Health unions in pay talks with SA government speak out about ongoing healthcare challenges
Three-and-a-half years after Labor was elected on a promise to fix the ramping crisis, one of the state's key health unions had a message for the South Australian government.
"We are sick and tired of being placated and told that people are working on things," Ms Dabars said, flanked by a group of members in scrubs.
The union this week went public with concerns over what it calls "internal ramping" — the practice of caring for patients in makeshift areas because no bed is available.
Asked about what had prompted her to speak out about the issue, Ms Dabars said she had spent months trying to work with the government behind closed doors — to no avail.
"We have tried every single avenue humanly open to us to resolve this concern," she said.
Health Minister Chris Picton fired back, responding "we don't accept that terminology from the trade union" — while SA Health claimed it was standard practice to care for patients in alternative spaces while they wait for a bed.
The nurses are not the only health workers to have aired their concerns publicly in recent weeks.
The unions representing doctors and paramedics have also criticised the government over its handling of issues including ramping, hospital overcrowding and safety.
Ambulance Employees Association secretary Paul Ekkelboom this week raised issues of ramping and resourcing in the wake of the death of a man involved in a car crash at Sellicks Hill.
SA Salaried Medical Officers' Association (SASMOA) chief industrial officer, Bernadette Mulholland, has highlighted safety concerns over working conditions inside hospitals.
In most cases, a union boss calling out the government is hardly remarkable.
Yet, for much of Labor's term, health unions faced criticism for keeping too low a profile as ramping hours climbed and the system struggled to cope under enormous strain.
The relative silence was most stark in the case of the Ambulance Employees' Association, which had played a key role in helping to turf out the previous Liberal government and get Labor into office.
The union helped the then-opposition to humanise the ramping crisis — raising the cases of victims and speaking out about the toll ramping takes on paramedics.
"Ash the Ambo" became the face of the campaign, issuing a powerful warning to "vote Labor like your life depends on it".
Following the election, the union faced accusations it was failing to hold Labor to the same standard it had the Liberals.
Even as ramping continued to reach eye-watering levels, former secretary Leah Watkins showed a more sympathetic approach to the new government — insisting in interviews it would take time for Labor's funding boost to alleviate pressure on the system.
Mr Ekkelboom was installed last year as union secretary, thoroughly defeating Ms Watkins after promising to re-establish the AEA's "political independence" and take a "stronger stance" on ramping.
The increasing union loudness comes at a time where doctors, nurses and paramedics are all in the midst of pay negotiations, some of which are threatening to turn hostile.
The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation said discussions with the government are continuing, while the doctors have already held a stop-work meeting and are planning a strike later this month.
SASMOA wants 10 per cent annual pay increases over the next three years — a demand the government has called untenable.
Bosses have been quick to shut down any link between their recent criticism and the ongoing pay talks.
"Let me be very clear. This is nothing to do with that," Ms Dabars said on Wednesday.
Mr Ekkelboom said it would be disrespectful to make any comment on his union's wage negotiations while he was speaking out about the death of a patient.
But public commentary is one of the most powerful tools at the unions' disposal — and one some are using now more than at any other point in this term of government.
It's been a quieter couple of weeks for the Health Services Union, which earlier this month reached a deal with the government on their new enterprise agreement.
Eight months out from the next state election, Labor is widely considered by politicians and pundits to be overwhelming favourites to win another term in office.
With a popular premier and an opposition struggling to land punches, there seem to be only a small handful of issues with the potential to inflict real damage on Labor between now and March.
Whether the difficulty the government has faced to deliver on its promise to fix the ramping crisis is one of those potential banana skins remains to be seen.
Public concern around the state of the health system is not at the same level it was in 2022, when Labor was swept to power on the back of its ramping pledge.
But the state's health unions hold the power to change that — and, whatever their motivation, they're looking ready to use it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
6 hours ago
- ABC News
The 'difficult' phase of returning to life after cancer treatment
In December, Grace Passfield finished four years of immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma. "I was really lucky, I had a really good response to that," says the 37-year-old physiotherapist and mother-of-two from Newcastle/Awabakal. "I had a scan at six weeks after starting the immunotherapy and all the melanoma had stopped growing, and then I had another scan six weeks later and half of it had gone or had shrunk significantly." When the time came to stop the treatment, Grace says many people close to her assumed she would be thrilled to return to "normal life". "Everyone was very excited that I was finishing and saying things like 'it's just so wonderful you're finishing, that's amazing'," she says. "But I was quite terrified because [treatment] felt like a safety net, it felt like a security blanket. "I had my last treatment, and I cried for half of the session." Clinical psychologist Samantha Clutton specialises in oncology support on Kabi Kabi lands on the Sunshine Coast. "It's a really difficult phase," she says. "A lot of people believe that once they sort of recover from the initial shock of diagnosis and get through the physical and psychological challenges of treatment, that they will feel better, that it will all be over. "And yet … particularly those months following the end of treatment, [it] is a very difficult time." Grace says once she realised her mortality, she couldn't "unsee it". Despite her treatment being deemed successful, she battles with constant anxiety that the disease will return. "Any sort of persistent niggles or pain" brings up that worry. "I have contact with my psychologist regularly … when I start to get worried about the future, she talks about how that's just a story and try to focus on what's going on right now." She says regular self-care and exercise are an important part of that. Grace still has routine scans, which look for signs of the disease. "I've had it described [as] it's almost like living with a chronic disease and that you're always monitoring for it," she says. The CEO of Cancer Australia, Professor Dorothy Keefe, says "survivorship care" is important and having a plan for that is key for people. "So that they know what sort of tests should be done, how often, and what to do if there's a crisis," the oncologist and supportive care expert says. "I would always say to my patients, this is something that could potentially come back, but it doesn't always come back. "And although we don't know if you in particular are cured at this point, there's no reason it shouldn't be you, so let's be positive, let's live life." Professor Keefe says it can be helpful to keep a check on anxiety levels. "Are they able to manage their normal activities of daily living?" she says. "Are they socialising? She says everybody's different and will need different levels of support. Ms Clutton says getting professional support can help normalise any challenging feelings. "People will very often feel as if there's something wrong with them because they're not feeling great," she says. "They don't have a renewed sense of purpose necessarily, they're not feeling incredibly grateful all of the time moving forward. "So, helping people to understand that this is a really normal reaction can really help to lift that layer of stress." She says Cancer Council Australia can direct people to either to their service or to other services within hospitals or other cancer organisations that can offer free or no out-of-pocket cost services. Grace, who returned to work as a physiotherapist several years ago, says while she had an amazing support system during her treatment, some of that has waned. "I said to my psychologist, 'How lucky am I? Everyone's so amazing'," she says "And she said, 'that will drop off and people do forget', and that did happen. Ms Clutton says she recommends people "check with their loved ones who have finished cancer treatment and don't assume that they're doing well". "Ask them how they're feeling and really stop and try and listen and reflect an understanding of that person's experience rather than trying to shut them down or tell them that they need to think positively." This is general information only. For personal advice, you should see a qualified medical practitioner.
