NHS staff could lose thousands if jobs are regraded

NURSES, doctors and healthcare assistants at Bolton NHS Foundation Trust could face losing thousands of pounds from their salaries if their jobs are down-banded.

Employees at the troubled Trust, which is more than £12 million in debt and must save £50 million in the next three years, are currently being told the extent of the proposals in meetings held by managers with each department.

The proposals include making staff re-apply for their jobs at a lower band, which could cost them thousands of pounds from their annual salary.

A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 could lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five.

If they are down-banded from the top scale of band six to a starting band five salary, they stand to lose £13,013 per year.

Staff have not yet been down-banded but as part of the ongoing 90-day consultation each department is being informed of the changes and the roles that will be affected.

In November, the Trust, which employs 5,300 staff, announced 500 jobs could be lost and bosses said they could not rule out compulsory redundancies.

They also announced a further 1,685 employees could also lose their jobs and be forced to reapply for their positions on “revised terms and conditions”, which could mean changes in hours, pay and responsibility.

Of the Trust’s 2,489 nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants, just under half — 1,450 staff — could be affected by the down-banding.

Out of the Trust’s 323 medical staff, more than two-thirds — 235 staff — could be affected by the changes.

Discussions are currently ongoing, with each department being told how many positions are at risk under the restructure.

The proposals for job cuts and down-banding will not be enforced until after March.

It is thought staff affected will have to re-apply for their jobs but until the consultation is concluded it is not known how this will work.

In a letter to Staff Side, which represents employees, the Trust said staff would be selected for redundancy based on an “objective selection criteria” and individual workers would then be consulted about alternative employment and ways their redundancy could be avoided.

The 90-day consultation period, which was started on November 14, had to be re-started on December 14 after unions complained they had not had enough information from the Trust.

About a dozen clerical staff, who were hired on temporary contracts, were told just days before Christmas their jobs would not be renewed.

Harry Hanley, secretary of Staff Side, said it would be holding meetings with staff about the proposals once all employees had been informed about the changes from managers.

He added: “At this moment in time we are still in discussions with the Trust.

“There is going to be down-banding and people are going to be losing a lot of money and considering they haven’t had a pay rise in the last three years this is going to make it even worse.”

Heather Edwards, head of communications at Bolton NHS Foundation Trust, said: “A range of proposals is being consulted on with staff.

“Some of these include different ways of working and/or changes to job descriptions and therefore these will be reasessed for banding in line with the national guidance under Agenda for Change.

“It is not possible to say at this point how many posts will be affected in this way, nor to give a final number of reductions in posts.”

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:00am Fri 25 Jan 13

exiled says...

Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up... exiled

11:08am Fri 25 Jan 13

Beyond News Forum says...

exiled wrote:
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Come on now, take a look at where the new offices have been located lol

Next time they will be reporting on the side of whoever wins the locals.

Corporate and lobbied media... I mean how much more proof do we need.

head's up incoming comment from the Shill on the BN newsdesk... I know you are there - I see you :P
[quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...[/p][/quote]Come on now, take a look at where the new offices have been located lol Next time they will be reporting on the side of whoever wins the locals. Corporate and lobbied media... I mean how much more proof do we need. head's up incoming comment from the Shill on the BN newsdesk... I know you are there - I see you :P Beyond News Forum

12:05pm Fri 25 Jan 13

boltonnut says...

Chop at the top.
Chop at the top. boltonnut

12:11pm Fri 25 Jan 13

twowok says...

exiled wrote:
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just!
[quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...[/p][/quote]Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just! twowok

12:23pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Puffin-Billy says...

BN reports that :
"Of the Trust’s 2,489 nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants, just under half — 1,450 staff — could be affected by the down-banding."

and that:

"Out of the Trust’s 323 medical staff, more than two-thirds — 235 staff — could be affected by the changes."

Dr Bhatiani claims “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked and that
"...the change is for the better and the fact that doctors are involved is critical.”

I would like to know how we can be Healthier Together if the above losses are going to take place?

Of course the Healthier Together campaign is linked to local issues.

