Six out of ten full-time Essex ambulance crews cut

6:00pm Monday 23rd July 2012 in News By Adam Cornell

SIX out of ten full-time ambulance crews in north Essex will be cut, it has been revealed.

The East of England Ambulance Service has to make £50million savings and is reducing the number of ambulance crews on the road for 24 hours.

There will be an increase in part-time ambulance staff, rapid response vehicles and emergency care assistants to make up for the loss of fully-crewed ambulances.

Staff have been told about the cuts at special briefings, but the details have not been made public.

The Gazette revealed on Friday the overall number of full-time ambulances will be reduced in October, and can now reveal where the cuts will be made: n The ambulance station in Halstead Road, Colchester, will go from three full-time ambulances to one, with some extra part-time cover.

n Clacton will lose one of its two full-time ambulances with some part-time cover.

n Weeley is set to lose both full-time ambulances and Frinton will lose its only full-time ambulance.

An ambulance worker, who asked for his identity to be protected, said: “Without being too dramatic, the risk of patients dying due to lack of ambulances is going to be much higher now – that’s the bottom line.

“You can’t take emergency 24-hour ambulances out of the Colchester and Tendring area and expect not to have some fall out.

“At the moment, we are struggling to meet demand with patients being left hours on end because of the lack of resources.”

The source said morale was at rock bottom among crews, adding: “People go into the ambulance service to do a job and they feel they can’t do that job to the best of their ability because they are not being given the resources.”

Staffing levels at the trust are also expected to fall by 260.

A spokesman for the trust said: “It is true that providing blanket cover, regardless of whether or not it is needed, is no longer a viable option in light of this situation.

“We are taking resources out of times and areas where there is not enough demand to justify putting them there and putting more when and where they are needed.”

Comments(27)

hughie-s says...
7:54pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Quite right too, do people really expect their taxes to go towards providing them with essential services? Cuts need to be made so we can continue to throw millions at deserving causes such as illegal wars, tin pot dictatorships and the EU.

Report this post »

Boris says...
8:35pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Anyone who wants to improvew their chances of staying alive should now move to Colchester, or indeed to other parts of the EU where they take health more seriously.

Report this post »

californianana says...
9:54pm Mon 23 Jul 12

First I know nothing about the ambulance service there. Our medic service is through private companies. There is always enough units with fully trained emergency paramedics
Response time very very fast and the level of care is amazing. Just a thought so people stay working and no lives lost because no staff.

Report this post »

californianana says...
10:02pm Mon 23 Jul 12

I'm sure this could be done there as you seem to have many many well trained paramedics and ambulances sitting idle are of no use to anyone. As I said just a thought maybe even a solution.

Report this post »

colchesterresident666 says...
10:48pm Mon 23 Jul 12

If the Ambulance service started charging time wasters then maybe there would be more then enough ambulances to help those with life threatening conditions. The public need to be educated in the difference between an emergency ambulance containing all the equipment needed to save someone's life and that of a TAXI. Many residents don't seem to know the difference. Just remember, when you call 999 complaining of a minor illness, your taking an ambulance away from someone who is dying. Colchester residents need to help each other, if you are able to get yourself to hospital by car, taxi etc then please don't call 999, leave that for your fellow residents who are unconscious, having a heart attack, fitting etc.

Report this post »

colchesterresident666 says...
10:50pm Mon 23 Jul 12

The ambulance service isn't going to help us come October, we need to help ourselves!!!!!

Report this post »

The old see dog says...
11:05pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Cut ambulance service, save money. People die because of no ambulance service, save money no hospital care. Why dont they go the whole hog and say that all cremations are to be done in power stations a never ending fuel supply, save money no fuel costs. With all the cuts and saving all that money they can borrow more next year and give themselves a pat on the back with a nice big fat pay rise.

Report this post »

Reginald47 says...
11:18pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Too many well-paid bosses in the emergency public services are taking the easy and unimaginative route of cutting frontline services. Get rid of them and replace them with sensible people who will not use 'the cuts' as an excuse for poor management.

Report this post »

The old see dog says...
1:01am Tue 24 Jul 12

The thing is all these cutting back of services are not getting us anywhere, only backwards.

Report this post »

SoundSense says...
9:05am Tue 24 Jul 12

Well said Reginald47. Far too many overpaid pension seekers in the public sector looking after themselves!

Report this post »

The Educated says...
10:42am Tue 24 Jul 12

If we could just stop fighting other people's wars;we could be self-sufficient.The average cripple cannot get DLA,because that money is needed for armaments.Where is the logic in replacing one full-time ambulance-crew;with two part-time ones? The Liberal Party died,when they made up the Coalition.Just the two sides now; Socialists & Capitalists.Whose side are you on?

Report this post »

jammin says...
10:52am Tue 24 Jul 12

Anyone recall the story from earlier this year when a pensioner was waiting in her garden for hours in end for an ambulance? Yes an rapid response vehicle arrived pretty quickly but took hours for the ambulance to arrive.

Please remember, you need an ambulance to take you to hospital if on a bed...that cant happen with rapid response vehicle.

If anyone is thinking of being seriously ill I would advise doing it before October!

