Nearly three-quarters of NHS staff who have been made redundant as part of the health reforms are female, research has found.

Figures show that of 74% of staff who have lost their jobs as part of the health shake-up are women.

Jamie Reed, Labour’s Shadow Health Minister, said the “Government is letting women bear the brunt” of its controversial reforms.

Data from the report prepared for the NHS Commissioning Board on the DH’s ‘people tracker’ revealed that employees over the age of 40 also were more likely to be made redundant than younger colleagues. Research found that 77% of staff who were received redundancy packages were over the age of 40.

Between 1 April and June 30 this year, figures show that 105 staff were axed from primary care trusts and strategic health authorities. Fifty of these were compulsory redundancies, 77% were women and 78% were aged over 40 years old.

“As the Government's reorganisation inflicts chaos on the NHS, its women employees who are being hit hardest,” said Jamie Reed.

With jobs at a premium and the cost of living continuing to rise, job security has suddenly become a main priority for employees.

The global recession has affected each and every one of us in one way or another. Sweeping job losses throughout the medical sales sector – and in the pharmaceutical industry in particular – have seen even the most experienced personnel joining the queue at the job centre. For those lucky enough to have avoided the dreaded axe, it seems to have made us appreciate our job a whole lot more.

Last year was somewhat of a breakthrough year for as far as job security is concerned. Results from last year’s Pf Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey highlighted how job security had gone from a passing thought to one of the main motivating factors for respondents. Ranked behind salary, relationship with manager and work-life balance in the 2009 survey, job security was suddenly thrust into the top-two motivating factors last year.

It has maintained its position this year behind salary as the second highest motivating factor after pharmaceutical companies continue to introduce ‘efficiency’ plans in an attempt to sustain profits and counter bleak pipelines. During an uncertain last twelve months it would seem that satisfaction levels in job security have also improved. Job security moved from 14th position last year to 11th in the latest set of results. Are companies doing more to reassure staff their jobs are safe, or are employees learning to live with the fact that their week at work may be their last?

Moving on
Attitudes towards job security have also affected respondents’ outlook on where they’d like to be within 12 months’ time – see Figure 1. In last year’s survey, 15% of respondents indicated they were searching for a move away from their current employers with 56% content to stay where they were. However, this year’s results show a slight increase in those figures with 13% of people within the medical sales sector looking for a new job and 59% happy where they are. 

Its men that indicated a stronger desire to change companies with 17% wishing to move organisations and a further 24% saying it was a possibility. However, female respondents were less sure about joining a new organisation with only a tenth wishing to move away from their current employers.

The importance now placed upon job security may also arise from the fact that employees are still very mindful of a turbulent few years – despite a glimpse of light at the end of a very, very dark tunnel. Dr John Philpott, Chief Economic Adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) recently told a panel of directors from Yorkshire that modest economic growth in the UK would see unemployment levels stabilise this year. He also discussed the potential of a stronger recovery resulting in a sudden, sharp fall in unemployment levels and employers again going on the hunt for talented staff to meet increasing demand.

Job security works both ways. It shouldn’t be something that only staff on the ground worry about. Stability and medium to long-term assurance ensures employees are engaged and motivated enough to be committed to company goals and objectives.

Although job security may be a state of mind, there are ways of improving one’s mindset. If a company can ensure or encourage career development and progression, an employee will feel a greater sense of loyalty and commitment. With this in place a sense of dedication allows employees to focus on their individual skills and capabilities and become a consistent performer. In turn, an employer gets a happy and productive employee in the work place.

Trust levels
However, it’s not always that easy it? Memories of colleagues and friends being made redundant can last for a very long time. Geoffrey James, argues on the website inc.com, that job security is defined by who you are, what you do and who you trust. If you’re an individual who is happy going along with your job, undertaking everyday tasks and playing second-fiddle to other staff then you’re more than likely to receive your marching orders, James says. Individuals should strive to stand out from colleagues and be different to the majority of the workforce. “If you really want job security, there must be something about you that’s different, that makes you more relevant than anybody else who does what you do. More importantly, other people must perceive that difference and see it as valuable,” he says.

Then, of course, there’s the trust issue. Do you think you can rely on your boss not to put a red cross next to your name if there are further redundancies? James – who pens one of the world’s most-visited sales-oriented blogs – suggests a novel approach to assessing trust whilst at work or in the field. People that you speak with on a daily basis – be they family, friends, colleagues or business associates – should be placed into three categories: those who trust you completely, those who moderately trust you, and those who vaguely trust you. When these have been grouped together, remove the people in the final two categories – these are the people unlikely to return sales calls, James adds – and then calculate the number of people who you believe completely trust you. If, he says, you have more than 20 people on that list, then you have a greater sense of job security. If you haven’t, it might be time to start building some bridges.