Dr Bhatiani and his cronies are talking rubbish. I would like to know how much they stand to gain financially by pushing through these changes?
BN reports that : "Of the Trust’s 2,489 nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants, just under half — 1,450 staff — could be affected by the down-banding." and that: "Out of the Trust’s 323 medical staff, more than two-thirds — 235 staff — could be affected by the changes." Dr Bhatiani claims “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked and that "...the change is for the better and the fact that doctors are involved is critical.” I would like to know how we can be Healthier Together if the above losses are going to take place? Of course the Healthier Together campaign is linked to local issues. Dr Bhatiani and his cronies are talking rubbish. I would like to know how much they stand to gain financially by pushing through these changes? Puffin-Billy

12:25pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Puffin-Billy says...

BN reports that :
"Of the Trust’s 2,489 nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants, just under half — 1,450 staff — could be affected by the down-banding."

and that:

"Out of the Trust’s 323 medical staff, more than two-thirds — 235 staff — could be affected by the changes."

Dr Bhatiani claims “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked and that
"...the change is for the better and the fact that doctors are involved is critical.”

I would like to know how we can be Healthier Together if the above losses are going to take place?

Of course the Healthier Together campaign is linked to local issues.

Dr Bhatiani and his cronies are talking rubbish. I would like to know how much they stand to gain financially by pushing through these changes?
BN reports that : "Of the Trust’s 2,489 nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants, just under half — 1,450 staff — could be affected by the down-banding." and that: "Out of the Trust’s 323 medical staff, more than two-thirds — 235 staff — could be affected by the changes." Dr Bhatiani claims “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked and that "...the change is for the better and the fact that doctors are involved is critical.” I would like to know how we can be Healthier Together if the above losses are going to take place? Of course the Healthier Together campaign is linked to local issues. Dr Bhatiani and his cronies are talking rubbish. I would like to know how much they stand to gain financially by pushing through these changes? Puffin-Billy

12:59pm Fri 25 Jan 13

btownlass says...

I used to work for the Trust and I must say the majority of the managers are a joke. Every meeting I attended they discussed the same issues and never actually made a decision about anything. Cuts at the top must be made.... too many fingers and all that! If the HR Department trained their staff equally across the board (Trust/PCT), then more cuts could be made via the sickness absence policy, as I know there are numerous employees who should have been dismissed for sickness 3 or 4 times over, but still appear to be working there, costing the NHS thousands.
I used to work for the Trust and I must say the majority of the managers are a joke. Every meeting I attended they discussed the same issues and never actually made a decision about anything. Cuts at the top must be made.... too many fingers and all that! If the HR Department trained their staff equally across the board (Trust/PCT), then more cuts could be made via the sickness absence policy, as I know there are numerous employees who should have been dismissed for sickness 3 or 4 times over, but still appear to be working there, costing the NHS thousands. btownlass

1:04pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Puffin-Billy says...

btownlass wrote:
I used to work for the Trust and I must say the majority of the managers are a joke. Every meeting I attended they discussed the same issues and never actually made a decision about anything. Cuts at the top must be made.... too many fingers and all that! If the HR Department trained their staff equally across the board (Trust/PCT), then more cuts could be made via the sickness absence policy, as I know there are numerous employees who should have been dismissed for sickness 3 or 4 times over, but still appear to be working there, costing the NHS thousands.
Investigate the links between

Sir Stephen Bubb, David Worskett, David Bennett’, the chair of Monitor, the industry regulator, at:

http://socialinvesti
gations.blogspot.co.
uk/2012/07/key-membe
r-of-nhs-future-foru
m-colluded.html

The whole thing's as bent as a nine-bob note.
[quote][p][bold]btownlass[/bold] wrote: I used to work for the Trust and I must say the majority of the managers are a joke. Every meeting I attended they discussed the same issues and never actually made a decision about anything. Cuts at the top must be made.... too many fingers and all that! If the HR Department trained their staff equally across the board (Trust/PCT), then more cuts could be made via the sickness absence policy, as I know there are numerous employees who should have been dismissed for sickness 3 or 4 times over, but still appear to be working there, costing the NHS thousands.[/p][/quote]Investigate the links between Sir Stephen Bubb, David Worskett, David Bennett’, the chair of Monitor, the industry regulator, at: http://socialinvesti gations.blogspot.co. uk/2012/07/key-membe r-of-nhs-future-foru m-colluded.html The whole thing's as bent as a nine-bob note. Puffin-Billy

1:32pm Fri 25 Jan 13

exiled says...

twowok wrote:
exiled wrote:
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just!
Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article.

