Why imposing a new contract on junior doctors will be a hugely risky gamble for Jeremy Hunt

[Image: AFP.]


Imposing a new contract unilaterally will be a huge gamble if Jeremy Hunt and the Conservative Government go through with it.

Under UK law, a contract may only be amended in accordance with its current terms, or with the agreement of all parties to it.

This means Jeremy Hunt cannot impose changes on the junior doctors against their will.

But there are precedents suggesting that, where fundamental contractual changes are proposed that will harm employees – as in the case of the junior doctors, no matter what Hunt may claim – the employer has several options:

He can consult with the employees, in order to get them to agree to the changes. Hunt has been trying this for many months by now, and has talked himself into a corner and at a standstill.

He can unilaterally impose the change and rely on employees’ subsequent conduct to establish implied agreement to the change. This is what Hunt is threatening to do, in the hope that junior doctors would rather keep their jobs than venture out into an uncertain employment market.

Except, for doctors, the employment market isn’t uncertain. These are highly-intelligent, highly-qualified individuals. The Scottish health service is already trying to lure doctors north of the border and no doubt healthcare providers from many other countries will make offers too – if they haven’t already done so.

Imposition of a contract in these circumstances therefore creates a huge risk of depopulating NHS England of its junior doctors, leading to huge gaps in healthcare provision.

It seems Hunt is happy to risk creating another crisis.

Perhaps Hunt is banking on the doctors giving in to him as an act of conscience – that they won’t be able to live with themselves if they abandon their patients to his tender ministrations.

It’s a valid argument; the Health and Social Care Act 2012 removed the duty of the Health Secretary to secure or provide comprehensive health services and abandoning their posts would give the pro-privatisation Hunt a huge opportunity to accelerate steps toward a for-profit medical system (it would be impossible to call it a health service as its operators would be interested in money, not health, and the only service they’d provide is to themselves).

But it would be universally unpopular – to such a degree that nobody knows how strongly the public would react.

So we have to ask ourselves: Is Jeremy Hunt a gambling man?

The final alternative would be for Hunt to terminate all the junior doctors’ contracts and offer re-employment on the new terms. Low-pay-grade council workers up and down the UK will be familiar with this dodge as it has been used to subject them to humiliating new pay offers and conditions of work.

In practise, this would be much the same as the second option, and Hunt can count on much the same reaction from the junior doctors. They aren’t in the same situation as the council workers and they know they have public support.

Let’s hope they stick to their principles and force Hunt to back down. It’s time these Tories learned they can’t have it all their own way.

Junior doctors’ leaders have rejected a “final take-it-or-leave-it” offer made by the government to settle the bitter contract dispute in England.
The offer included a concession on Saturday pay, but the British Medical Association said it was not enough.

The development is expected to lead ministers to announce that they are going to impose a contract on doctors.

The news has emerged as doctors take part in their second 24-hour strike – due to end at 08:00 GMT on Thursday.

During the walk-out they provided emergency cover, but the stoppage led to the cancellation of nearly 3,000 routine operations and treatments. GP care was largely unaffected.

Source: Junior doctors’ row: BMA rejects ‘final’ contract offer – BBC News

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

8 thoughts on “Why imposing a new contract on junior doctors will be a hugely risky gamble for Jeremy Hunt

  1. Mr.Angry

    Tory vermin, they are worse than Ebola at least they could find a cure for that, wish someone could find a cure for Toryism, it would be a major breakthrough and a blessing to mankind.

  2. Barry Davies

    As I understand it when a Doctor moves from one allocation to another, which can mean changing hospitals usually every 6 months they get a new contract so cockney rhyming slang can use that as a legal means of introducing a new set of terms and conditions. However the Doctors don’t have to accept those terms and conditions they can just leave and work in other countries that offer better terms. Given that a large number of our Doctors are from foreign climes that would not be the problem that some people think it would for them, but the loss of Doctors and we have not trained anywhere near enough of our own in this country, could not be catered for by our own home grown variety.

  3. David Penson

    I would advise the Junior Doctors to Stand Firm at all costs, they are in a Strong Position to face this Government of inadequate feeble minded nonentities Down.
    Stick together ignore what a biased press is saying and for goodness sake do not sign the New Contracts and I guarantee that within a fortnight Hunt will offer his resignation.
    Just remember this, you are dealing with a bunch of people who have lost the ability to differentiate between right and wrong. David Penson Bracknell Berkshire.

  4. Jenny Hambidge

    I thought a contract was something two or more parties had to agree…..how can you IMPOSE a contract???

Comments are closed.