Written report as tabled, including legal forms

Eric reported on Motions from the Ambulance Sector for the Health Care Group Conference

Health Care Conference Delegates, 7^th – 9^th April in Harrogate. It was agreed to elect delegates at the next meeting of the Branch Committee.

Congestion Charging. Eric reported on discussion with the Service over our demand that members should not have to pay who work in the Congestion Charging Zone. We suggested that the change should be mentioned in the same way as Subs. Eric reported that he was very pleased to say the Service agreed to pay staff but disagreed with the way in which the Service have decided to pay, by paying all staff in the Zone irrespective of whether they drive into the Zone. On a positive note, the Service has agreed to discuss a London Allowance.

Eric confirmed that no general exemptions were being made. In answer to a question from Steve Harbord, Eric explained that it was still unclear as to how the Service would make the savings to fund any agreed allowance. The question would be tabled at the next Staff Council. A set of internal procedures to govern the scheme is being drawn up

A special Health Care Group Conference will take place, added to the Conference in April, to consider the questions of the new NHS Pay Structure, known as Agenda for Change. Eric reminded the Branch how important it is for members in the Ambulance Service that the Agenda for Change proposals are agreed, both in the Special Conference and in the ensuing ballot of all members.

Eric outlined the specific benefits for Ambulance Workers in a range of areas, including unsociable hour payments, London Allowances, working week and so on.

All of this makes it important for the Branch to be effectively represented at the Special Health Group Conference.

Eric also explained the potential significance of Ambulance Workers on non-Whitley Contracts being brought back into National Terms and Conditions.

Eric also explained the changes for Ambulance Workers should the Agenda for Change proposals not be implemented.

George Achilles said that Management are saying that the Service was offered Early Implementor status but that UNISON had turned it down. Eric explained that was not the case. We did not put ourselves forward after seeking advice from the wider union. He also held the belief that the LAS would not have been selected as an Early Implementer as it forms too large a proportion of the Ambulance Sector to be seen as effectively a pilot.

Steve Harbord said that we should not be voting for some members in the NHS to lose out.

Eric replied that those who may lose out as a result of existing conditions will be protected for a number of years. He stated that the Service Group Executive still hoped that nobody will lose out.

Phil Thompson reminded members not to believe everything they read in the papers. Those opposed to the proposals have been quoted, wrongly, in the press that 10% of staff will lose out. He also outlined the fear that the real alternative to these Agenda for Change proposals would be local pay bargaining.

In answer to Paul Leggett’s further question about Early Implementers, Eric explained how decisions were taken on choosing Early Implementers, and that the decision was not finally that of the Branch. Phil explained that the LAS is simply too big for the Service to be an Early Implementer. There was an additional problem created by the time scale preventing us from consulting members on the proposal.

Jenny Wade referred to the email exchange between Eric Roberts and

Keith Andrews, Director of the P.T.S., which Eric had circulated. It was agreed that Keith Andrews should visit Darent Valley to explain the situation properly.

Jenny also reported on inadequate equipment supplying.

In answer to a question from Paul Leggett, Eddie Brand explained that the P.T.S. budget was £16million of which about £1.8million is consumed with management costs.

Eric Roberts explained the continuing difficulties created for this future of P.T.S. by the Government’s refusal to remove the requirement on Trusts to Tender for Patient Transport Services.

Steve Harbord proposed that members should not work for St. John’s Ambulance Service when Tendering (as happened recently) for a P.T.S. Contract.

Eric Roberts argued that the onus is upon the Service, who should be asking staff not to.

Andrea Shields expressed a widespread anger over the future of P.T.S., where so many A+E members started their careers. Also that it is a scandal that P.T.S. are not de-fib trained, when so many other jobs outside the Ambulance Service have that training.

It was proposed that the Branch Secretary should write to the Service on the St. John’s issue, and that is should be lodged with the staff council. This was agreed.

Phil Thompson gave a Returning Officer’s report, reminding the Branch of the agreed timetable for the forthcoming Branch Officer Elections.

The question of the organisation of private sector ambulance workers was raised. Phil invited the Branch to consider changing the way in which private ambulance workers and to consider recruiting them into the Branch. After lengthy discussion it was agree that they should not change.