The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n
ot yet known..

In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact.

Hope that clarifies my point?
[quote][p][bold]twowok[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...[/p][/quote]Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just![/p][/quote]Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article. The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n ot yet known.. In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact. Hope that clarifies my point? exiled

1:52pm Fri 25 Jan 13

WATOAOW says...

Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like:

"Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon."

and

"GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian."

Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin.

As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five."
Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like: "Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon." and "GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian." Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin. As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five." WATOAOW

2:03pm Fri 25 Jan 13

SmoggyDiasboro says...

Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments.
Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments. SmoggyDiasboro

2:19pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Puffin-Billy says...

SmoggyDiasboro wrote:
Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments.
Is Cllr Andy Morgan happy about this:

http://socialinvesti

gations.blogspot.co.

uk/2012/07/key-membe

r-of-nhs-future-foru

m-colluded.html

If he really cares about the NHS and its employees, he ought to resign immediately.
[quote][p][bold]SmoggyDiasboro[/bold] wrote: Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments.[/p][/quote]Is Cllr Andy Morgan happy about this: http://socialinvesti gations.blogspot.co. uk/2012/07/key-membe r-of-nhs-future-foru m-colluded.html If he really cares about the NHS and its employees, he ought to resign immediately. Puffin-Billy

2:42pm Fri 25 Jan 13

WATOAOW says...

SmoggyDiasboro. NHS jobs are banded using Agenda For Change. So unless mass sweeping national pay arrangements are to be changed, which is not what is being discussed at the hospital, for a nurse to be downbanded from a 6 to a 5, their job description would have to change sufficiently to make it a band 5 post. That means the more skilled/difficult parts of the role would have to be removed and either not done or undertaken by somebody else.
SmoggyDiasboro. NHS jobs are banded using Agenda For Change. So unless mass sweeping national pay arrangements are to be changed, which is not what is being discussed at the hospital, for a nurse to be downbanded from a 6 to a 5, their job description would have to change sufficiently to make it a band 5 post. That means the more skilled/difficult parts of the role would have to be removed and either not done or undertaken by somebody else. WATOAOW

3:29pm Fri 25 Jan 13

DaveLister says...

SmoggyDiasboro wrote:
Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments.
If this was the case, the NHS would do someting nationally. Its not, under the agenda for change, all post were graded acording to national guidance. To suddenly say those in Bolton are diffrerent is a bit cincial.

I just another way of Turnround Terry justifing his £1.5M contract, he will get the regrading done, save the money and move on. The staff will then appeal and win get back their original bandings and we are back where we started, just £1.5M lighter paid to Turnaround Terry et al.

I sometimes think the people of Bolton are blind to the facts and just want to see someone get kicked when they are down
[quote][p][bold]SmoggyDiasboro[/bold] wrote: Very difficult situation and the specifics are always going to cause issues. However, WATOAAW, let's just change the 'oughts; around slightly. In these times of shortfall, if someone is being paid £34K to do a job which should pay £28K, regardless of whether the current incumbent 'individually' could be losing £6K, the question is whether everyone else should be paying that premium. It's very nasty for the individual, but surely reducing people being being overpaid for a job is critical at present. To extend this, everyone who is criticising overpaid bankers (and I fully agree with that), and overpaid footballers (I fully agree with that), should fully agree with the concept that REGARDLESS, people who are overpaid shoudl not be. It's hard, but it's a consistent argument. The point is that it shouldn't be personalised - the rebanding argument should be transparent and public, and also undertaken behind a 'veil of ignorance'. Personalisation ruins the arguments.[/p][/quote]If this was the case, the NHS would do someting nationally. Its not, under the agenda for change, all post were graded acording to national guidance. To suddenly say those in Bolton are diffrerent is a bit cincial. I just another way of Turnround Terry justifing his £1.5M contract, he will get the regrading done, save the money and move on. The staff will then appeal and win get back their original bandings and we are back where we started, just £1.5M lighter paid to Turnaround Terry et al. I sometimes think the people of Bolton are blind to the facts and just want to see someone get kicked when they are down DaveLister

3:49pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Puffin-Billy says...