Report this post »

julieee says...
1:06pm Tue 24 Jul 12

on the other side of the coin...usually ambulance crews turn up promptly, deal promptly, get the person to hospital but then waht happens? the patient is unable to be left until a suitable handover takes place and this can mean waiting times at the hospital for the ambulance crew of up to 3 hours. time where they could be on the road again. not all delays are patient or ambulance crew based

Report this post »

The old see dog says...
2:49pm Tue 24 Jul 12

The Educated wrote:
If we could just stop fighting other people's wars;we could be self-sufficient.The average cripple cannot get DLA,because that money is needed for armaments.Where is the logic in replacing one full-time ambulance-crew;with two part-time ones? The Liberal Party died,when they made up the Coalition.Just the two sides now; Socialists & Capitalists.Whose side are you on?
The logic is, they pay a lower wage for part timer workers. That means they would be paying out less for two part time crews doing a full day or night split shift than a full time crew doing the day or night full shift. Thats why most places of employment these days only employ part time workers

Report this post »

romantic says...
12:17pm Wed 25 Jul 12

As others have said, it does seem to be the frontline staff who bear the brunt of the cuts. Public service has too many levels of management, but the problem is that they would have to recognise themselves as part of the problem - not an easy thing for many people to do.

So instead of trimming away a level of management that analyses response times or shoves questionnaires under everybody´s noses, the axe falls on the people who do the actual job.

The crews that are left will continue to do the excellent job that they do now, but will still have just as many managers telling them in a year´s time that response times have got worse, performance targets not met etc.

Yes, no doubt funding has to be cut to all areas of public funded services, but it has to be done in a way that does not prevent the actual job being done properly.

Report this post »

newtactic says...
3:17pm Wed 25 Jul 12

Cut, cut and cut again essential jobs and you deepen the recession. And that is exactly what has happened. The Government claim there is an increase in new businesses. This is because those public sector employees given the push, have had to start up a "business" to sell their skills on the open market. Fact is, the more essential jobs cut, the less taxes are paid and those out of work have less to spend. What kind of chancellor goes into office with only a plan A?

Report this post »

Checkout says...
4:26pm Wed 25 Jul 12

This article really smacks of poor reporting. A more thorough investigation by the newspaper might have revealed the rationale being used by the Ambulance Service management to justify their actions.
The article seems to have been written to provoke a reaction and not to inform the readers of all the facts.
Perhaps a reporter should interview the head of service to get their take on the situation and publish that information.. We might then be in a position to comment sensibly.

Report this post »

newtactic says...
6:23pm Wed 25 Jul 12

Re: "poor reporting" Checkout. It's factual reporting. Front-line jobs have been cut in the ambulance service. Maybe this the only way line-managers can stay in work and cut costs. I can guess what the head of the service would say. He or she would claim to be making the service "more efficient" by cutting jobs. Since the cuts in public spending were announced the public service job losses have been described as "restructuring".

Report this post »

Checkout says...
6:48pm Wed 25 Jul 12

You may know all the facts newtactic but not from reading this article. I just want to learn all the relevant facts about it. I don't disagree with you but I don't agree either
I'm not much good at guessing when I have nothing to go on.

Report this post »

newtactic says...
7:57pm Wed 25 Jul 12

I meant the article was factual. And, as such, I did not think it was poor reporting. The people quoted in the article are giving their opinions on the cuts. It is up to us to make up our own minds. What is apparent from the article is there will be fewer ambulances on call.

Report this post »

jut1972 says...
10:37pm Wed 25 Jul 12

The last two paragraphs are telling. The removal of blanket coverage. In an ideal world this is what we would all want but this isnt an ideal world. The NHS has limited resources and has to prioritise those resources more effectively.

Of course with any prioritisation you run the risk of getting it wrong. That risk then equates to delays and potentially death. You cant avoid that but neither can you contine to provide an "ideal world" service.

It's the same argument the fire fighters have used in their dispute, lives are put at risk by cutting front line services. Of course they are. But at 4am on a Sunday in Frinton is it necessary to have a crew on hot standby for example? No, of course not.

If the public sector staff gave up their inflationary pay rises for example which are not based on performance or merit but automatically given, that would save 1.9% (based on CPI). Think what 1.9% of the public sector wage budget would buy. A lot of people would still be in jobs and services would remain as is. But it doesnt happen...

Report this post »

romantic says...
4:52pm Thu 26 Jul 12

jut1972 wrote:
The last two paragraphs are telling. The removal of blanket coverage. In an ideal world this is what we would all want but this isnt an ideal world. The NHS has limited resources and has to prioritise those resources more effectively.

Of course with any prioritisation you run the risk of getting it wrong. That risk then equates to delays and potentially death. You cant avoid that but neither can you contine to provide an "ideal world" service.

It's the same argument the fire fighters have used in their dispute, lives are put at risk by cutting front line services. Of course they are. But at 4am on a Sunday in Frinton is it necessary to have a crew on hot standby for example? No, of course not.

