Defend Public Healthcare

Before the Liberals started attacking collective bargaining, they proposed a wage freeze in the summer of 2010.  The unions duly met with the government over the summer of 2010 to discuss this. While there was no agreement, settlements funded by the province have now moderated significantly. But since that time the Liberals have sharpened their attack significantly, crushing free collective bargaining in the school board sector and starting plans to do the same in the broader public sector.  They have also increased their demands from a wage freeze to cuts in compensation. So what caused the Liberals to go postal in the interim? Well, it wasn't the province's fiscal situation. In the 2010 provincial Budget (just before the summer meetings with unions), the province planned deficits of  $21.3 billion in 2009-10, $19.7 billion in 2010-11, $17.3 in 2011-12, and $15.9 billion in 2012-3 billion. Deficit (in billions of dollars) 2009–10 2010–11 201

The Ontario Liberal government's brand was built on creating social consensus after the harsh discord of the previous Mike Harris Progressive Conservative government.  That worked well for the Liberals until this past few months when they moved to crush free collective bargaining and unilaterally impose not just a wage freeze but also benefit concessions on teachers and other school board workers. That attack on free collective bargaining, run apparently by Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, was disastrous for the Liberals.  It was completely contrary to their brand and what they had stood for.  They are now a distant third in the polls, with a miserable 20% support.   Prior to this attack, they moved within the 35% to 27% range during 2012, tagging in at over 30% in August.  The major beneficiary of the Liberal decline has been the NDP, who are now tracking close to the PCs. The Liberal decline also destroyed their bargaining power in the legislature with the PCs and the NDP

Joseph Brant Memorial Hospital has agreed to settle a law-suit by approximately two-hundred victims of a C. difficile outbreak at the hospital for $9,000,000, the Hamilton Spectator reports.  That is an average of about $45,000 per claimant.   The law-suit alleged the Burlington hospital was not properly cleaned, maintained and disinfected.  OCHU has long warned that hospitals would be subject to law-suits because of cuts to housekeeping services.  Since the 1970s hospital support services have been cut back again and again.  Ninety-one patients infected with C. difficile died.   The settlement must still be approved by the courts.  The Spec adds "that lawyers for the plaintiffs will be paid $1.122 million, for partial fees and out-of-pocket disbursements to date, plus 15 per cent of what their clients receive in payments. There is also a sum - capped at $375,000 - to pay a court-appointed administrator to oversee the settlement and apportion the money."

The new Ontario Municipal Benchmarking Initiative public report  indicates that ambulances (and by extension paramedics) are spending more and more time in hospitals.  For the thirteen (mostly large) Ontario communities included, the median percentage of time ambulances spend in hospitals has increased from 15.5% in 2009, to 17.8% in 2010, to 18.7% in 2011. That's an increase by more than one-fifth in the amount of time spent in hospitals. As the report notes "the more time paramedics spend in the hospital process equates to less time that they are available on the road."  Ambulance hospital off-load delays are a major part of the problem, as hospitals with too few beds lead to clogged emergency rooms that are unable to deal with newly arriving patients. There is also some more positive news about improving EMS capacity: The number of hours of ambulance service per thousand population has increased from 343 hours in 2009 to 350 hours in 2011, a 2% increase. The

The association representing almost 12,000 professionals and supervisors working for the Ontario government claims its recent tentative agreement with the provincial government calls for a 1.83 % permanent reduction in compensation. The association adds that the Catholic teachers deal reduces teacher compensation permanently by 2.5%. For someone whose total compensation was $40,000, a 1.83% cut would mean giving back $732 each year to your employer.  A 2.5% cut would mean giving back $1,000 annually.   The government refers to its proposals as a "wage freeze".

Dwight Duncan has justified the government's proposal to remove collective bargaining rights in the broader public sector by suggesting that the private sector has had it much worse. Earlier, I looked at wage settlements as likely the best test to determine if this was true (it wasn't ). But one could argue that jobs are also a key measure. So, has the loss of jobs been much worse in the private sector than in the public sector? This turns partly on the start date chosen. So let's look at it from a variety of start dates. If we start at the pre-precession high in private sector employment in Ontario, the start date would be September 2008, when private sector employment was 4.433 million, according to Stats Can .  As of September 2012 private sector employment sat at 4.414 million, a decline of about 0.6%. Over the same period  the public sector has grown slightly, increasing from 1.302 million to 1.332 million. From this measure, the public sector has done bett

Since closing 30 beds designed for non-acute patients in March, the number of  non-acute patients occupying acute care beds at Health Sciences North in Sudbury has more than doubled. OCHU/CUPE members protesting Sudbury bed cuts In February only 44 non-acute care patients were occupying acute care beds. But since the bed closures that number has increased: to 77 in April, 96 in May, and now 100 this week. In other words: the Liberal government cut 30 beds and now 100  patients are waiting for more appropriate services, a 127% increase compared to before the cuts.  Every day an extra 56 patients are waiting in more expensive hospital beds set up to provide services for much more acutely ill patients. It's hard to believe this is effective health care  -- or that it is going to save money. As a result of the hospital back-ups there is also nowhere to care for new patients. Currently about 25 patients admitted via the emergency department await beds.  The Sudbury Star