the nurses' strike

tallaght01

Sorry for my pig-ignorance. I've been on-call pretty solidly for the past 2 weeks so havent had a chance to catch up. Plus living in the UK the nurses work to rule situation gets no coverage. I was wondering if somebody could tell me what's going on, from both sides.

Mebbe nurse-Baz could explain what the nurses are looking for, and the HSE's objections?
I had a brief look at the issue on another thread, but it's full of "You knew what you were getting into when you signed up, so stop complaining" rubbish.

Would be interested to know what people involved in healthcare. I don't really know the facts, but in principle I would always support an improvement in nurses' working conditions, but there are probably ramifications for the benchmarking process etc.
Has the labour court become involved yet?

Anyway, oncall, and me pager has just gone,so gotta go

Traumadoc

lots of debate elsewhere- usual ignorance displayed. We are losing to many good nurses to the green pastures of management.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055074289&referrerid=&highlight=nurses

Dr Galen

there are 2 other threads lads. one in politics which is a generally well patrolled forum so hopefully the muppetry won't seep in. there is also one in AH, have a look.

thanks for support, most health professionals aree behind us alright, now if only we could the junior doc's sorted out we'd all be laughing on the way to our "well paid, permanent, fabulous pensioned" jobs

nesf

The main, and serious, issue for the nurses at the moment is that they don't exist in a vacuum apart from the rest of the civil service which (for the most part) has been kept tethered to benchmarking. Whether nurses deserve the pay rise or the work week reduction or not is neither here nor there when compared to the potential for mass rebellion across the public service if their demands are granted.

Most, actually all, of the arguments put forward by them (that I've seen) seem to ignore the above.


The usual arguments of "they're angels"/"my mum was a nurse and missed Christmas dinner!"/"Hey! Graduates entering the private sector are lucky to get something in the early 20s! nevermind the early 30s!" etc. are being trotted out by both sides.

While I do have sympathy for the nurses I genuinely hope that they get a metaphorical slap on the wrist and go back to work and bring it up through benchmarking. The potential knock-on effect from the opposite outcome could seriously damage out economy as a whole if a sector wide wave of strikes started.

Dr Galen

nesf wrote:

The main, and serious, issue for the nurses at the moment is that they don't exist in a vacuum apart from the rest of the civil service which (for the most part) has been kept tethered to benchmarking. Whether nurses deserve the pay rise or the work week reduction or not is neither here nor there when compared to the potential for mass rebellion across the public service if their demands are granted.

Most, actually all, of the arguments put forward by them (that I've seen) seem to ignore the above.


The usual arguments of "they're angels"/"my mum was a nurse and missed Christmas dinner!"/"Hey! Graduates entering the private sector are lucky to get something in the early 20s! nevermind the early 30s!" etc. are being trotted out by both sides.

While I do have sympathy for the nurses I genuinely hope that they get a metaphorical slap on the wrist and go back to work and bring it up through benchmarking. The potential knock-on effect from the opposite outcome could seriously damage out economy as a whole if a sector wide wave of strikes started.

while i see your point about keeping public sector pay in check and realise the overall importance of this, can i ask how does a benchmarking procedure that doesn't/can't (by its own terms of reference btw) look at our claims be the answer? when other groups have gone outside this process to get their claims looked at, then the question that many of the 44,000 nurses involved are asking " is why should we?"

nesf

nurse_baz wrote:

while i see your point about keeping public sector pay in check and realise the overall importance of this, can i ask how does a benchmarking procedure that doesn't/can't (by its own terms of reference btw) look at our claims be the answer? when other groups have gone outside this process to get their claims looked at, then the question that many of the 44,000 nurses involved are asking " is why should we?"

Well, to begin, the work week issue is separate to benchmarking afaik. It can, and should, be dealt with outside of this but the point of contention is over the HSE wanting a risk assessment/study/whatever done first and the INO demanding it now as far as I can make out. Whatever one might think of these studies done by the HSE and others, they are unfortunately necessary and prudent, if only as a panacea to reassure people. I'm not 100% sure what the INO is trying to do here, I can't see a way out of this report being done before any change is made.

The second is the pay issue, and that is part of the benchmarking process and what the Labour Court ruling concerned. It's this pay issue that is the main problem, imho. Because of the industrial action, whether for better or worse, this situation is now very much in the public eye. Other groups will be watching the outcome very carefully and honestly the threat of a domino effect is a very real one. Also, you have to take into account the sheer size of the nurse workforce. The numbers involved are very big and this complicates matters further (if the nurses get 1 million, surely a million could be spared for the teachers etc.).

I've no issue really with the first, it just needs to be costed and stress tested before implementation. The second however is a much more serious issue and I'm a little confused why the strategy to demand both was chosen, it makes ye look greedy.

InFront

Yeah, as nurse baz said, the precedent has already been set by other health-care workers who have gone outside benchmarking, and suggestions otherwise is simply pandering to HSE "lives at risk", "as bad as a strike" type spin.
It does not take a genius PR consultant (with a wage packet multiplied the size of a nurse's basic pay) to figure out what the nurses are saying: that there is a solution to this issue outside of benchmarking - 14 other groups have gone down that merry path with the FF-PDs in toe.
As has been said so many times before, nurses have been promised the 35 hour week afforded to other health-care professionals for the past 27 years. There does appear to be possibility of some movement on that now, but if there is it will be purely down to the nurses (quite rightly) finally digging their heels in when the HSE maintained impossibility. I hope they get their pay rise too.

Dr Galen

Well, to begin, the work week issue is separate to benchmarking afaik. It can, and should, be dealt with outside of this but the point of contention is over the HSE wanting a risk assessment/study/whatever done first and the INO demanding it now as far as I can make out. Whatever one might think of these studies done by the HSE and others, they are unfortunately necessary and prudent, if only as a panacea to reassure people. I'm not 100% sure what the INO is trying to do here, I can't see a way out of this report being done before any change is made.

the unions basically want an indicator of a timescale for when this can report can be achieved and released by. Nurses just want a rough idea of when and how the 35hr will come about by. This is pretty understandable really considering that its been 27 years since this was forst mooted, and several times nurses have been told it would be sorted in that interveening period. we've offered to undertake major reform in working practices in return and to give timescales for this. what i'd ask though, is that seeing as this has been an issue for so long, and to fair was raised again when the negotiations for benchmarking 2 comenced, why could said study not already have been carried out? that would mean that this wouldn't even be an issue now....

The second is the pay issue, and that is part of the benchmarking process and what the Labour Court ruling concerned. It's this pay issue that is the main problem, imho. Because of the industrial action, whether for better or worse, this situation is now very much in the public eye. Other groups will be watching the outcome very carefully and honestly the threat of a domino effect is a very real one. Also, you have to take into account the sheer size of the nurse workforce. The numbers involved are very big and this complicates matters further (if the nurses get 1 million, surely a million could be spared for the teachers etc.).

again this situation could have been averted, headed off at the pass so to speak. the unions have been raising these issues since the beginning of benchmarking 1. specifically with regard to the care-workers getting thier pay increase. that all started 6 years ago. why did the governement not start fixing the issue then? instead of letting it get to this stage? would it not have been more cost effective to begin a process of reform and productivity review 6 years ago and phase increases in over time? instead of the situation that we have now

I've no issue really with the first, it just needs to be costed and stress tested before implementation. The second however is a much more serious issue and I'm a little confused why the strategy to demand both was chosen, it makes ye look greedy.

why demand both at the same time? well to be honest we've been trying to resolve both now for years, as i've just pointed out. it not gotten to the stage, after over a year of following the HSE's OWN grievances procedure that this was the ony option for nurses. 3 weeks ago the unions went in with an open book and said lets do what we have to, reform, expand the role etc etc and the employers just sat there. what else would peole have us do?

EDO

nesf wrote:

Well, to begin, the work week issue is separate to benchmarking afaik. It can, and should, be dealt with outside of this but the point of contention is over the HSE wanting a risk assessment/study/whatever done first and the INO demanding it now as far as I can make out. Whatever one might think of these studies done by the HSE and others, they are unfortunately necessary and prudent, if only as a panacea to reassure people. I'm not 100% sure what the INO is trying to do here, I can't see a way out of this report being done before any change is made.

The second is the pay issue, and that is part of the benchmarking process and what the Labour Court ruling concerned. It's this pay issue that is the main problem, imho. Because of the industrial action, whether for better or worse, this situation is now very much in the public eye. Other groups will be watching the outcome very carefully and honestly the threat of a domino effect is a very real one. Also, you have to take into account the sheer size of the nurse workforce. The numbers involved are very big and this complicates matters further (if the nurses get 1 million, surely a million could be spared for the teachers etc.).

