 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Laboratory / August 2005A4C banding (UK)
Anyone got any updates on where BMS grades have fitted in to the A4C bandings ? FWIW in my neck of the woods we have MLA Band 2 Trainee BMS Band 3 BMS (all of 'em) Band 5 Senior BMS Band 6 Chief BMS Band 7 Tribunals, here we come !! > Anyone got any updates on where BMS grades have fitted in to the A4C > bandings ? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Tribunals, here we come !! That doesn't look good. Which end of the bands are the points scores? There was a post on Dave Houlliston's group saying that across the country the majority of experienced BMS 1s were 6, BMS 2s 7 and one BMS 3 8b. I don't know how many this covered though. If others come out on the higher bands then it should be picked up during consistancy checking. Dave >> Anyone got any updates on where BMS grades have fitted in to the A4C >> bandings ? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > That doesn't look good. > Which end of the bands are the points scores? Dunno - we got the gradings this pm. It would seem that scoring was abandoned in favour of "salary-matching" > There was a post on Dave Houlliston's group saying that across the country > the majority of experienced BMS 1s were 6, BMS 2s 7 and one BMS 3 8b. > I don't know how many this covered though. I find that group has very complex posts that don't actually say much :o) > If others come out on the higher bands then it should be picked up during > consistancy checking. Is there to be any national consistancy checking ? >> That doesn't look good. >> Which end of the bands are the points scores? > > Dunno - we got the gradings this pm. It would seem that scoring was > abandoned in favour of "salary-matching" You need the scores and the justification for each factor. >> There was a post on Dave Houlliston's group saying that across the >> country the majority of experienced BMS 1s were 6, BMS 2s 7 and one >> BMS 3 8b. I don't know how many this covered though. > > I find that group has very complex posts that don't actually say much > :o) I know what you mean, but there's still lots of info and someone on there is collating the bandings. >> If others come out on the higher bands then it should be picked up >> during consistancy checking. > > Is there to be any national consistancy checking ? Yes, although if the content isn't in your JD in the first place then nothing will happen. Dave Where are you and who the hell agredd to abandon scoring in favour of salary matching, There is pressure to get this finished but also to get this right!! >>> That doesn't look good. >>> Which end of the bands are the points scores? [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Dave > Where are you and who the hell agredd to abandon scoring in favour of > salary matching, Deepest Kent. As for agreeing, I'm still to meet anyone who agreed for A4C in the first place, let alone any of the details of it's implementation. > There is pressure to get this finished but also to get this right!! > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >> >> Dave >> Where are you and who the hell agredd to abandon scoring in favour of >> salary matching, > > Deepest Kent. > As for agreeing, I'm still to meet anyone who agreed for A4C in the > first place, let alone any of the details of it's implementation. Well I'm not travelling all the way to Kent so you can meet someone :-) When all this is sorted it will be interesting to compare bandings where there is a strong staff side and where there isn't. Have you heard the bandings from any other local trusts? If they come out as hoped, then you'll have even worse recruitment problems than now. Hopefully some BMS 1 band 6 JDs will appear so band 5s can compare them to their own. It's KSF next Dave any further movement in Kent, For information of approx 42 Trusts so far with Pathology results only 6 have 2=6 1 =6 is the majority at between 60 and 70% of Trusts You seem to be in a small minority >>> Where are you and who the hell agredd to abandon scoring in favour of >>> salary matching, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Dave "Dan Smith" <dansmith17@yahoo.com> wrote in news:FiGGe.14550$zp1.13953 @newsfe7-win.ntli.net: > any further movement in Kent, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You seem to be in a small minority Dan Any results from Welsh trusts yet? Dave sorry nothing yet even on a confidential basis. > "Dan Smith" <dansmith17@yahoo.com> wrote in news:FiGGe.14550$zp1.13953 > @newsfe7-win.ntli.net: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Dave > any further movement in Kent, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You seem to be in a small minority The latest I've heard is that staff an hour's drive up the motorway who did have 1=6, 2=7 have since been downgraded so 1=5 & 2=6. Why on earth wasn't such grading decided nationally ? >>>> Where are you and who the hell agredd to abandon scoring in favour of >>>> salary matching, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> >> Dave >> any further movement in Kent, >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Why on earth wasn't such grading decided nationally ? It has been decided nationally that's what the profiles are, but you can't assume that because you have a certain job title the person isn't working at a higher or possibly lower level. The problem is how complete are the JDs or possibly how robust the matching process is. Have experienced BMS 1s agreed the same JD as newly qualified? Do the JDs mention anything about giving advice, supervision or training? Do the JDs use language which conveys the need for experience or complex nature of the work? Maybe Dan with his contacts can find out how the other trust downgraded it's staff. I presume there must be appeals over this? Dave >>> any further movement in Kent, >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > can't assume that because you have a certain job title the person isn't > working at a higher or possibly lower level. Surely this is just an excercise in semantics ? > The problem is how complete are the JDs or possibly how robust the > matching process is. > Have experienced BMS 1s agreed the same JD as newly qualified? > Do the JDs mention anything about giving advice, supervision or training? > Do the JDs use language which conveys the need for experience or complex > nature of the work? All that's going to happen is that those with bad gradings copy the job descriptions of those with good gradings and then appeal. > Maybe Dan with his contacts can find out how the other trust downgraded > it's staff. > > I presume there must be appeals over this? I beleive the unions have agreed to restart the whole process over again. >>>> any further movement in Kent, >>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Surely this is just an excercise in semantics ? It's probably the best way to compare jobs in the NHS to end up with equal pay for equal jobs or at least A4Cs version of the jobs. How else do you compare the jobs of lets say an MLA to a cleaner? >> The problem is how complete are the JDs or possibly how robust the >> matching process is. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > All that's going to happen is that those with bad gradings copy the > job descriptions of those with good gradings and then appeal. If that's what people do then the JDs should be changed which might be easier said than done. >> Maybe Dan with his contacts can find out how the other trust >> downgraded it's staff. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I beleive the unions have agreed to restart the whole process over > again. Good, let's hope they get it right this time. Dave >>>>> any further movement in Kent, >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > equal pay for equal jobs or at least A4Cs version of the jobs. > How else do you compare the jobs of lets say an MLA to a cleaner? Yes but it's not acheived this, has it? We have jobs demonstrably the same, such as a trainee in haematology in my lab and a trainee in haematology in the lab up the road and now we are paying them differeently. > Yes but it's not acheived this, has it? We have jobs demonstrably the > same, such as a trainee in haematology in my lab and a trainee in > haematology in the lab up the road and now we are paying them > differeently. Anomalies will occur and obviously need to be highlighted and corrected either up or down. Is it a difference in JDs or matching? Anyway that should be sorted when QA happens. How else do you compare jobs? Dave >> Yes but it's not acheived this, has it? We have jobs demonstrably the >> same, such as a trainee in haematology in my lab and a trainee in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > How else do you compare jobs? Don't know - don't care :o) I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs all about anyway ? We seem to be in a daft scheme whereby there's now parity created between the cleaners and the car park attendants and imbalance created between the urine bench & the electrolyte station. Why wasn't it all done nationally in that nationally ALL ubergrupen-radiographers should have been graded as band Z and then any local discrepancies could be sorted later. I'm now in the position whereby I and the chief up the road (ex-college pal) are actively losing basic grade staff to a third equidistant lab who pays a band higher. OK, we'll get upgraded eventually, but in the meantime one lab has solved it staffing problems at the expense of two others. >> Yes but it's not acheived this, has it? We have jobs demonstrably the >> same, such as a trainee in haematology in my lab and a trainee in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > How else do you compare jobs? Don't know - don't care :o) I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs all about anyway ? We seem to be in a daft scheme whereby there's now parity created between the cleaners and the car park attendants and imbalance created between the urine bench & the electrolyte station. Why wasn't it all done nationally in that nationally ALL ubergrupen-radiographers should have been graded as band Z and then any local discrepancies could be sorted later. I'm now in the position whereby I and the chief up the road (ex-college pal) are actively losing basic grade staff to a third equidistant lab who pays a band higher. OK, we'll get upgraded eventually, but in the meantime one lab has solved it staffing problems at the expense of two others. "Manky Badger" said:: >>> Yes but it's not acheived this, has it? We have jobs demonstrably the >>> same, such as a trainee in haematology in my lab and a trainee in [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs all > about anyway ? The problem was unless a way was found of comparing all jobs in NHS the NHS was facing a tidal wave of equal pay claims by multiple overlapping proffessions. There is still a risk of some of this as some of the groups who have gained are theoretically entitled to make claims for backpay going back 7 years, and some no win-no fee solicitors are sniffing around. At the end of the process the only claims allowed will be "rest of NHS" v Doctors and the Midwives are preparing one v Obstetricians. > We seem to be in a daft scheme whereby there's now parity created between > the cleaners and the car park attendants and imbalance created between the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it > staffing problems at the expense of two others. Being cynical third lab got it right, result instant recruitment problem, thus go do it again. The lab North of you seems to be in the strange position were initially they got it right then their Trust management found out about you and tried to use that as the excuse to drag them down this will be a problem across the country, nationaly 1=6, 2=7 is deliverable but it will not just happen if people sit on their hands and whinge, some else should have done the work for me, why do I have to help update a JD or read about Job evaluation. However I have a lot of sympathy for labs that did things in good faith months and months and months ago because HR demanded it and now find themselves with poor results as they at the time did not have access to advice which became available later as other sites went through the process, as profiles were reviewed etc. The final versions of the BMS profiles were only available on April 8th, with between 6 weeks and 3 months between matching and results published to work out finnacial implications for each individual many of the results available now would have been matched to the earlier versions which gave less differentiation between the 5 and 6 profiles. Bottom line 5 needs degree only no further training not even logbook 6 needs postgrduate training 7 needs Masters level knowledge if your 2's are matching to 6 they do not need FIBMS or Masters, in which case 6 is right, or you did not make the JD's clear in which case it will be fixed at review. Good luck and if any of your Grade 1's want to move to Portsmouth, Plymouth, Southampton, Bournemouth, Reading, Oxford, etc etc we would be happy to take them as well. > Don't know - don't care :o) > I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs > all about anyway ? I take it then that you didn't attend an awareness session? Mind you we have a lab of nearly 130 staff and I delivered 2 sessions to a total of 12 people. I amazes me with something so far reaching how people can show so little interest. I suppose they just assume that someone else will sort it Dave >> Don't know - don't care :o) >> I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I amazes me with something so far reaching how people can show so little > interest. I suppose they just assume that someone else will sort it I've had endless "awareness sessions" and "your questions answered seminars", none of which seem to actually say anything along the lines of why we are doing this. > I've had endless "awareness sessions" and "your questions answered > seminars", none of which seem to actually say anything along the lines > of why we are doing this. If the sessions were carried out correctly then why we're doing this is the first thing. Dave >> Don't know - don't care :o) >> I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I amazes me with something so far reaching how people can show so little > interest. I suppose they just assume that someone else will sort it I've had endless "awareness sessions" and "your questions answered seminars", none of which seem to actually say anything along the lines of why we are doing this. >>> Don't know - don't care :o) >>> I think I'm missing the point here. What is this need to compare jobs [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > seminars", none of which seem to actually say anything along the lines of > why we are doing this. Poxy thing keeps duplicating my posts - wish it wouldn't !! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.