Analysis of the Survey Results of Staff at SIZO No. 13 in Kyiv

The International Society for Human Rights – Ukrainian Section (ISHR – US), thanks to funding from the Fund for Support of Human Rights and Democracy of the US Department of State, completed the Project "Transparency of the Process of Isolation of Persons in ITT and SIZO in Ukraine (2006 – 2007)."

Within the framework of the Project, monitoring of the state of implementation of the rights and freedoms of persons held in SIZO in Kyiv and working therein was conducted. During the implementation of the monitoring, questionnaire forms developed by the non-governmental human rights organisation "Donetsk Memorial" were used. Experts of the ISHR – US made editorial changes to the content of these questionnaires in accordance with the specific requirements of the Project. Presented below are the results of a survey of staff at SIZO No. 13 in Kyiv. The survey was conducted during January-February 2007.

Analysis of the Survey Results of Staff at SIZO No. 13 in Kyiv

The total number of surveyed SIZO staff is 100 people (48 men and 52 women). By age, the staff is divided into a group of young people under 30 years old (40%), middle-aged people (from 35 to 50) – 56%, and older people – 4%. 2% have an incomplete secondary education, 43% have a complete secondary education, 28% have vocational-technical education, and 26% have secondary-specialised and higher education. Personnel of the rank-and-file and command staff of the criminal executive service make up 64% of those surveyed, specialists without special ranks (working under labour contracts) – 24%, and staff without special ranks (working under labour contracts) – 6%. Among the staff who have ranks, those surveyed were distributed as follows: sergeants 28%, warrant officers 28%, lieutenants 23%, captains 12%, officers of higher ranks 8%. By work experience, those surveyed were divided into the following groups: experience of up to 3 years – 14%, from 3 to 6 years – 18%, from 6 to 9 years – 20%, over 9 years – 48%. 14% of those surveyed stated their surname; of them, seven people gave consent for its use.

The assessment by those surveyed of their own awareness of international standards relating to the penitentiary system showed that, in general, this level is evaluated as average (69%) or insufficient (26%). 5% evaluated it as high. The sufficiency of knowledge of international law and national legislation relating to the criminal executive system for carrying out professional activities is evaluated approximately the same. A third of those surveyed (37%) lack it, two-thirds (60%) consider it sufficient, and only 3% consider this level high. As for the assessment of their own experience regarding the work being performed, 10% of those surveyed evaluate it as high, 77% are satisfied with it, and 13% consider it insufficient. Such an assessment depends directly on work experience. Among the staff who have more than 9 years of experience, there was not a single person who would consider their own experience insufficient.

To a large extent, this is connected with the fact that for the majority of SIZO staff, the main source of obtaining professional skills is practical activity (50%) and self-education (23%). Only 25% obtained professional skills in a specialised educational institution. These are, first and foremost, graduates of the Kyiv Institute of Internal Affairs under the National Academy of Internal Affairs of Ukraine and the Chernihiv Law College of the State Department of Ukraine on Execution of Punishments. In total, 37% of those surveyed underwent retraining or advanced training courses (in the year preceding the study, 13%). At the same time, 47% of those surveyed believe that they need retraining or advanced training. Moreover, of those who did not undergo it, 61% would like to improve their qualifications. It should be noted that such a form of professional training positively influences the self-assessment by respondents of the level of their professional skills. It turned out that among those who consider their experience insufficient, the vast majority did not have the opportunity to improve their qualifications in relevant courses.

Most often, SIZO staff refer during work to the Law of Ukraine "On Pre-trial Detention" (69%), 45% each indicated that they refer to the Constitution of Ukraine and the Criminal Executive Code, 39% of those surveyed refer to the Law of Ukraine "On the Criminal Executive Service." The least utilised in direct work are those normative acts that regulate it directly. Thus, "Rules of conduct in pre-trial detention centres for persons taken into custody and convicts" is referred to by 31% during work, and "Rules of holding persons taken into custody and convicts in pre-trial detention centres of the State Department of Ukraine on Execution of Punishments" – by 30% of those surveyed. Among other legislative acts, the Criminal and Criminal Procedural Codes of Ukraine were most often mentioned, as well as other legislative acts that regulate separate types of activities of specialists (Regulations on Service; Labour Code; Law of Ukraine on Fire Safety; orders relating to medical assistance and medical support in the criminal executive system).

