Summary
Mr C, who is a prisoner, complained about the prison's decision to reduce his wage banding (prisoners' work output is assessed against three performance standards). Mr C said he produced good quality work and he felt he should be on the higher banding. In their response to his complaint, the prison told Mr C that his wage had been reduced because of the quality of his work, and said that staff were entitled to move prisoners within the performance bandings. In response to our investigation, the prison explained that prisoners could be promoted or demoted depending on their work standards, behaviour, attendance etc. The prison confirmed that this also acted as a motivational tool for prisoners. They said that Mr C had been demoted because they felt the quality of his work could be improved. We did not uphold the complaint, as we were satisfied the prison had made their decision appropriately, after considering the relevant information.
Mr C also complained that the internal complaints committee (ICC) failed to consider his complaint appropriately. He said the ICC did not meet with him to discuss his complaint. We found, however, that the ICC tried twice to meet with Mr C to discuss his complaint, but Mr C chose not to meet them because he was at work. Because of this, they discussed Mr C's complaint in his absence. In the circumstances, we were satisfied that the ICC considered Mr C's complaint appropriately.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201201458 as a PDF (11.31 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018