Threatened nurses strike

[room305]

If you choose to ignore the knock-on effect that a huge pay increase to one section of the public sector will have on other public sector and civil service pay demands that’s your business.

I couldn't agree more with this. Why else have the teachers been so vocal in support of the nurse's strike? They've never seen a pay dispute they didn't like to get a piece of.

Senior nurses are undoubtedly vastly underpaid compared to their private sector counterparts but to suggest that the solution to this is across the board payrises for all nurses is simply laughable.

 

[ajapale]

Senior nurses are undoubtedly vastly underpaid compared to their private sector counterparts .....

Hi room,

Im interested, do you have any evidence for the assertion that senior private sector nurses are paid vastly more than their public sector counterparts?

aj

 

[room305]

Im interested, do you have any evidence for the assertion that senior private sector nurses are paid vastly more than their public sector counterparts?

Only through conversation with a senior nurse who has recently rejoined the workforce after a long period of absence. Having looked at both private and public sector work she was shocked by the differences in what was on offer. She didn't give exact details I got the impression it was close to double. When I expressed my surprise that more seniors nurses in the public sector didn't simply leave to work in the private sector she pointed out some of the disadvantages.

She works for an agency so she is essentially working on numerous short-term contracts with no job security (although there certainly didn't appear to be a shortage of work) and none of the pension benefits etc. Working hours can be very long with lots of night-shifts and double-shifts. It also entails a lot more responsibility as the expense of senior nurses means she is often the only senior nurse working the shift with responsibility for all the aides and junior nurses.

If a lot of senior nurses are leaving for the private sector then clearly the HSE should consider improving pay or conditions to entice them to stay. However, a blanket across the board payrise of 25% seems somewhat unjustified.

 

[nelly]

Only through conversation with a senior nurse who has recently rejoined the workforce after a long period of absence. Having looked at both private and public sector work she was shocked by the differences in what was on offer. She didn't give exact details I got the impression it was close to double. When I expressed my surprise that more seniors nurses in the public sector didn't simply leave to work in the private sector she pointed out some of the disadvantages.

She works for an agency so she is essentially working on numerous short-term contracts with no job security (although there certainly didn't appear to be a shortage of work) and none of the pension benefits etc. Working hours can be very long with lots of night-shifts and double-shifts. It also entails a lot more responsibility as the expense of senior nurses means she is often the only senior nurse working the shift with responsibility for all the aides and junior nurses.

From simply speaking to nurses working full time in HSE i dunno would i believe a lot of what your source states:
If she opted out of the workforce why should be payed the same as someone who did not and has years more exprerience?
Nurses are covered by unions in private sector in order to practice AFAIK so difference should not be near double - maybe other non-monetory perks are being factored in?
long shifts - are often premium and are what agency nurses often sign up for so whats the problem?
Double shifts - unsafe i would have thought? - as in 12 hours in night and 12 hour shift following day?
"more" resposnsibility and supervision not from what I hear, I know nurses who will tell you that they are better off some times being understaffed than having a temp so as for having temps come in and have sole responsibility for a ward and all the underlings seems unrealistic - although i cannot say it does not or could not happen.

i would ask that agancy nurse is if its all that bad why not a) go for position in HSE full time or b) head into private sector for double the money?
just seems strange to me

 

[room305]

i would ask that agancy nurse is if its all that bad why not a) go for position in HSE full time or b) head into private sector for double the money?

Just to be clear, this nurse is working in the private sector right now. She has no complaints beyond the usual grumbling everybody does from time-to-time. She merely pro-offered these comments as possible reasons why there has not been a mass exodus from public sector nursing to private sector nursing. I'm not sure about her union status but suspect she is in one.

 

[nelly]

All nurses have to be in a union to work as far as i know. Even in the private sector they must pay their dues to the union and then the employer must recognise their union (not necessarily agree with them i suspect).

 

[oopsbuddy]

Thanks opsbuddy, the next time I need something I write interpreted I will give you a shout. I would love to live in your world where after years of pay increases well in excess of inflation a claim for a 25% hourly rate increase is reasonable and simply a demand for “reasonable pay”. Wherever you are I hope the sun keeps shining.
At no time have I defended the HSE and their role in this. They have offered weak management and have indeed been ham-fisted but they are too inept to be considered bullies.
If you choose to ignore the knock-on effect that a huge pay increase to one section of the public sector will have on other public sector and civil service pay demands that’s your business. Please do not ask others to assess the situation with the same level of economic illiteracy. It is the government’s job to assess situations like this in the context of what is good for the country and I again commend Mary Harney for having the courage to do just that.

Purple, as much as you may think I am 'economically illiterate' and simply out to misinterpret what you say, I am neither. Nor do you have the monopoly say on what is best for nurses, the public sector as a whole, or the economy. What I do from time to time is simply read what you say and point out that your view is not necessarily the only one. What you seem to do regularly is conveniently ignore parts of what I say. For example, I agreed with Polaris' worthy suggestion that an imaginative approach be taken to addressing the pay issue. I also agreed that a commitment to a time-frame for the implementation of a 35 hour week, followed by pay talks via benchmarking would be a good way forward. I don't know what the answer will be, and I freely admit that, but things cannot remain as they are or the whole damn thing will fall apart. I am not ignoring the FACT that there will be knock-on effects, but that is not justification for allowing things to remain as they are.

