OPINION

'How can two years of effective pay cuts be described as fair?'

13 December, 2011

The government should take nurses’ continued goodwill for granted at their peril, warns Josie Irwin

The festive season is almost upon us but NHS staff are hardly in a party mood; morale is lower than ever. Staff are more likely to be talking about withdrawing goodwill than bestowing it on fellow mankind. Indeed, it is a bleak midwinter for many who do not have much to celebrate.

The chancellor’s announcement that public sector pay will be capped at 1% for a further two years following the pay freeze operating in 2011 and 2012 will have a serious impact on an already demoralised workforce and, in turn, is likely to impact on the quality of patient care.

‘The pay review body’s independent role in recommending fair pay increases for NHS staff has been seriously undermined. On top of the pension dispute, the government has put industrial relations in serious jeopardy’

As the demand for NHS services continues to grow and staff face greater pressures and higher workloads, their morale and motivation has slumped. A range of recent surveys undertaken by trade unions, the Department of Health and other organisations show staff remain as dedicated as ever to their work and to the NHS but they highlight a concerning situation, with many staff fearing they cannot provide the very best quality of care that patients deserve.

Nurses and healthcare assistants now face another two years of effective pay cuts at a time when inflation is rising. Retail price index inflation is currently 17 times the value of the most recent pay award - what this means in real terms is that a nurse at the top of band 5 has already sacrificed £1,000 in earnings in 2011. If inflation continues at similar levels, this loss could rise to around £4,000 from 2012 to 2014.

Last week, George Osborne said “1% is tough but fair on taxpayers”. The government seems to forget that public sector staff are taxpayers too. While NHS staff accepted that the economic crisis meant necessary savings, they have every right to ask why the government is punishing hard-working people who have chosen to dedicate themselves to public service, forgoing better packages in the private sector, rather than the politicians and bankers who are responsible for the recession in the first place. It is just not fair.

And it doesn’t feel fair either to be lectured that “public sector staff should take their share of the pain” with the prospect of continued pay restraint for the foreseeable future, paying higher pension contributions, a greater workload and increasing uncertainty about jobs when, at the same time, bankers continue to enjoy obscenely generous bonuses and some private sector bosses take home more than 100 times the pay of the lowest paid workers. It feels as if some are in it together more than others.

The pay review body’s independent role in recommending fair pay increases for NHS staff has been seriously undermined. On top of the pension dispute, the government has put industrial relations in serious jeopardy.

The chancellor also said the government wants the pay review body to look at how public sector pay “can be made more responsive to local labour markets.” Do they really mean that nurses working in the more deprived areas of the UK should be paid less than those doing the same job in more economically buoyant regions? How would this stimulate the local economy? It’s just not thought through. Moreover, past experience of local and regional pay in the NHS is that it was nothing but an expensive, time-consuming distraction from the core business of delivering care.

Nurses will remain loyal to the NHS and will continue to deliver the best they can in difficult circumstances but this comes at a cost. My prediction for the new year is that the government should take nurses’ continued goodwill for granted at their peril.

Josie Irwin is head of employment relations at the Royal College of Nursing

Readers' comments (7)

mike | 13-Dec-2011 11:03 am
Exactly! It can't! Simple as that!

I don't think Nurses will remain loyal for too much longer though, yes the profession has a history of cowardice, rolling over, doing nothing as we are repeatedly kicked by the government, but even Nurses can only take so much. All it will take is a tiny little straw to break the back of Nursing, and the government are perilously close as it is.

The recent strike was only the start. Things WILL get worse, and we have to stop simply taking it! We HAVE to fight. It is as simple as that.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 13-Dec-2011 11:14 am
I seem to remember when clinical grading came in a TORY minister pledged that nurses would never be allowed to fall ehind again. Under Labour we made gains, but the current shysters are robbing us blind.

Perhaps we need to all club together to pay the wages of staff at a single hospital to go on an all out strike. It would give a hint of the chaos that would ensue if we all walked...
Unsuitable or offensive?
barbara botterill | 13-Dec-2011 5:22 pm
Nurses are very poorly paid as it is, this measure is totally unfounded and it seems to me that we are an easy target. I would like to ask David Cameron if he has had a pay freeze and expects this to carry on for a further 2 years whilst the cost of living inflates around him.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Tim Wood | 13-Dec-2011 5:42 pm
I feel that Josie has picked up precisely the wrong end of the stick. She bleats about bankers - and in the case of the pubicly owned/funded banks - has a point. However a private company is free to pay whatever they wish to reward their employees with - it's none of our business, and to be frank, the bigger the bonus, the more tax the Government will receive.
The fact is - we are Government employees - the Government has no money ergo something has to give! At least there are not mass redundancies planned - they are at present mostly voluntary - and we are (in the main) all keeping our jobs which cannot be said of the private sector
Unsuitable or offensive?
mike | 13-Dec-2011 7:12 pm
Tim, what you say is technically correct, but what you fail to remember or factor in is that we are government employees for a reason, we hold vital key roles for the country, healthcare, education, policing, military, etc. The public rely on the government to provide those services to them and the country cannot do without us, it is as simple as that. Just because we are government employees does not mean we should forego any expectation of fair pay or remuneration, especially in relation to our worth. A private company CAN pay whatever they like, yes, but we should have fair pay in relation to that from OUR employer. Or do you really think that it is acceptable to pay far under what a job is worth simply due to the fact that we are public sector? And to be frank, the more money we earn, the more we would pay in tax too so I don't accept that argument about bonuses. And I understand your point about the supposed lack of funds the government has, but I do not accept it either. The money is there, they just CHOOSE not to put it into public sector, or Nursing into particular, pay and pensions. I can think of BILLIONS (just off the top of my head) that are wasted every single year by this government (and previous ones) that could be better spent on the public sector. And are you kidding about the 'no mass redundancy bit'? job freezes, job cuts, downbanding, a rose by any other name...
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 15-Dec-2011 10:33 pm
Tim, Josie is disagreeing with the stance of Osborne and Cameron, who seem to be using moveable goalposts to argue their point of view.

Yes, we have no money, Europe is going into meltdown (which is costing us more money. That we haven't got), we pay India £750 million a year (which is exactly what they spend on their space programme), we have just spent a fortune on regime change in Iran, spend a fortune in Afghanistan, PFI etc etc etc etc etc.

It's about choices, the current unelected dictatorship choose to focus on changing the nhs from a provider into a commisioner of health. To make it attractive to big business (which will, undoubtedly, choose to make big donations to the ConDemned party) costs will be kept low by making real term pay cuts, increasing the cost of our pensions to us (currently in profit by £2billion a year) and cherry-picking the profitable bits and chucking them to big business.

In the same way that the unelected dictatorship is making taxpayers pay for the toxic debts of the banks we now own (and selling best bits at cut down prices to big business) the taxpayer will keep the loss making bits of the nhs and the cream will be sold to big business. And i'm sure that those ministers facilitating this process will not be made Lords or Sirs or given seats on various boards as advisors for big business consultancy fees.

So there is money, it is really about motivation, political outlook, and choices.

My personal choice is that i will continue to work very hard (the nhs gets a free week of work from me every month) and as soon as our service is moved into the private sector i will demand overtime or down tools and go home (like in the private sector).

Once i am employed by the private sector that goodwill will evaporate.

Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 18-Dec-2011 11:13 pm
It seems that NHS Staff are paying for the Con-Dem NHS re-organisation which none of us wanted anyway. Just how much is that costing? Probably more than it's supposed to be saving!
Unsuitable or offensive?