News.com.au
6 hours ago
- News.com.au
Private healthcare giant Ramsay shuts psychology clinics
The country's biggest private hospital company will shut the majority of its psychology clinics in a matter of months. Ramsay Health Care notified staff of the closure of 17 of its 20 clinics earlier this month. The three remaining clinics are in the Newcastle suburb of Charlestown, in Perth's northern suburbs, and in Cairns. 'We understand this change might be unsettling and we are working closely with our psychologists to ensure every client is supported and has continuity of care, whether through our existing and expanded Telehealth service or with another trusted provider, depending on what is clinically appropriate,' a spokesperson said. 'This change is part of Ramsay's broader strategy to strengthen how we deliver high-quality, accessible and connected care across hospital, home and virtual settings.' Only Ramsay's community-based psychology clinics are closing, not its hospital mental health services or inpatient and day programs. Federal Greens leader Larissa Waters said half of Australians who needed mental health support already could not get it. 'The waiting lists are huge, and so it's devastating to see that a private healthcare operator is going to close down yet more facilities, and where are those people going to go?' she said. 'Health care shouldn't be for profit, and it shouldn't be how much money you've got on your credit card to enable you to get the health care that you need. 'So it's a real shame that profit seems to be driving this outcome that will have a real impact.' Ramsay Health is listed on the Australian sharemarket and valued at $8.9bn. The company's share price is down 16 per cent over the past 12 months. In August, Ramsay Health Care reported a nearly triple full-year profit of $888.7m, up from $298.1m the year before. The large return was mostly due to the sale of Ramsay's stake in Ramsay Sime Darby, which owns hospitals in Malaysia and Indonesia. The financial results gave shareholders an 80 cent dividend per share across the financial year. 'The government should be providing healthcare services as a universal right of all Australians, and it shouldn't be whether or not a private company's profit margin is going to work to determine the outcomes for Australians' access to mental health care,' Ms Waters said. The 17 clinics are being shut progressively until the final one closes the doors permanently by the end of August. Four Melbourne clinics are being shut, three in Sydney will close, two in Perth will shut, and single clinics on the Sunshine Coast, Ipswich, the Gold Coast, NSW's Central Coast and Wollongong will close. 'After careful consideration, we are transitioning Ramsay Psychology to a more flexible and sustainable model, which includes the progressive closure of 17 clinics by the end of August,' the Ramsay spokesperson said. 'Three clinics, in Cairns (QLD), Charlestown (NSW) and Joondalup (WA), will remain open to support local needs, maintain key partnerships and pilot more integrated models of care. 'Ramsay Health Care is reshaping how it delivers community-based mental health support to better meet the evolving needs of clients and clinicians.' The National Mental Health Commission's National Report Card was also released on Thursday, the same day as news of the Ramsay closures broke. Health commission chief executive David McGrath said fewer and fewer people could afford mental health care. 'We have also seen a steady rise in financial stress and in the proportion of people in Australia delaying mental health care due to cost in the last four years,' Mr McGrath said in the report. 'Disappointingly, many social factors impacting mental health are not showing improvement (e.g. loneliness and experiences of discrimination) and positive experiences of mental health care have remained stable.' People were feeling less secluded than in the previous year, the commission found, and more people were getting help now than in 2007. 'However, there is no question there is a long way to go – our younger generations continue to report heightened psychological distress and financial stress and have a much higher prevalence of mental health challenges relative to the rest of the population,' Mr McGrath said.
