999 union snubs deal for life-or-death calls

Health secretary Nicola Sturgeon led demands last night for a speedy resolution to the life-threatening dispute and crisis talks are to be held in Edinburgh on Friday in a bid to break the deadlock.

Ambulance staff who are members of the GMB union yesterday joined colleagues in the Unite and Unison trade unions who have already rejected a management offer of an extra payment if they are called out to an emergency.

The new payment incentive was tabled by bosses at the Scottish Ambulance Service (SAS) following the furore over the deaths of two patients when the nearest ambulance crews failed to respond to 999 calls because they were on rest breaks.

Ms Sturgeon said: "I have been clear that current arrangements for handling rest breaks in the ambulance service cannot remain in place.

"It is disappointing that trade unions have rejected an eminently fair offer from SAS management to resolve this issue."

Margaret Watt, chairwoman of the Patients Association Scotland, warned more patients could die as the dispute dragged on. She said: "The fact is that we are losing lives, and that is at the core here. It is not about money or anything else. We are talking about people losing their lives.

"The ambulance service is a public service and we employ them through our taxes. And the ambulance crews should be told that there is no more money in the pot and that if we have to give them more money, we have to cut back on hospital beds, on care for the elderly and other important services.

• Case study: Tea-break technician failed to answer emergency call

• Case Study: Boy died after 48-minute wait

• Analysis: 'What is needed is an element of flexibility'

"We have already had lives lost because of this and, if this dispute is not resolved, there will be more."

She added: "It is a matter of conscience. I am quite sure if ambulance crews were having their lunch and it was a relative in an emergency, then they wouldn't sit there and have a sandwich. They would respond immediately. They should respond to any life-threatening situation."

In October last year, Mandy Mathieson died of a heart attack at her home in the Speyside village of Tomintoul after an ambulance technician, on duty at the ambulance depot just 800 yards from her home, refused to respond to the emergency call because he was on a tea break. She died before an ambulance reached Tomintoul from Grantown-on-Spey, 21 miles away.

In April this year, the family of three-year-old Martyn Gray had to wait 48 minutes for paramedics to reach their home in Crieff, Perthshire, as they battled to resuscitate him after he became seriously ill at home.

An ambulance crew was less than ten minutes away but they failed to respond as they were on a break. Martyn died while his family waited for paramedics to arrive.

The two deaths sparked calls for a major shake-up in emergency cover by ambulance crews, and earlier this year the SAS offered a one-off payment of 250 and a compensatory overtime allowance for working through their existing rest periods.Crews are currently entitled to an undisturbed rest break. But those who opt to be disturbed while they are on a break, under the "Agenda for Change" rules, are paid an extra 250 a year and an additional 5 every time they are "disturbed" during a break for reacting to a "life-threatening emergency."

Ambulance crews who are members of the Unite and Unison trade unions have already overwhelmingly rejected the offer. And yesterday the GMB announced that 92 per cent of its ambulance service members had also thrown out the latest offer by the SAS.

Murdo Fraser, the Scottish Conservatives' health spokesman, attacked the union's stance.

He said: "This is completely unacceptable. We all applaud the tireless and dedicated work of our emergency services and, of course, it is vital that staff are well rested and alert on the job. However, serious injury, critical illness and imminent death do not wait for tea breaks.

"An emergency service must be able to cope with all emergencies, as the fire service does. I hope the Scottish Government make their displeasure clear and I would urge the unions to think again.

"We do not want any more tragedies like the ones in Tomintoul and Crieff on our hands."

Charles Skene, the uncle of Ms Mathieson, said he had sympathy for both sides in the dispute.

But he added: "Money seems to be more important than lives. Undoubtedly, other lives will be lost before this is resolved. The management don't want to do anything about it and the unions are not going to do anything about it.

"It is a very difficult situation. We are disappointed that it can't be resolved. The offer seems fair to me, but the management has to come up with something realistic if 92 per cent of the crews rejected the offer."

Mr Skene argued that a separate agreement should be thrashed out to cover rural areas where at least one team was always available to cover four or five stations while crews were on a break.

He said: "There is plenty of cover in towns and cities. When somebody is on a lunch break, there is always someone else there to provide cover. But the management are letting down the rural areas by not having crews in place to provide cover for rest breaks."

Mick Conroy, the senior organiser for GMB Scotland, defended the stance taken by his union's members in the ambulance service.

And he contrasted the "paltry" offer made by the SAS to similar agreements reached by some health trusts in England, where workers get between 1,800 and 2,300 a year for working through their rest breaks, plus an extra 85 each month.

Mr Conroy said: "Our members would like to have this dispute resolved. They want it resolved, not only for our members' sake but for the sake of the general public in Scotland.

"Our members' job is to provide a service to the public and they know that service is being provided wrongly at times because if crews don't turn up in time, the first reaction by certain people is that they have been on a meal break.

"We have also had situations in the past that have resulted in a loss of life."However, he said: "What a lot of people don't know is that the crews don't determine when they are on a break. It is the emergency control rooms who decide when they should stand down. And crews who are on 12-hour shifts must, by law, have a break after six hours at the latest."

He went on: "Crews are often stood down in a hurry and an incident occurs and the next crew might be 15 or 30 minutes away.

"That is OK if you are in the middle of Glasgow or Edinburgh. But if you are in the Highlands or Argyllshire and other parts of Scotland, there might not be another crew handy."

He said the offer tabled by the SAS was "derisory" compared with the special payments being made to crews in England.

Mr Conroy said: "Morale in the service is at rock bottom. One of the stewards told me last week that if one of his relations has to get to hospital, he will take them in his car to make sure they get there."

He said he hoped the fresh talks due to take place at SAS headquarters in Edinburgh on Friday could lead to a break in the deadlock over the payments dispute.

"At the meeting, each of the unions will have a senior steward there, who also works as a front-line paramedic, to put our response and hear what they've got to say," he said.

A spokesman for the ambulance service told The Scotsman: "A proposal was made to staff that preserves the rest break during a shift, while at the same time allowing for crews to be interrupted in a life-threatening emergency.

"We are committed to finding a solution to this issue and will continue discussions with staff and the Scottish Government to achieve this."

Ms Sturgeon said: "I am committed to overseeing all necessary action to address this issue and urge management and trade unions to enter into further negotiations as a matter of urgency in order to move this issue forward."