Lisbon II and the rights of healthcare workers

tallaght01

So, Lisbon II.

Seeing as all of you in the motherland gave them the wrong answer first time around, I assume you'll be giving them the preferred answer this time

I actually broadly support what Lisbon is about, but I don't see how the guarantees given to our government amunt to anything that's legally binding.

However, as a group who's working conditions have been absolutely shocking over the last few decades, has anyone any thoughts on what we could be signing up for in terms of what's been gained recently.

European law has meant that Irish docs will be working less hours than ever sometime soon.

But, from what I'm hearing when I listen to the radio in Ireland, there's a bit on the document which seems to say that workers rights (that are currently enshrined in legislation) can be overturned in order to help the EU achive it's aims. This is why one of the big trade unions were protesting aout it on RTE yesterday.

This has made me think twice about the treaty. Workers rights are very important to me. Not only because of the profession I'm in, but also because I remember my dad and grandad telling me about the days when you had next to no rights as a blue collar worker in Dublin.

But as this is a bio+med forum.....can anyone tell me if Europe can claw back on the EWTD agreement if healthcare or staffing is suffering under the terms of Lisbon II.

I could ask my lawyer sister to tell me the answer, but I wanted to get an idea about people's perceptions as well, as that wil be just as important as fact in the run up to the vote.

sam34

i actually havent got a clue, didnt even know it was an issue.

along with our esteemed leaders, i havent read all of the treaty.

i didnt vote the first time round (womens libbers, please dont shoot me. i didnt vote because i actually cant find my vote, it's registered to an old address i had in college and i dont really know how to change it to my current address, and tbh i didnt care enough about lisbon to go finding out)

i would have voted no, if i had voted.

in the aftermath of the vote, and with sarkozy saying "the irish must vote again", i got up on my high horse and decided that it was making a mockery of democracy to make us vote again, and i vowed to get myself on the register just so i could go out and damned well vote no this time.

of course, i havent done that.

plus, ive been swayed, so i think i'd vote yes if i was voting.

but anyway, back to your question, i dunno if it will affect us.

where im working currently, we're just ignoring the EWTD and going about overtime as usual.

ZorbaTehZ

sam34 wrote: »

where im working currently, we're just ignoring the EWTD and going about overtime as usual.

Slightly off-topic, but is there anywhere in Ireland that the EWTD is being adhered to as a matter of interest?

DrIndy

The only place it is applied in full is Emergency Medicine because of the already pre-existing shift system. It may be applied next in ICU/anaesthetics because they are largely shift systems too. There will be a long time before an effective system which preserves training is applied to medicine and surgery because it would mean greater inherent co-operation between teams.

Traumadoc

The shift system for all specialities seems to work in Australia, Medical SHO does a month of nights, and hands over to the day team in the morning.Then does day shifts for 4 months. I donjt understand why the medical trainers seem to think the current system is the only way.

Tree

AFAIK lisbon has no particular effect on workers rights. The part that the cóir nutters folk are referring to is a part of different legislation regarding migrant workers, and how they may have to, under certain circumstances, adhere to employment law in their home countries. I doubt that affects many healthcare workers.

locum-motion

sam34 wrote: »

i actually havent got a clue, didnt even know it was an issue.

along with our esteemed leaders, i havent read all of the treaty.

i didnt vote the first time round (womens libbers, please dont shoot me. i didnt vote because i actually cant find my vote, it's registered to an old address i had in college and i dont really know how to change it to my current address, and tbh i didnt care enough about lisbon to go finding out)

i would have voted no, if i had voted.

in the aftermath of the vote, and with sarkozy saying "the irish must vote again", i got up on my high horse and decided that it was making a mockery of democracy to make us vote again, and i vowed to get myself on the register just so i could go out and damned well vote no this time.

of course, i havent done that.

plus, ive been swayed, so i think i'd vote yes if i was voting.

but anyway, back to your question, i dunno if it will affect us.

where im working currently, we're just ignoring the EWTD and going about overtime as usual.

OK, I know this is kinda off topic, so Mods, feel free to delete if this is inappropriate.

