Ambulance tea break death
Discussion
Johnnytheboy said:
Mr_annie_vxr said:
grumbledoak said:
The emergency services don't get to work to rule or strike, for me.
That woman is quite likely dead because he wanted the doughnut that was 'due to him'.
No rights for paramedics. How dare they insist on being paid for working. I absolutely agree with you. They should work without pay every day. They should work 70 hours and be paid for 30. They should have their money reduced by cutting their hours but then be forced to work the hours cut to save money for free. That woman is quite likely dead because he wanted the doughnut that was 'due to him'.
JumboBeef said:
Lost_BMW said:
Chrisgr31 said:
The reality is that this issue is caused by the management of the NHS and Ambulance Trusts trying to make the service more "efficient". They are doing this by trying to make the forntline work harded rather than making themselves redundant.
The outcome is that ambulance stations are being closed, and ambulances can now work anywhere throughout huge areas leading to the reliance on GPS etc. However to hit targets which call for them to get to calls within an average of x minutes they will tend to be based in population areas as there will be more calls. So dont need an ambulance in a hurry in a rural area.
However ambulance crews now tend to be so busy that if they answered every call they wouldn't get a break so it seems to me they have to take a break, and be free from their radio and callouts. After all this guys colleague calls his behaviour disgraceful, but she didnt take the call, and why not? Because she was at home and unavailable. So she is on a break at home and doesn't get criticised for not taking the call, he is on a break but still at the station and does get criticised.
Guess the answer is for them all to take breaks away from the radio!
Or to invest properly in a well planned needs level such that if one medic/van is 'off' for a deserved or mandatory rest, others are deployed in their place = no forced gap in service/ availability. But they might lose a few execs. of course to pay for this, so optimistic I guess!The outcome is that ambulance stations are being closed, and ambulances can now work anywhere throughout huge areas leading to the reliance on GPS etc. However to hit targets which call for them to get to calls within an average of x minutes they will tend to be based in population areas as there will be more calls. So dont need an ambulance in a hurry in a rural area.
However ambulance crews now tend to be so busy that if they answered every call they wouldn't get a break so it seems to me they have to take a break, and be free from their radio and callouts. After all this guys colleague calls his behaviour disgraceful, but she didnt take the call, and why not? Because she was at home and unavailable. So she is on a break at home and doesn't get criticised for not taking the call, he is on a break but still at the station and does get criticised.
Guess the answer is for them all to take breaks away from the radio!
. . hardly worth bothering to respond really. Jesus!
Lost_BMW said:
Did you not spot the word 'invest'? Or maybe we are limited by some unalterable law of procurement to one ambulance per area. Why don't we cut back to one per county? Or one for a region? Or . .
. . hardly worth bothering to respond really. Jesus!
this is the crux of the ignorant armchair experts arguments, they view all 999 services as being the fire brigade i.e. sat on their arses waiting for jobs, most people are suprised about few police or ambulance resources are available or that an ambulance might run 50 miles even in a supposedly urban service to ensure that 999 cover is preserved on the fringes of the service( as i've done a number of times on support shifts to make sure an 'urgent' detail will be covered without depriving an area of it's 999 resources ). . hardly worth bothering to respond really. Jesus!
additional ambulances just get pulled to where there are the most 999 calls or urgents aobut to time out anyway
Edited by mph1977 on Friday 5th November 23:59
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion 
You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
When it is quiet we get sent out on stand by as well which often means sitting in a lay by for 40 mins without facilitates or having a cup of tea waiting for next shout.
Ruskie said:
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
When it is quiet we get sent out on stand by as well which often means sitting in a lay by for 40 mins without facilitates or having a cup of tea waiting for next shout.
Ruskie said:
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
When it is quiet we get sent out on stand by as well which often means sitting in a lay by for 40 mins without facilitates or having a cup of tea waiting for next shout.
Those who work in busy areas NEED their breaks. Those who work in very rural areas do not. Those in between: difficult to say as some days can be quiet and so you have a lot of downtime and other days you can be hammered.
I have worked in very rural, suburban and city centres so can understand the problems of breaks/no breaks in different situations.
Edited by JumboBeef on Saturday 6th November 09:41
JumboBeef said:
Ruskie said:
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
When it is quiet we get sent out on stand by as well which often means sitting in a lay by for 40 mins without facilitates or having a cup of tea waiting for next shout.
Those who work in busy areas NEED their breaks. Those who work in very rural areas do not. Those in between: difficult to say as some days can be quiet and so you have a lot of downtime and other days you can be hammered.
I have worked in very rural, suburban and city centres so can understand the problems of breaks/no breaks in different situations.
Edited by JumboBeef on Saturday 6th November 09:41
Having read through this post, I can't believe that there are people in the Ambulance service arguing that having a cup of tea is more important than saving someones life. FFS, your'e in a job where one of your main duties is to respond to a 999 call, if you are the only person available, and you decide not to go because you are on your tea break, then that is inexcusable - no further discussion needed, if you don;t like it, resign and get another job where you can have a nice uninterrupted tea break at 11 o'clock without the inconvenience of having to rush out to try and save some ones life.