SBS Australia
7 hours ago
- SBS Australia
The big biosecurity question at the centre of Australia's US beef move
The federal government has lifted a ban on beef imports from the United States, expanding access to products sourced from Canada and Mexico. It's a move some experts say risks Australia's biosecurity and may be politically motivated. Although the US has been able to send beef to Australia since 2019, any cattle raised in Canada or Mexico before being slaughtered and processed in the US was previously barred due to biosecurity concerns. Now, following a decade-long science-based review, that restriction is gone. But some question whether Australia's strict biosecurity laws are being used for political gain, with the government facing questions over whether the move was made to appease US President Donald Trump. Biosecurity concerns One key concern was that Mexico's livestock tracking system could inadvertently allow beef from disease-affected regions to enter Australia. But the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry said the new changes follow the introduction of more robust movement controls in the US in late 2024 and early 2025, allowing for better tracing of cattle through the supply chain. Professor Michael Ward, a veterinary public health expert at the University of Sydney, said the decision opens Australia up to more risk because disease traceability in North America is "not quite as strong" as in Europe. Australia allows imports of beef products from a limited number of European countries. "You can potentially have cattle coming from lower disease status areas caught up in what gets exported, and then trying to work out where it's come from, that becomes really difficult," he said. "You can't really [separate those markets] in the US because it's such a bigger market and it's integrated … If a cow is moved to the US and it's there for three months, is it then an American cow? "You're basically increasing the pool of potentially risky animals, and that then flows into the risk assessment." The main risks associated with beef imports are the introduction of diseases such as mad cow disease and foot and mouth disease. Both the US and Mexico are free from both diseases. Canada is free of foot and mouth disease, but has had some cases of mad cow disease in the past. Ward said it's not "reasonable to believe all three countries have the same risk". "They're different systems, different countries, different raising conditions, different administrations. As you increase the number of countries, you're going to increase the risk." A spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture said the review was the culmination of "a decade of science and risk-based import assessment and evaluation … to make sure Australia's robust biosecurity measures are upheld". They added that the government would "not compromise on our enviable biosecurity status or our food standards, ever". Is biosecurity being used as a bargaining tool? Some believe the change could help Australia negotiate a better trade deal with the US — particularly on tariffs. As part of his sweeping global tariffs, Trump introduced a baseline 10 per cent tariff on many Australian goods in April. "[Australians] ban American beef," Trump said at the time. "Yet, we imported [US]$3 billion ($4.5 billion) of Australian beef from them just last year alone … They don't want it because they don't want it to affect their farmers." Nationals leader David Littleproud has accused the Albanese government of using the beef industry to appease Trump as it continues to pursue a broader tariff exemption. "It looks as though it's [biosecurity] been traded away to appease Donald Trump," Littleproud said on ABC's Radio National on Thursday. Coalition frontbencher James Paterson called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to "stand up ... and explain" to Australia's beef farmers that the government hasn't "watered down" biosecurity. Ward is also concerned the government is "playing off" biosecurity protections to secure a better deal. "It seems like a trade-driven decision," he said. He warned that the short-term economic gain from lifting tariffs could pale in comparison to the potential cost of a disease outbreak. "It's a huge concern — once you have introduced a disease — foot and mouth disease, for example — years and years and millions of dollars are spent trying to control that," he said. "That short-term gain — if it is tariff-driven — whether what the benefit of that is compared to a long-term disease scenario, it just doesn't add up. You really have to think about the long-term." Trade Minister Don Farrell has denied any link between the decision and pressure from the US. "There's nothing suspicious about this," he told Sky News. "If we want to export our beef overseas, then we have to accept that other countries will want to import their beef into Australia." "We're not going to allow our biosecurity rules to be impacted by the trade issues." How has the industry responded? Some industry groups say they support science-based decision-making but expressed frustration over the lack of transparency. "Science must remain the cornerstone of technical market access decisions," Australian Meat Industry Council CEO Tim Ryan said in a statement. "This progress on the US's access request demonstrates Australia's consistency in applying internationally recognised standards, which is vital to the long-term sustainability of our sector." The National Farmers Federation (NFF) said the decision needed to come "separate from any tariff negotiations". "The NFF's been clear that the revised request from the US needed to undergo the standard, science-based assessment to protect our biosecurity, and should be dealt with separate from any tariff negotiations," the organisation said in a statement. Cattle Australia CEO Will Evans said the announcement came without proper consultation. "There's going to be a lot of people today who feel blindsided by this, there's going to be a lot of people who are going to feel really frustrated and threatened by this," he told ABC radio. 'This science-based process has been, and always should be, conducted completely independently of any international trade negotiations," he added. Ward said that without seeing the final risk assessment, it's hard to judge whether the safeguards are sufficient. "It's a bit surprising," he said. "I would have thought if it's good science, you publicise it." SBS News has contacted Agriculture Minister Julie Collins for comment. With additional reporting from AAP.
