EBME Forums Forums Free discussion Free discussion Contractors

I have come across "contractors" working on hospital sites on medical device who have no practical experience of working on Medical Device, yet employed as a contractor.

In case of any adverse incidents, who would be responsible?

1. Agent who supplied the Contractor

2. The On site MES provider who allowed the contractor to work on site

3. or the so called "contractor"

4. Or the NHS manager who turned a blind eye?

First of all, Umish ... where are you (or, to be more specific, where abouts are you talking about:- the UK)?

The agent will certainly "deny all knowledge" ... etc., etc.

Did anyone look at relevant CV's? Were any dubious claims made there?

I am interested in the circumstances, Umish. I guess that you don't want to "name names", so PM me if you like.

Stuff like:- what kit was the guy working on (and did it really matter), was he happy to be doing this (or was he struggling), how did any "deficiences" come to light ... and all the rest.

Well it falls to the Chief executive and the trust who employed them.

Just to add another dimension to this argument 'someone who has not had the formal training on a piece of equipment (vents etc)from the manufacturer and the work not being supervised or signed off by a qualified tech'

As Geoff has stated about the cv's but I would go further and monitor them until you are satisfied they can do the job, or even a 1 in 6 check.

As may be well known to some, I have done a few stints as an agency "contractor" myself in the past. In each case I advised the bloke I was reporting to at site (eg, the biomed manager) to have my presence declared on the Trust Risk Register. My thinking there being that all arses would be covered (including, of course, my own). Not one of those guys did as I suggested, however, and I have often wondered why not.

Speaking as an ex-"contractor" ... I doubt that the tech himself is to blame in the type of situation mentioned. To be frank, it's more likely to be the way the guy was "sold" by the agent, if y'all catch my drift.

Umish.
Who are they employed by.
The hospital.
A contractor
The original OEM of kit.
The outcomes could all different.

They are employed by an Umbrella company

In that case they should be used to weathering the storm.

These issues are here in UK, as more and more NHS trusts are taken over by MES companies, these problems are getting worst......

"... taken over by MES companies" ... what are you talking about, Umish?

Work needs to be carried out (kit needs to be fixed, etc.), and surely it's up to individual Trusts to find the best way (for them) to get it done. If managers can't manage properly, that's a matter for them and those they answer to.

Do you have a particular axe to grind here, or are you simply trying to stir the [censored]?

Cant speak for anyone else but i'd have thought the Trust will still have an equipment lead.
The responsibility lies with that lead to ensure that they ask for the exact support they want. e.g Engineer must have been trained by the OEM to be able of servicing and repairing the Trusts ventilators etc etc.
Then if the contractor provides an engineer who isnt able and they make a pigs ear of something the contractor is liable.
Suppose its all about the Trust having the correct knowing people in charge of their kit and not some numpty who just looks at pounds, shillings and pence at the end of the day.