Considering voting Labour?

Also re training and experience:

Many of the NHS zero hours contracts are second jobs. So doing one or two bank shifts every 6 months for those people does not make them unsafe if they also work there on a permanant contract!

Besides which there are professional bodies that take care of fitness to practice issues so it does not need to be enforced by taking away 0 hrs contracta

If your partner works away you might just want to work when theyre home. Maybe in a 2 months off one month on pattern.

Working full time 4 months of the year is still the same amount of work that someone who works every week on a .33 part time contract does! So why should you appear less "employed" on your CV?

So why not list it as employment. Rather than:
Unemployed March 2017-April 2017
Employed May 1 - May 31
Unemployed June 1- July 31
Employed August 1 - August 31

And so on

Does that answer your queation Trisher?

Young nurses who want to travel and nurse abroad can come back for a month and do a run of bank to keep up their bank contract and UK registration without having to jump through hoops to prove their overseas hours. So their bank job is there waiting for them when they come home to hop straight back into when they return. They wont want to come back every month to do their X hours.

But they are working.

I know another lady whose child suffers a lot in winter with breathing issues. Someone like her could work more in warm weather and less in winter on a zero hours contract. They're not not working at all! But still employed and keeping up to date. Just without a monthly/weekly commitment they have to meet every month/week.

Also trisher registered health professionals are required by their registering bodies to do a minimum amount of practice hours to say regiatered.

They are not required however do spread those hours evenly each month. They can do them bunched together if they like.

I refer again to dual registered midwives, they dont want to commit to X no of extra hours doing nursing every month on top of their full time midwifery job. But they may want to do a bunch of nursing shifts all together every few weeks to keep up to date.

Zero hours allows them to do their nursing hours when it SUITS them, not every month no matter how busy their midwifery job is at that time!

noanan2 I still don't understand why anyone would want to have a zero hours contract if they are not actually working. If as you suggest it is to show a sustained period of employment well actually that in my opinion constitutes a fraud

No it doesnt. You cant keep a bank contract if you never work. The NHS does deactivate peope who never work. But their bank staff are not committed to minimum hours

You can keep a bank contract if you work in fits and starts.

That is still working!

E.g. the person I mentioned before whose injuries flair up. She may not work for weeks. Then she'll do lots of hours when she is well. She does work. She wont have a payslip from every single week!

noanan2 I still don't understand why anyone would want to have a zero hours contract if they are not actually working. If as you suggest it is to show a sustained period of employment well actually that in my opinion constitutes a fraud. If someone has not been active but has been on extended leave that needs to be clearly shown in their CV, otherwise it could be assumed that as they have been "working"they are up to date and knowledgeable about the latest training and information their job requires. So actually your argument for zero hours contracts is a reason to get rid of them as they give no indication of the amount of work actually undertaken or experience gained which in the cases of some professions could be downright dangerous.

Besides which, a lot of those bank hours are done on people's own wards! Where they work or study anyway. Most bank will be offered to the permanant staff first and they often pick it up! So there really is no difference in care in most cases.

I am very sorry for your loss growstuff

As for your sisters, you do find that wards that dont have that sort of attitude from the permanant staff will usually have a "little black book" of regular bank staff (usually made up of ex students and ex staff from that ward) who know the ward well, are part of the team and are happy to go there on a semi regular basis. But yes there are a minority of ward nurses who have "us and them" attitudes so no bank staff go there regularly so they dont get to know the ward and end up with "randoms". Its is a minority though as most places look after their regular bank staff as theyre glad to have them & invite them to staff dos etc.

Let's face it, whatever walk of life , we like familiarity and safety. We like to hang out coats up, find the toilet, have a coffee, contact with colleagues.
Humans like continuity.

Budgets have been cut, so permanent staff can't be employed

Almost all trusts have vacancies outstanding. Which there IS funding for but dont get filled. Many of these vacancies are "rolling" which means they go on unfilled for months.

The vacancies are there. The funding is approved. They remain unfilled!

notanan2, it is not the case that some businesses cannot commit to zero-hours contracts, it is a case that many businesses do not wish to employ on such contracts.

I wish to see commitment in those who wish to work for us, and undoubtedly those prospective employees wish the same in return.

Having such assurance in employees make our training of those employees much more straightforward which gives both us and them ongoing benefits into the future.

We find ongoing training is the requirement that the vast majority of employees wish for even above an annual salary increase. That is the matter that never seems to be discussed on this forum even when employment is the topic of a thread.

Anyway, we are now out for the evening, so signing off for now.

By making more effort to retain permanent staff.

Errrmmm … yes I would notanan2. Unfortunately, I had a reason to know when I bank midwife was nearly responsible for the death of my unborn baby and me. I did eventually receive an explanation and apology from the hospital. Both my sisters were senior nurses and it was a long-standing grievance of theirs that bank staff just not understand routines and patients as well as regular staff. Budgets have been cut, so permanent staff can't be employed, which works out to be a false economy.

Of course they can be part of the team growstuff

Most of the time you would never know when you have a bank nurse.

You could have the same nurse 2 days in a row: yesterday they did a shift on their permanant contract & today they have picked up a bank shift on their day off!

The benefit of bank (over agency etc) is they are trained by the trust and have the same induction and manditory training as permanant staff.

Some people only ever do bank on one ward, others like to move around.

No, it is not poor staff management. There simply are not enough permanant staff! There are vacancies in almost every trust! How would you bridge that gap?

If you're correct notanan2 (and I have no reason to believe you're not), that's an absolute disgrace. There's a place for bank staff in the NHS, but better planning of staffing could avoid many of those hours. Bank staff do not receive adequate training and can never be part of a team and there have been cases where inadequate communication with non-permanent staff has led to compromising patient safety.

I have a limited experience of people working zero hours contracts, so I could be wrong here.

My understanding is that nurses who work "on the bank" or supply teachers (or similar) choose the hours they want to work, provided work is available. They are not required to be available for work at a moment's notice.

People with zero hours contracts are often required to work whenever the employer needs them. Occasionally, they are paid a retainer for being available, but more often or not they are left in the situation of not being able to seek work elsewhere with another employer.

25 million working hours. In the NHS alone, is not a small minority grandad, if it is a minority at all

Well thats the thing grandad. Many business structures cannot offer work to someone who wants to work no hours for 6 weeks, then 40 hours for 2 weeks for example. In the NHS it is mutually beneficial, for the bank staff and the organisation. And it will suffer greatly if this ban goes ahead. All ward's budgets will be blown. Safety will suffer.

notanan2, I do understand that not all persons wish to commit to any minimum hours of working, but we find that far more wish for such guaranteed work hours and employer commitment to them.

If a prospective employee cannot commit to a minimum of six hours per week (which is the minimum we have ever offered anyone) then they are not for our employ.

We have found over the years that for the one who would not wish to give that commitment there are always several others who will.

Simple as that, and in employment that is what the vast majority want.

Would anybody like to address the points I raised about the Care Industry......no union, no colleagues, possibly in debt, certainly bills to pay, predominantly female?

Surely a properly trained and valued, salaried workforce would be better for all concerned

It works because its zero hours!

How does that work notonan, how can somebody have a full time job and be a bank nurse?

There are job shares in the NHS too.

They do not offer the same thing as 0 hrs.
Some suit one. Some suit the other.

A lot of the bank hours done in the NHS are by people who have full time jobs or study as well. A min hr commitment would not work for them.

Gosh, Grandad......jobshare, I had forgotten that even existed.

Surely that would be a fairer way for all these women to keep their hand in.