Looks like only one of the striking unions voted against the pay deal. Unfortunately doesn't look like this will be backdated to 2014-15 as well as from April 2015. As rubbish as this deal is, it was what the Pay Review Body recommended last year, just that the government made a massive issue out of it (and happy to be paid far more than the average nurse). As the economy is improving and if politicians really do value nurses and carers, then put money where their mouth is and properly remunerate. If pay remains relatively low, staff are likely to take up agency work in their spare time to make ends meet.
HCSW | 28-Feb-2015 3:54 am Agreed. Also agency staff take the higher pay and sacrifice employers' pension contributions (which staff won't see until retirement and some staff are unaware what employers put aside for staff pensions) A lot of permanent staff work flat-bank rates and at their substantive increment rate, or more preferably on overtime rates (if working above 37.5hr). Probably what's also taken into account is nurses have transferable skills, which means quite a lot can be moved from one department into another (for short term/emergency cover) when needed. Also on most people's contracts now it's likely to say 'to work where asked to'
Comment on: RCN members vote to accept government pay offer
Did those who went on strike vote in favour or against the offer? All the unions have voted to accept the offer, so it's likely this will be accepted when everyone goes back to the negotiating table with NHS Employers. So we're going to hear no end from the government that nurses have accepted an above inflation pay-rise in April and any action that were taken were pretty much ineffectual anyway - strewth :s
Ever get the feeling that some politicians would like to get rid of nurses altogether and replace them with family help and carers on minimum wage (not even living wage). Then if you want nurses you'll have to pay one of their private companies who supply them, costing an arm and a leg. Nurses would probably still not be paid properly, not enough resources and having to train + develop in their own time/expense. A hideous vision that hopefully won't be realised.
I think enhanced DBS checks should be done. At least volunteers won't have to pay for it (and maybe charities could get exemption for fees). Some organisations already have their volunteers DBS checked. 3-yearly DBS checks? - like MOTs only uptodate on day of checking. If you think, DBS checks are another bureaucratic way of making money / taxing workers and some bad apples still slip through the net. I quite agree.