Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Chiefs declare support for increment freeze

  • 59 Comments

The first chief executives to publicly support a freeze on pay increments have spelt out why they believe the move is vital to protect services.

Twelve NHS chiefs have signed a letter to HSJ supporting NHS Employer’s proposal to freeze increments and guarantee not to issue compulsory redundancies to those on Agenda for Change bands 1 to 6 for two years from 1 April.

As revealed by HSJ last September, many trusts have been privately lobbying for the change, but until now few have been prepared to speak openly (23 September 2010, page 4-5).

The letter says the deal is “not only desirable as a way of dealing with financial pressures, it is essential in order to be able to protect employment and staffing levels,” (see below).

One of the signatories, Worcestershire Acute Hospitals Trust chief executive John Rostill, said increments were “a significant factor in cost pressures.” Next year’s 1.5 per cent tariff reduction meant trusts needed to do “anything to reflect those pressures to continue providing a high level of care.”

Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh Foundation Trust chief executive Andrew Foster warned that failure to broker a deal could result in mass cuts in posts exceeding the figure of 35,000 being mooted within the NHS as the likely consequence of not restraining pay.

However, he told HSJ the deal appeared “fragile” because unions were reluctant to sign up, fearing employers could later abandon the guarantee on job security.

Mr Foster said the terms were “very carefully constructed to offer an absolute guarantee to those on bands 1 to 6.”

Those in higher pay bands would not receive any guarantee regarding compulsory redundancies but trusts make “best endeavours” to maintain jobs. Mr Foster said there was a need to “flesh out” what this meant in practice.

NHS Employers believes the national framework agreement would save £1.9bn a year. It would come on top of the freeze on cost-of-living pay rises for all public sector staff earning more than £21,000.

Unions are due to meet on 20 January to decide whether to proceed.

But Unite’s lead officer for nursing Barrie Brown told HSJ: “From the feedback we’ve had so far there’s clearly no appetite for entering into any decisions over the proposals that have come forward.”

One of the main sticking points for unions is the fact that staff in bands 7 to 9 will not necessarily benefit from the freeze.

However, NHS Employers director Dean Royles said controlling pay would “also enable more certainty of employment for other bands” because trusts would be in a healthier financial position.

He added that the agreement would be “binding” as employees would be able to seek an injunction to prevent compulsorily redundancies. Alternatively, they could potentially sue for wrongful or unfair dismissal.

“The reality is employers would be determined to make it work. It isn’t something they would enter into lightly,” he said.

The letter:

To the Editor

Dear Sir,

You have reported on the NHS Employers proposals to the staff side of the NHS Staff Council, for a national framework agreement involving a freeze in incremental progression that NHS organisations can use where there is agreement locally.

In summary, each organisation adopting the framework would freeze pay increments for all staff for a two year period, and guarantee not to make compulsory redundancies for staff earning at or below the equivalent of the maximum of Agenda for Change band 6 during the same period.

We, the undersigned, support the need to make such a proposal and believe that the proposal is one we are very willing to work with. This letter aims to make clear the reasons why trusts see this proposal as a win for them and a win for staff. Although the NHS has been offered significant protection of funding in the most recent spending round, rising costs and increasing demand for patient care make the next two years a huge challenge and we expect to have to make efficiency savings of well over 5 per cent per year. We are looking at all areas of expenditure to find savings, but salaries represent 60 to 70 per cent of our costs so we need to explore measures to contain the pay bill. NHS Employers’ proposal represents a practical way forward, which maintains the integrity of the nationally agreed pay systems.

Each of our organisations has plans to improve quality and productivity over the period of the spending review, but these will take time to deliver benefits. In the meantime, we want to maximise employment security for our staff and retain their skills in the NHS. We know from local feedback and surveys that trade unions have undertaken, that job security is a key concern for staff. We will be having a very open dialogue with our staff locally, so that the benefit of these ideas can be explored with them.

In summary, we believe that this is a fair deal and one that can be delivered. It is not only desirable as a way of dealing with financial pressures, it is essential in order to be able to protect employment and staffing levels,

Yours sincerely

Maggie Boyle, Chief Executive, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust

Sir Robert Naylor, Chief Executive, University College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Jo Cubbon, Chief Executive, Taunton and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust

Peter Cubbon, Chief Executive, West London Mental Health NHS Trust

David Dalton, Chief Executive, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust

Stephen Eames, Chief Executive, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust

Mike Farrar, Chief Executive, North West Strategic Health Authority

Andrew Foster, Chief Executive, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust

Julian Hartley, Chief Executive, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust

Simon Pleydell, Chief Executive, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

John Rostill, Chief Executive, Worcestershire Acute Hospitals Trust

Chris Sharratt, Chief Executive, Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust

 

  • 59 Comments

Readers' comments (59)

  • What rubbish! 'NHS Employers’ proposal represents a practical way forward, which maintains the integrity of the nationally agreed pay systems' - no it doesn't and I'm sure is illegal given terms and conditions under Agenda for Change. NHS Employers are already making a huge saving over the next two years as we're not getting a pay rise! Stuff it, go on, make staff redundent, lets see how productive the NHS becomes then! Each and everyone who works in the NHS needs to tell NHS employers were to stick this proposal. I'll give them a clue, there isn't much daylight where I suggest they stick it!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Pay increments are cost neutral due to staff turnover. The headline should be that pay for new starters is being cut by 1.9 billion. Since most staff are top of their scale anyway it's only taking money off a minority, and why should that minority be punished. I went for my current job knowing that I wouldn't be getting much more money at first due to being on the top of my previous scale but at least I'd be getting increments for a few years, now I'm just annoyed that I've taken on all this extra responsiblity and will be stuck on an extra 40 quid a month for years, no increments and probably no pay rise either. Great, give me my old job back please.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What's unfair is that those on band 7 and above have to take the increment freeze along with everyone else, but don't get the guarantee of no redundancy that everyone else gets. Are those on band 7 and above being discriminated against?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • OK, so let me see if I have got straight. We have given up our pay rise. We give up our increments. We are not allowed to replace staff who have left. We are not allowed to recruit more staff to cover the excess pressures. We are expected to say "Wonderful, you have gone sick but we can manage with one trained and one HCA for 28 patients + the four extra who are escalated". Umm, what are they giving us in return? Guarantee of no redundancies even though they are getting rid of the dead wood and not replacing it. An increase in VAT and National Insurance. So this means - high living expenses, lower wages, more work. I say that this is crap. I only hope the Unions say STRIKE

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The Foundation Trusts can be so magnanimous to agree to no redandancies for Bands 1-6. The fact is they can't afford to make us redundant that is why they are frantically trying to find other ways to reduce the numbers of nhs employees e.g. not filling vacancies, "reorganising" of workforces by degrading staff and getting them to apply for their own jobs and making the "unsuccessful" candidates join the ever-lengthening redeployment lists where only Band 5 vacancies exist. Oh and getting rid of nurses over 65 when in fact the government is telling us we should be working longer. I hope that the trust executives above can sleep at night seeing their staff pay cut when they are receiving salaries of between £160,000-£210.00 p.a.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Boy, am I so glad that I managed to get out of the NHS years ago and happily working in Oz!
    I have seen how our union here in south Australia fight for what we want and the ways and means they do it together with the members-I say thay have the balls! In my five years in NHS I have never seen Nurses do some kind of strike.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I totally agree with Anonymous 4-Jan-2011 1:54 pm. This has happened in the trust i work for to. What I dread the most is all the increases VAT ect ect no pay increase I work in the community and reguarly have to fill up my car (petrol prices rise but there has been talk about reducing milage allowance) No room to see clients at base ( anyway with the age i work with they find it hard to get there anyway).

    In effect we are getting a pay cut. Reduce top level management or even their pay i am sure they can afford it or not. ?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I have recently been advised that I will be taking on additional responsibilities in my role as a band 7 Nurse. According to the article above, I will not be getting my annual increment to help balance out this added responsibility (in addition the the increase in VAT and petrol costs), and at Band 7 will have not be included in the job guarantee anyway.
    What a load of liquid excrement!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What's unfair is that those on band 7 and above have to take the increment freeze along with everyone else, but don't get the guarantee of no redundancy that everyone else gets. Are those on band 7 and above being discriminated against?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 's far more than the increments. Then see how hard it is to balance the books

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Show 102050results per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.