FFS I will lay this out for the hard of thinking.
1. Ambulance staff are people.
2. Ambulance staff are entitled to contractual breaks.
3. Most NHS staff are on pay freezes.
4. A lot of sections of the NHS are understaffed meaning that even when not at work staff are getting calls to see if they can come in to cover shifts.
The guy in the story just made a s
tty decision, but sometimes these decisions need making or your 12hr shift becomes 13hrs with no breaks. Without knowing the full sequence of events, and any contributing situations we can't comment.
1. Ambulance staff are people.
2. Ambulance staff are entitled to contractual breaks.
3. Most NHS staff are on pay freezes.
4. A lot of sections of the NHS are understaffed meaning that even when not at work staff are getting calls to see if they can come in to cover shifts.
The guy in the story just made a s
tty decision, but sometimes these decisions need making or your 12hr shift becomes 13hrs with no breaks. Without knowing the full sequence of events, and any contributing situations we can't comment. Ruskie said:
JumboBeef said:
Ruskie said:
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
When it is quiet we get sent out on stand by as well which often means sitting in a lay by for 40 mins without facilitates or having a cup of tea waiting for next shout.
Those who work in busy areas NEED their breaks. Those who work in very rural areas do not. Those in between: difficult to say as some days can be quiet and so you have a lot of downtime and other days you can be hammered.
I have worked in very rural, suburban and city centres so can understand the problems of breaks/no breaks in different situations.
Edited by JumboBeef on Saturday 6th November 09:41
JensenA said:
Having read through this post, I can't believe that there are people in the Ambulance service arguing that having a cup of tea is more important than saving someones life. FFS, your'e in a job where one of your main duties is to respond to a 999 call, if you are the only person available, and you decide not to go because you are on your tea break, then that is inexcusable - no further discussion needed, if you don;t like it, resign and get another job where you can have a nice uninterrupted tea break at 11 o'clock without the inconvenience of having to rush out to try and save some ones life.
No one has said that. We are entitled to breaks. Morally it is a different story. Me personally I would never have protected meal breaks as IMO it's morally wrong however other people think different.You have no idea if what it's like to work front line which is evident in the tone of your post. These threads always have armchair experts giving ill thought out opinions on things they have no experience of.
JensenA said:
Having read through this post, I can't believe that there are people in the Ambulance service arguing that having a cup of tea is more important than saving someones life. FFS, your'e in a job where one of your main duties is to respond to a 999 call, if you are the only person available, and you decide not to go because you are on your tea break, then that is inexcusable - no further discussion needed, if you don;t like it, resign and get another job where you can have a nice uninterrupted tea break at 11 o'clock without the inconvenience of having to rush out to try and save some ones life.
How about a surgeon? If he worked straight through his 12 hour+ shift without a break, he could squeeze another op in there, thus saving another life. Or maybe RNLI? Don't bring them back in, just keep them permanently out there at sea, ready to go? Drs and nurses also don't need breaks, think of how much extra patient care there could be if they worked non-stop. Midwives, A&E staff, trauma teams, even vets: none of them should ever have a break because what happens to whoever needs them when they do?Get the picture?
Also, consider this. Your employer employs you for 40 hours per week. He pays you for your meal break time, and in return you stay in the office, and are happy to leave/bin whatever you are eating at any time during your break if the phone rings and you get a job (which could last hours).
Then your employer reduces your working week to 37.5 hours, which means your meal breaks are now NOT paid. In return, he offers you £250 pa (about £1 per working day) to stay in your office, unable to leave. Even going to the toilet has to be a quick job.
So then the phone rings. If you have turned down your £1/day and don't go out, you risk begin nailed to a cross like this poor sod. If you do go, you will be paid the princely sum of £5 for up to 45 minutes extra work (overtime) and for the loss of your 'downtime', break, food, cup of tea and leisurely toilet break: you might not see your break again that day.
Regardless of what your job is, would you do it? No? When why should ambulance staff?
Ruskie said:
JensenA said:
Having read through this post, I can't believe that there are people in the Ambulance service arguing that having a cup of tea is more important than saving someones life. FFS, your'e in a job where one of your main duties is to respond to a 999 call, if you are the only person available, and you decide not to go because you are on your tea break, then that is inexcusable - no further discussion needed, if you don;t like it, resign and get another job where you can have a nice uninterrupted tea break at 11 o'clock without the inconvenience of having to rush out to try and save some ones life.
No one has said that. We are entitled to breaks. Morally it is a different story. Me personally I would never have protected meal breaks as IMO it's morally wrong however other people think different.You have no idea if what it's like to work front line which is evident in the tone of your post. These threads always have armchair experts giving ill thought out opinions on things they have no experience of.
Edit: search 'meal breaks', and you get this: "You are required to work [insert]* hours per week, on average, excluding meal breaks. [Note: The standard hours of work for full time staff shall be 37.5 hours per week excluding meal breaks]."
