PRIVATE care home chiefs have accused councils of holding "a gun to our heads" to secure agreement on a vital funding package.
The deal between local government body Cosla and Scottish Care, which represents owners of private homes for the elderly, will entail fees paid by Scottish local authorities rising by 6.5 per cent in two stages this year.
The big rise is to help pay the workers a minimum wage of £7.20 an hour from April, rising to £8.25 for care staff in October.
Private care home bosses warned the agreement could result in closures and the quality of accommodation worsening for residents.
But the criticisms brought an angry reaction from Cosla, which said the deal was fair and reasonable and gave care workers a living wage.
Robert Kilgour, whose Renaissance care company runs 11 care homes north of the Border, said care home owners were being forced to foot the bill for a political pledge by the Scottish Government.
While Scottish Care members are in favour of paying staff higher wages, they were "very reluctant" to agree to the deal, he said.
"We are having a gun put to our heads and being forced to dig into our pockets to fund what is a political commitment that the Scottish Government want to make for the May elections," Mr Kilgour added. "It is bringing in £8.25 an hour, but are not prepared to fund it."
Many care home providers are angry that while the government and Cosla are part-funding the pay rises, they are not contributing anything towards the additional costs of ensuring the pay differentials of senior staff and managers.
Mr Kilgour said his firm would be hit with a six figure bill as a result of the deal but said Scottish Care's members were in a corner, adding: "We will get no referrals without it. We agree staff deserve to be paid for the job they do, but we are going to have to make a lot of difficult decisions.
"Homes will close and new build projects will be binned. That is going to lead to more bed-blocking and more cancelled operations."
Although the negotiations were with Cosla, whose member councils have yet to ratify it, Mr Kilgour said local authorities had been forced to sign up to cuts by government.
He said: "We understand the difficult position councils have been put in.
"However homes are going to be unable to invest in improvements such as equipment and carpets. Some will have to have a very awkward chat with their banks."
Ranald Mair, chief executive of Scottish Care, confirmed that members had accepted the offer from councils, but reluctantly. "This is a positive increase, but the problem is the sums don't stack up. The increase won't cover the increase in costs, therefore services will be worse off and will have less scope for investment in things like refurbishment, or bringing in more qualified nurses to help staff homes.
"We all agree with the need to improve care staff pay, but there are unintended consequences and homes may also be less viable. There is a concern that we have been steamrollered in effect and presented with a fait accomplit."
Mr Mair said councils were insisting safeguards be built into the final deal, including a commitment from councils to support any homes left in financial difficulties by the agreement, a fresh independent assessment of the real cost of care home provision by next April and further look at the need to attract more nurses to work in residential care for the elderly, despite the fact that they can earn more in the NHS.
The proposals will be put to council leaders when they vote on the wider deal on Friday [April 1] at Cosla's regular leaders' meeting.
A Cosla spokesman said: "It is hugely disappointing that Scottish Care feel the need to go public while this contract is technically still under negotiation.
"However, in the financial climate we are all in we think that the deal on the table is both fair and reasonable and perhaps above all else, it provides a living wage for care workers."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel