Trade Union Anger over Vote Requirement.

[mph1977]

Ganglandboss said:

Are you saying a typical nurse will start on the bottom of band 5 and get an annual increment until they reach the top (£28,180)? If so, that is pretty similar to what I was on as an electrician at a university, and I do not think that is a bad salary.

A Registered Nurse , after completing a Full Bachelors degree including 2300 hours of clinical practice placement will enter on band 5 ,

after completing a further Degree or Masters levle Supporting Learners in Practice to allow them to mentor and assessor students and probably further academic study at degree or Masters level in their chosen speciality they will have reached the the top increment after 7 years, at which point they may remain for the next 35 years as there is no guaranteed promotions .

[lauda]

mph1977 said:

after completing a further Degree or Masters levle Supporting Learners in Practice to allow them to mentor and assessor students and probably further academic study at degree or Masters level in their chosen speciality they will have reached the the top increment after 7 years, at which point they may remain for the next 35 years as there is no guaranteed promotions .

Out of interest, would they need to have taken those additional qualifications in order to have reached the top increment after seven years or do the increments happen regardless of additional skills acquired?

[mph1977]

lauda said:

mph1977 said:

after completing a further Degree or Masters levle Supporting Learners in Practice to allow them to mentor and assessor students and probably further academic study at degree or Masters level in their chosen speciality they will have reached the the top increment after 7 years, at which point they may remain for the next 35 years as there is no guaranteed promotions .

Out of interest, would they need to have taken those additional qualifications in order to have reached the top increment after seven years or do the increments happen regardless of additional skills acquired?

Most KSF profiles for Band 5 Registered Nurses include at the 'upper gateway' point (couple of increments off the top) holding SLiP (or a legacy version of the mentorship / assessor course) and additional study / training ( although you might not have to have done them as academic modules vs multiple of the large / harder CPD courses and internal (to employer) competencies ... IIRC the 'standard' skeleton KSF profiles did .

Each increment requires the Line Manager to sign off that the annual review /PDR has happened andthat the last PDR's action plan was completed sufficiently for progression.

[Ganglandboss]

mph1977 said:

lauda said:

mph1977 said:

after completing a further Degree or Masters levle Supporting Learners in Practice to allow them to mentor and assessor students and probably further academic study at degree or Masters level in their chosen speciality they will have reached the the top increment after 7 years, at which point they may remain for the next 35 years as there is no guaranteed promotions .

Out of interest, would they need to have taken those additional qualifications in order to have reached the top increment after seven years or do the increments happen regardless of additional skills acquired?

Most KSF profiles for Band 5 Registered Nurses include at the 'upper gateway' point (couple of increments off the top) holding SLiP (or a legacy version of the mentorship / assessor course) and additional study / training ( although you might not have to have done them as academic modules vs multiple of the large / harder CPD courses and internal (to employer) competencies ... IIRC the 'standard' skeleton KSF profiles did .

Each increment requires the Line Manager to sign off that the annual review /PDR has happened andthat the last PDR's action plan was completed sufficiently for progression.

So is what you are saying, nurses have to do additional training to progress to the top of the scale? If so, is this training funded by the employer and undertaken in the course of their duties? Will a nurse who enters at the bottom of the scale normally reach the top of the scale without having to be selected for promotion?

[mph1977]

Ganglandboss said:

mph1977 said:

lauda said:

mph1977 said:

after completing a further Degree or Masters levle Supporting Learners in Practice to allow them to mentor and assessor students and probably further academic study at degree or Masters level in their chosen speciality they will have reached the the top increment after 7 years, at which point they may remain for the next 35 years as there is no guaranteed promotions .

Out of interest, would they need to have taken those additional qualifications in order to have reached the top increment after seven years or do the increments happen regardless of additional skills acquired?

Most KSF profiles for Band 5 Registered Nurses include at the 'upper gateway' point (couple of increments off the top) holding SLiP (or a legacy version of the mentorship / assessor course) and additional study / training ( although you might not have to have done them as academic modules vs multiple of the large / harder CPD courses and internal (to employer) competencies ... IIRC the 'standard' skeleton KSF profiles did .

Each increment requires the Line Manager to sign off that the annual review /PDR has happened andthat the last PDR's action plan was completed sufficiently for progression.

So is what you are saying, nurses have to do additional training to progress to the top of the scale?

yes

[quote] If so, is this training funded by the employer

No, it is funded centrally from top sliced funds as the DoH sets the numbers of students etc and also wants a full range of placement environments across NHS, private and third sector organisations.

[quote]and undertaken in the course of their duties?

