EBME Forums Forums Free discussion Free discussion Working environment

My how this topic has wavered from it's initial query,"Working Enviroment"
We get lesson's on Grammer,History, and substance Abuse.
Just go's too show our readers what a broard base we need for our jobs..!
It's not that often that any topic on these pages reaches "two" pages, so I guess the subject are getting better.

Before you all complain sarcasm is my trade mark..unfortunately

One could also give you some abecedarian regarding your spelling my dear Mark

Click Here

Says it all my friends, says it all!

No slur on John Sandham or his colleagues is intended but there will always be individuals in a position to take advantage of a situation. Essentially, my view towards private contractors is that they are out there to do business and make a profit for the owner or the shareholders. In some ways private organisations do not have any option but to compete in a market that is expanding - to take advantage of opportunities as they occur.

However I cannot see how private firms can provide the savings that the NHS is looking for, that is: something for nothing it seems but this is not my concern. I think a big motivation for the NHS to award contracts for maintenance services is that it is convenient is to let contractors provide a 'one-stop shop' as NHS procurement puts it, to manage the service for a negotiated price, at reduced risk to the NHS. Fine: just as long as the contractors performance is acceptable.

I am not so sure whether it is a good idea for NHS departments to go out trawling for business, so to speak, or what the motivation to take on contracts is - unless John's department has 'excess capacity'. Some would argue that departments, which cannot provide for all commitments in the parent organisation should not commit to other contractual obligations (I am not suggesting that John's department cannot meet its obligations).

Surely the continued existence of an NHS department which currently meets it obligations to the organisation is justified - what is the motivation to expand beyond the bounds of the parent organisation? I could understand it if it were to improve the management of services at other organisations but this does not necessarily need a contractor to take over the services does it? Perhaps, in John's opinion, it does.

I am wondering how one NHS organisation such as John's department would take on the additional risks associated with the provision of external service contracts to another - whether this would be some form of NHS indemnity or an insurance scheme of some sort. If there are staff involved from other NHS Trusts who may be affected and they are subsequently disadvantaged under the terms of the contract, then out-sourcing is not acceptable in my view, particularly if the service only improves at their expense. What happens if the contract fails - where do these individuals stand?

I think when TUPE applies it is intended to protect employees but it subsequently affects the relationship between employee and employer after the transfer, in such a way that it can be detrimental - swings and roundabouts. It would be really interesting if John were to expand on the views he put forward, earlier on.

Sorry Richard, I would have to disagree with you, on your point of going beyond the boundaries of one's own immediate department for business.
Ultimately if a private company is interseted in taking over a EBME's department it all comes down to money.
"Hope" was undercut by 25% I believe, and so lost their existance as an NHS department.
Personally I believe the only way too perhaps prevent it happening to any Department is too increase their overall value and capacity.
I'm not saying that it would prevent a Private company from still taking you over but it would prove that one could operate as a legitimate business. Wasn't this style of excercise done at another Manchester Hospital which we both know of? Didn't it pay for all those grade 4's ?

Unfortunately " Dead Man's Shoes" is an old topic on these pages.

However if extra revenue is generated by cancelling external contractors or taking on outside work; then additional grading can be costed for or perhaps extra workers taken on.
Of course, this all turns sour if you loose the work at the next renewal date! But that is also the case in the Private Sector as well.


If I have spelling mistakes it's because I'm fick!! and too lazy too look for the dictionary :p

Ok so I've looked for my spelling book and I can't find the meaning of that one Louie..?

what's it mean then?

I'm big enough to acknowledge defeat!

Hope lost the contract because the management team in Medical Physics costed the specification for services as accurately as they could and a private company undercut them significantly to get the business but yes, it was about money, you are correct. The proposed in-house bid was undercut by the difference between what Hope Hospital was funding the Medical Physics department and the proposed value of the in-house bid, I think. This was more than 25% Mark (If anyone out there disagrees then feel free to update me on the exact figures).

However; under resourced and particularly mismanaged is the way you could describe the situation at Hope for years before the service was out-sourced. You must know about the management problems that the department had! Obviously, the monies were soon made available to pay the private company; which incidentally upped the ante as soon as they could by invoicing the Trust for extra-contractual work which was not tied down in the contract.

Prior to this; Hope Medical Physics had been income generating for years via SLA's and was actually unable to meet the commitments for equipment servicing in-house because of the demands of the SLA. Myself and the rest of my colleagues worked 2 month stints at a local childrens hospital, fulfilling a contract, apparently income generating for the trust (in the region of 2 wte technicians out of a total of 6 or so in the main workshop). You could say: 'making ourselves a valuable asset to the trust', as John Sandham would put it. It turned out we were earning just enough to pay the technicians wages for the contract. We found this out when we were told that if we lost the SLA then a redundancy or two might have to be made: hence no incentive to stop the contract and get on with fulfilling Hope Hospital's needs.

There never seemed to be justification for extra staff, even though we could not commit staff to PPM's in areas other than high-care, intensivist or theatre settings. Sort of a breakdown service only in the main workshop and a 'all hands to the pump approach'. The SLA was dragging us down. The section was not allowed to expand, had restricted space, very limited resources and they weren't allowed to drop the SLA until the day the private company were to take over. More significantly, there was pressure on the accomodation we were in for clinical use. As if by magic, new, more suitable premises only appeared shortly before the final bidder for the contract was announced. Just decorated with that lived in look, ready and set up for when they moved in. Shame this couldn't have been done years earlier.

What's really laughable is that the new management of the private company that we were out-sourced to were happy for the original business plan put forward by the unsuccessful Medical Physics bid to be utilised - it turns out they didn't really have a busness plan because they'd never really run a show like maintenance at Hope before! The new lot was effectively a business start-up in the UK, it seems. Field service totally seperate entity from Hospital services.

You see, it was almost as if someone did not want the in-house team to perform well in the two years or so that the tender process was proceeeding - no effort to improve the running of the system and no extra resources. This could be described as running the business into the ground, perhaps. The Hospital was keen to pay the extra to have a private company provide the service but not cough up the cash or manage the system well enough to enable the underfunded in-house Medcial Physics department to do the job properly and thereby avoid the threat of out-sourcing.

Yes Mark, its about money. Unfortunately there were politics as well in this case - it's really about politics. Hope this gives you an idea of where I'm coming from with regard to transfers and the lack of interest in managing services like maintenance from within the NHS.

a·be·ce·dar·i·an

n.
One who teaches or studies the alphabet.
One who is just learning; a beginner.

adj.
Having to do with the alphabet.
Being arranged alphabetically.
Elementary or rudimentary.

[Middle English, from Medieval Latin abecedrium, alphabet, from Late Latin abecedrius, alphabetical : from the names of the letters A B C D + -rius, -ary.]

Hope this enlightens one my dear Mark

Dearest Mark, Richard, you both have valid points, however, the plain simple fact, as Richard says, is down to plain simple “Wonga”, or lack of…. Politics is unfortunate, as I said earlier you most often find yourself banging your head on the foot of some senior bod, (Estates Manager etc) whose egotistic inaptitude to represent us is a major cause for concern. I feel that these tomfool, wiseacre, simpleton, witling, dizzard, donkey, ass; ninny,; chowderhead, chucklehead; dolt, booby, Tom Noddy, looby, hoddy-doddy, noddy, nonny, noodle, nizy, owl; goose, goosecap, imbecile, gaby; radoteur, nincompoop, badaud, zany, trifler, babblers cannot wait to cut us loose.

PFI is inevitable, we all know that behind the scenes, medical device manufacture's are impregnating each other's backsides, i.e. combining, with the simple intention of an all out NHS invasion. (Drager absorbing Siemens etc,,, Joke not intended). It hasn't helped when trust's are guilty of purchasing the majority of equipment off one single manufacturer. As Mr. Mundy stated earlier we have paved the way for their parasitic walk in. The plain simple fact,my friends, is, it WILL, cost the NHS ,more,lots more, they are obliged by law to have this work done, they feel, by giving the contract to the manufacturer they will alleviate their little gluteus maximus's of all responsibility. It is, in their sad eyes, the only way standards like DB9801 and all its updates can be realistically met whilst at the same time, putting the onus firmly on the manufacturers doorstep.... Oh sufferance my friends, sufferance.



P.S. is it not weird, my friends, that you never see John Sandham and Bill Gates together at any one time. Hmm very suspicious.

What we need to keep reminding the masters is that an EBME Dept provides a mountain of other benefits to a trust.
As NHS employees we are interested in the best care to the patient, in most cases. And as such
will generally help out with a wide expanse of tasks, you try and get a contractor to do this without renegotiation taking place.
We also need to stand together and defend the ground we stand on when faced with the advance of any soursing that will ultimately not only cost more, but do less.
Many an industry has seen many such cases where contractors have taken over public services and look at the state there in trains, buses, roads,
to name a few.
On this note I will get off my soap box and make sure that I book the said box down as seen just in case a PFI contractor wants to give a quote for future maintance on it.
:p

My fellow hewers of wood and drawers of water, brethren, herald at our fellow compatriot, Mr. Mundys poetry. We indeed do need to stand together and defend the ground we stand on. Brothers, a simple solution for a mere fractional parting of moolah we could unite under the heavenly flag of the IPEM as they are now an official nominating body for our tired souls. Friends, Techs, fellow compatriots across the UK join us in our final stand against the advancing Hun for united we stand, divided we fall.

for details..click here

To join e-mail our fellow artisan

justin.mccarthy@cardiffandvale.wales.nhs.uk

and express your interest