EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Agenda For Change Agenda for Change and Union

Colleagues, There are a couple of points that need addressing in previous correspondence on this subject.
Firstly there seems to be a perception among some that there is a difference between The Union and ordinary Medical Engineers. I am a Medical Engineer at the Royal Preston Hospital, I am a member of Amicus, I represent Medical Engineers in the Hospital and thus attend meetings of the NW Regional Committee of Healthcare Scientists. From that Committee I attend the National Occupational Committee for MTOs. That body elects representatives who meet the Department of Health.
All this is done in worktime as a legal right.
Secondly there seems to be an information gap for some. All you have to do is get one of your Dept elected as a Rep for Amicus - which is the Union selected by the Joint Evaluation Working Party to represent Medical Engineers on Agenda for Change -then get on the Reps Direct email list and you will have all the info you require.
As an aside - there was a huge meeting held in Leyland for NW Healthcare Scientists about A4C and I sent letters to all the Hospitals containing Medical Engineering Departments in the NW.
Thirdly it is very important that the job profiles for Medical Engineers are drawn up correctly. Initial work has been done by Medical Engineer members of Amicus at national level. The aim is to get new entrants onto Band 5 and State Registered Engineers onto Band 6. Anyone in the NW can contact me for info (my email address is medicalengineeringRPH@lthtr.nhs.uk)and outside this area each place will have its own Amicus office or Hospital Amicus Rep who will help.
Join the Union and make a Difference.
Terry Quinn

Which AMICUS Terry? EESA AEEU or MSF - I wish they would get their act together with this merger.

It's Amicus-msf. It will probably change to just Amicus after the Annual Conference Terry

If State registered engineers are to go into band 6, engineers currently in the band 7 range of pay(MTO 5s)will have to endure an effective pay cut.
Or can MTO 5s move to band 7?

Terry

I know you are doing lots of good work "for the cause" and have done for years, but there are certain things to do with AfC that disturb me, and I'm sure, many others.

You say that there seems to be a "perception amongst some" about a difference between the union and other Medical Engineers.

I'd say it's a little bit more "than some" from the postings I read here and by speaking to other biomeds. There seems to be a great deal of apprehension from biomeds, both union and non-union members, about AfC and it's implications.
I've even spoke to full time officials who "unofficially" say that we are not going to fair too well out of this deal, more aimed at keeping the nurses happy you only have to view the Job Evaluation criteria to see this.

I appreciate you represent people at the RPH and it is always best to be part of the discussion than just criticise from the outside, but not everyone is part of the union and there are lots of people in small far away places who would rightly feel alienated.

Regarding the meeting in Leyland, I never got any info. This is the first I've heard about it. If we are suppose to communicate isn't it best if the people who it affects are wise before rather than after the event.

Your final comment I feel is the most poignant, Join the Union. I think you missed the "...or ELSE!!!" after your comment.
So much for living in a free state, if your not part of "our gang" then you can't play.

Finally to do with State Registration. As far as I'm aware we are still at the Voluntary stage. Has something changed? Did my letter get lost along with the Leyland one or do I have to join IPEM as well as Amicus to benefit for Band 6

Who says that existing MTO5's are all eligible for state registration? - that's an assumption if ever i saw one!

The result of Unison's ballot on AforC is as follows:

Yes: 76,056 (81.5%)

No : 17,224 (18.5%)

The turnout was only 22%, which is disappointing, considering the importance of the issue.

I think some of Terrys comments are right.
And I do seem to remember getting his letter, but was on leave for the actual event.(excuse)
As for the terrible turn outs for the votes, I dont see the point in being (paying) to be in a union unless you use your votes to make things happen, wether yes or no to the subject matter VOTE.It took me about 5 secs to realise what I wanted to do and I think the reply envelope was postage paid, didnt half tire we out putting the folded slip in the envelope though.
Maybe people not in the union should also not get the benefits of negotiated advances etc, now theres a subject to throw around.As for the gangs theory, look at most of the other professions within the NHS {drs, nurses, physio, xray, etc} they seem to have made their official gangs work for them over the years for the advantage of higher annual pay increases and better conditions, wether you agree or not they also seem to be better thought of because of these gangs. Therefore whynot use the IPEM to raise our position, if anyone has a better idea lets hear it, but the problem is if we are to go it alone people need to put the time in, if you cant afford the time to lick an envelope and put it in the post weve got no chance of creating an all encumpassing EBME INSTITUTE OR ROYAL SOCIETY.

I looks like things have turned for the worst. Has anybody read this weeks Health Service Journal, click this link for a summery

web page

It appears that Andrew Foster Director at NHS Human Resources said that any Trust hoping to transfer to Foundation status must start implementing AfC this October with running systems in place when Foundation Trusts start next April. This means by this time next year 40 Trusts could be on AfC with 12 Piloting and 29 running it properly. What is point of piloting if they have already decided to implement it?

Taking about using the back door route

I agree Karl, if the union negotiates on a local level with my employer, then the benefits to it's members, on a local level, should be offered accordingly.

What tends to happen, my employer offers a yearly pay rise to it's employees, local union negotiating hasn't been relevant.

The percentage I get is based on affordability, national recommendation and budgetry restictions.

I don't seem to remember the union being of much use back in 1989 from MPT's to MTO's regrading, do you Karl, I seem to remember we did most of the work ourselves, negotiating at a local level.

Most of the gangs you mentioned seemed to be related more to professional bodies as opposed to Trade Unions.

That I agree with, it's just IPEM I have a problem with, something to do with small fish in a big pond. But we've been here before in my many moans in other forum topics.

I'm all for professional registration for Biomed Engineers, I just don't want my future mapped out by a union or Physicist without asking my opinion.

I know what the argument is, we don't have an alternative as there appears to be no voice for Biomeds/Medical Engineers as a collective.

In my humble opinion this forum/web group supports more of my views and feelings than any other Union/Society/Institute that I know of.

The question is how do we move from here, which way forward