After the 'No' last time out, one of the reasons that was identified for people voting "No" was "I didn't understand it, so I voted 'No'."
My suggestion to these people is this: if you don't understand it, then either 1) educate yourself or 2) abstain from voting. If you vote 'No' because you don't understand it, how do you know that you're not voting against something that you'd be in favour of if you did understand it?

I don't claim to understand it all, but what I do understand led me to vote Yes last time, and I will again.
Also, many of the arguments put forward by the No side were straightforward lies; abortion is coming, there'll be conscription into a European army, we'll lose our Commissioner etc. (On the Commissioner thing; 1) Charlie McCreevy isn't Ireland's Commissioner. He's "European Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services", and he happens to be Irish. He is actually prohibited from working in Ireland's interest as he goes about his merry way doing his job. 2) The reduction in size of the Commission was actually already adopted in the Nice 2 Referendum.)
And thirdly, one of my favourite reasons for voting 'Yes' is that Sinn Fein wanted me to to vote 'No'.

As regards the 'Democracy' argument: surely it's the very essence of democracy that you get asked a second time. After all, we vote again for a new Dail at least every 5 years. Should it just be 'Ball-burst-game-over' if there's a No in a referendum? Should it be prohibited to ask the question a second time?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commissioner#Commissioner.27s_oath

tallaght01

Tree wrote: »

AFAIK lisbon has no particular effect on workers rights. The part that the cóir nutters folk are referring to is a part of different legislation regarding migrant workers, and how they may have to, under certain circumstances, adhere to employment law in their home countries. I doubt that affects many healthcare workers.

Well, depending on what country you're in, a lot of nurses are from overseas. Same with docs. But I digress. I'm no lawyer. But, we've been given legally binding guarantees on a lot of stuff, such as abortion. But I was listening to Micheal Martin on the radio the other day, and he was dodging the issue of workers' rights bigtime. Giving the odd fudge answer when he had to. But he was uncomfortable.

The website, too, gives guarantees in lots of area, and then gives quite a soft guarantee about workers' right:

da government wrote:

How are workers' rights protected by the solemn declaration?

n the Solemn Declaration, which was agreed at the June European Council, the EU re-iterated the high importance which the Union attaches to:

Social progress and the protection of workers’ rights;
Public services;
The responsibility of Member States for the delivery of education and health services;
The essential role and wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest.
This Solemn Declaration by the 27 Member States of the EU underlines and highlights for all, the value which the Union attaches to workers’ rights and the provision of public services.

Reading the above didn't make me feel ,much more at ease, I have to say.

Jessibelle

From what I understand from reading the treaty (though this could be misinterpretation and I'm open to correction) the treaty states that a company based in one EU state can bring migrant workers to another country and pay them no more than the minimum wage. This means that Irish workers who currently work in any business, medical, shop, restaurant, hotel, etc, whose base is in another country in the European Union, can be held to the minimum wage here, and if they don't like it, they may lump it. Whereas I doubt that if this was implemented, it would have any impact on public health sector wages, could this potentially affect private clinics and medical groups that have international holdings e.g. Aviva health clinics etc?

tallaght01

So, a company cold bring, say, workers over from Latvia to Ireland and pay them the Latvian minimum wage??

Jessibelle

tallaght01 wrote: »

So, a company cold bring, say, workers over from Latvia to Ireland and pay them the Latvian minimum wage??

Not quite, they have to, as far as I understand it, pay the minimum wage of the country of operation, so that would be €8.66, but they're not obliged to pay above that, meaning they can replace workers that wouldn't agree to work at that rate with workers that would, i.e. let the workforce go at the higher rate and rehire a new workforce at the lower rate.

drzhivago

tallaght01 wrote: »

So, Lisbon II.

Seeing as all of you in the motherland gave them the wrong answer first time around, I assume you'll be giving them the preferred answer this time

I actually broadly support what Lisbon is about, but I don't see how the guarantees given to our government amunt to anything that's legally binding.

However, as a group who's working conditions have been absolutely shocking over the last few decades, has anyone any thoughts on what we could be signing up for in terms of what's been gained recently.

European law has meant that Irish docs will be working less hours than ever sometime soon.

But, from what I'm hearing when I listen to the radio in Ireland, there's a bit on the document which seems to say that workers rights (that are currently enshrined in legislation) can be overturned in order to help the EU achive it's aims. This is why one of the big trade unions were protesting aout it on RTE yesterday.

This has made me think twice about the treaty. Workers rights are very important to me. Not only because of the profession I'm in, but also because I remember my dad and grandad telling me about the days when you had next to no rights as a blue collar worker in Dublin.

But as this is a bio+med forum.....can anyone tell me if Europe can claw back on the EWTD agreement if healthcare or staffing is suffering under the terms of Lisbon II.

I could ask my lawyer sister to tell me the answer, but I wanted to get an idea about people's perceptions as well, as that wil be just as important as fact in the run up to the vote.

Lisbon has nothing to do with EWTD and specifically they have rejected clawback on it at Council of Ministers

drzhivago

DrIndy wrote: »

The only place it is applied in full is Emergency Medicine because of the already pre-existing shift system. It may be applied next in ICU/anaesthetics because they are largely shift systems too. There will be a long time before an effective system which preserves training is applied to medicine and surgery because it would mean greater inherent co-operation between teams.

Not quite true here either

Not ALL ED are fully EWTD compliant and there is a little catch all clause in Irish legislation taht says in critical industries where the gaps between shifts are not of sufficient duration that is ok as long as they get compensatory rest at another time

That is a problem as no one has defined compensatory rest

Meant to work friday 10am-9pm
Due 3 hours compensatory rest

Does that mean I start 3 hours late, finish on time and get paid for full shift
Start 3 hours late finish on time get paid 3 hours less for that shift
Start 3 hours late and finish 3 hours late on that shift with a knock on effect on each shift until I have a full day off

This is not a grey area there is no colour o describe this

drzhivago

tallaght01 wrote: »

So, a company cold bring, say, workers over from Latvia to Ireland and pay them the Latvian minimum wage??

There is something in that Tallaght but dont have all the details as this was an issue that arose in the building Industry

Like yourself have some fears for workers in this but in General more happy with the Treaty and will be voting for it

If workers from other countries with lower standard of living cam here and were paid lower rates of pay they simply couldnt survive for very long here with prices as they are

tallaght01

drzhivago wrote: »

Lisbon has nothing to do with EWTD and specifically they have rejected clawback on it at Council of Ministers

Lisbom has nothing to do with EWTD per se. But could they claw back the conditions on the EWTD if it was needed. Presumably Lisbon will supercede any previous legislation?

drzhivago

tallaght01 wrote: »

Lisbom has nothing to do with EWTD per se. But could they claw back the conditions on the EWTD if it was needed. Presumably Lisbon will supercede any previous legislation?

OMG Australia has sucked the reason out of your head

Lisbon is not to do with legislation per se

There is a legislative process in EU which will continue to operate whether Lisbon passes or fails

When an issue such as EWTD raises again, a raporteur is appointed who seeks views from all sides of industry. Council of parliament seeks guidance from the governments, MEPS seek guidance from their constituents and also Unions who go to Brussels to lobby on proposed changes

Long drawn out process which could happen without Lisbon

In February this year they could not come to agreement between council and Parliament I believe so EWTD buried for time being

tallaght01

The point I'm making, or rather the question I'm asking is whether the gains in working conditions from EWTD are set in stone. I doubt they are. EWTD has been implemented without Lisbon. But presumably, with a new legislative framework, it could be reversed.

I know that's unlikely to happen. But, could it? The unions, or some of them, seem to think that work rights are in danger. I'm trying to find out if that's the case. I'm not saying it is. I'm just asking the question.

drzhivago

tallaght01 wrote: »

The point I'm making, or rather the question I'm asking is whether the gains in working conditions from EWTD are set in stone. I doubt they are. EWTD has been implemented without Lisbon. But presumably, with a new legislative framework, it could be reversed.

I know that's unlikely to happen. But, could it? The unions, or some of them, seem to think that work rights are in danger. I'm trying to find out if that's the case. I'm not saying it is. I'm just asking the question.

Lisbon doesnt change the legislative process that is there

No law is set in stone, it can be changed by the legislature in the particular country if they wish

To change ETWD now would be at keats 5 years away

Would be more interested in them actually implementing what exists

Regarding Unions and workers rights what they fear is mass immigration of people on lesser pay which would destabilise working conditions here- they think there is a loophole n the law allowing that