John Lahart
Ceist:8. Deputy John Lahart asked the Minister for Health the status of the situation regarding medical scientists; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26798/22]
Amharc ar fhreagraThursday, 26 May 2022
Ceisteanna (8, 20, 21)
Paul Murphy
Ceist:20. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Health if he will work with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to ensure that an organisation (details supplied) is granted pay parity with other laboratory colleagues that they have been seeking for 21 years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26950/22]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Neale Richmond
Ceist:21. Deputy Neale Richmond asked the Minister for Health if he will address the issues raised by medical scientists; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25997/22]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (6 píosaí cainte)
My question relates to medical scientists, who were on strike last week, on Tuesday and today and who then called off the strike to enter into discussions with the Department of Health and the HSE. We debated this yesterday morning in the House with our motion. Does the Minister agree the expert group recommendations should be implemented and that these workers should get equal pay for equal work and pay parity with biochemists?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 20 and 21 together.
I hope the Deputy will accept my bona fides when I say I want to let all sides engage without interference from the Government, Ministers or whatever it may be. What happened yesterday was welcome and I commend the Medical Laboratory Scientists Association, MLSA, on agreeing to suspend the industrial action because it was having a very significant impact on patient services. As I said yesterday in response to the Deputy or his colleague Deputy Boyd Barrett, I know that not a single medical scientist who went on the picket line wanted to be there. They, more than any of us, are acutely aware of the disruption to patients, sometimes for quite urgent care, and the last place they wanted to be was on a picket line. It is noticeable, as several colleagues referenced, that it has been a long time since they felt compelled to take such action. I commend them on suspending the action and going to the Labour Court yesterday. We now know more than we did when we were debating this yesterday morning, and there has been a very positive and constructive development. All sides have agreed to go back to the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, for three weeks. All issues will be put on the table and all sides represented. They have also agreed that if, as we hope, that three-week process in the WRC is all that will be required and an agreement can be reached that works for all sides, any outstanding issues will revert to the Labour Court and all sides will be bound by that court's decision. It is a very positive move.
Turning to the Deputy's very reasonable question, this issue was identified in 2000. Thereafter, the report was received in early 2001, and through a benchmarking exercise in 2002, the matter went in a different direction. It was further noted, although not acted on, in 2007. I want to see a resolution to this that will work for all sides. Nevertheless, Deputy Naughten made an important contribution yesterday when he made the point that as science, technology, genetics and personalised medicines come more and more to the fore, the role of medical scientists and other scientific grades and groups within the public health system will come more and more to the fore of medicine for patients.
Not only, therefore, do we need a resolution to this issue, which is essentially a pay dispute, we also need an ambitious pathway for medical and laboratory scientists into the future. Dr. Colm Henry, the HSE's chief clinical officer, is instigating a review and looking more broadly at the profession and where it can go. I am pleased that work is being done on advanced practice. Advanced practice nurses and midwives are, effectively, autonomous clinicians. This is one of the most important and radical changes we are seeing in healthcare in Ireland. Ireland is becoming one of the leading countries in this and work is under way looking at advanced health and social care professional practitioners, one category of whom comprises medical scientists. We need to resolve the current situation and then be ambitious about what is possible for the profession.
As a general point, many of these workers were in the Public Gallery yesterday watching the debate, and the Government line, which is the usual Government line, suggested it has nothing to do with the issue. The Minister stated he wants to resolve the dispute without interference from the Government and so on, but that is as though the Government is not a party to the dispute. The Government, fundamentally, is these people's employer and I do not accept the idea it needs to take a hands-off approach. It can resolve this with a clear statement about pay equality and by finding the funds for it.
The Minister responded to Deputy Boyd Barrett yesterday by highlighting a line in the countermotion relating to “insufficient funds”, which I accept. Does he accept that any resolution of this dispute will have to be agreed outside the framework of Building Momentum, for example?
Finally, why has the MLSA not been invited to participate in the Dr. Colm Henry review?
To the first claim, about the hands-off approach, our approach is quite the opposite. Officials from my Department were in the Labour Court yesterday, along with officials from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The people involved in these negotiations comprise officials from the Departments of Health and Public Expenditure and Reform, the HSE and the MLSA, so I am not for a moment suggesting this has nothing to do with the Government - of course it does. Nevertheless, given all parties have agreed to go into talks, it is appropriate to let those talks happen and respect that process, and I hope that will work well.
With regard to the MLSA and the future of the review, there is no question but that the association will be involved in that and I have no doubt Dr. Henry will talk to its representatives. It is essential that it be part of that process.
I apologise for not reaching the Deputy's final question. He might remind me of it in order that I can follow-up in my second response.
The third question was whether the Minister accepts that if this is to be resolved, it will have to be resolved outside of the framework of Building Momentum.
The strike was not just about pay equality, although that was the dominant issue, but also about a lack of people coming into the profession and a lack of clear career progression. There are very few roles beyond that of medical scientist. Workers have to go into management if they want to progress, which means they will not get to work as a front-line scientist in the way many people want to. Deputy Barry made a point yesterday about the role of clinical medical scientists in the UK National Health Service, NHS, which seems to provide a natural career progression. Would the Minister be open to that?
There are a few stories I did not get to raise yesterday during the debate on the motion. People have told me about their co-worker in Tallaght who lives in Belfast and drives to Dublin every day to work - just incredible. As a result of low pay and the cost-of-living crisis we are experiencing, those are the kinds of conditions in which, unfortunately, some of these people are working and living.
There are five grades at the moment for medical scientists, namely, basic scientist, senior scientist, chief scientist, specialist scientist and laboratory manager, ranging from €34,429 to €95,320. There is an anomaly, as we discussed yesterday, although it applies only in the first year. The grade of medical laboratory aide was moved up at a time when that of medical scientist was not, so there is an overlap. It amounts to only €82 for the entire year, which is very small and applies only for the first year. Nevertheless, it is an anomaly and these issues need to be examined.
To the wider point, many people in the country face very serious pressures, such as those relating to inflation and housing. There are many wider aspects to this. In the realm of healthcare at least, we want to see a resolution to this that will address the various issues raised by MLSA members.