If the public sector staff gave up their inflationary pay rises for example which are not based on performance or merit but automatically given, that would save 1.9% (based on CPI). Think what 1.9% of the public sector wage budget would buy. A lot of people would still be in jobs and services would remain as is. But it doesnt happen...
You may be correct that you do not need a crew on "hot standby" at 4am in Frinton, but you still need to be able to get there quickly enough to maybe save somebody´s life. In a head injury, or a heart attack, 20 minutes each way can make all the difference. The nature of emergencies is that they do not always happen at predictable times.

Of course, it´s all academic until you or somebody you know is the one who needs an ambulance. That´s when the management speak "prioritise the resources more effectively" becomes nonsense, and you would be on the phone every 5 minutes until an ambulance turned up.

Why should public sector workers have no pay rise? (I am not a public sector worker, by the way). A zero pay rise means in effect being 1.9% worse off (and inflation is at its lowest for 3 years). The frontline public sector workers do their jobs under difficult conditions, and at the moment, under threat of losing their jobs at any moment. You may have got your information from the tabloids, but the public sector workers I know are not raking in loads of money, sitting on massive pensions or retiring at 53, they are desperately hoping that the axe does not fall on their head next.

The inefficiency within the public sector is one of too many levels of management. That is what needs to be tackled more. Cutting back ambulance cover will cost somebody a life someday. Axing a level of management will not.

If we as a nation are prepared to spend a fortune on bailing out the banks, or on Afghanistan, or on Trident, then we should be prepared to pay for a decent ambulance service.

Report this post »

Concerned of Clacton says...
11:27am Fri 27 Jul 12

Too many cheifs & not enough indians in the ambulance service like all the other public services me thinks! On such an important issue even the spokesman does not want to be named. How spineless!! I'm geusing he is a one time Paramedic who got himself a nice promotion & is obviously looking after his own pension sat in an office as he looks out on his nice shiney company car which I'm paying for. This is where the cuts should be not the front line. Paramedics will save my life when i get stabbed in Clacton, not a pen pushing suit wearer living in his big house in the countryside. Be brave Mr Suit wearer & see that the real savings can be made by getting rid of you & all your monthly expenses, your new once a year leather office chair, & the company car.

Report this post »

jut1972 says...
8:37pm Fri 27 Jul 12

romantic wrote:
jut1972 wrote:
The last two paragraphs are telling. The removal of blanket coverage. In an ideal world this is what we would all want but this isnt an ideal world. The NHS has limited resources and has to prioritise those resources more effectively.

Of course with any prioritisation you run the risk of getting it wrong. That risk then equates to delays and potentially death. You cant avoid that but neither can you contine to provide an "ideal world" service.

It's the same argument the fire fighters have used in their dispute, lives are put at risk by cutting front line services. Of course they are. But at 4am on a Sunday in Frinton is it necessary to have a crew on hot standby for example? No, of course not.

If the public sector staff gave up their inflationary pay rises for example which are not based on performance or merit but automatically given, that would save 1.9% (based on CPI). Think what 1.9% of the public sector wage budget would buy. A lot of people would still be in jobs and services would remain as is. But it doesnt happen...
You may be correct that you do not need a crew on "hot standby" at 4am in Frinton, but you still need to be able to get there quickly enough to maybe save somebody´s life. In a head injury, or a heart attack, 20 minutes each way can make all the difference. The nature of emergencies is that they do not always happen at predictable times.

Of course, it´s all academic until you or somebody you know is the one who needs an ambulance. That´s when the management speak "prioritise the resources more effectively" becomes nonsense, and you would be on the phone every 5 minutes until an ambulance turned up.

Why should public sector workers have no pay rise? (I am not a public sector worker, by the way). A zero pay rise means in effect being 1.9% worse off (and inflation is at its lowest for 3 years). The frontline public sector workers do their jobs under difficult conditions, and at the moment, under threat of losing their jobs at any moment. You may have got your information from the tabloids, but the public sector workers I know are not raking in loads of money, sitting on massive pensions or retiring at 53, they are desperately hoping that the axe does not fall on their head next.

The inefficiency within the public sector is one of too many levels of management. That is what needs to be tackled more. Cutting back ambulance cover will cost somebody a life someday. Axing a level of management will not.

If we as a nation are prepared to spend a fortune on bailing out the banks, or on Afghanistan, or on Trident, then we should be prepared to pay for a decent ambulance service.
I didn't get my info from the tabloids. I'm an ex public sector manager. I chose to leave as I was fed up with the bureaucracy and constant obstacles to getting anything done.

Report this post »

wellnow says...
5:26pm Sat 28 Jul 12

g4s supply ambulance services.

Report this post »

Bigh321 says...
8:33pm Mon 30 Jul 12

wellnow wrote:
g4s supply ambulance services.
Lol

Report this post »

The old see dog says...
8:54pm Mon 30 Jul 12

As quoted "The NHS has limited resources and has to prioritise those resources more effectively" And one of the main reasons is that foreign visitors come to these shores to have medical treatment that costs the NHS millions of pounds then f*** off back home with out paying, thats one thing that needs prioritising. And for the few out there, dont jump on the racist band wagon because stating the truth is not being racist go look up the facts.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree