NHS Reform: Union Attacks Region Pay Rates As 'Divisive Nightmare'

Posted: 22/04/2012 15:45 Updated: 22/04/2012 15:53   PA

Nhs Reform

Changing the pay rates of public sector workers, including NHS staff, to reflect regional differences would be an "unworkable, divisive nightmare", union leaders warned on Sunday.

Unison said health workers were already suffering a pay freeze, job and budget cuts as well as huge reorganisation in the wake of the Government's controversial health reforms.

In evidence to be submitted tomorrow to the NHS pay review body, Unison will say: "The current UK-wide pay system, which sets a floor pay rate for the NHS and allows for adjustments in high cost areas or local areas with particular recruitment difficulties has proven itself as a robust, effective pay system that adequately follows geographic variations in the UK labour market."

The government is pressing ahead with plans to introduce regional pay in the public sector, sparking union warnings of massive wage cuts for employees in some parts of the country.

Unison, which holds its annual health conference in Brighton this week, said the current pay system, Agenda for Change, took many years to develop and implement and was recognised as the tool to deliver fair pay.

Christina McAnea, Unison's head of health, said: "The Department of Health's evidence on regional pay is built on sand. For a government that says it wants to cut paperwork, introducing regional pay would be a massively expensive, bureaucratic nightmare, designed to cause huge disruption and conflict.

"Regional pay would cause skills shortages in so-called low cost areas with nurses, midwives and specialised staff being hard to recruit and retain, hitting the care of patients.

"The government wants to introduce a market ethos into the NHS but most private companies abandoned regional pay scales years ago as divisive and unworkable.

"The NHS is already struggling to find billions in so-called efficiency savings and with no extra money promised to fund higher cost areas, the money would have to come from existing budgets."

Unison will say in its submission: "Market-facing pay would lead to a reduction in public sector pay in some areas of the UK and further entrench low pay in those areas. Reducing public sector pay will not stimulate economic growth but take demand out of the economy.

"Private sector labour markets do not provide an appropriate framework on which to map NHS pay. Modelling NHS pay on private sector pay outcomes would replicate the private sector's market failures, distortions and inequalities. These failures have led to rapidly rising income inequality and a gender wage gap.

"The differential between highest and lowest earners and between men and women is larger in the private sector than the public sector. Income inequality has also grown between London and the rest of the country over the last decade.

"Reducing NHS pay rates in low income areas will widen this gap as the private sector competes for staff in a labour market with a reduced 'going rate.'

"NHS staff have already borne the brunt of a pay freeze, face further pay restraint and pensions reforms. NHS staff morale and motivation have been harmed by these policies, as well as fears over job security. More attacks on pay and conditions will do further damage - and will impact on recruitment and retention."

Andy Burnham, Labour's shadow health secretary, who will address Unison's conference this week, said the Government's plans were "flawed on every level", adding: "First, it fails the economic test, making it harder to control costs and reinforcing the North-South divide.

"Second, it fails the heath policy test. Differential pay will bring instability to the NHS, with the risk of one area poaching staff from another. It makes it harder to bring the best staff to the more deprived parts of the country where the health challenge is often greatest.

"Third, it fails the fairness test. Paying people differently for the same work is difficult to justify. Indeed, it is often harder to work on the NHS front-line in more deprived parts of the country.

Welsh Labour Health Minister, Lesley Griffiths, said: "Our stance on introducing regional pay is clear - we do not support it. We view it as Tory code for cutting the pay of NHS workers in Wales.

"The Tory-led UK Government has given the NHS Pay Review Body a remit to consider the introduction of regional pay for NHS staff in England.

"However, in a joint letter with the Scottish Government, I have recently informed the NHS Pay Review Body that we will not be providing a remit to them to consider this issue for Wales."