WATOAOW wrote:
Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like:

"Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon."

and

"GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian."

Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin.

As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five."
"WILL" -not could !

A&E at birthplace of the NHS downgraded
25 Jan 2013 09:04

Trafford casualty will now be called an urgent care centre, and open between 8am and midnight. Emergency surgery will also be axed and the intensive care and paediatric observation and assessment units will close.

Tory-controlled Trafford council have passed a motion calling on Jeremy Hunt to intervene. Hypocrites !

In his response to Mr Burnham, Jeremy Hunt said he would not be getting involved.

He wrote: "We are absolutely clear that decisions concerning the provision and reconfiguration of NHS services are a matter for the local (I stress) local NHS."

Which directly contradicts Dr Bhatiani's statement: “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked.

Cllr Morgan should speak out against his government's plans for the NHS, or resign.
[quote][p][bold]WATOAOW[/bold] wrote: Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like: "Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon." and "GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian." Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin. As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five."[/p][/quote]"WILL" -not could ! A&E at birthplace of the NHS downgraded 25 Jan 2013 09:04 Trafford casualty will now be called an urgent care centre, and open between 8am and midnight. Emergency surgery will also be axed and the intensive care and paediatric observation and assessment units will close. Tory-controlled Trafford council have passed a motion calling on Jeremy Hunt to intervene. Hypocrites ! In his response to Mr Burnham, Jeremy Hunt said he would not be getting involved. He wrote: "We are absolutely clear that decisions concerning the provision and reconfiguration of NHS services are a matter for the local (I stress) local NHS." Which directly contradicts Dr Bhatiani's statement: “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked. Cllr Morgan should speak out against his government's plans for the NHS, or resign. Puffin-Billy

4:49pm Fri 25 Jan 13

tracy1000 says...

i work for an NHS trust in manchester and we have already been downgraded. we receive protected pay for aperiod of time but that depends on your length of service. i stand to lose 3k next year. if i wished to remain on my current band i had to apply for my own job which i had been doing for 20 years but at the time i was off long term sick so wasnt in any fit state to apply. But what they give you with one hand they take away with the other you had to perform the duties of the management on bands 5, 6 and above.

why is it that management and the like get to sit on their backsides earning a cushy wage and its us mugs on the front line that take the fall out. how much of a pay cut is the chief exec taking....none you can bet.
i work for an NHS trust in manchester and we have already been downgraded. we receive protected pay for aperiod of time but that depends on your length of service. i stand to lose 3k next year. if i wished to remain on my current band i had to apply for my own job which i had been doing for 20 years but at the time i was off long term sick so wasnt in any fit state to apply. But what they give you with one hand they take away with the other you had to perform the duties of the management on bands 5, 6 and above. why is it that management and the like get to sit on their backsides earning a cushy wage and its us mugs on the front line that take the fall out. how much of a pay cut is the chief exec taking....none you can bet. tracy1000

7:24pm Fri 25 Jan 13

LS says...

Puffin-Billy wrote:
WATOAOW wrote:
Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like:

"Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon."

and

"GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian."

Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin.

As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five."
"WILL" -not could !

A&E at birthplace of the NHS downgraded
25 Jan 2013 09:04

Trafford casualty will now be called an urgent care centre, and open between 8am and midnight. Emergency surgery will also be axed and the intensive care and paediatric observation and assessment units will close.

Tory-controlled Trafford council have passed a motion calling on Jeremy Hunt to intervene. Hypocrites !

In his response to Mr Burnham, Jeremy Hunt said he would not be getting involved.

He wrote: "We are absolutely clear that decisions concerning the provision and reconfiguration of NHS services are a matter for the local (I stress) local NHS."

Which directly contradicts Dr Bhatiani's statement: “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked.

