This was the single most important contributory factor to the problems at Ashfield. There were two distinct but related problems:
Unsafe staffing levels - Premier's original bid was based on four PCOs per wing - the Prison Service negotiated this figure down to three PCOs per wing. However, the prison failed to meet these indicative staffing levels. In the year prior to the Prison Service's intervention, Ashfield had a target number of 148 PCOs but the prison operated with an average of 11 per cent below this target. After the Prison Service's intervention, Premier used staff from their other prisons to increase the numbers but at the end of May 2002, there was still a shortfall of 22 PCOs (17 per cent) out of a total complement of 132.
Lack of experienced staff due to high turnover - Problems associated with understaffing were exacerbated by high staff turnover. Between April 2001 and March 2002, 115 staff left Ashfield - this represents a turnover rate of 47 per cent. The Prison Service and YJB both noted that middle managers were very inexperienced and new staff were being trained by PCOs who had only been in post themselves for six weeks.
It is clear that staff terms and conditions were a major contributory factor to the staff shortages and high turnover at Ashfield. Newly-appointed PCOs at Ashfield start on £15,250 per year compared to a range of £16,159 to £23,000 (as shown in Figure 17) for a prison officer at a public prison. PCOs work a longer working week and the occupational pension scheme is less generous than that offered in the public sector. We were told by staff at the prison that better paid jobs were available locally.
There was also a high turnover of Directors at Ashfield. In the two and a half years before the Prison Service intervened there were three Directors. The relative stability at Ashfield in the first eighteen months (when there was only one Director) suggests that the prison's subsequent problems were partly caused by the frequent changes in management.