FOLLOW UK POLITICS

Changing the pay rates of public sector workers, including NHS staff, to reflect regional differences would be an "unworkable, divisive nightmare", union leaders warned on Sunday. Unison said healt...
Changing the pay rates of public sector workers, including NHS staff, to reflect regional differences would be an "unworkable, divisive nightmare", union leaders warned on Sunday. Unison said healt...
Filed by Michael Rundle  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 103
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:23 AM on 04/26/2012
NHS trying it on again!
12:03 AM on 04/26/2012
Do people see Consultants any more? Or is it SHO & Junior Doctor allowed to 'practice' in the NHS!!! lol. The best of the best so we are told! Who put that one about?
05:37 PM on 04/25/2012
NHS staff morale and motivation, has always been the problem! All patients are abusive aggressive alcoholics, so the NHS tells us! lol.
11:48 PM on 04/25/2012
Don't U just like the staff, self made A4 laminated posters telling us!!!
05:31 PM on 04/25/2012
Is the NHS where you go for them to write DNAR before your funeral!
01:41 PM on 04/25/2012
They want all the perks of pay of London but don't wish to move, so they have a better standard of living & housing than those actually in London!
05:27 PM on 04/25/2012
There aren't enough jobs to cater for all NHS employees in London - they have to go where the work is. Supply & demand just like any other industry.
09:29 PM on 04/24/2012
GPs are actually private & hired by the NHS for their service. GPs like to run groups as it brings money into their practice. They have shown themselves to be greedy & don't want to be called out any more. Why are they being put in charge of NHS budgets is beyond me!
04:58 PM on 04/23/2012
Another bonkers idea from Lansley & Co., no doubt designed to please their friends in the private sector waiting to take over more NHS functions. Apart from the effect on recruitment, well argued below by majdf18148, there would be other impacts. Reduction of movement from the higher salaried areas (professional staff tend to be highly mobile which is good for the NHS) and reduction of money circulating in local economies in more deprived areas are two of the more obvious ones. The NHS suffered for decades once before when someone didn't understand the value of ward domestic staff and privatised it all (with worse conditions for staff) to the detriment of ward cleanliness and patient safety. Now, apparently, Osborne is saying that this will give a boost to local businesses in deprived areas. If those businesses can't hack it now when levels of unemployment are so high how are they going to grow when there is even less money in their local economy? The policy will result in an even more profound North South divide.
majdf18148
I have nothing to declare but my curiosity
09:09 AM on 04/23/2012
I rarely if ever agree with the unions. On this occasion they have my support.The reason for this is based on my personal experience gained over almost two decades of working in the NHS at a fairly senior level. Many district general hospitals (DGHs) already struggle to attract well qualified and experienced staff to come and work in the more "unfashionable" areas of the country. No Teaching Hospital status, no major trauma centre, no research facilities, single consultant status specialties et al all combine to make it less attractive to career minded clinical staff to move to these areas. They want something good to add to their CV! Add in the low job prospects for spouses and other family members in the smaller town environs of many DGHs, and the disadvantages of moving to one of these smaller hosptals becomes self evident. There are plusses. Cheaper housing, lower cost of living are but two such attractions. But; start introducing pay differentuals and the already fragile balance of clinical staff availability and distribution in the "sticks" will likely become critical. A surgeon operating on a critically ill patient in the north should not earn less than his colleagues doing the same thing in the south. London already has its own "weighting" system and that is right and proper, to expand that throughout the country will prove to be detrimental and dangerous!
03:09 AM on 04/23/2012
I can only assume, that if it is fair and reasonable for there to be variable rates of pay in the public sector, ie. the NHS, Teachers, Police, etc. than Parliament must follow suit and adjust the rate of members pay to reflect the rates of pay in those areas which they represent. In simpler terms, for those members who find numbers difficult to understand and therefore leave their financial affairs for others to conduct in their stead, if you represent an low income constituency, your remuneration would reflect that and be reduced to reflect the area which you represent. In other words, poorer areas would equal poorer representation. After all it would be fairer, wouldn't it???
11:34 PM on 04/23/2012
So in your eyes,someone who work in a poor area should take a cut in wages,Are the MPs going to do the same?
11:40 PM on 04/23/2012
Sorry Fred, That's exactly what I was trying to say but got caught up with wordiness. Thanks for making it clearer.
11:26 PM on 04/22/2012
So we already have a regional pay system and they gvmt want to bring in regional pay system and they are complaining. Is it possible the new system will be just like a review and more robust, fair system? I always find it strange how unions complain straight away about what the new system will mean when they do not have a clue.
02:01 AM on 04/23/2012
I think you will find the Unions have more of a clue whats going on than any of us!
A pay and grading exercise was carried out across the NHS a couple of years back (a similar exercise was carried out as well in local Govt) it was called the `agenda for change` This exercise sorted out the pay structure across the board to make it a fairer system, and more importantly equal pay compliant. The Unions concerns for their members (who remember are ordinary people just like you and me) are rightly justified, this is pure and simply an attempt to drive down peoples pay and conditions of service. In terms of equal pay legislation, If people are paid different wages for doing work of equal value, e.g. the same job just in a different `pay location` then surely this cannot be equal pay compliant and therefore technically illegal.
02:34 AM on 04/23/2012
i agree with you what will happen as well many persons will not want to do these jobs why because they will be better off on benefits if pay is lower it means as well
many persons dependent upon tax credits or soon be the universal credit,
10:45 PM on 04/22/2012
Instability in the NHS ain't anything new!
09:34 PM on 04/22/2012
In this blind rush to cut cost and increase the tax take is the baby being thrown out with the bath water, everything has a true price. That’s where a product is for sale or property to buy/rent then it’s only worth what people will pay but this may not be its true value, people can affect the price by offering to little or too much. This is all about product, something solid, touchable visually obvious, but there is still a true price.