It is increasingly rare for full study leave to be given - so much of the time the course is undertaken in unpaid overtime in addition to the private study required ( which typically was undertaken in people;s own time anyway)

[quote]
Will a nurse who enters at the bottom of the scale normally reach the top of the scale without having to be selected for promotion?

Yes because it's an incremental pay grade where the full 'rate for the job' is the rate of the increments at or above the upper gateway. Increments are not promotions - although the first few increments only mandate a sub set of the skills .

[arp1]

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

[lauda]

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

I'm interested to know why you think this is a vile attempt by the government. Is it really that wrong to require the majority of members of a union to approve action which can be massively disruptive to the wider public?

[arp1]

It is wrong when the government is changing the goal posts whilst saying do as I say not as I do.

[lauda]

arp1 said:

It is wrong when the government is changing the goal posts whilst saying do as I say not as I do.

Not sure I follow what you're saying. Why is what the government is proposing vile?

[Du1point8]

lauda said:

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

I'm interested to know why you think this is a vile attempt by the government. Is it really that wrong to require the majority of members of a union to approve action which can be massively disruptive to the wider public?

I have often wondered this...

Also why can't the union be sued for time and money lost by the innocent public?

I bet you that if even one bank decided to go on strike at the end of the month and shut everything down for a few days, they would be made to pay fines, compensation, etc.

[Ganglandboss]

arp1 said:

It is wrong when the government is changing the goal posts whilst saying do as I say not as I do.

What do you mean, 'do as I say not as I do'? I had no idea the government were organising strikes.

[crankedup]

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

[lauda]

crankedup said:

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

And the unions can't help but continue to act in a way that motivates them to do it.

Whilst the rest of the non-unionised population is generally apathetic at best.

[London424]

crankedup said:

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

Is it really that onerous to stick an 'X' on a piece of paper and return it in an already stamped envelope?

[crankedup]

lauda said:

crankedup said:

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

And the unions can't help but continue to act in a way that motivates them to do it.

Whilst the rest of the non-unionised population is generally apathetic at best.

Both democratic oganisations that REPRESENT those that elected them. Unions for workers and Government for general public. Remind me how many in terms of % of the population turned out to vote for the Tories?

[crankedup]

London424 said:

crankedup said:

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

Is it really that onerous to stick an 'X' on a piece of paper and return it in an already stamped envelope?

What has that got to do with anything? The question is one of democratic Rights, if I choose to place a vote and have been invited to do so then I exercise my Right or not as I please to do. I think in most situations it's called abstention, perfectly acceptable from the Boardroom to General Elections to Unions Workers, unless the Union workers are being discriminated against as this would appear to be the case.

[London424]

crankedup said:

London424 said:

crankedup said:

arp1 said:

We need to remember that in this case it is not public vs private sector (which I have been sucked into debating) but the vile attempts at the government foisting upon the trade unions such conditions. I really do hope that if they do come into force that it will lead to less apathy within the unions and get members to start attending meetings again and actually voting. It's not difficult.

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

Is it really that onerous to stick an 'X' on a piece of paper and return it in an already stamped envelope?

What has that got to do with anything? The question is one of democratic Rights, if I choose to place a vote and have been invited to do so then I exercise my Right or not as I please to do. I think in most situations it's called abstention, perfectly acceptable from the Boardroom to General Elections to Unions Workers, unless the Union workers are being discriminated against as this would appear to be the case.

And the government are saying that when a 50:50 choice is on the table a certain percentage of the membership have to register a vote. Doesn't sound 'undemocratic' to me.

[lauda]

crankedup said:

Both democratic oganisations that REPRESENT those that elected them. Unions for workers and Government for general public. Remind me how many in terms of % of the population turned out to vote for the Tories?

Oh, that bullst argument again? I answered that for you on page 13 of this thread. You must have missed it.

Apples and oranges.

[Du1point8]

crankedup said:

lauda said:

crankedup said:

Agreed, the Tories simply cannot help themselves but make every effort to bang the last nail into the Unions coffin, it's their default policy. 'All in it together' never sounded so hollow.

And the unions can't help but continue to act in a way that motivates them to do it.

Whilst the rest of the non-unionised population is generally apathetic at best.

Both democratic oganisations that REPRESENT those that elected them. Unions for workers and Government for general public. Remind me how many in terms of % of the population turned out to vote for the Tories?

Blackmail to get something then getting doing the vote to get the go ahead to blackmail is not the same as getting the vote to improve a country.

Unions have a time and a place to improve conditions so people are not working 48hours straight, etc, but to constantly blackmail on pay or strike is not what that they should be there for.

Still at least I hope the labour/union money laundering has now stopped.

[arp1]

You need to remember that many unions do action short of strike prior to a strike being called.