Cllr Morgan should speak out against his government's plans for the NHS, or resign.
Absobloodylutely!!!! Lost 50 beds, lost multitudes of staff, did any managers go? Nope!!! Downgrade whoever you like, but if the downgraded staff have any sense they'll work "to grade", and a move from a top band six to a bottom band five means a move from a senior nurse to a newly qualfied. Newly qualified needs a mentor, doesn't provide extended skills, doesn't take charge of the ward/department, doesn't "think outside of the box", doesn't carry senior nurse bleep, doesn't do anymore than a newly qualified...........
.....bring it on, Boltn Hospitals NHS Trust, take the proverbial and you will be well and truely stitched up!!!
[quote][p][bold]Puffin-Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WATOAOW[/bold] wrote: Exiled. Other stories on the BN website include sentences like: "Up to seven inches of snow is predicted over high ground in the borough, which is likely to cause more disruption for schools and travel networks this afternoon." and "GREGG Wylde could be on his way to Hibernian." Both of which are/or at least at the time of writing speculative stories regarding things which might happen Would you also class these as Labour biased BN reporting? If a paper only ever reported concrete facts of definite events it'd be pretty thin. As somebody else has already said, these discussions are taking place at the hospital. The only problem I can see with the article is that COULD should be swapped with WOULD a couple of times. e.g. "A band six nurse, currently earning the top band sum of £34,189 WOULD lose £6,924 per year if they are down-banded to the top scale of band five."[/p][/quote]"WILL" -not could ! A&E at birthplace of the NHS downgraded 25 Jan 2013 09:04 Trafford casualty will now be called an urgent care centre, and open between 8am and midnight. Emergency surgery will also be axed and the intensive care and paediatric observation and assessment units will close. Tory-controlled Trafford council have passed a motion calling on Jeremy Hunt to intervene. Hypocrites ! In his response to Mr Burnham, Jeremy Hunt said he would not be getting involved. He wrote: "We are absolutely clear that decisions concerning the provision and reconfiguration of NHS services are a matter for the local (I stress) local NHS." Which directly contradicts Dr Bhatiani's statement: “Healthier Together and local issues are not linked. Cllr Morgan should speak out against his government's plans for the NHS, or resign.[/p][/quote]Absobloodylutely!!!! Lost 50 beds, lost multitudes of staff, did any managers go? Nope!!! Downgrade whoever you like, but if the downgraded staff have any sense they'll work "to grade", and a move from a top band six to a bottom band five means a move from a senior nurse to a newly qualfied. Newly qualified needs a mentor, doesn't provide extended skills, doesn't take charge of the ward/department, doesn't "think outside of the box", doesn't carry senior nurse bleep, doesn't do anymore than a newly qualified........... .....bring it on, Boltn Hospitals NHS Trust, take the proverbial and you will be well and truely stitched up!!! LS

7:53pm Fri 25 Jan 13

genesis22 says...

Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.
Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft. genesis22

8:11pm Fri 25 Jan 13

Citizen Cane says...

Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc.

Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes.

Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector.
Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc. Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes. Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector. Citizen Cane

9:36pm Fri 25 Jan 13

SmoggyDiasboro says...

@Puffin-Billy. I don't know what Cllr Morgan would say. To be honest what Bolton's Councillors say about the NHS is what it always was - tomorrow's chip paper wrappings.
@WATOAOW - if I have misread, then I apologise. My understanding from the article was that 'staff would have to apply for their own jobs' which have been 'down-banded'. Maybe I'm being disingenuous but to me that means they are doing the lower graded jobs and therefore are in 'protected' positions - to the layperson, being overpaid. Either I'm wrong or BEN has misreported. If what you are saying is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then this is a simple management failure: people have been misgraded, or perhaps I'm just being cynical and thinking that Agenda for Change was just a methodology of increasing staff salaries by 'regrading' - silly me
@Puffin-Billy. I don't know what Cllr Morgan would say. To be honest what Bolton's Councillors say about the NHS is what it always was - tomorrow's chip paper wrappings. @WATOAOW - if I have misread, then I apologise. My understanding from the article was that 'staff would have to apply for their own jobs' which have been 'down-banded'. Maybe I'm being disingenuous but to me that means they are doing the lower graded jobs and therefore are in 'protected' positions - to the layperson, being overpaid. Either I'm wrong or BEN has misreported. If what you are saying is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it) then this is a simple management failure: people have been misgraded, or perhaps I'm just being cynical and thinking that Agenda for Change was just a methodology of increasing staff salaries by 'regrading' - silly me SmoggyDiasboro

11:21pm Fri 25 Jan 13

twowok says...

exiled wrote:
twowok wrote:
exiled wrote:
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just!
Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article.

