This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/feb/26/junior-doctors-will-boycott-review-into-poor-morale
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Junior doctors will boycott review into poor morale | Junior doctors will boycott review into poor morale |
(35 minutes later) | |
Junior doctors are preparing to boycott a review into falling morale among medics, the Guardian understands, casting doubt on the inquiry, which was announced on the same day the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, vowed to impose a controversial new contract. | Junior doctors are preparing to boycott a review into falling morale among medics, the Guardian understands, casting doubt on the inquiry, which was announced on the same day the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, vowed to impose a controversial new contract. |
The Department of Health may now be forced to overhaul the terms of the independent review of junior doctors’ poor morale, announced by Hunt earlier this month. | The Department of Health may now be forced to overhaul the terms of the independent review of junior doctors’ poor morale, announced by Hunt earlier this month. |
The review is being led by Prof Dame Sue Bailey, chair of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, but junior doctors’ representatives have said they were not prepared to discuss general issues of morale at a time of industrial dispute over working hours and wages, a topic the review specifically excludes. | The review is being led by Prof Dame Sue Bailey, chair of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, but junior doctors’ representatives have said they were not prepared to discuss general issues of morale at a time of industrial dispute over working hours and wages, a topic the review specifically excludes. |
In a statement circulated to members after a meeting on Thursday, the Academy Trainee Doctors’ Group (ATDG), elected representatives of junior medics from different royal colleges across the profession, said it had unanimously agreed not to take part in the review. | |
In the memo, seen by the Guardian, the group said it was “unable to accept the proposed terms of reference” and warned that a review into morale in the current climate “risks producing a report with significant bias”. | |
“On these grounds, the ATDG is unable to participate in the review as it is currently described, and is unable to recommend wider participation to junior doctors,” the statement said. | “On these grounds, the ATDG is unable to participate in the review as it is currently described, and is unable to recommend wider participation to junior doctors,” the statement said. |
“The exclusion of pay, and particularly the exclusion of terms and conditions, from any discussion of morale and wellbeing will render a review unable to discuss both problems and potential solutions that have a significant impact on morale and recruitment and retention,” the statement said. | “The exclusion of pay, and particularly the exclusion of terms and conditions, from any discussion of morale and wellbeing will render a review unable to discuss both problems and potential solutions that have a significant impact on morale and recruitment and retention,” the statement said. |
“During a time of ongoing industrial action in response to a continuing position of contractual imposition, there is obvious and significant discontent amongst the junior doctor workforce.” | “During a time of ongoing industrial action in response to a continuing position of contractual imposition, there is obvious and significant discontent amongst the junior doctor workforce.” |
Junior doctors are only willing to support the review after the current industrial dispute is resolved, the statement ends. | Junior doctors are only willing to support the review after the current industrial dispute is resolved, the statement ends. |
The trainee doctors’ group in the academy is separate from the British Medical Association, the doctors’ union that has been leading opposition to the controversial new contract for junior doctors. | The trainee doctors’ group in the academy is separate from the British Medical Association, the doctors’ union that has been leading opposition to the controversial new contract for junior doctors. |
In the initial announcement of the review into low morale, due to report back in autumn 2016, the Department of Health said Bailey would hear from representatives of the royal colleges, employers and training bodies, as well as junior doctors and their representatives. | In the initial announcement of the review into low morale, due to report back in autumn 2016, the Department of Health said Bailey would hear from representatives of the royal colleges, employers and training bodies, as well as junior doctors and their representatives. |
In the terms of reference published earlier this month, the academy explicitly says the review “does not extend to matters of pay or terms and conditions of service for junior doctors”, but says it intends to examine relationships between junior doctors with their hospitals and senior medics, stressful working environments and the lack of flexibility around annual leave. | In the terms of reference published earlier this month, the academy explicitly says the review “does not extend to matters of pay or terms and conditions of service for junior doctors”, but says it intends to examine relationships between junior doctors with their hospitals and senior medics, stressful working environments and the lack of flexibility around annual leave. |
After the review was announced on 12 February, Bailey had stressed the importance of hearing from junior doctors. “I particularly want to hear about the concerns of junior doctors directly so we can, as a whole NHS community, significantly improve the morale and wellbeing of trainees,” she said. | After the review was announced on 12 February, Bailey had stressed the importance of hearing from junior doctors. “I particularly want to hear about the concerns of junior doctors directly so we can, as a whole NHS community, significantly improve the morale and wellbeing of trainees,” she said. |
“We will work openly to ensure all views are heard, understood and then acted upon.” | “We will work openly to ensure all views are heard, understood and then acted upon.” |
Junior doctors declared earlier this week they will stage three new 48-hour walkouts and intend to seek a judicial review of the government’s plan to impose new contracts on them by 1 August, after negotiations between the Department of Health and the BMA broke down. | |
Medics claim the new contract will mean stretching the junior doctor workforce even thinner to meet the demands of the government’s manifesto pledge for a seven-day NHS, though the government denies that doctors will be working longer hours, saying the new contract will bring down the maximum number of hours doctors can work and will mean an average 13.5% basic pay rise. | Medics claim the new contract will mean stretching the junior doctor workforce even thinner to meet the demands of the government’s manifesto pledge for a seven-day NHS, though the government denies that doctors will be working longer hours, saying the new contract will bring down the maximum number of hours doctors can work and will mean an average 13.5% basic pay rise. |
Industrial action by junior doctors, which will not affect emergency care, is scheduled for 9 March, 6 April and 26 April. This follows two 24-hour strikes held earlier this year, which caused thousands of operations to be cancelled. | Industrial action by junior doctors, which will not affect emergency care, is scheduled for 9 March, 6 April and 26 April. This follows two 24-hour strikes held earlier this year, which caused thousands of operations to be cancelled. |
The judicial review is based on the fact that the government appears to have failed to carry out an equality impact assessment (EIA), required under the Equality Act 2010, before its decision to impose a new contract. | The judicial review is based on the fact that the government appears to have failed to carry out an equality impact assessment (EIA), required under the Equality Act 2010, before its decision to impose a new contract. |
Previous version
1
Next version