay increase the second £29k is this right
Does this include going up a pay band for last April, which we missed and also again this April in line with current CBF? So actually we gain the 6% plus 2 pay points for 2026?
How is a shift from 4% to 6% being presented as “the best offer available through negotiation”?
Members were originally told that 4% was wholly unacceptable — “an insult” that fell far short of the 12% claim and failed to reflect years of below-inflation pay. 
If that was the benchmark, then a marginal increase to 6% still leaves us at only half of what was deemed necessary. On what basis is that now considered meaningful progress rather than a continuation of the same problem?
The core issues haven’t changed. Pay has lagged behind inflation for years, and the cost of living pressures facing staff are not easing — if anything, they are intensifying. 
So the question is simple:
If 4% was an insult, why is 6% now being framed as acceptable?
At what point does negotiation become reframing rather than delivering?
Because 6% is better than 4% and I personally would just like this over and done with! Especially if we still get our payment increase. We can go again then for this year. Realistically we were never going to get 12%, or 8% and people won’t strike. Let’s not cut off our noses to spite our faces.
I would like to know if we will get our next CBF Pay increment starting 1st of April or not – else this is not worth it. If we do not start to see CBF being deployed 1st of April this might have to be considered a firm rejection.
Agreed and exactly what I asked. Awaiting a response. That needs to be clear before we vote.
Agreed. Many members of staff are suffering the cost of living rise and need a little extra. My only issue is that it will come in May’s salary and not when it should. It could be paid into accounts quicker than May.
Exactly what they expect us to do. Give in and roll over like we always do while the long term problem of recruitment and retention continues. A Police Constable earns more than a qualified Probation Officer.
This is the way it has always worked dangle the carrot pull it back dangle a bigger carrot but this time with conditions – no one looks at ‘the conditions’ only the 6% do not be dragged in and say want this to end. Its the lower end of the scales that always suffer – we are a service and we owe it to our colleagues to fight everyone’s corner. I have been around long enough to remember not having a pay rise for 10 years. We are now so far behind every other profession its degrading. If we are ever to catch up and be worthy of our roles then we must be paid for it because this job gets harder by the day.
Well said.
THIS!
Very well said!!
6% is embarrassing.The initial request was for a 12% increase, the union appears to have given up and to be proposing acceptance of this offer. Hopefully the members don’t give up and continue to fight for a just and well deserved pay rise.
I strongly agree. We have been strong till now. So not accept 6% – its an absolute insult.
AGREE!!!! Really hope members don’t roll over and agree to this.
Minimum wage is to increase to almost £13 in April 2026, PO grade wage is just over £21, does this offer actually reflect the work we do, the extra hours we work, the commitment to the PS under extreme pressure and the changing climate of risk and vast multi agency working. If we vote against it, the fear of the offer being rejected, when it has already been noted that 6% has been offered, that’s unfair. That offer should not be rescinded, there was obviously negotiations that led to this being offered, suggesting the initial offer was poor. If the unions believe this offer is unacceptable, which I do, then negotiations need to continue with a view that the pay offer is increased. And the mention of potentially rescinding the updated offer of 6% if it is not accepted is far from fair.
Reject. We need to take industrial action.
Do they think we’re clowns?
Obviously!
What percentage pay rise are M.Ps getting ?
With inflation rising, the cost of living increasing, and the added pressures expected from the new sentencing bill, now is the moment to exert pressure and push back to hold the employer to account. Industrial action has historically been a powerful tool in securing fair pay. Hold your nerve 💪
I am just being mindful to consider the wording. NAPO accept this is the furthest we can get and accept that this is the furthest we can get with negotiation but has not yet said we accept this offer outright. However CPOs wording seems to suggest the unions have accepted this offer. I appreciate the time and energy put in by our Pay Negotiation Committee and I am sure their work has not been easy around this. Forcing the CS hand into quickly finding 2% down the back of the couch could demonstrate the concern of CS if we move to Industrial Action / WTR
I will be leaving the service this is an insult. If they cannot respect those with a commitment from lengthy service and only protect and provide financial incentive to those starting at the bottom of the scale….. good luck as I am one of many staff leaving and when there is even less staff with experience I just HOPE there is no consequences to the the management of risk in our communities
I too will be leaving. Can anyone confirm if we still get the back pay for the last 12 months we have been underpaid, if we have already left the service when a deal is agreed?
