LEADERS of the largest nurses' union, the non-TUC Royal College of
Nursing, yesterday voted overwhelmingly to jettison its no-strike rule
in a reversal of a 79-year policy of moderation.
Their angry reaction to the Government's ''miserly'' pay offer of 1%
nationally, with the prospect of an additional 2% by way of local
bargaining, resulted in a 488 to 3 vote, with two absentions, at the
RCN's annual congress in Harrogate.
The RCN's 300,000 members will now be balloted on the new rule, which
allows for limited action.
The ballot will take place next month and a two-thirds majority is
needed for the rule change to be endorsed, and even then there would
need to be a further legal industrial action ballot before action could
be taken.
Yesterday's dramatic decision opens the way to possible joint action
with the TUC health unions, who are already preparing the ground for
industrial action ballots among their 600,000 members, in protest at
broadly similar pay offers.
Mr Bob Abberley, head of health for Unison, which has some 440,000
members employed in the NHS, welcomed the RCN decision.
''If RCN members back this decision in their ballot, the Government
will never again be able to drive a wedge between the RCN and the other
half of the nursing workforce in Unison,'' he said.
It would mean that college members would be able to stand shoulder to
shoulder with Unison's nurses and other health staff this year, in an
effective nationwide campaign to secure a fair pay deal for all staff.
However, patients could rest assured that all the unions were pledged
to take action that would not put them at risk, Mr Abberley added.
In an opening speech to RCN delegates, Miss Judith Hunter, chair of
the RCN governing council, called for support for the change -- and won
a standing ovation.
Miss Hunter said that, while the fundamental principle of not harming
patients remained the same, conditions in the NHS had changed. The RCN
would still never take industrial action which would harm patients.
However, she went on: ''What has changed is the environment in which
we nurses are working in. It has changed beyond recognition. Now nurses
are in an environment that talks numbers, data, winners and losers,
statistics, and market forces. These have become the fundamental aspects
of caring.''
Miss Christine Hancock, the RCN general secretary, said directly after
the vote it had showed clearly that the Government had pushed nurses too
far -- the move was not just over pay but over changing working
conditions in the health service.
Asked about the likelihood of industrial action, she said: ''This is
no poker game. There is real concern and real anger.''
Nurses were concerned not for themselves personally, but for the
''reality of what is happening in the health service at the moment''.
However, Health Minister Gerald Malone warned that any sort of action
by nurses ''would mean patients feel the pain''. In a statement, he said
he regretted the RCN decision, adding that he felt potential action was
still a long way off.
''The RCN appears to be labouring under the illusion that limited
industrial action would not impact on patients. Any sort of action would
mean patients feel the pain. Simply put, if nurses do not fill in forms,
trusts will not be able to treat patients and waiting times will rise.
And what forms does the RCN have in mind?''
He claimed that 321 NHS trusts out of a total of 485 had made offers,
three quarters of them at 3% and said that he expected the remaining 164
to have come forward with offers by the end of the month.
Later, Miss Hancock told a news conference it was ''very difficult''
to tell whether nurses would take action in the current pay dispute.
Latest figures showed 115 trusts had made offers worth 3% with no
strings attached -- the condition of the RCN. She believed 300 offers
were needed for victory.
She emphasised repeatedly that nurses would not harm patients and that
industrial action remained for the RCN an action of last resort.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article