Nurses cynical about increment freeze offer
More than 80 per cent of nurses believe their trust would fail to honour a proposed deal not to make compulsory redundancies over the next two years if they agreed to forego a pay rise, according to an poll by HSJ’s sister title Nursing Times.
The government’s pay negotiator NHS Employers has proposed freezing increments for two years from April in exchange for a “no compulsory redundancy” agreement.
All Agenda for Change staff would have their increments frozen, but only those in pay bands one to six earning up to £34,189 would benefit from the “no compulsory redundancy” agreement.
At least 12 chief executives have so far added their names to a letter circulated by NHS Employers to garner formal support from trusts for the deal, which is likely to be agreed at a local level by union representatives and individual trusts.
However, early results from an online poll of nearly 1,500 Nursing Times readers suggests the profession has little faith in their employers’ willingness or ability to honour the deal, if it was agreed at their trust.
A quarter of respondents said they had no confidence at all that their organisation would honour its side of the bargain and make no compulsory redundancies, due to a “bad track record on honesty”.
A further 56 per cent said they were not very confident their employer would keep to the agreement, as “nothing was sacred in the present climate”.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Share
Readers' comments (16)
Patrick Newman | 6-Jan-2011 11:54 am
A sad reflection of the lack of trust between management and staff. Would it not be possible for RCN/Unison to get signed agreements from each Trust Board that would be very difficult to break. All this assumes that Trust management are not able to avoid compulsory redundancies and pay increments. There is much scope for cost reduction through flexible staff 'disengagement' especially with boomers many of who would welcome retirement/flexible retirement, part-time lighter duties and many of whom are the higher paid. Trust management should also look closely at overheads before targeting front line staff. Study organisation that cope when senior management go on long term sick!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 1:31 pm
No pay increase, no incremental increase, and no protection from redundancy. Where is the deal for staff above Band 6?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 1:46 pm
No-one is protected from redundancy, we have it from the horses mouth that 35,000 jobs will go. The key is no "compulsory" redundancies so that doesnt stop them offering voluntary or another form of MARS. Those who are left will have to work harder then ever for in effect less pay.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 2:14 pm
Another factor not mentioned elsewhere is that anyone due to retire over the next few years who is not at the top of their incremental scale will have their pension adversely affected , not just for two years, but permanently!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 6-Jan-2011 5:47 pm
There is no NHS body that can possibly honour the no redundancy clause. Staff are quite right to be suspicious of an unsustainable promise
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 9:57 am
if your job is to be made redundant it will be
would you trust any chief exec..after all they have had a 7% pay rise on top of thier already inflated salaries and know they want you to have a pay cut for 2 years
wonder if their all friends of this shame of a govt and banking circle...no pay freeze thier eh!!
but we are all in this together..!!!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 1:25 pm
That's not to mention the between 20% and 50% payrise that Board Members awarded themselves upon achievement of Foundation Trust status. If they are intent on freezing increments maybe they should give some of that back before coming across as all holier than thou because they too are having a pay freeze!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 2:28 pm
Increments are roughly 2-3% of salary
Most organisations are having to cut a lot more than that from their budgets so how can anyone promise that by saving 2-3% (ok, plus oncosts) no one will compulsarily be made redundant. The PCT I'm at is cutting 50% of staff costs.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 2:42 pm
It is a very sad day that we can no longer trust our employers, or our politicians.
It would be madness for unions to make agree to this inequitable agreement with NHS Trusts, and it would be madness for CEOs to agree to it if they cannot honour it.
What is unforgiveable is for 12 CEOs to put their names to such a discriminatory and inequitable proposal -- they must be bonkers. I am glad I do not work in any of their Trusts, as they have just demonstrated their stupidity.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 3:13 pm
ref the 12 CE who have agreed this stupid proposal
another forum..nursing times..a rob munro has a blog on whet they earn between them..have a look, you wont believe your eyes
http://tinyurl.com/34 x 9492
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 7-Jan-2011 4:56 pm
I have worked in the NHS for 10 years to reach band 7. Pay freeze and no increment to guarantee no compulsory redundancies for others is frankly demoralising. Surely band 7 and 8 posts are among the most vulnerable, open to down-banding to cut costs. And all this when bankers bonuses are predicted to be Billions of pounds this year.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Richard Palfreeman | 7-Jan-2011 11:47 pm
So, here's the rub! Firstly, isn't there already an undertaking to limit the redundancies that have to be made? If so, then not much is being offered in return for no incremental increase.
Secondly, why is it just Agenda for Change staff? What about freezing increments (and so called 'merit' awards) for "Doctors, Dentists and the most Senior Managers"? It's no wonder that so few Chief Execs have signed up for this self-interesting proposal - their colleagues with consciences have rightly resisted the call to arms.
Finally, what's the (non)deal for protection only to be given up to Band 6? Here am I, hoping for another 15 or so years until retirement, having worked flippin hard over the years across Primary, Secondary and Tertiary services to reach the 'dizzy heights' of a Band 8A and now they're wanting to freeze my pay and then sometime over the next year or so, make me redundant anyway!
I may as well go on strike - now THERE'S an idea!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
martin bainbridge | 8-Jan-2011 10:09 am
My previous employer is the Essex foundation trust outside agenda for change embarking on closing wards and saying 400 jobs to go before April so this offer is worthless there.
My current employer is a London PCT forced to make saving of 52% via management cuts by April. I am band 6 and have a letter confirming I am “at risk”.
Seems far too late to be asking staff to consider giving away pay increases for job security when many of us will be removed before April. Looks like the proverbial horse has already bolted leaving the stable door hanging off its hinges in a puddle of contaminated water! Tiz a crazy world going mad me thinks!!
Happy new year to all!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2011 11:06 am
What I find interesting is that managers continue to be identified here as "untrustworthy". In effect, the NHS is a political pawn and managers really just the back office implementors of whatever is the latest policy to filter down from Westminster. Until there is some realisation from governments that perpetually changing the NHS is not the best way to deliver efficient quality healthcare, we're all doomed to have guarantees revoked and agreements reneged upon.
Managers are put in the difficult position of being tasked to make work the unworkable and as such, can't just throw their hands up and say "whatever". Ideas come to the fore and they may not offer a complete solution, but what other option do we have?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2011 1:05 pm
Only 80%!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2011 8:54 am
Ironic really, look at the pay of the jobs advertised at the bottom of this page. Senior managers 'untrustworthy'?? Well, who would have thought it. We can say they are only implementing demand from DoH but there is such a thing as saying no. Daring move and guaranteed not to get you major goodie points in party central but what price integrity?
There can be no guarantees re job losses at whatever banding and the minute we agree to this or any similar appeal in the name of saving jobs, the gloves will be off. Support your reps, support your union to say 'no', tell your MP enough is enough. Stand up for yourself, your job, your worth, your patients and the care they deserve.
Unsuitable or offensive?