Edited by JumboBeef on Saturday 6th November 12:27
jamieboy said:
mph1977 said:
jamieboy said:
What does an ambulance driver / paramedic do when they're on duty, but not on a 'shout'?
irrelevant to the discussion You're the second person to say that, and I don't see it as irrelevant at all.As an outsider, it's hard for me to understand why a paramedic's breaks have to be un-interruptible, unless I have an idea of what the work pattern is when they're not on a break. Hard to think of many things more relevant to the discussion, to be honest.
2. Breaks in the NHS are unpaid - therefore you should not be interrupted during those breaks
3. if breaks were not unpaid and not protected it is very likely that crews would not get them , do you really want people making life critical decisions or driving emergency vehicles after 11 hours without a break ? most of the time there is a queue of jobs waiting to be allocated - usually these are urgents , transfers and cat C emergencies but i have been working or been in comms when they are stacking Cat Bs , I also spent a shift on the road with the Medical Director of a service and at a number of times in that shift the only none tasked resource for an entire county was us (in a car) and the Control supervisor ( with a car sat outside the control room) - every other ambulance and rrv in the service was tasked either responding to, treating or transprting a patient ...
the NHS ambulance service ( with the exception of the Isle of wight - where the Ambulance service is part of the Island's PCT) is organised and managed on a regional basis and the regions have standing mutual aid arrangements, therefore no one ambulance or RRV is irreplaceable , it is the responsibility of management to allocate resources appropriately , both in terms of the location of on duty resources and in terms of ensuring an appropriate supply of resources of the correct type and grade.
JensenA said:
Having read through this post, I can't believe that there are people in the Ambulance service arguing that having a cup of tea is more important than saving someones life.
as has been pointed out by myself (as someone who works in NHS acute care and volunteers in pre-hospital care) and by other posters who are either in the same position or are the employees of NHS ambulance services - without protected breaks quite often we simply would not get a break during our 12 hour (scheduled - you can get given jobs right until the end of the shift - being an hour or more late off is quite common) [quote]
FFS, your'e in a job where one of your main duties is to respond to a 999 call, if you are the only person available, and you decide not to go because you are on your tea break, then that is inexcusable
you are not the only resource in the service - assuming you haven't breached the 6 hour point your break can be delayed until that point if thelocality is busy
[quote]
- no further discussion needed, if you don;t like it, resign and get another job where you can have a nice uninterrupted tea break at 11 o'clock without the inconvenience of having to rush out to try and save some ones life.
Engineer1 said:
FFS I will lay this out for the hard of thinking.
1. Ambulance staff are people.
2. Ambulance staff are entitled to contractual breaks.
3. Most NHS staff are on pay freezes.
4. A lot of sections of the NHS are understaffed meaning that even when not at work staff are getting calls to see if they can come in to cover shifts.
The guy in the story just made a stty decision, but sometimes these decisions need making or your 12hr shift becomes 13hrs with no breaks. Without knowing the full sequence of events, and any contributing situations we can't comment.
exactly ...1. Ambulance staff are people.
2. Ambulance staff are entitled to contractual breaks.
3. Most NHS staff are on pay freezes.
4. A lot of sections of the NHS are understaffed meaning that even when not at work staff are getting calls to see if they can come in to cover shifts.
The guy in the story just made a s
tty decision, but sometimes these decisions need making or your 12hr shift becomes 13hrs with no breaks. Without knowing the full sequence of events, and any contributing situations we can't comment. 746529 said:
If the rules allowed him not to go then he's not to blame, it's the rules fault and those people policing those rules, morals don't come in to it
Just like the rules allowed the bankers to do what they did without any blame being put on them and all the blame being put on those that created the rules ( the government) and policed those rules
People are not morally responsible for their actions when they are following rules and proceedures
It's that sort of dumbass attitude that causes societies to fall on their face. The need to save a human life should override such mundane rules as "uninterrupted breaks". You say morals don't factor in this. When morals such as the ones being discussed here are ignored, we are all phucked. That is one of the fine lines seperating us from the animals. That man hid behind a rule to avoid a moral obligation.Just like the rules allowed the bankers to do what they did without any blame being put on them and all the blame being put on those that created the rules ( the government) and policed those rules
People are not morally responsible for their actions when they are following rules and proceedures
I completely understand the need for enforced breaks if it is constantly busy, as I would imagine it would be in a populated area - but this guy 'probably' had done bugger all that day yet still said that he was on an enforced break.
My view is that it was a massive judgement call by the single individual and does not reflect the service as a whole.
My view is that it was a massive judgement call by the single individual and does not reflect the service as a whole.
Asterix said:
I completely understand the need for enforced breaks if it is constantly busy, as I would imagine it would be in a populated area - but this guy 'probably' had done bugger all that day yet still said that he was on an enforced break.
My view is that it was a massive judgement call by the single individual and does not reflect the service as a whole.
Well said, unfortunately incidents like this shine a light on all ambulance staff and dent public confidence.My view is that it was a massive judgement call by the single individual and does not reflect the service as a whole.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff