New Council Member It was announced that Gillian Arr-Jones had resigned due to pressure of work in her new post. It was agreed that Anthony Oxley be co-opted to fill the vacancy. As elections are about to take place, and at least one other member of Council has decided to stand down in April, there will be an opportunity for new members of Council. If you might be interested in standing as either a National or District Member, or you wish more information about the difference between them, please contact me.
Communication Group A communication group has been set up to look at communications with members and outside bodies. If you have any thoughts you wish me to forward to them please contact me.
RPSGB Hospital Pharmacists Group It has been agreed to meet with this group with a view to future joint working.
Group Delegates Meeting 2003 It was agreed that, due to the fact only three motions were submitted, the GDM would be moved to just before the Annual General Meeting at the Annual National Conference on 5th April 2003. The existing timetable for amendments/delegates etc. still stands. Since there will be a rule change proposed at the AGM to scrap the GDM, it would be useful for members to submit their ideas on what should replace it. Obviously, Council has its own views and the views of Group Secretaries were canvassed in September, but I would be grateful for any thoughts you may have. If the members wish to keep the GDM, they can vote against the proposal at the AGM, but falling attendances and small numbers of motions have led Council to believe it has had its day.
Since there will be a rule change proposed at the AGM to scrap the GDM, it would be useful for members to submit their ideas on what should replace it. Obviously, Council has its own views and the views of Group Secretaries were canvassed in September, but I would be grateful for any thoughts you may have. If the members wish to keep the GDM, they can vote against the proposal at the AGM, but falling attendances and small numbers of motions have led Council to believe it has had its day.
Agenda for Change Agenda for Change has hit significant problems with timing. Much of the real detail of the project remains highly confidential at the insistence of the DoH, and this in itself is causing difficulties. Amicus has recorded its objection to being tied in to a negotiation which cannot be reported back in any great detail to members. The leak which appeared in the Nursing Times apparently no longer describes the position of the negotiations, although at one point it may have been an accurate representation of the DoH's position. The same applies to the more recent leak. It is understood that the current position is that job rankings for benchmark jobs have been devised, and that the results have not been entirely satisfactory. Amicus has raised objections, and a review is now taking place of the evaluation factor weightings. A number of other major issues remain outstanding. A meeting between Ron Pate, PWC Chair, and Roger Spiller, Amicus National Secretary, discussed the situation on Tuesday 26th November. Details of the meeting remained confidential to the participants and little information was available to Council. A major difficulty appears to be in convincing the DoH and the Treasury that real life is not adequately reflected in the Whitley scales they are using for the costings. Some items, e.g. all pathology on-call rates, are higher than the base Whitley rates and this is likely to severely disrupt the costings of the exercise the DoH and Treasury have made. There was a more positive feel to the discussions than there has been for some time. Part of the problem with AfC is that the two strands of Job Evaluation and Assimilation have become entwined and mixed up. There is a need to disentangle the two and sort out the Job Evaluation process before moving on to the Assimilation. A major row has apparently broken out between the DoH and the Treasury over the funding streams for Foundation Hospitals. This is likely to limit the number of Foundation Hospitals initially, until costs can be quantified. On 28th November, Alan Milburn announced that AfC is definitely going ahead and there was a statement of the details of the system. N.B. This does not include the details on the Job Evaluation or assimilation exercises, but does contain details of the proposed pay scales and a list of early implementers. This joint statement between the central Negotiating Group and the Department of Health has been issued and is available here. If you are not on the mailing list, which will carry details of further discussions on the main issues, you can join here.
Part of the problem with AfC is that the two strands of Job Evaluation and Assimilation have become entwined and mixed up. There is a need to disentangle the two and sort out the Job Evaluation process before moving on to the Assimilation. A major row has apparently broken out between the DoH and the Treasury over the funding streams for Foundation Hospitals. This is likely to limit the number of Foundation Hospitals initially, until costs can be quantified.
On 28th November, Alan Milburn announced that AfC is definitely going ahead and there was a statement of the details of the system. N.B. This does not include the details on the Job Evaluation or assimilation exercises, but does contain details of the proposed pay scales and a list of early implementers. This joint statement between the central Negotiating Group and the Department of Health has been issued and is available here. If you are not on the mailing list, which will carry details of further discussions on the main issues, you can join here.
Reports to NAC The GHP report to the National Advisory Committee is available here. The Amicus NHS Section report is available here.
Colin Rodden 28 November 2002