Yes, you would be entitled to any back pay regardless if you are still in the service. This will not be paid automatically though, you would need to chase SSCL to request the payment.
Can we ensure that we don’t have to wait another 12 months for our next ‘pay rise?’
Okay, What about April 2026? do we get a pay rise this year as this is negotiated for last year or will the 2026 increase come in 2027?
It seems we are being played – that 6% was always the offer and the went in low to force our hands into accepting. Why else would this (supposedly impossible) increase have come so quickly. Perhaps time to reject.
If HMPPS can suddenly find an extra 2% to move from 4% to 6%, it really does beg the question — what else is hidden down the back of the MoJ sofa?
For a PSO on a starting salary, that increase amounts to roughly £360 a year after tax — about £30 a month. That’s what all this negotiation delivers in real terms.
Are we seriously expected to fold and roll over for a measly 2% more?
At a time when the cost of living is still rising, this doesn’t come close to reflecting the reality staff are dealing with. It feels completely out of touch.
And when hundreds of millions can be written off on tagging contracts, it’s hard not to see this for what it is — not a meaningful offer, but a token gesture.
TBH is is disgusting, look back to 2018 minimum wage was roughly £7.80PH, meaning starting salary for a PQIP was roughly £15 hour, starting salary has not much changed… but look at the minimum wage £12.70 ish !! the government forces increase of salaries elsewhere yet does not reward its staff…
If they followed their annual min wage increase, the starting salary would be around 40k, with top band for PO being around 50k.
We are aware when applying we work with complex people, who can lack boundaries, morals, key skills etc and as a result we are rarely rewarded with positive outcomes, but face increasing workloads, abuse and in rare occasions have been physically assaulted. All other civil servants have security in likes of DWP, no tolerance policies etc Probation expect amazing individuals to work miracles for peanuts !
I would also advise everyone to review the sentencing act 2026, a magistrate friend has highlighted after he completed 4hr of death by power point, if everything is brought in it will actually create a great deal more work for probation officers and an expectation of responsibility!
We need more money for this….
If we’re backward 2025 6% then wont we end up paying more tax on it as part of 2026 tax?
It strikes me as too little too late but sure many will be grateful to even get a response after all the waiting games of government.
The workload promises also sound pie in the sky, based on low staffing levels and office requirements.
I want more than 6%. It remains an insult given what we do. However, can we sustain the pain to do that and is 8% worth the pain.
Maybe we regroup for next years claim and challenge for the rise we really deserve, not a mere 12%. The genuine minimum for what we do. I don’t think £100,000 a year is asking for too much for the risk we manage and the responsibility we take. Let’s wait to fight for when we ask for pay that reflects the skill of the job we do.
Given how far we have fallen behind our Prison and Police MOJ colleagues (A pathetic 11% cost of living increase in 16 years compared with around 40% for those professions!), shouldn’t we be demanding at least comparable pay – a request of 12% was already an insult when we have fallen so far behind the standard of living we had back in 2010. Wasn’t 4% all they could afford, now it’s suddenly 6%? Didn’t they threaten then that if we didn’t accept we would lose that offer. They can afford it when they choose to. They were banking on their staff saying “well we’re now in a new negotiation period, so let’s start renegotiating then”. No let’s negotiate now. Because they will use exactly the same strategy next year, because it will have worked and because they are abusive employers, who prey upon vulnerable employees who are too scared to fight for their rights, in case they lose the already insulting offer made almost a year too late. I would not vote to accept 6% and am willing to strike.