The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n

ot yet known..

In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact.

Hope that clarifies my point?
Well exiled I can tell you its already happening, so BN is right on this occasion. Why can't people see what is happening and be so blind as to not think it could be their turn next. How can people work for less money for the same job its immoral to expect they should. We should all support the nurses and other workers of the NHS we don't know when we may need it. Most of the workers go beyond the call of duty, that's the ones at the front line.
[quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]twowok[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...[/p][/quote]Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just![/p][/quote]Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article. The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n ot yet known.. In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact. Hope that clarifies my point?[/p][/quote]Well exiled I can tell you its already happening, so BN is right on this occasion. Why can't people see what is happening and be so blind as to not think it could be their turn next. How can people work for less money for the same job its immoral to expect they should. We should all support the nurses and other workers of the NHS we don't know when we may need it. Most of the workers go beyond the call of duty, that's the ones at the front line. twowok

11:22pm Fri 25 Jan 13

twowok says...

exiled wrote:
twowok wrote:
exiled wrote:
Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...
Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just!
Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article.

The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n

ot yet known..

In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact.

Hope that clarifies my point?
Well exiled I can tell you its already happening, so BN is right on this occasion. Why can't people see what is happening and be so blind as to not think it could be their turn next. How can people work for less money for the same job its immoral to expect they should. We should all support the nurses and other workers of the NHS we don't know when we may need it. Most of the workers go beyond the call of duty, that's the ones at the front line.
[quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]twowok[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]exiled[/bold] wrote: Here we go again, the labour biased BN reporting on speculation only, jumping the gun as usual to stir it up...[/p][/quote]Do you work for the NHS exiled? Do you actually know what you are talking about. What the BN is saying is actually true, and I suppose you think Its fair and just![/p][/quote]Twowok, no I don't work for the NHS. But before I had read the reader responses I re-read the BN article. The most frequently used phrase are...could...if...n ot yet known.. In other words, and as I did actually say previously, the BN is reporting that speculation is rife. Little is actually certain or is fact. Hope that clarifies my point?[/p][/quote]Well exiled I can tell you its already happening, so BN is right on this occasion. Why can't people see what is happening and be so blind as to not think it could be their turn next. How can people work for less money for the same job its immoral to expect they should. We should all support the nurses and other workers of the NHS we don't know when we may need it. Most of the workers go beyond the call of duty, that's the ones at the front line. twowok

9:04am Sat 26 Jan 13

Misnomer says...

NURSES, doctors and healthcare assistants at Bolton NHS Foundation Trust could face losing thousands of pounds from their salaries if their jobs are down-banded. How interesting to note that senior management is not included in this! Once again their very large snouts and digging deeper and deeper in the trough, and the people who really do the work are being punished! I speak from experience, I used to work there!
NURSES, doctors and healthcare assistants at Bolton NHS Foundation Trust could face losing thousands of pounds from their salaries if their jobs are down-banded. How interesting to note that senior management is not included in this! Once again their very large snouts and digging deeper and deeper in the trough, and the people who really do the work are being punished! I speak from experience, I used to work there! Misnomer

12:27pm Sat 26 Jan 13

berushka says...

genesis22 wrote:
Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.
CORRECT! As one poster on here, Tracy1000, admitted, she has been on long term sick. Haven't you all, at one time or another? If the HS is to survive, overpayment has to be addressed, like it or not. If the workers are so concerned to save the service, why didn't they refuse the greedy increases given to them by the labour clowns, and ask that the money be poured into the service instead? It is about time that the health workers stopped complaining about nothing, when they have an envious job, good conditions of service and a pension better than most others, and certainly better than any private sector worker can look forward to. Just do your job, that you are always telling us your are dedicated to, and stopped the whining.
[quote][p][bold]genesis22[/bold] wrote: Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.[/p][/quote]CORRECT! As one poster on here, Tracy1000, admitted, she has been on long term sick. Haven't you all, at one time or another? If the HS is to survive, overpayment has to be addressed, like it or not. If the workers are so concerned to save the service, why didn't they refuse the greedy increases given to them by the labour clowns, and ask that the money be poured into the service instead? It is about time that the health workers stopped complaining about nothing, when they have an envious job, good conditions of service and a pension better than most others, and certainly better than any private sector worker can look forward to. Just do your job, that you are always telling us your are dedicated to, and stopped the whining. berushka

5:55pm Sat 26 Jan 13

bwfc0210 says...

