Mike,
I smiled when you indirectly suggested that Peter Holden was 'conciliatory'
Having worked with Peter many years ago I found him very friendly but very
unlikely to 'roll over' when under pressure! He is undoubtedly firm.
Whether he has the skill required for this high level negotiating I don't
know.
I don't agree with the current mess that appears to have been created by
some GPC decisions, but I suspect as individuals the GPC did fight our
corner, or is that being conciliatory?
I think this mess was predictable as far back as 2000 and we compounded the
problems due to inactivity and the lure of gold; and were easily duped and
played by the DH and ended up selling the family silver and signing our
profession away.....
Alun
-----Original Message-----
From: GP-UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Leuty
Sent: 20 February 2008 23:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Options
On 20/02/2008, Adrian Midgley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Usually 80:20 in these things, no?
Indeed, but in this case the cage has been rattled to an unusual degree.
> Do you _have_ a clear instruction for the GPC?
Yes.
At the time of the new Contract negotiations my GPC rep Peter Holden
said something along the lines of "they are the Government and they
can do what they like". Last week on the cover of Pulse he was quoted
as saying "the bottom line is there's no point being offensive to
these people and making them take their bat home". I think this
indicates that when the GPC actually meet those nice men at NHS
Employers they find themselves being conciliatory and try to find
solutions to satisfy the awkward demands of the person in the other
chair. Which is what GPs do all the time.
I don't want the GPC to be offensive but I want them to be firm.
My instruction to the GPC is as follows. Say to the Government that we
recognise their power to do as they wish. Say that we wish to reach a
freely negotiated agreement with them. Say that if they intend to use
their sovereignty to impose alterations to the contract then
negotiations will cease. We will not choose between alternative
impositions. At that point all goodwill will cease, a formal dispute
will exist, and legal protests and action may be arranged. The
severity of those protests will depend on how draconian the imposition
is.
This is probably hopelessly naïve, stupid, counterproductive and so
on. That's why I'm a rank and file GP and not a politician. But you
did ask.
Mike
--
Michael Leuty
Nottingham, UK
|