Wages/salaries even bonuses are different, they are not just about the product, with in its makeup there is loyalty, experience, qualification, time served, reliability, willingness, team play, reasonability, hours put in. Wages are recognition of your ability, the way you do your job, how good you are, sometimes qualifications are taken for ability carrying a great pay rate but you know and your mates know who can do the job.

Large organisations have to have a structure even though some people within that structure will be paid more than they are worth. Pay scales tell the workforce from day one what their efforts will be worth not just that day but for all their working days. Any organisation that wants to destroy that pay structure will destroy the organisation, maybe that’s the intention behind the suggested changes. The job has a true value no matter where its carried out, if its only worth fifty pence in the north its only worth fifty pence in London.
11:11 PM on 04/22/2012
If a cabbage costs 50 pence in bolton and a pound in London then you can afford 2 cabbages in bolton and only one in london ,thats not right , all being that they eat cabbages in bolton but I do know that they eat cabbages in london . We all know that the cost of living is way more expensive in the south so there should be higher pay where it is expensive and lower pay where it is not so expensive , not rocket science is it .
11:34 PM on 04/22/2012
Probably 35p in scotland. Seems a long way to go though to save a few pence. Ill keep having mine sent from Bolton.
08:24 AM on 04/23/2012
No it’s not rocket science all the best will move to London where the money is, so those in the north will have little or no quality staff, very short sighted. Then the authorities will have to spend more in the private sector to fill their obligations, so again it’s not rocket science. Then with the overspend, taxes and rates will climb the NHS will have to offer higher salaries to attract the correct type of staff, no you are right it’s not rocket science.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickbono
huff is crap
09:29 PM on 04/22/2012
well well well , they have targeted the single parents, the low paid, the sick & disabled the unemployed & the OAP`s . last week i asked who would be next & low & behold its the workers now , most likely those that thought it was great that the elderly,unemployed ,disabled & sick were having there benefits cut
11:35 PM on 04/22/2012
Everyone pretty much then has had their money squeezed. That sounds quite fair to me. Was that your point?
01:23 AM on 04/23/2012
The real point is that stinking rich OAPs and overpaid "workers" have not 'had their money squeezed' while poorer OAPs and underpaid workers have had to face the brunt of the coalition cuts.
09:24 PM on 04/22/2012
All the palaver about the 3rd of May local elections would make a stone statue smile. Who are we meant to vote in? Surely not the More rights for minorities, and unlimited open door immigration Labour Party. The party that changed the face of Britain whether you like it or not, and resurrected the art of invading other countries, and interfering with their internal affairs, at the loss of over 400 of our young men, and women? The large scale destruction of our economy, Or the namby pamby Libdems who stand for the abolition of marriage as we know it, and are more concerned with peoples sexuality, and their private relationships?
UKIP, who say we will be are better off out of the EU, or extremist parties with their far right agenda to repatriate our ethnic population back to their country of origin? Or the Tory party with their continuing quest to privatise the UK, reduce everyone to the lower classes where they reckon they should be, with the unemployed, and any dependents to be denied state benefit, effectively reducing them to the status of beggar. That's real progress for us?
Do any of them deserve a vote? It beggars belief!
This comment has been removed.