EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Redundancies

Managers who make these decisions have absolulutely no idea of the implications of either freezing a post or making a technical person redundant. They only look at the financial savings.
The person in charge of the department needs to put these implications in writing so that management are aware that they will be held responsible for their actions.
Here's a few
1. Loss of morale
2. Increase in sickness due to stress
3. Failure to comply with manufacturer's service intervals
4. Increase in equipment breakdowns which affects waiting times
5. Increase in repair costs
6. Destruction of a PPM/Service System that has probably taken
years to set up and run.
And last but not least.
All responibility for equipment failures due to lack of maintenance should be clearly passed to the management level making these decisions.

When will they get the "lightbulb" momment and see that frontline staff (so called) minus readily available kit, in the high tech world we live in now = less activity or even frontline staff + sla with oem = less activity cause it usually costs more and you get less support than from inhouse ebme. Which = more sla to cover all the activity = even less dosh to spend which = less activity and eventually the trust cant compete with others locally so they have to merge it or shut it down, eh up theres a lighbulb momment maybe eventually the people in charge will talk themselves out of jobs. Sad thing is they get shut of everyone else first then, whats the phrase rats from a sinking ship.

Hello John I am correct in saying that we should keep our departments in good order. To show the accountants our records and saving we make etc. To show them that we good QA and our end users are happy with the service we provide.

At the end of the day our services are needed but these can easily be done by a third party contractor.

I would put it a bit stronger than that, Karl:- "Enemies of the State"!

Umish, my Dear Chap. How can you do any of that once the in-house department, for all intents and purposes, no longer exists?

Surely you've heard of PFI, and all the rest?

@Graham: they're not really Managers at all, are they? These people are rarely on the scene for very long. They are not managing the situation, in the sense of taking charge of it, at all. In reality they are little more than asset strippers, whose main obsession will be to "impress" the Board (to "justify" their bonuses) before moving on to the next Target ... er, Trust.

Almost correct Geoff. No. They are not managers to us older ones, more like *ankers. The trouble is that when they do move on its usually to a higher position.

If these people were proper managers and have to make financial cuts, they would evaluate the vast numbers of non-jobs in the NHS that do absolutely nothing for patient care.

I would like to think that EBME types actually do make a difference to patient care by making sure that the equipment is in good working order, providing ordering advice and all the rest that a good department provides.

Bankers?

I'm sure we all agree with what you're saying, Graham. But I came to the conclusion many years ago that the sort of people you're talking about simply don't care.

Nevertheless, having suffered so much at the hands of such (and similar) specimens in this life (and being denied - by Rule of Law - sweet retribution so richly deserved in the here and now), I continue in the expectation that they will meet their comeuppance in the next!

I have been reading all of this with some interest.
For financial year 10/11, there will be an effective reduction in available budget to Acute Trusts of 15%. Going forward, there will be at least a 2% reduction in real money terms year on year until at least 2017.
All of this means the following:
1. Efficiencies will have to improve.
2. All positions will need to be justified.
3. There will be wholesale redundancies.
4. Services will be reduced or cut from the Acute Trusts.
5. Thresholds for treatments will be raised.
6. There will be a general move towards vertically integrated health care. This means that Acute Trusts will be more involved in the management of Community services.
7. Services will become more quality driven from a payment and assessment view point.

All of this means that there will be significant changes in the Health Service as we know it today and it will not be available for everyone that thinks they require it!!

... and the Good News is?

Sounds like a case of "what goes around, comes around" (or even, "back to the future") to me!

(there's a General Election coming up. Please cast your vote wisely and with forethought. Otherwise, mine will be wasted)

...And the Good News is....those that wake up and smell the coffee will be OK!!!
The General Election won't change anything as the NHS is in such deep kaka that it will take 5 years to get it on an even keel.
Sorry to be such a bearer of doom and gloom, but better to be a realist instead of a fantasist. Hopefully it will be a big enough shake up to get rid of all the dross out of the system.

Pity that I'm a tea drinker, then, Kawa.

But, to be honest, I doubt that the dross will be ready to give up without a fight. And (unfortunately) they are, collectively, the very kind of people who can bring the big guns to bear.