Wrong End of Telescope (8/1/12)
A worker in the Scottish Amubulance Sevice (SAS) has been in touch by e-mail - to put over a rather different point of view in the long-running SAS 'rest breaks' dispute.
So I said that I would summarise the key points - which I presume are supported by the three trade unions - GMB, Unison and Unite.
And here is my understanding of what the unions are arguing - on behalf of their SAS members.
Rest Breaks Dispute - the union case
But I have to say that I disagree entirely with the case the trade unions are advancing - because it seems completely unreasonable and over the top to me - for a whole number of powerful reasons.
Firstly it is not good practice (and unlawful under the WTD) for ambulance staff to be working routinely for 12 hours straight without a scheduled break. The unions should be ashamed of themselves for arguing such a ridiculous position.
Secondly, the unpaid rest break introduced as a result of the Working Time Directive did not lead to any loss of pay - simply that ambulance staff did not get an extra £2,200 a year.
Thirdly, because of these long 12 hour shifts (why are they so long anyway?) and the way work is currently organised ambulance crews are being asked to respond to emergency 999 calls during their rest breaks. But this is not a big deal and according to the Scottish Ambulance Service - staff are disturbed on average only once per year.
So to my mind the trade unions are trying their best to make a mountain out of an industrial molehill. Because how can it be reasonable for someone to be paid £2,200 for having their rest break disturbed on average once a year?
Now that sounds completely bonkers to me - because I used to work in the NHS myself. I used to work night shift sometimes (not 12 hours long) but a break was always built into the shift - even though there was no point in leaving the premises since nothing was open at that time of night.
In any event the substantive issue was that I was entitled to a break at a notionally fixed point during my shift - but if an emergency arose this was simply re-scheduled and taken later at a convenient time.
To my mind this is all about money - nothing else - with the unions encouraging their members to look at the issue through the wrong end of the telescope.
Being paid an extra £100 every time your rest break gets disturbed - on average once per year - seems perfectly fine to me. Especially as it's an exceptional event and people still get a break at some other point during their long shift.
So what's the big deal?
I happen to think it's an enormous waste of public money - to offer every ambulance worker £1,500 to move over to the new system.
Because I don't understand what the £1500 is for - in the context of a new, reasonable and forward-looking £100 payment.
Seems to me it's just an old-fashioned, unjustified sweetener - which will cost the public purse around £3.7 million that it can ill-afford in such straitened times.
So I would say we have the worst of all possible worlds - weak management from the Scottish Ambulance Service (SAS) and equally weak leadership from the trade unions.
The SAS seems incapable of getting a message - explaining what the key issues are - despite its role in running the service on behalf of the Scottish public.
The trade unions for their part swear the dispute is not about money - yet the facts suggest otherwise - since the cost of implementing their demands would add around £5.5 million a year to the SAS pay bill.
One final point, the SAS is a very male dominated service.
But did you ever see the GMB, Unison or Unite make such fuss over a much bigger issue - equal pay for low paid women in Scotland's councils?
The answer of course is - No.
So I said that I would summarise the key points - which I presume are supported by the three trade unions - GMB, Unison and Unite.
And here is my understanding of what the unions are arguing - on behalf of their SAS members.
Rest Breaks Dispute - the union case
- The SAS and/or Scottish government are to blame for everything
- Several years ago (2004) the EU introduced new working time rules
- The Working Time Directive required all workers to have a break
- At that time SAS staff were (still are) on duty for a 12 hour period
- SAS solution was to introduce a 0.75 hour break for each shift
- Staff pay was not affected - it remained the same as before
- But the break was unpaid - and not agreed by staff or the unions
- Over 24 hours the SAS is 'paying' for only 22.5 hours worth of cover
- Whereas SAS should be paying for 24 hours worth of cover
- Over a year the 0.75 unpaid hour is worth around £2,200 per person
- Unions want this break to be paid = £2,200 more per person per year
- In return staff will to respond to 999 calls during their rest breaks
But I have to say that I disagree entirely with the case the trade unions are advancing - because it seems completely unreasonable and over the top to me - for a whole number of powerful reasons.
Firstly it is not good practice (and unlawful under the WTD) for ambulance staff to be working routinely for 12 hours straight without a scheduled break. The unions should be ashamed of themselves for arguing such a ridiculous position.
Secondly, the unpaid rest break introduced as a result of the Working Time Directive did not lead to any loss of pay - simply that ambulance staff did not get an extra £2,200 a year.
Thirdly, because of these long 12 hour shifts (why are they so long anyway?) and the way work is currently organised ambulance crews are being asked to respond to emergency 999 calls during their rest breaks. But this is not a big deal and according to the Scottish Ambulance Service - staff are disturbed on average only once per year.
So to my mind the trade unions are trying their best to make a mountain out of an industrial molehill. Because how can it be reasonable for someone to be paid £2,200 for having their rest break disturbed on average once a year?
Now that sounds completely bonkers to me - because I used to work in the NHS myself. I used to work night shift sometimes (not 12 hours long) but a break was always built into the shift - even though there was no point in leaving the premises since nothing was open at that time of night.
In any event the substantive issue was that I was entitled to a break at a notionally fixed point during my shift - but if an emergency arose this was simply re-scheduled and taken later at a convenient time.
To my mind this is all about money - nothing else - with the unions encouraging their members to look at the issue through the wrong end of the telescope.
Being paid an extra £100 every time your rest break gets disturbed - on average once per year - seems perfectly fine to me. Especially as it's an exceptional event and people still get a break at some other point during their long shift.
So what's the big deal?
I happen to think it's an enormous waste of public money - to offer every ambulance worker £1,500 to move over to the new system.
Because I don't understand what the £1500 is for - in the context of a new, reasonable and forward-looking £100 payment.
Seems to me it's just an old-fashioned, unjustified sweetener - which will cost the public purse around £3.7 million that it can ill-afford in such straitened times.
So I would say we have the worst of all possible worlds - weak management from the Scottish Ambulance Service (SAS) and equally weak leadership from the trade unions.
The SAS seems incapable of getting a message - explaining what the key issues are - despite its role in running the service on behalf of the Scottish public.
The trade unions for their part swear the dispute is not about money - yet the facts suggest otherwise - since the cost of implementing their demands would add around £5.5 million a year to the SAS pay bill.
One final point, the SAS is a very male dominated service.
But did you ever see the GMB, Unison or Unite make such fuss over a much bigger issue - equal pay for low paid women in Scotland's councils?
The answer of course is - No.
