And The Weasel Goes To.....
More than three months on from my original request - the SAS has finally given me some, but not all, of the information I asked for originally.
To my mind their behaviour is cynical abuse of the FOI process.
Because the information I asked for under Request 3 - could just as easily been given to me in their first answer.
Yet the SAS has dragged things out for months and months - instead of doing what they should have done - answer a perfectly straight question with an equally straight answer.
Eagle-eyed readers will spot the fact that the SAS have still not answered Request 2 - which asked for information about the previous policy on rest breaks - not the new one which has since been imposed following the intervention of the Health Secretary - Nicola Sturgeon.
So what are the SAS playing at - you would be entitled to ask?
As for the underlying issue it turns out that all this fuss about rest breaks is really a fuss about nothing - with only 0.38% of rest breaks being interrupted in 2010.
In other words it's a tiny little 'problem' - which affects each SAS on average around once a year according their own figures - with anyone affected getting their rest break back - during the same shift.
But the thing is the whole business is costing lots of public money - with the new deal agreed withthe trade unions being worth £100 a pop - every time someone's rest break gets disturbed.
Now £100 x 2248 interruptions (the 2010 figure) would cost the NHS a £224,000 a year - which seems a very high price to pay - taking all the circumstances into account.
Not least because the original payment of £5 has been increased twenty fold to £100 - which seems more than a tad generous in these difficult times.
Nor is there any mention of what happened to the £250 annual payment for agreeing voluntarily to interrupt a rest break when required - 0.38% of the time (in 2010) according to the SAS.
Come to think of it - maybe that's why the SAS have deliberately not answered Request No. 2 - regarding the cost of the 'rest break' policy that was in place at the time of my original FOI request.
I can feel another FOI request coming on - and/or an appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner.
Because my trusty bullshit detector tells me that someone, somehwere has something to hide - because why else does this publicly owned service - refuse to answer my very reasonable question?
Details of the SAS response
You asked:
1. How many ambulance personnel are affected by the current SAS policy on rest breaks?
SAS Response
1. All our Accident and Emergency staff are affected – 2,445 as at 31 March 2011.
You asked:
2. How many ambulance personnel have opted to give up their uninterrupted rest breaks - and what is the current annual cost of the additional £5 payment?
SAS Reponse
2. All our crews are now required to work 24/7 with uninterrupted rest breaks if necessary.
You asked:
3. In 2010 (or equivalent 12 month period) on how many occasions were ambulance crews interrupted during their rest breaks - what percentage does this figure represent?
SAS Response
3. There was a total number of 2248 disturbed meal breaks paid in Financial year 2010. This equated to a 0.38% of total meal breaks taken (assuming that 2866 average A & E staff per week taking 4 meal breaks per week).
You asked:
4. If an ambulance crew is interrupted during a rest break - is the crew still entitled to a break later on during that same shift?
SAS Response
4. Yes
You asked:
5. Does the Employee Director of the SAS Board get time-off with pay to perform his trade union duties and if so how much time-off - full-time release, for example?
SAS Response
5. Our Employee Director is appointed to attend the SAS Board meeting and one other. He does not need time off as such for trade union duties.
Mark Irvine's FOI Review Request
4 October 2011
Calum Kerr
Head of Corporate Affairs
Scottish Ambulance Service
By e-mail
Dear Calum
FOISA Review Request
I refer to the FOISA response of the Scottish Ambulance Service dated 3 October 2011 (received today 4 October 2011) - a copy of which is attached to this letter for easy reference.
I would like to ask for a review of this decision because the SAS has not responded to my questions numbered 1 to 5 - and I can see no valid reason under FOISA for withholding this this information.
As far as I can tell Questions 1 to 4 relate to historical information which cannot prejudice any ongoing discussions regarding SAS policy on 'rest breaks' - while the SAS has simply not answered my request in relation to Question 5.
I note your answers in relation to Questions 6, 7 and 8.
I look forward to hearing from you and would be grateful if you could respond by e-mail to - markirvine@compuserve.com
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