Citizen Cane wrote:
Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc.

Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes.

Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector.
Cushy pension for a staff nurse, you are an absolute joke. Lets see you try and do some of the jobs nurses have to do. My wife is a dedicated nurse and the biggest complaint is there are definitely too many managers. She's just got home after stopping at the hospital overnight as she couldn't travel home. Not 1 manager rang to ask how they were coping staff wise due to weather. Managers always off at weekends and don't help on wards but expect staff to work through breaks and dinners.
[quote][p][bold]Citizen Cane[/bold] wrote: Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc. Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes. Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector.[/p][/quote]Cushy pension for a staff nurse, you are an absolute joke. Lets see you try and do some of the jobs nurses have to do. My wife is a dedicated nurse and the biggest complaint is there are definitely too many managers. She's just got home after stopping at the hospital overnight as she couldn't travel home. Not 1 manager rang to ask how they were coping staff wise due to weather. Managers always off at weekends and don't help on wards but expect staff to work through breaks and dinners. bwfc0210

6:07pm Sat 26 Jan 13

berushka says...

bwfc0210 wrote:
Citizen Cane wrote:
Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc.

Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes.

Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector.
Cushy pension for a staff nurse, you are an absolute joke. Lets see you try and do some of the jobs nurses have to do. My wife is a dedicated nurse and the biggest complaint is there are definitely too many managers. She's just got home after stopping at the hospital overnight as she couldn't travel home. Not 1 manager rang to ask how they were coping staff wise due to weather. Managers always off at weekends and don't help on wards but expect staff to work through breaks and dinners.
Nurses do the job they are trained to do, and I would like to see them do something else, like tree-felling or fire-fighting. So your argument that some people could not do what nurses do is silly. Plus, they joined voluntarily, knew what the (good) pay and conditions would be and what they would be expected to do. Those who do this job and do it without complaining are called dedicated, the rest are just in it for the money, the prestige of being able to say that they are a nurse, and most of all, members of moronic trade unions who complain about everything. If they dislike the job so much, get out and give real dedicated people a chance. Managers are Managers because they have the ability and experience to be Managers. The workers always think they know more than the boss, but jealousy don't make you better.
[quote][p][bold]bwfc0210[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Citizen Cane[/bold] wrote: Yes, yes, yes - it's about time that overpaid public "servants" were called to account. They didn't complain when they got overpaid but scream like hell when the cream is taken away. Somebody has to pay for your jobs you know and that is the real taxpayers and the reason for expensive motoring fuel and taxes on air travel and insurance etc etc. Keeping very quiet about your cushy pensions too and over generous long term sickness holidays -(until Jesus Christ pops in and cures the intractable "problem" just prior to the pay dropping down. Don't deny it - it's well known that some public sector workers abuse the sickness schemes. Pay-back time now. Get a taste of what it's like in the private sector.[/p][/quote]Cushy pension for a staff nurse, you are an absolute joke. Lets see you try and do some of the jobs nurses have to do. My wife is a dedicated nurse and the biggest complaint is there are definitely too many managers. She's just got home after stopping at the hospital overnight as she couldn't travel home. Not 1 manager rang to ask how they were coping staff wise due to weather. Managers always off at weekends and don't help on wards but expect staff to work through breaks and dinners.[/p][/quote]Nurses do the job they are trained to do, and I would like to see them do something else, like tree-felling or fire-fighting. So your argument that some people could not do what nurses do is silly. Plus, they joined voluntarily, knew what the (good) pay and conditions would be and what they would be expected to do. Those who do this job and do it without complaining are called dedicated, the rest are just in it for the money, the prestige of being able to say that they are a nurse, and most of all, members of moronic trade unions who complain about everything. If they dislike the job so much, get out and give real dedicated people a chance. Managers are Managers because they have the ability and experience to be Managers. The workers always think they know more than the boss, but jealousy don't make you better. berushka

6:23pm Sat 26 Jan 13

bwfc0210 says...