Only 6 respondents referred to international legal acts during work. Among the acts used, the International Convention on the Rights of Prisoners, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, and the Convention against Torture were mentioned.

The level of satisfaction with working conditions among those surveyed is low. 29% are satisfied with them, 9% have not decided on an assessment, and 62% of those surveyed are dissatisfied. The majority of those surveyed indicated that they would leave work in the penitentiary system in the event of a more attractive offer. 57.7% would agree to change jobs, 23.7% would not agree, the rest hesitated with an answer. Among the main reasons that would cause such a decision, respondents named a higher level of remuneration (33%), better working conditions (8%), and some would agree to change jobs on the condition of receiving better social guarantees.

General dissatisfaction with the level of remuneration among SIZO staff is almost total. Only three of those surveyed noted that the salary they receive provides a sufficient standard of living. The rest are either completely dissatisfied with the level of pay (45%) or believe that it does not fully provide for a normal standard of living (52%). Ideas about the desired salary level clearly fix its minimum limit at the level of 1500 hryvnias. Only 2 of those surveyed agreed to receive less than this amount. 23% of those surveyed consider a salary of 1500 hryvnias sufficient; 25.3% would like to receive a salary of 2000 hryvnias. The rest – 49% believe that based on the position they hold and the actually performed work, their salary should exceed 2000 hryvnias. Moreover, the tendency to define such a level of desired salary is most clearly expressed among those staff who belong to the rank-and-file and command staff of the criminal executive service. More than half of them (55.6%) would like to receive more than 2000 hryvnias.

Dissatisfaction with the level of salary is not compensated for at present by significant benefits. To the question "Do you have benefits conditioned by your work?" only 14% of those surveyed answered in the affirmative. Among the benefits, preferential length of service (3 for 4 years) was most often mentioned. One respondent noted that they use free travel on city transport. 34% of those surveyed use free medical assistance. Mainly, this concerns an annual check-up. In general, the possibility of receiving free medical assistance is practically not considered as an advantage of this place of work. As one of the respondents noted: "Using medical assistance in the MVS (Ministry of Internal Affairs) polyclinic for free, I put money into the doctors' pockets because they don't want to treat for free."

The majority of those surveyed (70%) support the necessity of conducting psychological prophylaxis among SIZO personnel. 22% deny its necessity, the rest did not answer. The main arguments in favour of such assistance are the danger of professional deformation (degradation), high psychological load, and the receiving of negative emotions. One of the aspects is the formation of a sense of usefulness of work; as was noted in one questionnaire, such work is needed, "so the personnel see that they are needed by someone, and do not carry their problems home, or to the pub to wash it down with vodka." The possibility of using such work as a way to improve the qualifications of personnel is also indicated: "One can organise classes on responding to critical situations (hostage taking)"; "needed for new and young employees in connection with the lack of experience of work in the system." At the same time, some employees believe that such help is not needed by everyone ("except for those who get into 'connections' and employees who abuse alcohol").

Assessing other working conditions, the respondents noted that only 38% of those surveyed are provided with uniforms (not infrequently, uniforms were purchased "with own money"). The uniforms themselves were considered by the majority of respondents (58% of those who answered this question) as not corresponding to the season or climate in which they have to perform service. 79% of those surveyed have their own office or other service premises. Among the reasons for the absence of premises – the nature of the work ("I serve at posts"). Furniture and inventory in the work office (room) are, in the opinion of the majority of respondents (61%), in poor condition. Only one respondent noted that the furniture is new; in a third of cases, they are in good condition. 71% of those surveyed indicated that the office or room requires repair, mainly cosmetic (74% of those who answered this question).