Completely agree with this comment. 6% is another insult, I hope members can come together to show how they truly feel. We have yet again, more work incoming and the employer knows this. I will not be voting to accept 6%, as difficult as that will be in the interim – I’m ready to take part in industrial action because enough is enough. I’m not about to wait to see ‘what happens’ with the next negotiations – lets do this now, properly.
Agree it’s disrespectful that a magical extra 2% can be found. Just goes to show they can find extra when the pressure is put on. It is so worth to keep pushing for more and not give in because there are major sentence management changes afoot and they need us to make it work.
It costs me over £10 A DAY in fuel just to go to work because I have been placed 31 miles away from home even though there are nearer offices. With rising electricity and other living costs, the pay rises offered are pitiful. We slog our guts outs in stressful roles just to pay bills and pay to go to work. They are saying they will recruit more PO’s – but how do they intend to keep them? People will realise what it is like and leave because the pay is not at a level which will encourage retention and reflect the nature and impact of the role.
We are nothing like other civil services departments who get to drive a desk and don’t have to deal with difficult people daily or make decisions about risks and people’s lives which have consequences.
Will we be backdated for overtime that has been completed and paid during 2025-2026? Had we received the pay increase in April 2025, we would have been paid an additional 6% for all of this overtime. If we are having our contracted hours backdated, surely overtime should be backdated also?
This I would like to know too..
Absolute embarrassing 6% we should hold out for at least 8% and which side is Lord Timpson playing for what about a fair pay deal for staff so we can support his so called moto to give people second chances in life and his other so called moto of supporting frontline staff what about giving hard working staff a chance to do their job and paid fairly but then again I forgot he is a politician and a very wealthy businessman.
I will be rejecting this appalling offer! I’m disgusted that all unions are backtracking, urging members to accept this! 6% is NOT the 12% they initially recommend!
What happens if pay deal is agreed but some like myself have left the service this month for good and no longer HMPPS will SSCL and shared services still remember us to pay are back dated pay or just right us of and forget about us as a cost cutting exercise .
I read comments – and having been a union member for number of years the appetite for strike action in the past has been limited and in fact it comes at financial costs. Reluctantly I would accept the offer but hope that a fairer system is imposed – I proposed that up to and including Band A have bigger % rise and those who are above this pay grade have less for example a Band 2 with 6% pay rise will have £1200 rise where as a Band C has over £4000 pay rise is this a fair system??
This is a weak and disappointing update from NAPO.
We asked for 12%. You described the 4% offer as insulting. We voted overwhelmingly to reject.
We then asked for 8% and have been told 6% is the best and final offer we will get. We have been bullied and threatened that the offer may well be rescinded if we choose not to accept it.
The language is this update is shocking. Why is 6% suddenly now acceptable? We are being urged to consider the limited impact of other campaigns and our own financial positions etc…. Clearly attempts to persuade us to just roll over and take it. We are considering our financial positions. Our position ages are not commensurate with our roles, the risks and responsibilities we carry and certainly not with the cost of living.
Why the turnaround? Unless NAPO know something we don’t. In which case, a little more transparency and clarity would be appreciated instead of this woolly, vague language that doesn’t make any sense.
We deserve a strong union that fights for us and we expect leadership and transparency with that.
Will we be receiving our increment on time this year?
I need more information on this and I understand this is coming.
Initially though I’m disappointed about the language being used here by NAPO to suggest that 6 per cent is acceptable.
Furthermore, I am angry about the narrative around this being the best civil service offer. It’s not comparable when these organisations (even the Prison Service) have not been subject to the same pay freezes for years.
We are now in a position where it feels like once again we are being manipulated into accepting half of what is right (after a year campaign and with the cost of living) and this years pay deal hasn’t even started yet!
It’s not good enough.
Agree
It would appear to me that there are 2 core pay issues here that need addressing, and approaching independently. The first relates to the depreciation of basic pay when contrasted against comparable partner Government and CJS agencies (Please refer to https://www.gmb.org.uk/assets/media/documents/jtu-02-2025-probation-pay-claim-2025.pdf). This needs addressing by way of a basic uplift in pay points. And then the second matter of the cost of living increase can be considered, based on inflation factors etc. I feel that we are being drawn in to negotiations that conflate the 2 issues, to the benefit of the employer. I’m not confident that the Unions are not being coerced into being complicit in this, in trying to achieve an offer that on the face of it looks less insulting, and are missing the core point of the campaign. I am a Unison member by the way, but we need to be aligned across NAPO, Unison and GMB on this.
I will be voting to accept this offer.
The CBF process is very unfair for those at the top of their pay bands, we have had to struggle for years and years to reach it when new staff members get there in no time these days. Experienced staff get no reward. Strike action again doesnt work, been there done that a few times, Probation are good at planning ahead for strike days ensuring nobody has appointments on the day so it doesn’t really inconvenience any service users but will affect our pensions. Personally I will probably accept the offer and the hope new negotiations for this year will be kinder to us .. wont hold my brath though
I agree, we are worth more than 6%, but negotiations only work when both sides can walk away and say they didn’t loose.
12% over two years 25/26 and 26/27 would get us the 12% we want and the Government to say they only gave us 6% for the 25/26 period
If we can’t get an acceptable deal via negotiations, then we the members of NAPO have to be prepared to take a stand. WE (the members) are the power of the Unions, with out us the union is nothing.
Agreed, if we were told 6% this year and 6% next year, then that’s something we could work with.
It’s a strong no vote from me.
What will happen with CBF for those at the top of their pay band?
I am a thirty + years in service and if it was not for the position of “pension trapped” would have left around 8 years ago. I am afraid that this remains insulting and underwhelming and I can fully appreciate why people vote with their feet. At the risk of being archaic I bemoan the times when we were valued. I am sure that this will be accepted, although that is more about capitulation than success, and given no one can actually afford to strike it is almost a given that we will be “grateful” for the raise and backpay; who has already spent it ?! And once you all breathe a sigh of relief we can literally say “oh, here we go again” given we have no agreement for this year!. but as the enormous sum of money (!!!) will have just landed I am sure that we will be reminded how lucky we are and not to push again and again.
Sorry… must dash… just about to open my new community charge bill, energy bill and need to do my grocery shopping.
As someone on top of scale for a long time I have lost, over the years, a number of days leave with no recompense. While others have reached top of scale quickly we have been left behind with no percentage increases for years. I will also remind all that any back pay we get will be taxed out of existence. The last increase we got ( the first for years on my pay point) I ended up with the monthly increase (which was derisory) being exceeded by the increase in tax.
Stay strong – Reject – We need to take industrial action. Enough is enough and 6% is an insult still when 12% was asked for.
As a person who lives alone with a mortgage and at the top of band 3, I struggle month to month to survive; I don’t drink or smoke and very rarely go out (due to lack of funds) …. a holiday would be nice, but that is completely out of the question. Minimum wage is £13 per hour, I earn £16.45 an hour and deal with potentially dangerous people on a daily basis – a 6% increase is still insulting … we need to dig our heels in and fight this one, otherwise we are always going to be seen as rolling over and retreating back into our holes – easily controlled and overworked!! No, not this time ….
The Unions attitude to the pay offer is also shocking almost like they have settled for the 6%. what is your contingency plan? what will you be doing for this financial year?
Industrial action should be taken then if thats what will make the difference, given a decade of other services within the CJS having significant pay increases. If NAPO support this and say its the best they can do – the union has already folded. If they can do more they should do more.
I completely agree. The fact that the offer jumped from 4% to 6% without any real pressure or industrial action shows they clearly had more money sitting there from the start. It feels like they’re testing how little they can get away with, rather than genuinely valuing the workforce. Given that other public sector and CJS roles have seen far higher increases over the years, there’s no reason to believe 6% is the ceiling. Industrial action might be the only way to force that level of seriousness from them. This affects every single one of us, top to bottom. Different grades, same disrespect. If we don’t come together now, they’ll keep treating the entire service like it’s disposable.
NAPO rejected the 4% and stated it was insulting… 6% is still insulting yet NAPO have accepted this??? I find the union accepting this offer insulting!!!
To be clear, Napo hasn’t accepted the 6%. Unison and GMB are recommending their members accept the offer. The PNC have however acklowledged that negotiations are exhausted and the next step is for members to decide on the offer being presented to them
For a workforce consistently praised for its contribution to public protection, rehabilitation, and reducing prison pressure, it is quite understandable that staff are questioning whether a 6% rise — still below what unions originally sought — genuinely reflects the value, accountability, and complexity of the work we do.
So while the movement to 6% is a step rather than a standstill, I am still contemplating if this is in fact recognition or the minimum possible improvement after years of falling behind. I do not think it is unreasonable to expect an offer that aligns not just with inflation, but with the level of responsibility I carry every day.
I’m extremely disappointed by this outcome and by what appears to be the Union’s acquiescence. Yet again, it feels as though the lower bands have been overlooked, and the work we do is not being recognised.
If the Union believes that approximately £13.88 per hour (previously £13.10) is now an acceptable rate of pay for someone on the top of Band 2, I would strongly suggest revisiting the role and removing many of the job specifications and expectations. At this point, one can only assume the Service believe our work consists solely of scanning and sorting documents.
This pay level is equivalent to that of a junior or apprentice role. It certainly does not reflect the years of experience many of us have, nor the range and complexity of the tasks we carry out.
The blanket percentage rise is glaringly unjust. Many people will now feel less inclined to go out of their way, coach, or support colleagues who are earning £10k more than they are.
There seriously needs to be a job evaluation of case admin/band 2 roles, PSO role and PO roles. I strongly believe given the work and responsibilities that all these roles needs to move up a band, in order to retain experienced staff and value the work we ALL do.
Please do not forget that year after year, Probation staff have faced 0–1% pay rises, which is exactly how we’ve ended up so far behind. For those of us already at the top of our pay band, a 6% rise barely touches the years of erosion we’ve already absorbed.
The Public Accounts Committee report (4 Feb 2026) gives official parliamentary confirmation of what we have been warning about and living through:
Excessive and unsafe workloads
Chronic staffing shortages
Emotional strain and trauma built into the culture
Constant crisis‑driven change
Falling performance and declining safety
Growing public protection failures linked directly to understaffing
These conditions cannot be fixed by a below‑inflation 6% offer.
The PAC was clear:
The Probation Service is “pushed to the brink of collapse”.
It is collapsing because it cannot attract or retain qualified staff.
Those who remain are being worked beyond breaking point.
Public safety is now at risk due to chronic under‑investment.
If the government wants safe supervision, reduced reoffending, and a stable workforce, then serious pay restoration is essential.
A 6% rise — after years of pay suppression — does not come close.
This is exactly why we must stand together and push for a meaningful, restorative pay award, not another sticking plaster.
Key Findings – Public Accounts Committee Report (4 Feb 2026)
Probation Services “pushed to the brink of collapse”
1. The probation service is under such severe strain that public safety is at risk
The PAC warns that probation performance has deteriorated to the point where it seriously impedes the ability to protect the public. Reoffending is rising, recalls are at record levels, and the service is failing on basic statutory functions.
2. Workloads are unmanageable – 118% capacity and climbing
Probation officers have been working at 118% capacity for several years, with evidence suggesting the real figure is even higher.
Workload pressure is directly linked to:
Burnout
Stress-related absence
High turnover
Inability to meet statutory duties
The PAC describes a working culture built on “emotional strain” and “trauma.”
3. Chronic staffing shortages – vacancy rate now 21%
Vacancies in core probation officer roles rose from 14% (2021) to 21% (2025).
This is thousands of missing staff—leaving remaining officers doing the work of 2–3 people, year after year.
4. Key performance measures have collapsed
In 2024–25, probation met only 7 of 27 performance targets.
Risk of harm was correctly assessed in only 28% of cases, down from 60% in 2018–19.
[telegraph.co.uk]
This means dangerous individuals are being supervised with inadequate assessment and monitoring.
5. Serious Further Offences (SFOs) rising sharply
SFO rates increased by 55% between 2021–22 and 2023–24.
[russellwebster.com]
This rise in murders, rapes and violent harm is directly linked to system collapse and staff overwork.
6. Record recall levels showing system instability
13,583 people are now in prison on recall — a 49% increase since 2021, making up 15% of the entire prison population.
[committees…liament.uk]
High recall numbers reflect:
Inadequate supervision
Lack of capacity
Rising breaches and escalating risk that practitioners cannot safely manage
7. MoJ reforms (“Our Future Probation Service”) deemed insufficient
The PAC explicitly warns that the OFPS programme is unlikely to fix the crisis because:
The MoJ has a poor track record on digital reforms
Key decisions on supervision levels haven’t been made
Planned reductions in supervision for “lower risk” individuals pose significant danger
[committees…liament.uk], [solicitornews.co.uk]
8. Electronic monitoring is failing badly
Serco’s tagging performance has serious operational problems, including delays fitting tags and failure to monitor people correctly.
Despite this, the MoJ still wants to replace human supervision with more tagging — even though the system is widely acknowledged to be unreliable.
9. Probation was brought back in‑house in 2021 — and things have deteriorated every year since
The PAC states performance has worsened year on year since reunification.
[committees…liament.uk]
This undermines claims that “reform” has stabilised the service.
Why this matters for pay negotiations
The PAC report gives official parliamentary confirmation of what probation staff have been living through:
Excessive workloads
Unsafe staffing levels
Emotional strain and trauma
Constant crisis‑driven change
Declining safety
Rising public protection failures
These conditions cannot be fixed by a below‑inflation 6% pay offer.
The service cannot recruit or retain staff without significant pay restoration.
The PAC shows clearly that:
Probation is collapsing because it cannot attract and keep qualified staff
Those who remain are overworked to the point of burnout
Public safety is now at risk because of under‑investment
This is exactly the moment to push for a higher offer.
The new Sentencing Bill has now come into force, which certainly gives us plenty to reflect on. Under the revised approach, custodial sentences of 12 months or less will be suspended. They no doubt have forecasting data to support this shift, but it means we can expect to see an increase in community-based caseloads.
The employer is pushing this 6% like it’s some incredible, generous offer, which is honestly insulting. They spent months implying 4% was the absolute best they could do — then the moment staff rejected it, they somehow managed to dig up enough funding to bump it to 6%. That alone tells you everything about how little they wanted to give us until they were forced to move.
If this is really all they’re willing to put on the table, then industrial action might be the only language they’ll understand. It’s time we use it.
I was considering accepting the 6% offer but after listened to the all staff call re: pay on 23/03/2026, I am reconsidering.
My interpretation is that HMPPS are now saying that no one will progress through CBF until the next pay deal for 2026/2027 is agreed. My understanding was that CBF was completely separate from the pay deals. Essentially, they are now stalling us from progressing through CBF because they’ve offered us a pay deal (in arrears) that we’re already entitled to (and doesn’t even touch the sides for what is going to happen with inflation).
I would love for someone from NAPO to correct me on this if I’m wrong but what I’m interpreting is that we’re stuck on our current pay scale if we accept the 6% and this will not change until the next pay offer is concluded (which could be another year if anything like 2025/2026).
HMPPS do not care about their staff.
If this is true then I will 100% reject this offer. Effectively this would not be a pay rise it would be our CBF increment
Why is it so hard to get an answer about CBF progression! I know people at the top of their pay grade get upset about not moving forward any higher, but there are people who spent 3 years on the same pay as new starters with the last pay deal. We need to know if CBF will as promised be kept seperated. The last pay deal policy actually stated that we would still be eligible for progression under CBF but they didnt honour that- There are a lot of staff at the lower bands unable to afford to join unions and I feel that this may be why there wasn’t an emphasis on the CBF progression being protected last time?
“Last week we advised you of the decision by your Probation Negotiating Committee that a revised 6% pay offer should be put to you for your consideration. …The ballot will be open from Friday 27th March and closes at 12:00 noon on Friday 17th April 2026.” It’s disappointing that members are now being asked to consider 6%, given that 4% was rejected so strongly and our original claim was 12%. The employer didn’t accept Napo’s counter-offer of 8%, yet instead of moving toward industrial action, we’re entering another lengthy ballot period. This means that if members reject 6%, it will be well over a month before any industrial action could realistically begin. That delay risks weakening the momentum we’ve seen recently and places pressure on members who want timely action. These extended timelines make it harder to maintain confidence that our pay and conditions are being robustly defended. Is it any wonder pay and conditions have been allowed to degrade so much?
It would be helpful to get a response to this
Reject reject reject
The time is right now to REJECT! If we accept this offer and wait for the next years pay negotiations to get a better offer we will have a rude awakening. We must reject the offer now because we are desperately needed now more than ever. The impact of industrial action will be significant right now! Why do you think they came back so quickly with an increase of 2%. Think about the plans set out for the next month and the year ahead. None of it can be achieved without a full quota of staff . For the first time we can be in control. Don’t cave now.
Can someone please confirm… the “conditions” that seem to be hidden in the small print. Are we saying that CBF progression will in future be linked to the pay raise? or am I missing something? I thought CBF was totally separate to the pay negotiation?
A lot of younger staff chose to join the service on the low pay scales we have – they have no experience or knowledge of years of erosion. It would seem to make sense that HMPSS are banking on plenty of dinosaurs having left the service and younger staff not being in the union (because they cannot afford it!)
When a 12% pay claim has been costed out and justified it is highly unreasonable and irresponsible for a Union to then recommend acceptance of 1/2 that amount. I am glad that NAPO at least are putting this out with nill recommendation (effectively) Unison and GMB should be ashamed of themselves. As for NAPO the momentum is clearly there, to settle for 6 % shows weakness to the employer and while this may well be the best position reachable through negotiation this is certainly not the end of the process and industrial action needs to now be considered. With the cap on the 26/27 civil service pay remit being most likely 2.5% this is what next years offer will look like and we will be back in the same position for another 15 months for this years deal. Bite the bullet now and take the action that is necessary to demonstrate that enough is enough and we will not roll over and accept such a paltry and insulting pay offer. All the rubbish that is pushed down our throats about “Current climate” and the such like is an age old tactic and there is never a point in time where this rhetoric wont be pushed, I for one sincerely hope this insult is rejected and a mandate for industrial action can be obtained, the time is now.
AGREE. Stay strong all. Reject. This is still an insult.
I have had information that information that Prison Officers are going to be receiving a 7.5% pay rise. We need to REJECT the 6% offer.
I think the prison service recieved a 4% rise in 2025, but I’ll still be rejecting the 6% given how far behind the value of our pay has fallen compared to other services!
Aldi just announced hourly pay of £18.23. please have a think about that, respect yourself and decline this insulting offer. Enough is enough. If you believe things will get better for the 26/27 increase you haven’t been in the service long enough.
Stay strong and get what we deserve.
I have been in the service for 22 years and taken part in industrial action twice during that time. It did not work on either of those occasions and I have no faith that further industrial action would yield the results we would like this time either. The only result for me was loss of wages and pension contributions for the action I took. Industrial action will not have the impact you think it will.