I've no issue really with the first, it just needs to be costed and stress tested before implementation. The second however is a much more serious issue and I'm a little confused why the strategy to demand both was chosen, it makes ye look greedy.

Nesf , you've summed very well - nobody in the country doubts that the nurses have a case here, both in regard to pay and conditions but the way the union is going about it is all wrong and the timing is very bad. Like Nesf I'm quite concerned about the potential effects on the rest of public service - all the rest are watching to see and pounce if any concession outside the partnership and benchmarking process is given and all hell could break loose if it does - I think the union is vastly overestimating public support and considerably underestimating the Government's resolve on this issue - the ASTI tried the same stunt in the run-up to the last election and it failed miserably - they had to go back to benchmarking and the partnership process and lost considerable public sympathy and respect in the process.

I'm in considerable sympathy with the staff nurses position - they do deserve to be rewarded more and given more resources etc - more motivated and productive front line staff is exactly what our health service requires - if there ever was an organisation that was top heavy with bureaucrats its the HSE - way too many chiefs and not half enough indians. But do you think the other health service unions would stand by if the logical and commonsense position making 50% of the bureauracy redundant and pouring the savings into frontline staff and facilities came about? - well it hasn't happened so far despite the millions spent on various reports every couple of years coming to the same conclusion.

Take it easy on the Private sector folks will'yis! - we're not all earning telephone number salaries and getting double digit payrises in the financial sector - (I personally have been on a pay freeze for the last 3 years and this year is not looking much better - the semi-conductor business is in doldrums with recession in the US and cutthroat competition from the Far east). The financial health of this country is in the process of taking a sharp turn for the worse in recent months - tax receipts are down an average of 10% on projections, the property market is stalling and because of our high inflation rate (which another gigantic round of public sector payouts will only add fuel to the flames on) our industrial and manufacturing sectors are in meltdown as we lose competitiveness. I know the public sector workers will go -" well tough luck bud" - but its the private sector that earns and pays the taxes that pay the public sector - Im have an awful feeling that regardless of who wins the general election we are going to see a dramatic tightening of the financial belt in the months after.

So I really feel the unions should really go back to drawing board on this one - and come up with a plan and a deal that would make the HSE put its money where its mouth is - And come out and show how nearly every increase in spending on health is being swallowed up by the bureucrats - don't be afraid to upset the other unions: I dont see many calls of solidarity from them at the moment. Be transparent and honest with the General Public - we all know that a good healthcare system costs- but we would like to know that there is a plan behind whatever is being asked for and that there is a proper system of reward and promotion based on meritocracy put in place to prevent this happening again - there will be no winners out of the current standoff.

my two cents

Dr Galen

Nesf , you've summed very well - nobody in the country doubts that the nurses have a case here, both in regard to pay and conditions but the way the union is going about it is all wrong and the timing is very bad.

we've been trying to get some of these issues sorted for nearly 27 years now. the timing is really the fault of the government, why couldn't this have sorted out weeks,months, years ago? in a piecemeal fashion?

Like Nesf I'm quite concerned about the potential effects on the rest of public service - all the rest are watching to see and pounce if any concession outside the partnership and benchmarking process is given and all hell could break loose if it does - I think the union is vastly overestimating public support and considerably underestimating the Government's resolve on this issue - the ASTI tried the same stunt in the run-up to the last election and it failed miserably - they had to go back to benchmarking and the partnership process and lost considerable public sympathy and respect in the process.

we've no issue with the process, one way or another nurses have been following process for about a year now, and getting nothing from it. its only been in the past 2 weeks that the HSE began to talk about reviews and health and safety inspections. why couldn't they have done that months ago, and right now we could have a viable and agreed plan that would sort out at least the 35hr week issue.

