TV3’s Hot Issues on Saturday, February 15, 2014 was unimpressive
TV3’s Hot Issues programme has always served as a fountain of insightful discourse on major topical issues owing largely to the host, Mr Kwasi Pratt Jnr’s adept ability in posing incisive questions to the guest. However, same cannot be said of the recently aired episode that set to dissect the constant labour agitations plaguing the nation since the inception of the Single Spine.
The recently aired episode quite clearly portrayed Mr Pratt as a host who had not done much background checks on the issues of discussion. Consequently his poor grasp on the nub of the tumultuous labour front confronting the country sadly opened a window of opportunity for his guest, Mr Graham Smith to engage in blatant obscurantism. Since most of the sub-topics deliberated upon in the course of the programme are in contention between the guest’s agency and some labour unions, it would have been much better for the sake of fairness and balance for Mr Pratt to have at least presented the side of the story of these labour unions. However, nothing of this sort occurred, allowing Mr Graham to paint a completely bias picture of the story and therefore miring the quality of this particular episode of the Hot Issue with respect to indisputable truth and objectivity.
On why pharmacists are at loggerheads with FWSC, Mr Graham averred that the Government and Hospital Pharmacist Association (GHOSPA) are finding it difficult to accept why nurses are collecting the same salaries as pharmacists under the SSSS. This is however an unfortunate statement aimed at pitting two professional working groups against each other for no good reason. Beside the incendiary nature of this warped fact, it is completely devoid of truth and therefore should be summarily dismissed by viewers of that particular episode in question.
GHOSPA has been raging at the failure of FWSC in abandoning the scores of a Job Evaluation (JE) performed in 2010 prior to the SSSS implementation. The sole objective of the JE was to serve as a scientific basis on which the various professions could be placed on the SSSS without any element of bias and also to eliminate discrepancies. Put it otherwise, the JE was to establish internal relativities across and within service classifications with the object of enabling Government to reward its employees. However the following discrepancies as shown in the table below exist to undermine the purpose of the JE and the basic tenet of the SSSS in the salary structures of health workers from onset.
Factors Medical Assistant Nursing Tutor Principal Nursing Tutor Biomedical Scientist Dietician Pharmacist
Knowledge 144 192 192 168 168 168
Learning Experience 20 20 35 25 20 20
Judgment 54 54 54 54 81 81
Consequence of error 24 36 36 36 24 36
Financial Responsibility 24 6 6 12 6 18
Responsibility for Asset 36 36 36 36 36 36
Supervision 15 15 15 20 10 20
Contact 33 33 33 44 33 55
Work Environment 24 12 12 24 12 18
Hazards 48 24 24 36 24 36
Dexterity 36 36 36 36 36 36
Physical Effort 15 15 15 15 15 15
Mental Effort 30 30 30 30 30 30
Total Score 503 504 519 531 495 569
FWSC Placement on SSSS 18L 18L 20H 18L 18L 18L
As can be seen on the table, on what grounds did the FWSC place a Principal Nursing Tutor with a score of 519 above a Pharmacist with a higher score of 569? This clearly is one of the distortions GHOSPA has bristled at since the SSSS was implemented.
To make matters worse, a pharmacist working in a university hospital—for example KNUST University Hospital—with a completely similar job description to a pharmacist in a teaching hospital or Ghana Health Service (GHS) is placed on level 21H as shown by records. The fact that a pharmacist from GHS or any teaching hospital can easily move to perform similar duties as that of a pharmacist in a public university hospital without any additional requirement, but yet are placed differently on the SSSS underscores the serious violations undermining the principles for the establishment of the new pay structure—equal pay for work of equal value! Interestingly, no such inequalities exist between medical doctors working in public university hospitals and those working in GHS and teaching hospitals.
