On 1 Apr, 01:29, John B wrote:
On Mar 31, 4:32 pm, " wrote:

If they're so worried about agency staff I hope they never have to go
an NHS hospital. A large proportion of the medical staff *are
generally agency staff, particularly the nurses. Funnily enough the
unions there didn't consider it a safety issue though as we all know
the tube unions live in their own little fantasy world where any
working practices not devised during the Bolshevic Revolution are
frowned upon.

Possibly because the agency staff (especially nurses) have recognised
qualifications to ensure they are competent to carry out the role?
Bear in mind that the example you used, agency nurses, costs the
health service an awful lot of money, that could possibly be better
used directly employing more nurses to provide cover, rather than fill
the coffers of the agencies.

Yes; I'm sure the NHS deliberately uses agency nurses to maximise its
spending with agencies and wind up union types, rather than doing so
because it's the most efficient way of matching supply with demand.

Maybe neither. Maybe it's because the permanent staff budget is
capped, or because the agencies make political donations (these are
just a couple more hypotheses).

On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, MIG wrote:

On 1 Apr, 01:29, John B wrote:
On Mar 31, 4:32 pm, " wrote:

If they're so worried about agency staff I hope they never have to go
an NHS hospital. A large proportion of the medical staff *are
generally agency staff, particularly the nurses. Funnily enough the
unions there didn't consider it a safety issue though as we all know
the tube unions live in their own little fantasy world where any
working practices not devised during the Bolshevic Revolution are
frowned upon.

Possibly because the agency staff (especially nurses) have recognised
qualifications to ensure they are competent to carry out the role?
Bear in mind that the example you used, agency nurses, costs the
health service an awful lot of money, that could possibly be better
used directly employing more nurses to provide cover, rather than fill
the coffers of the agencies.

Yes; I'm sure the NHS deliberately uses agency nurses to maximise its
spending with agencies and wind up union types, rather than doing so
because it's the most efficient way of matching supply with demand.

Maybe neither. Maybe it's because the permanent staff budget is capped,
or because the agencies make political donations (these are just a
couple more hypotheses).

Or because NHS administrators are incompetent at long-term planning, or
simply have funny ideas about the flexibility being worth paying extra
for, or because there's a shortage of nurses willing to take up permanent
contracts, or any one of a number of reasons.

Agency nurses must cost more than employed nurses of the same calibre,
otherwise how would the agency make its money?

Assuming that the decision is the correct one made on the basis of a
rational examination of the data seems highly counterfactual. When have
you ever seen a large organisation that works that way? Even major
corporations and financial institutions, who you'd expect to be experts at
this, seem to make strategic decisions based on little more than fashion
and short-termism.

tom

--
Ten years of radio astronomy have taught humanity more about the creation
and organization of the universe than thousands of years of religion
and philosophy. -- P. C. W. Davis