Scottish activist warns against privatization

Scottish activist warns against privatization
By Dan Hilborn, Burnaby Now assistant editor
Published Jan. 29, 2003

The proof against privatization is in the pudding, according to a Scottish trade union leader who was in British Columbia last week to protest the contracting out of health-care services.
"The evidence is absolutely overwhelming that privatization, contrary to the arguments made, does not lead to increased efficiency, lower costs or improvements to the quality of service," said Carolyn Leckie, branch secretary of Unison, the largest trade union in the United Kingdom.
"In fact, it does the reverse. It leads to more bureaucracy, more expense, and the quality of service is reduced," she said. "Scotland and England have already been through the experience, and we've learned some very difficult lessons in terms of its effects on patients and staff."
Leckie, a midwife by trade, was invited to B.C. by the Hospital Employees Union after her union successfully argued against the contracting out of services to multinational corporations that are now interested in working in British Columbia.
Last summer, Unison went on strike and organized a successful anti-privatization drive that resulted in the French-based multinational Sodexho losing contracts to provide cleaning services at several of Scotland's largest hospitals.
Leckie said the problems with privatization are well known. "Typically, things that happen are the number and hours of people in the workforce to do cleaning is reduced, their wages are cut and their pensions are cut, and then you get a high turnover.
"Without proper training, the health and safety of employees and patients is compromised, and they even find it difficult to get basic equipment such as mops."
One of the most serious problems experienced by Sodexho came last winter when a salmonella outbreak at Glasgow Royal Infirmary killed three patients at the same time 283 staff and patients caught 'a stomach bug.' A subsequent union investigation resulted in the discovery of cockroaches, and allegations from cleaning employees that they were told to serve meals to patients after they finished washing the toilets.
When private companies take over public health services, they begin to cut corners any way they can, Leckie said.
"The health authority doesn't save money, but the companies get to extract profits. That's the problem," she said. "Their only motivation is profit, so there are very big incentives to cut costs, and wrong decisions are made."
Among the other problems found in the privatized Scottish hospitals was the use of inadequate filters on cleaning equipment used in the chemotherapy wards, the discovery of blood-soaked linens in patient areas, and rodent and insect infestations.
During a five-day strike last summer, which ended with the cancellation of the private contracts, the union discovered that patients were forced to sleep on plastic sheets and were served only sandwiches for lunch. She also alleges that at least one company was operating with as many as 200 fewer employees than they were obligated to under the terms of their contract.
"All of these things became apparent during the strike, that's why we were successful," Leckie said.
The strike escalated into violence when Sodexho brought replacement workers into the hospitals.
Since the private contracts were cancelled, newly re-unionized workers have won back many of the concessions that were made, including improved regular, sick pay and overtime rates.
While Sodexho still has the contract at the Glasgow hospital, the company is facing weekly fines for not living up to the terms of its contract, and it has been ordered to pay improved terms and conditions to its employees, Leckie said.
Leckie also dismisses claims that union labour always costs more.
"I think you need to pay for skilled, experienced people. That is how you get good quality service," she said. "If you allow these companies to pay what they are proposing, then there is absolutely no way to retain the skills and quality that is necessary. That has already been shown.
"I think it's shocking that politicians (in B.C.) are using the same arguments that were used by Margaret Thatcher and the Tories almost 20 years ago to justify these measures when it's been shown time and time again that it's detrimental to the quality of service.