Making a meal of safety

The more we’re told something’s not about the money, the more we can’t help but think it’s all about the money.

Both paramedics and ambulance chiefs tell us the proposed changes to the staff meal break policy will affect patient safety.

Paramedics say forcing them to take meal breaks will put lives at risk; ambulance chiefs say paramedics who fail to take meal breaks compromise patient safety.

While both parties insist the crux of the argument is the safety of patients, the issue is costing the NHS £700,000 a year.

That’s how much the North East Ambulance Service pays out to cover staff for missed or late meal breaks while on shift.

Paramedics fear enforced meal breaks mean they will be grounded when they could be attending emergencies. The argument holds water. The service is stretched and struggles to meet emergency response times even without mandatory breaks. How can they possibly improve response times if they are grounded more often?

But then ambulance bosses have a point when they say paramedics who do not take breaks will be tired, increasing the risk of mistakes and putting patients’ safety at risk.

Can paramedics working 12-hour shifts without a break for food or drink really maintain the highest of standards?

It’s an issue which is dividing staff, management, and our readers, as our online poll shows.

Patient safety should be paramount in all discussions and we hope a satisfactory answer can be found in this instance ... but money is an issue.

This meal break controversy is all about the money. Our ambulance service simply doesn’t have enough of it.