I'll try not to be as patronising and sarcastic as you when I say this too, but by all means come and live in my world (it's quite ordinary really!) for a while where you will see some very dedicated nurses working bloody hard, and for many more hours than they are contracted, who are worn out and overstressed half the time, but who keep doing it, not for the money (which is modest enough IN MY VIEW for what they do), but because they care about their patients and about looking after their best welfare, ...and then read back on previous comments here and tell me if some response is not justified.

I have no interest in getting into any overly personal exchanges with you over this thread, so lets both try and maintain this discipline.

 

[Purple]

Purple, as much as you may think I am 'economically illiterate' and simply out to misinterpret what you say, I am neither. Nor do you have the monopoly say on what is best for nurses, the public sector as a whole, or the economy.

I know that I do not have the monopoly say on what is best for nurses, the public sector as a whole, or the economy. To be honest I don’t think that my opinion is important enough to you for you to spend time misinterpreting it. I do think that your view on this issue does not take the wider economic implications into account.

What I do from time to time is simply read what you say and point out that your view is not necessarily the only one.

I never suggested it was.

What you seem to do regularly is conveniently ignore parts of what I say. For example, I agreed with Polaris' worthy suggestion that an imaginative approach be taken to addressing the pay issue. I also agreed that a commitment to a time-frame for the implementation of a 35 hour week, followed by pay talks via benchmarking would be a good way forward. I don't know what the answer will be, and I freely admit that, but things cannot remain as they are or the whole damn thing will fall apart.

I did not ignore what you said but I don’t have the time to go through everything point by point. I don’t see why Nurses should work a 35 hour week. Everyone on the public sector should work a 39 hour week. Other healthcare workers should have their hours increased and managers should work more hours than those they are over. That’s the way it works for most people in the private sector, in small companies a 39 hour week is a distant aspiration, just like a defined benefit pension.
I also disagree with the whole Benchmarking process. Last time it cost the people of Ireland an extra 1.1 billion Euro a year. What did we get in return? Where’s all the increases in productivity?
If it can be shown that public sector pay is even further ahead of the private sector will the public sector unions accept pay cuts in the next round of benchmarking?

I am not ignoring the FACT that there will be knock-on effects, but that is not justification for allowing things to remain as they are.

So how do we fix things without it costing even more jobs in the productive sectors of the econmy?

I have no interest in getting into any overly personal exchanges with you over this thread, so lets both try and maintain this discipline.

Agreed

 

[Purple]

But the point is, a study of these figures would be free of the sort of bias which I have absolutely no doubt permeates the so-called 'benchmarking' studies which have been used in wage claims to date.

like this one? http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=11924

 

[oopsbuddy]

To be honest I don’t think that my opinion is important enough to you for you to spend time misinterpreting it. I do think that your view on this issue does not take the wider economic implications into account.

I will resist a response to your first point in the interests of our newly agreed discipline, but I am not sure where I have been misinterpreting you. A contrary view to yours is not misinterpretation.

I never suggested it was.

If you say so.

I did not ignore what you said but I don’t have the time to go through everything point by point.

You appear to have the time to go through the points you wish to go through.

I don’t see why Nurses should work a 35 hour week. Everyone on the public sector should work a 39 hour week. Other healthcare workers should have their hours increased and managers should work more hours than those they are over. That’s the way it works for most people in the private sector, in small companies a 39 hour week is a distant aspiration, just like a defined benefit pension.

Go with that proposal, and good luck with making it fly, and to paraphrase your earlier comment "I hope the sun continues to shine there for you" too, but have you taken into account the wider economic and political implications of such a policy?

I also disagree with the whole Benchmarking process. Last time it cost the people of Ireland an extra 1.1 billion Euro a year. What did we get in return? Where’s all the increases in productivity?

I agree with you! I don't have much truck with benchmarking either, but I was working on the premise that it was generally agreed that as it was "the only show in town" it should be given some role to play in resolving the process.

Enough of this!!! I'm not going to add any more comments to this thread (I know I've said this before, but will try harder this time!) but will continue to read with interest.

 

[Purple]

I will resist a response to your first point in the interests of our newly agreed discipline, but I am not sure where I have been misinterpreting you. A contrary view to yours is not misinterpretation.

I was saying that I don't think that you are misinterpreting me.

 

[KalEl]

Maybe we need a new section beyond "The Depths" called "The Absolute Pits" so you guys can vent rather than just let off steam?
This is getting a bit repetitive

 

[dam099]

All nurses have to be in a union to work as far as i know. Even in the private sector they must pay their dues to the union and then the employer must recognise their union (not necessarily agree with them i suspect).

Membership of the unions like INO/PNA and SIPTU is optional even in the public sector.

All nurses must register with Bord Altranais but this is the regulator for their profession not the union.

 

[Purple]

Maybe we need a new section beyond "The Depths" called "The Absolute Pits" so you guys can vent rather than just let off steam?
This is getting a bit repetitive

Jasus, that's very hurtful

 

[nelly]

Membership of the unions like INO/PNA and SIPTU is optional even in the public sector.

All nurses must register with Bord Altranais but this is the regulator for their profession not the union.

yes that sounds more like it actually. Any nurses in the private sector that i know do have INO/ Siptu membership though. possibly because they are suchs strong unions.