Category Archives: Prisoners: Work & Pay
SLAVE LABOUR RATES FOR PRISON INMATES
Prisoners may get paid to work in call centres under a new scheme to increase work opportunities in prisons.
Inmates already carry out many types of manufacturing work, such as assembling windows and doors and packaging products, but these are expected to be increased to make working a five-day week normal practice within prisons.
Many prisoners have never had a proper job before, so by working while they serve their time they are able to learn new skills as well as get into the habit of working in a structured environment.
The Ministry of Justice said the plans would increase the output of one3one Solutions, which replaced the Prison Industries Unit earlier this year, in helping prisoners to improve their job prospects.
One3one Solutions, named for the 131 prisons in England and Wales, has 190 external customers according to its website, which pay prisoners to carry out services for them.
However putting call centres in prisons would mean that prisoners would come into direct contact with members of the public.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said: “Prisoners who learn the habit of real work inside prison are less likely to commit further crime when they are released.
“For that reason the Prison Service is looking at a number of potential schemes to increase work opportunities in prisons. However, no call centres are being run from prisons.
“All contracts with outside employers must comply with a strict code of practice which sets out that prisoners cannot be used to replace existing jobs in the community. Prisoner wages, for those in closed prisons, are set by prison governors and companies have no control over the level of payment.”
The average rate of pay for inmates working inside prisons was £9.60 per week in 2007, figures in the Prison Reform Trust’s latest Bromley Briefings factfile showed.
It said that in 2007/08 prisoners spent an average of 12.6 hours a week working.
Mark Leech editor of Converse the national newspaper for priosners said: “This is nothing more than sklave labour disgracefully disguised as rehabilitation.
“I am all for prisoners being given training that equips them with employability skills, but this nothing of the sort – those who operate utility company call centres train their staff to handle calls from customers in just half a day, anything more than that shows it is all about the bottom line.
“If prisoners are to work in call centres full time, and are to be paid prison pay rates because they have no overheads, then that is one thing, but the company company concerend must still pay the correct minimum wage rate for the job and donate the excess not paid to the prisoner to a charity such as victim support – but of course they won’t do that.”
PRISONERS LOSE LEGAL CHALLENGE
Prisoners who took jobs outside jail have lost their High Court claim that a levy on their wages which goes to victim support is too high.
A judge in London rejected “on all grounds” their challenge to the legality of the way Justice Secretary Ken Clarke is operating rules governing deductions from pay packets.
The test case action affects inmates working in the community as they prepare for their release and to “go straight”.
Welcoming the judgment, the “delighted” Justice Secretary said: “For too long offenders have not done enough to shoulder the financial burden of their crimes, leaving the taxpayer to foot the bill for the damage they have caused.”
Mr Clarke added: “The Prisoners’ Earnings Act is the start of Government getting the balance right – forcing prisoners to take responsibility for their crimes and helping victims to recover through the funding of these vital support services.
“In the first six months, nearly £400,000 has been raised through the Prisoners’ Earnings Act for Victim Support.
“I’m delighted that this ruling means that offenders will continue to contribute to make amends for their crimes.”
Under the Prisoners’ Earnings Act 1996, inmates engaged in “enhanced wages work” outside prison have 40% of pay which is in excess of £20 paid to victim support.
Lawyers representing two inmates, S and KF, who cannot be named for legal reasons, argued the payments were “disproportionate” and said there was “widespread concern” about the levy.
The court heard claims that prisoners with high travel expenses to reach work were being left with no wages.
There were also complaints that they were being left with insufficient funds to pay towards costs of resettlement such as helping out with family expenses, or saving for a rent deposit and furniture for when they were released.
Mr Justice Sales was told at a two-day hearing in May the pressure group “Unlock” (the National Association of Reformed Offenders) was complaining that the levy undermined rehabilitation and acted as “a disincentive to work”.
Kate Markus, appearing for S, a 40-year-old serving an indeterminate sentence in an openprison, argued Mr Clarke could, and should, have allocated a portion of the 40% levy to help the inmates rebuild their lives as well as help victims.
S has had a full-time job with a private employer doing manual work outside the prisonsince June last year.
Ms Markus asked the High Court to declare that Prison Service instructions issued by Mr Clarke – the first took effect in August last year – giving effect to the levy were “incompatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights.
She said Mr Clarke had failed to strike a balance between the interests of victims of crime and inmates.
The second claimant, KF, described by the judge as having an unspecified number of children, attends college while serving a four-year sentence at an open prison and is due for release next month.
Her QC, Hugh Southey, said she had decided not to seek work outside prison because of the impact of the levy on her potential earnings.
He argued the levy unlawfully imposed a heavier penalty than the one applicable at the time KF committed her offence and violated her rights under human rights legislation.
He also argued it breached the Equality Act as the levy was having a disproportionate impact on women.
After examining each of the arguments in turn, the judge announced he was dismissing the challenges to the relevant prison instructions on all grounds.
The question of an appeal to the Court of Appeal will be considered at a hearing later this month.
The case mostly affects the inmates of open prisons but also some Category C prisoners allowed to work in the community on day release under contracts of employment.
Rates of pay from outside employers are higher than those for work performed in prison.
PRISONERS AWAIT EARNING RULING
Prisoners who have taken jobs outside jail are to find out the result of their High Court claim that a levy on their wages which goes to victim support is too high. The test case action affects inmates working in the community as they prepare for their release and to “go straight”.
A judge in London is to announce his decision in the challenge against the legality of the way Justice Secretary Ken Clarke is operating rules governing deductions from pay packets.
Under the Prisoners’ Earnings Act 1996, inmates engaged in “enhanced wages work” outside prison have 40% of pay that is in excess of £20 paid to victim support.
Kate Markus, appearing at a recent hearing with Hugh Southey QC for several working prisoners who cannot be named, told Mr Justice Sales that the payments were “disproportionate” and there was “widespread concern” about the levy.
She referred to the pressure group “Unlock” (the National Association of Reformed Offenders) which argues that the levy is undermining rehabilitation and acting as “a disincentive to work”.
Mr Clarke could, and should, have allocated a portion of the 40% levy to help the inmates rebuild their lives as well as help victims, she argued.
Ms Markus asked the court to declare that the way Prison Service rules were being applied to inmate’s earnings was “incompatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights.
She said Mr Clarke had failed to strike a balance between the interests of victims of crime and inmates.
The case mostly affects the inmates of open prisons but also some Category C prisoners allowed to work out in the community on day release under contracts of employment.
Rates of pay from outside employers are higher than those for work performed in prison.
The court heard claims that prisoners with high travel expenses to reach work were being left with no wages.
There were also complaints that they were being left with insufficient funds to pay towards costs of resettlement such as helping out with family expenses, or saving for a rent deposit and furniture for when they were released.
Mark Leech, editor of Converse the national newspaper for prisoners and the founder of UNLOCK said: “This levy is nothing more than a political tool to win votes by attacking those prisoners who have complied with everything they have been asked to do, have achieved trusted positions in open prison conditions, are nearing the end of their sentences and who are preparing for their release.
“If Ken Clarke is serious about wanting to help victims of crime then he should place the levy on all of the 85,000 people in prison, and not just the handful of inmates who this disingenuous provision unfairly targets.”
