The start of 2011 is a time for setting objectives having finalised what we feel has been achieved, in the previous years, it is a time for moving forward to improve and complete any existing projects and consider new aims and objectives. As we enter this New Year we are increasingly concerned with the growing privatisation of outpatient supply services including the out-sourcing of out-patient dispensing. We know that the area collectively called homecare now equates to over 30% by expenditure in England and with the increase in the VAT rate to 20% from this month there is an increased tax subsidy to private providers. This must therefore be near the top of our list of issues to address in 2011 as we seek to level the playing field for our members. We have no problems with fair competition or about being innovative in seeking to improve patient access and care in many different ways. What we object to is the unfairness of the situation and the increased costs to the taxpayer of this process. We noted the working group led by Mark Hackett to review information and evidence in relation to Homecare and we will be pushing to ensure that overall value to the taxpayer and the inequity of the VAT process is also picked up by the group. We have also tried other ways of raising this issue through the national press with questions to ministers via radio 4 and commenting on specific news stories in relation to the NHS, but going forward we are likely to seek Unite support for a more formal parliamentary scrutiny and potential competition review.
Working closely with national officers and local groups the work in relation to on-call continues, but the outcomes are not in the hands of Guild Council or the Unite officers that attend the NHS staff council. These will be determined by how members in each local organisation engage in the process and their skill and determination in negotiating a successful outcome. Nationally (see below) the latest addition to the frequently answered questions on the principles is evidence of the work and close links the Chair Dave Thornton and Vice Chair Peter Leslie have with Lead Unite negotiators through this work and in other areas such as attendance at the Pay Review Body. The following response is key in our view to enable local negotiators maintain the unforeseeable emergency orientation and professionally led aspect of on-call.
14. Does the term “as and when required” in the definition of on-call mean that staff will no longer be able to use their professional judgement to decide if they need to attend the workplace when called out?
No, staff such as healthcare pharmacists will continue to be able to decide if their attendance at the workplace is required or not, based on their professional judgement, existing protocols and depending on the arrangements made with the employer for dealing with such situations.
We continue to collate details on progress (or more often not) in relation to on-call via the regional member network. Additionally we continue to seek information from primary care members on any reductions in posts or redundancies proposed so we can provide appropriate advice and support. Heather Weaver who is primary care lead on Council co-ordinating support can be contacted by email here.
The position of Unite in relation to the NHS Employers proposals to “freeze increments” was outlined when the management side of the NHS staff council issued a letter on 5th January regarding their proposals for an incremental pay freeze in England without any consultation with the staff side. This was rejected by Unite and by other Unions at a meeting on 20th January. The Staff Side response to these pay freeze proposals were that proposals were divisive, non deliverable by NHS Employers and a threat to the basic principles of Agenda for Change.
Finally in a busy month for industrial issues Dave Thornton along with the officers of Unite attended an oral evidence session in relation to Unite’s request for the Pay Review Body (PRB) to re-iterate its support for a Recruitment and retention premia for junior pharmacists. We believe it is inequitable that NHS employers can negotiate contracts in primary care that allow a major differential in salary and not seek to address the consequences on the managed sector. We are grateful that the PRB for recommending this be addressed for the last three years, but accept that if the new coalition government rejects their advice again we have to look for alternative routes.
Educationally the work on the 2011 Annual Conference, which is led for GHP by Roisin O’Hare took on a pace as the final arrangements for the programme in Nottingham 20th-22nd May required final agreement of the programme, the letters to exhibitors and delegates and confirmation with speakers for the various workshops and plenary sessions. I expect this conference to be of the usual high standard and invite you to keep that weekend free ahead of the publication of the programme. Roisin has also agreed to attend a task and finish sub-group of Modernising Pharmacy Careers (MPC) that will deal with the small but important group of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians that deliver pharmaceutical sciences like radio pharmacy and quality control that may not be directly addressed in the MPC or in the parallel group dealing with Modernising Scientific Careers. The MPC also published a major document on the undergraduate degree course in pharmacy. They recognise the difficulties and deficiencies of the current programmes and seek to achieve the following:-
- To provide students with a continuous 5 year period of development
- To provide a curriculum where theoretical knowledge and practical skills are connected more effectively
- To provide opportunities across the curriculum for students to place their theoretical and practical learning in the context of practice
- To ensure that employers and universities form strong partnerships to agree the five year curricula and to ensure that transitions into and out of practice placements are properly managed as part of the delivery of the curriculum.
The importance we place on this process is such that we have allocated a major part of the next GHP Council in February to this document and invited the MPC leads Rob Darracott and Professor Anthony Smith to the meeting.
The professional representation process of responding to consultations continued in January with responses showing the full range of GHP spectrum of interest as professional and industrial lead organisation for pharmacists in the managed sector. They ranged from simple changes in the legal category of Nicorette and extension of the range of medicines to Podiatrists led by the Professional Secretary, to major clinical areas like the NPSA and the safer use of insulins led by the Chair of Practice Graeme Richardson and Organisational Lead Vilma Gilis and a political/industrial response on the NHS constitution and whistleblowing led by the Chair of Terms and Conditions. Vilma Gilis also attended on behalf of GHP a meeting led by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society to improve and set standards for the transfer of care. As the lead professional representative body for hospital pharmacists we highlighted the fact that there are two transfers from community practice and a return not just a discharge process to Community practitioners and this needs to be reflected in the standards.
Finally no doubt like me you have been inundated with reminders to retain your membership of the new professional body the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. I intend to pay my membership fee for the next 12 months as I believe the Royal Pharmaceutical Society is the one body that can speak for all pharmacists and we continue to work with them on standards such as transfer of care and in relation to future career accreditation and credentialisation of services to the benefit of members of both organisations.
David Miller
GHP President