The assessment of the SIZO management's work shows that staff consider the treatment of inmates better than the treatment of personnel (Table 1).

Table 1

How do you evaluate the actions of your institution's management...

Among the reasons for dissatisfaction is that a significant part of the staff (39%) believes that the initiatives of employees are not encouraged by the SIZO administration. Moreover, they name both objective ("lack of funds") and subjective reasons ("initiative is not encouraged, because it will never be rewarded"). At the same time, that part of the staff who believe that initiative is encouraged cites such examples of encouragement as "gratitude," "a rank one step higher," "monetary reward," and "honour board."

Relations between SIZO staff are evaluated mainly positively. Only 15% of those surveyed evaluated them negatively. The basis for the negative evaluation serves the following considerations: "High level of distrust, lack of provision of practical and theoretical help by officers to younger staff, the salary of many young officers is significantly lower or at the level of the junior command staff, which worsens relations in connection with different levels of responsibility." The low level of cooperation between divisions is also noted: "The entire collective (the entire number of personnel) is broken into separate small groups, which are usually formed only on the basis of personal sympathies, and not on the basis of the principle of effectiveness of cooperation." Accordingly, a third of those surveyed (33%) indicated that they cannot evaluate the actions of SIZO staff as coordinated actions of a "team." Again, motivating such evaluations, respondents refer to the fact that "interaction between different departments and services exists only theoretically, mutual help is almost non-existent at all"; "insufficient organisation and cohesion"; "on the command 'alarm,' the turnout of personnel is unsatisfactory."

Evaluating the treatment of inmates by personnel, respondents generally consider it satisfactory (77%), 9% evaluate it as good, 11% as poor. The conditions for holding persons taken into custody and convicts in SIZO are evaluated by the vast majority of staff as satisfactory (82%). 14% consider them poor, 4% good. Regarding what these conditions should be, the staff expressed themselves approximately the same. The majority believe that they should be satisfactory (67%). 20% believe that they should be good, 9% are supporters of the fact that the conditions should be poor.

The necessity of improving conditions is seen by the respondents in the following directions: "improve technical support, increase footage per one prisoner, equip with exhaust hoods, provide with hot water, normal plumbing"; "separate sleeping place, hot water"; "approximated to international standards, taking into account the mentality and general social security of the population of Ukraine." One of those surveyed noted that the level of holding prisoners should correlate with the level of living conditions of the personnel: "I cannot deeply justify the conditions of prisoners in the institution, because in the dormitory where I have been living for about 1 year there is no hot water, and the heating rarely works, for which funds are deducted every month."

Regarding those who believe that conditions do not need to be improved, they justify their point of view with two main arguments. First, "prisoners have everything." As one of the staff wrote: "Prisoners have everything necessary, it's even hard to imagine what else could be improved. 3-time meals, bed linen, television, radio, walks, library, visits, parcels, medical service, etc., practically a closed-type sanatorium." The second line of argumentation relies on the thesis that "a pre-trial detention centre is not a sanatorium"; "this is a SIZO, not a kindergarten"; "prisoners cannot be given very good conditions, they will sit on your head."

The suggestions of the personnel mainly concern the improvement of working conditions: increase the salary, return benefits, ensure stable funding and timely payment of salary, provide staff with housing, improve the management's attitude towards personnel. Among specific wishes, the most often named was "the possibility to go outside the SIZO during the lunch break." In one of the questionnaires, a wish was expressed "to see how the information from the questionnaires will affect further work." Only one of those surveyed emphasised not the material, but the moral component that needs improvement. In their questionnaire, we read: "I want the staff of our system to be endowed with such qualities as kindness, honesty, and justice. I want sometime in the future to be able to say with pride without unnecessary shame: I am a worker of the execution of punishments system! And that these words would evoke respect from people, and in the employees of other law enforcement agencies – good envy." It is not accidental that precisely a senior inspector for social-educational and psychological work with the special contingent expressed such an opinion. This is one of the important arguments in favour of the fact that psychological prophylaxis among SIZO personnel should be implemented and yield its positive consequences.