After months of discord between FWSC and GHOSPA, the National Labour Commission (NLC) upon the consent of both parties ruled in a letter dated 31st October, 2012 that “The pharmacist entry point of GHOSPA members shall be moved from 18L to 18H.” To this the FWSC complied partially by only moving the Pharmacist grade from 18L to 18H while disregarding the upper grades—Senior Pharmacist, Principal Pharmacist etc. In view of this, GHOSPA registered its displeasure to the NLC for the precise interpretation of its ruling as the FWSC was bent on subverting the authority of the commission. Consequently, the NLC replied with a letter dated 23rd January, 2013 (copied to both parties) spelling out the new grade structure of GHOSPA members without any shadow of ambiguity. The table below is adapted from the said letter.
Ranks Single Spine Salary Scale
FWSC Placement Demand of GHOSPA Ruling of NLC
Consultant nothing 24H 24L
Senior Specialist nothing 24L 23H
Specialist 21H 23H 23L
Chief Pharmacist nothing 23H 23L
Dept Chief Pharmacist 21H 23H 22L
Principal Pharmacist 20H 21H 21L
Senior Pharmacist 19L 20L 19H
Pharmacist 18L 19L 18H
Mr Graham on the TV show scoffed at the NLC’s ruling on grounds that the committee lacks the mandate to rule on grade structure except to settle disputes and therefore has resultantly dragged the matter to the Appeals Court since early 2013. Prior to his legal challenge in the court of appeal, the FWSC applied for a stay of execution from the NLC. (NLC has the powers of a High Court.) To his disappointment, the application for stay was thrown out by the commission which still insisted that the FWSC abides by its ruling while it seeks it grievances at appeal. As at the time of writing this piece, FWSC has still not implemented the directives of the NLC and the court of appeal is still yet to freshly open the case. For how long will the FWSC continue to run roughshod the rule of law in this country with impunity? Would it not have been right in accordance with respect to rule of law for the FWSC to implement the NLC’s directives till the appeals court finally open and close the matter?
Instead, the CEO of FWSC continues to make clamorous call for the undertaking of a new job evaluation for GHOSPA members. This suggestion clearly reeks of mischief, unwarranted bias and wasteful resources of state finances. In a similar event relating to doctors, the Medical Officer (MO) who had scored 791 had been placed at 20H, whereas the Deputy Chief Medical Assistance with a lower score of 669, and the Principal Nursing Officer also with a score of 597 had been placed at 21L and 20H respectively. This was however resolved by FWSC when it moved the MO from 20H to 21L and cascaded upwards all the upper grades—Senior MO from 21L to 21H etc—without any instance of demand for job re-evaluation.
Until the above elaborated discrepancies are resolved, the only difference between a Pharmacist and a Senior Pharmacist with 3years work of experience will continue to be only a meager nineteen (19) cedis while other professions enjoy reasonable monetary differences between their grade structures on the SSSS. Again, until the FWSC abides by the NLC’s ruling, career progression across the various positions of pharmacists in public hospitals will be utterly unattractive as there are no appreciable pecuniary rewards attached to them.
To cement the position of the NLC, a cabinet sub-committee which was constituted by cabinet around May 2013 probed the impasse between GHOSPA and FWSC. The committee made the following ringing recommendation: “With the raising of the entry level of the pharmacist from 18L to 18H the case for cascading the other grade levels is valid to bring equity into the grade structure.”
Yet still, Mr Graham’s view of the committee’s work as aired on the show was that it is politically manipulative and seeks to undercut the effort of the FWSC. This position is also clearly flawed in all respects since the committee was tasked to solve the persistent labour agitations from public sector pharmacists but rather portrays the FWSC as an institution whose officials apparently grow aversion to a calm and harmonious labour front on the altar of self-seeking.
In summary, Mr Pratt’s previous episode of the Hot Issue cannot be seen as objective enough and therefore not complete. Seeking the other side of the story is highly recommended and will serve as a consummation of the episode’s required quality.
By:
Frank Kumi
Spokesperson
GHOSPA Northern Regional chapter
Contact: macfancy2g4@yahoo.com