Bull, there are too many managers for an intermediate care facility and not enough care staff-fact. My point is, people criticise without any idea or worse, any appreciation of what they do. As for we'll paid, ****.
Bull, there are too many managers for an intermediate care facility and not enough care staff-fact. My point is, people criticise without any idea or worse, any appreciation of what they do. As for we'll paid, ****. bwfc0210

1:15pm Sun 27 Jan 13

Willow311 says...

genesis22 wrote:
Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.
I can not believe that staff are repeatedly criticised for getting sick. It's a hospital for crying out loud. People have a tendency to pass on viruses etc. Okay I've got the answer, lets lock the nursing staff in offices and they can communicate with patients through a computer screen.
I suspect that this would stop those pesky staff from getting sick.
Lots of patients would die....but hey ho at least money would be saved.
[quote][p][bold]genesis22[/bold] wrote: Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.[/p][/quote]I can not believe that staff are repeatedly criticised for getting sick. It's a hospital for crying out loud. People have a tendency to pass on viruses etc. Okay I've got the answer, lets lock the nursing staff in offices and they can communicate with patients through a computer screen. I suspect that this would stop those pesky staff from getting sick. Lots of patients would die....but hey ho at least money would be saved. Willow311

2:04pm Sun 27 Jan 13

tracy1000 says...

Willow311 wrote:
genesis22 wrote:
Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.
I can not believe that staff are repeatedly criticised for getting sick. It's a hospital for crying out loud. People have a tendency to pass on viruses etc. Okay I've got the answer, lets lock the nursing staff in offices and they can communicate with patients through a computer screen.
I suspect that this would stop those pesky staff from getting sick.
Lots of patients would die....but hey ho at least money would be saved.
well said willow. I have a MH problem. due to cuts i was doing the work of at least 2 people and ended up having a breakdown as a result of added stress which aggravated my condition. So according to genesis22 i shouldnt be paid if i go off sick despite paying national insurance for the last 20 years! I have gone to work when i have been ill and got no thanks for it and if you ring in sick it causes a predicament....you cant win. sure there are some that are swinging the lead but you can't tar everyone with the same brush
[quote][p][bold]Willow311[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]genesis22[/bold] wrote: Bolton NHS like most Trusts spends 80% of its entire budget on staff salaries, this is where cuts are needed if major savings are to be achieved. Unions and staff had no objections when salaries increased under labour, now the pendelum is to swing back they are up in arms. The entire public sector is guilty of paying excessive salaries and benefits. An earlier reader mentioned the bloated admin managerial structure, its true, I also worked for Bolton NHS , the financial waste was dreadful, £1 million spent on refurbishing offices and walk in clinics in the town centre 4 years ago, they all now stand empty, whoever approved the business cases should be sacked. Bolton 1 is a white elephant, only ever went ahead for contractual reasons, never fully utilised, the same will happen with Crompton Way & Breightmet, all public funded leaving the trust with long term rent payments. A nurse spoke earlier about being on long term sick lieave, it is rife in the NHS, which prides itself on never sacking its staff, everyone would love guaranteed long term sick on full salary, year after year, it simply is unaffordable. The NHS and Local Authority staff need to feel the harsh cold winds that blow in the real world, if you dont work you dont get paid and you risk losing your job, end of story. You would be amazed at how the sick leave figures would plummet if this policy was introduced. Taxpayers should not fund the financial enjoyment of public employees not working who invariably repeatedly abuse the benefits available, simply because the system allows them to do it, its like legalised legitimate theft.[/p][/quote]I can not believe that staff are repeatedly criticised for getting sick. It's a hospital for crying out loud. People have a tendency to pass on viruses etc. Okay I've got the answer, lets lock the nursing staff in offices and they can communicate with patients through a computer screen. I suspect that this would stop those pesky staff from getting sick. Lots of patients would die....but hey ho at least money would be saved.[/p][/quote]well said willow. I have a MH problem. due to cuts i was doing the work of at least 2 people and ended up having a breakdown as a result of added stress which aggravated my condition. So according to genesis22 i shouldnt be paid if i go off sick despite paying national insurance for the last 20 years! I have gone to work when i have been ill and got no thanks for it and if you ring in sick it causes a predicament....you cant win. sure there are some that are swinging the lead but you can't tar everyone with the same brush tracy1000

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree