Login

MTAS and the GMC

Read about our campaign to bring the Architects of MTAS before the GMC Fitness to Practice committee.
 
Petition for signatures
Our letter of referral
The legal background
 
We need to raise funds to support this case. We welcome donations by Paypal, bank transfer or credit/debit cards.
Surgeons speak out on Working Time PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 11 October 2009
  • EWTD - time for PMETB to act
  • Remedy vs the GMC - an update
  • Deaneries, employment agencies & doctors' choices

EWTD - time for PMETB to act

This week, the Royal College of Surgeons published its own survey findings into the first two months of life under the new European 'Health and Safety' legislation. In common with our own survey across other specialties it showed that training has got worse and patient care has got worse. The survey revealed inadequate handovers and inadequate contact with consultants. Moonlighting was rife, to cope with the shortages of doctors.

The general picture is one of despondency and isolation. To cap it all, most of the surgeons were not even complying with the 48 hour week. The full results are on the Royal College of Surgeons website

Remedy believes that patients are being harmed because of the government’s imposition of a job culture on a profession. Punch-in punch-out shiftwork is anathema to most hospital doctors, and this evidence now shows it also puts patients at risk. The Department of Health must start putting patient safety before its commitment to one-size-fits-all European legislation.

We now urge PMETB to get its head out of the sand and take some action. Training programmes were approved when doctors worked longer hours and had closer patient contact. Is the training nowadays as good as it used to be? It is about time that the 'regulators of training' woke up to what is happening. Not after another survey, not in a year's time, but right now.

Remedy vs the GMC - an update

We do not yet have a date for the next part of our judicial review. In the meantime our lawyers have been poring over the judgement from the first hearing (on the Bailii database for anyone interested) and preparing our grounds.

Don't forget that you can still donate money - see the Remedy website for details, www.remedyuk.org

Deaneries, employment agencies & doctors' choices

When it became clear that Deaneries were, or could possibly be, employment agencies, a ripple of panic went around the Department of Health. Employment Agency legislation was designed for the protection of job-seekers from unscrupulous recruiters.

In order to prevent Deaneries for having to comply, the Government decided it would introduce new legislation to specifically exempt them from these inconvenient constraints. There has been a period of consultation, to which both Remedy and the BMA have sent submissions, and the matter was to have been resolved by September. However it has now been delayed. The consultation can be viewed at the Berr website which makes it clear that Deaneries currently operate as employment agencies within the meaning of the legislation.

One of the most important parts of this legisation is the requirement that Employment Agencies cannot subject or threaten to subject a relevant work-seeker to any detriment on the grounds that he or she wishes to terminate their contract between themselves - see our analysis. We have heard that some Deaneries are still telling applicants that if they accept an offer of a 'training programme' then they must withdraw from all other job applications. There have even been fairly unsubtle attempts at coercion on this.

It appears to us that this 'threat' explicitly breaches Section 6 of the 2003 Act. If you are asked to sign any agreement which contains this threat then you can complain to the Employment Agency regulators at http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/employment/employment-agencies/page27003.html

In the meantime we have seen a posting on a doctors' forum describing some recent Deanery goings-on in ST4 recruitment. It alleges that 'someone who was in charge of shortlisting cocked up' and that there were '50 extra applications hidden in their inbox not even been seen by admin'. The rumours are that the Deanery was forced to interview every eligible candidate. We are still trying to find out whether there is any truth in this, and how much disruption this caused to NHS Trusts.

We are especially keen to determine whether any of the applicants were disadvantaged by this unusual action. We would welcome any further information, which you can send to our office anonymously if you wish.

The Team

RemedyUK