MAM makes case for sedqa doctors

Medical Association of Malta president Stephen Fava said the association was hoping to negotiate an improved financial package for sedqa doctors before having to resort to industrial action

MAM is in dispute with sedqa over the remuneration of the five doctors who work for the national agency for drug and alcohol abuse.

Dr Fava said the importance of the work of the sedqa doctors was underestimated - they earned far less than their colleagues in the public service and had worse working conditions.

Discussions on the issue have been underway for around six months, but sedqa has not presented acceptable counter-proposals, MAM said.

Its doctors, who were highly dedicated and fulfilled an important role in society, earned as much as a houseman - a junior doctor - who did not yet have a warrant.

MAM maintained that the sedqa doctors, two of whom had postgraduate degrees, should earn the same as their colleagues.

Moreover, the doctors did not have job security. If sedqa ceased to exist, they would end up jobless since they were not in the civil service.

MAM urged the government to tread cautiously on the matter. It was running the risk of losing these doctors, who had a vocation and were particularly cut out for the demanding job.

"It should be a priority for the government to invest in such a sensitive and essential service," Dr Fava said.

Regarding the Labour and Industrial Relations Act, which started to be debated in Parliament yesterday, MAM said it did not agree with the fact that 12 clinical directors had been added to the list of staff that made up the emergency service, who are not permitted to strike.

Following discussions on the White Paper, the original figure, which was considered to be high, had been reduced to the number available on Sundays and public holidays (around 70). However, the union did not agree with the addition of 12 clinical directors.

The union also objected to a sub-clause in the law, which gave the prime minister carte blanche to alter and increase the emergency service list in consultation with the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development.

MAM also felt the MCESD was not the competent forum to decide such a technical issue.

In no EU member or applicant state did such a law exist, except in Bulgaria, Dr Fava said, adding that, under recommendations of the International Labour Organisation, codes of practice were decided between the unions and the government.

Nor did the union agree with another sub-clause in the law, which stated that if an officer, in contemplation of a trade dispute, refused, or failed to carry out his duties in accordance with his conditions of employment, his service with the government would be "terminated forthwith".

The union maintained that a public officer should have the right to a fair hearing.