I know the public sector workers will go -" well tough luck bud" - but its the private sector that earns and pays the taxes that pay the public sector - Im have an awful feeling that regardless of who wins the general election we are going to see a dramatic tightening of the financial belt in the months after.

i agree with you here, maybe we'll see less wastage by governement, and i'd never say that kind of thing about private sector workers. worked there long enough myself to have sympathy

So I really feel the unions should really go back to drawing board on this one - and come up with a plan and a deal that would make the HSE put its money where its mouth is - be transparent and honest with the General Public - we all know that a good healthcare system costs- but we would like to know that there is a plan behind whatever is being asked for and that there is a proper system of reward and promotion based on meritocracy put in place to prevent this happening again - there will be no winners out of the current standoff.

not to repeat what i've already posted here and in AH/politics forums, but we've tried and nurses have been totally open to reform for ages now.

nesf

InFront wrote:

Yeah, as nurse baz said, the precedent has already been set by other health-care workers who have gone outside benchmarking, and suggestions otherwise is simply pandering to HSE "lives at risk", "as bad as a strike" type spin.
It does not take a genius PR consultant (with a wage packet multiplied the size of a nurse's basic pay) to figure out what the nurses are saying: that there is a solution to this issue outside of benchmarking - 14 other groups have gone down that merry path with the FF-PDs in toe.
As has been said so many times before, nurses have been promised the 35 hour week afforded to other health-care professionals for the past 27 years. There does appear to be possibility of some movement on that now, but if there is it will be purely down to the nurses (quite rightly) finally digging their heels in when the HSE maintained impossibility. I hope they get their pay rise too.

They were never promised anything, the Labour Court doesn't make promises on behalf of others.

nesf

nurse_baz wrote:

the unions basically want an indicator of a timescale for when this can report can be achieved and released by. Nurses just want a rough idea of when and how the 35hr will come about by. This is pretty understandable really considering that its been 27 years since this was forst mooted, and several times nurses have been told it would be sorted in that interveening period. we've offered to undertake major reform in working practices in return and to give timescales for this. what i'd ask though, is that seeing as this has been an issue for so long, and to fair was raised again when the negotiations for benchmarking 2 comenced, why could said study not already have been carried out? that would mean that this wouldn't even be an issue now....

And the HSE is quite right in saying that setting a date for it would be unreasonable considering that there's a stack of red tape to claw through first. Demand that the report begin sure, but demanding a date isn't very viable imho.

nurse_baz wrote:

again this situation could have been averted, headed off at the pass so to speak. the unions have been raising these issues since the beginning of benchmarking 1. specifically with regard to the care-workers getting thier pay increase. that all started 6 years ago. why did the governement not start fixing the issue then? instead of letting it get to this stage? would it not have been more cost effective to begin a process of reform and productivity review 6 years ago and phase increases in over time? instead of the situation that we have now

You're assuming that you are entitled to a 10% pay rise. That's a relatively large assumption to be making.

nurse_baz wrote:

why demand both at the same time? well to be honest we've been trying to resolve both now for years, as i've just pointed out. it not gotten to the stage, after over a year of following the HSE's OWN grievances procedure that this was the ony option for nurses. 3 weeks ago the unions went in with an open book and said lets do what we have to, reform, expand the role etc etc and the employers just sat there. what else would peole have us do?

Well, honestly, the above is very nurse-centric reasoning. There is a world out their beyond ye and what happens about this does effect others and really ye should, imho, look out at the effects this will have before making demands and taking industrial action. As I've repeated over and over, ye're not in a vacuum.

Traumadoc

We are spending 80K on training nurses to degree standard - then loosing them because the working conditions are so demanding-

If nursing is to progress we have to encourage progressing and retention in nursing - all the management in the hospital I work in is former nurses - good people lost to a decent salary and shorter working weeks. Why does no one in management want to become a nurse??

nesf

Traumadoc wrote:

We are spending 80K on training nurses to degree standard - then loosing them because the working conditions are so demanding-

Well, similar to medicine, you'd have to expect some gap between degree holders and people going into the profession. Could people have unrealistic expectations going into the nursing degrees? I mean leaving college and going into a 30+K a year job is really not something that most other degrees can boast.

Could it be that nursing, as a profession, will always be demanding due to the kind of work it entails and that a fair percentage of people who graduate just aren't able to do it or make that kind of effort? I appreciate that a fair few emigrate since it's one of those qualifications that will get you into countries, but I don't think that it's strictly a pay issue or work week issue when it comes to the gap itself. Nursing is not the kind of work that any person could do, never mind do well and/or enjoy it.

Traumadoc

Have to agree with a lot of what you say. but it is not poor quality nurses that are leaving- its the good ones.