THE question of who pays for the deal to avert a porters and cleaners'
strike at Glasgow Royal Infirmary remains unresolved, despite lengthy
talks.
However, a decision ''on the way forward'' -- at the least -- is
expected in the coming week after more negotiations between hospital
chiefs.
Executive Healthcare was awarded the portering and domestic services'
contract in March by Greater Glasgow Health Board, with savings of
#314,000 based on cuts in earnings.
However, a strike threat led to Glasgow Royal Infirmary Trust
announcing this week that the contract would go ahead in July only on
the basis that wages and conditions of the 380-strong staff were intact.
The trust ruled that terms should be protected by the European Union's
Transfer of Undertakings (Employment Protection) regulations (Tupe).
Both trust chairman Professor Robert Burgess and health board chairman
Sir Robert Calderwood admitted yesterday that talks so far had failed to
resolve who should meet the settlement costs.
Nevertheless, they appeared optimistic, despite the complex issues
involved and threats of legal action by aggrieved contractors.
Professor Burgess emphasised he had not expected any decisions during
the talks which covered events of the past few weeks and options
available ''to take the matter forward''.
Professor Burgess declined to comment on threats of legal action or a
possible investigation by the Audit Commissioners.
Other firms who tendered for the contracts are seeking legal advice on
a possible rerun of the process. Executive Healthcare is also likely to
take legal action if the contract does not go ahead as originally
awarded.
Sir Robert described talks with the trust as positive.
It is understood the trust has no intention of meeting the #314,000
shortfall caused by averting the strike.
It is also understood the Government has no intention of bailing out
either the trust or the board by making up the shortfall.
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 hereComments are closed on this article