|
|
| The road to safety: The problem of staff division |
| By Joe Bouchard and Tracy Barnhart |
| Published: 11/01/2009 |
The road to safety is like any other road. There are times that the conditions are ideal and we enjoy a smooth commute. Conversely, we can be met with horrible conditions. Poor visibility, slick conditions, and bumper to bumper traffic are examples of these and are out of our control.
On our own road to safety, sometimes we are the inadvertent architects of poor conditions. Through our own actions, we are capable of constructing speed bumps and other obstructions. Chief among these is staff division. In short, staff division is an important topic because safety in our jails and prisons is compromised when we are occupied with internal squabbles and work soap operas. Our attention is shifted from managing potentially dangerous populations. Also, the worst side of staff is exposed in these interpersonal battles, making an indelible mark for those who would endeavor to manipulate. Manipulation clouds the judgment of staff and makes all of us vulnerable. Joe Bouchard: Tracy, I think that staff division is something that we do not talk about enough in corrections. Rather, we sweep it away and attribute the problem solely to individual quirks. While I understand that individuals initiate action, there is a facility’s culture and history to consider. We can safely attribute much of this to the competition and occasional distrust of different work groups. Sadly, the custody/programs rift is alive and well and has antagonists on both sides. Tracy Barnhart: Joe I see staff division everyday and most of the stress either directly or indirectly we experience can be attributed to staff on staff interactions. You have you admit that as corrections employees we are an inquisitive bunch and we tend to look at ourselves harder and more closely than most. It makes us who we are and when it breaks down we are inquisitive, untrusting, cynical individuals all thrown into an institution attempting to keep the peace. We want to know everything about everything and you know we have to know the latest gossip and dirt; it makes the day go by faster. Joe Bouchard: That is such an excellent point. Those who do well on the job are typically inquisitive, investigative types. It is an attribute that keeps us safe. Still, the irony is not lost on me as you mentioned it, Tracy. Our strengths can sometimes lead to our weaknesses. Tracy Barnhart: Now that daily staff on staff interactions creates a division and I know you see the cliques around you and see a division between each other everyday. Inmates see it, they often create it and expound on it and tend to use it against us. Joe Bouchard: Cliques are the worst. These are really like human signposts to division. It can program/custody rifts, division between shifts, or factions within a niche. I guess that we would have to expect that an enterprising offender would want to capitalize on all weak spots. We may not like it, but it is inevitable. For the sake of power, comfort, boredom alleviation or leverage, offenders can use staff against staff. There are many problems that come from this – infighting, sabotage, and burn out, high turnover/low staff retention rates; a lack of focus on security issues, the list goes on. But in the end, all of these can be placed under the very broad umbrella of safety issues. All disunity pushes us further down this road. Tracy Barnhart: Inmates need and want chaos inside the institution to establish an atmosphere where the criminal can thrive. What better atmosphere than to split the staff and allow the inmates to cut away the weaker staff and make them more vulnerable to attack. Both psychological and physical. Staff will automatically steer clear and distance themselves from staff who they perceive as bad or corrupt. They want to distance themselves so they in turn do not obtain the stigma of corrupt staff. The inmates will then in turn act as a pack of wolves and cut away that staff from the crew and begin to work them like a pet project. Sadly this stigma can be labeled by not only inmates but other staff. Joe Bouchard: We who watch are being watched. It is so transparent to insightful offenders when we distance ourselves from our own. Yet turning away from “dirty” staff is the easiest thing to do, though not necessarily the right thing. The problem is that there is a big breach of trust and, therefore, compromised safety. And these are two things that one should not take away from corrections staff. But still, the watchers will plot against security by preying on the disenfranchised. Tracy Barnhart: Some poor relationships and philosophical differences between correction officers, administration and mental health staff hinder the operation of the facility and reduce any treatment some of the inmates are attempting to get while maintaining a safe and secure environment. Finding a balance between these three vital missions is a difficult process at best. Chain of Command and supervisory staff seem to add to the lack of cohesion by having their very own set of divisions within the management capacity and supervision becomes problematic. Most I have spoke to agree that a difference in philosophy existed between administration, correctional officers and mental health staff and that this difference often resulted in a territorial struggle. These philosophical differences between mental health staff and correction officers and administration prevent each of them from fully appreciating the other's role. I am sure you see a difference in philosophy’s in the school setting don’t you Joe. Joe Bouchard: I do. There are definitely definite foci. At the risk of sounding base, this sort of territorialism is not unlike an animal marking its territory in its own special way. And human nature is as natural as that process. I know that I have my own work priorities. I try to perform my duties with a strong foundation of safety, but others may not always perceive it in that way. It is very clear to me that staff division is a pervasive force, even when conscientious staff tries to work together. Tracy Barnhart: Joe, when it hits the bottom line we as corrections employees are walking among predators everyday, some of them are staff. We must have each others backs and constantly support each other without fail in order to maintain a high level of safety and security. You are spending more time with your co-workers than you are with your families and we all know there are some family members that we don’t particularly agree with all the time. You might not like Uncle Jeff’s white shoes that he wears all the time but he will always be your uncle Jeff, and you would miss him if he was gone. We have to look out for the uncle Jeff’s we work next to everyday as well. You may not agree with them all the time, they might have aggravating quirks but they might be all you have someday defending each other in a riot. Building walls and creating rumors, innuendoes and cliques will only tear down our thin grey line of defense against an already impressive adversary. Is staff division inevitable? Will we be mired perpetually in a bog of mutual animosity? What solutions are there to mitigate this persistent pest? Please see next month’s The Road to Safety – Solutions to Staff Division. Other "Road to Safety" articles by Bouchard and Barnhart: Visit the Joe Bouchard or the Tracy Barnhart page |
Comments:
Login to let us know what you think
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
I must agree that this article gives a very true picture of staff division in a correctional facility. Indeed, division among staff poses greater problems in carrying out ones duties and threatens the security. This article is very informative and I look forward to about the solution to staff division. Christ Felix