So there you have it. Job security ultimately comes down to who you can trust and who trusts you. Can you hold on to trusted colleagues at work whilst the UK tries to climb out of a double-dip recession. Or, are the people who you believe you rely on merely providing a crocodile smile during work hours? It’s probably wise to start drawing up that list...

NHS job cuts have resulted in health care professionals (HCPs) working harder than they were a year ago, being more stressed and less productive, new research has found.

After questioning more than 2,000 doctors, nurses and other HCPs the survey found that more than 50% feel they are now performing the job of 1.5 people after streamlining measures reduced staff levels.

The survey by Randstad discovered that a third of HCPs feel their workload requires the assistance of a part-time colleague to adequately complete tasks.

Vicky Short, Operations Director of Randstad Care, said that healthcare workers are “facing greater workloads” leading to “burnout, mistakes and lower productivity in the long-run”.

Nearly one in three respondents said their current workload would need two full-time employees to manage tasks effectively.

The increase in responsibilities has also led to a rise in stress levels. Nearly a quarter of HCPs said they feel more stressed than they did just six months ago, 49% indicated issues in unwinding away from work and 11% said they had trouble sleeping due to worrying about work.

“It’s clear that public austerity measures are exerting more and more pressure on local authorities and the NHS to keep their workforces as lean as possible,” said Vicky Short.

“It’s vital that heavier work burdens for health care professionals do not lead to the erosion of the quality of service provision.”

Up to 6,000 jobs may be lost over the coming months as part of the final transitional stages of the new NHS structure, a leading union boss has predicted.

It’s believed that 400 jobs at the Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country PCT and a further 400 positions at Greater Manchester PCT will be the first axed.

Jon Restell, Chief Executive of Managers in Practice, said he was “expecting something big to happen” in the next three months due to the NHS still needing to “downsize”.

The wave of job cuts are as a result of CCGs, CSS and the NHSCB only now calculating how many employees they will be able to afford when they are fully authorised from next April.

The hundreds of jobs predicted to go in the Midlands and the North West have also been replicated in other parts of England. However, regions such as London reduced posts “harder and earlier” in the restructuring process, Restell said.

A reduction of 400 posts at the Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country PCT would result in a 30% reduction in staff. However, it’s expected that those who will lose their jobs will take on new roles in the local CSSs, council public health teams, Public Health England and other bodies formed after the reforms.

Pfizer Inc. has cut its redundancy payouts to US employees by a third just before its anticipated spring round of layoffs.

Employees of the world’s largest drug company will see their basic severance pay cut from 12 to eight weeks.

Other aspects of Pfizer’s severance package will remain in place, but employee health benefits will now last eight weeks instead of a year.

Pfizer CEO Ian Read (pictured), whose pay package rose by 44% in 2011, has promised to cut $1bn from global operations in 2012.

This continues the slimming process that saw the company’s costs reduced by $642m in 2011.

Pfizer has already shed 20% of its total workforce since its acquisition of Wyeth in 2009.

An internal memo announcing the changes in terms and conditions noted: “We will continue to analyze all of our benefit programs to support our long-term competitiveness and the sustainability of benefits in today’s challenging business environment.”

The measure suggests that major job losses are planned, since the company is now taking steps to manage the cost of redundancy itself.

During an era of job cuts and widespread pay freezes, employee benefits are an essential way of maintaining motivation and satisfaction. But just how important are these?

After sitting through a palm-sweating, grilling and probing interview from potential bosses, the first question you’re likely to be asked afterwards is not about how well your interrogation went, but what are the perks like?

It’s in our nature to want to know what added extras we’re going to get. We always like to believe we’re getting a good deal, be it at a hotel, whilst out buying a new pair of jeans, or at work.

With job security at an all time low and wage increases way below the rate of inflation, employers are realising the importance of reward packages to keep experienced professionals on board.

For the past four decades, organisations have increasingly looked to improve the benefits packages which they offer to staff. These have become more individualistic recently as organisations aim to increase loyalty via new perks instead of widespread salary increases.

Private medical and accident insurance, season ticket travel passes, death in service payments, flexitime and pensions schemes are all commonplace. But are they enough to stop employees making envious glances at roles in other organisations?

These perks are appreciated if they are ever called upon – and may even be taken for granted in the modern workplace – but when employees are asking for more towards the price of travel or a greater subsidy at the canteen there comes a point when employers start to rein in added benefits.

As companies have started to tighten their belts, company cars have been pulled, pension schemes have stopped and the portion sizes at lunch have been reduced. These added extras may seem to be expendable by employers, but they are valued by the workforce. When these are removed staff take it personally – people like boasting about having the nearest car parking space to the door or how their dog is insured through the firm.

But what can be done about it? Would you really put your job on the line to insist Puddles’ vet’s bill is covered or because you now have to fight for a parking space every morning? How important are perks of the job at a time when people are pleased not to arrive at work on a Monday morning and find their P45?

Have your say on your benefits package in Pf’s annual Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey here. The online survey takes only ten minutes to complete with a donation made by HSP – the publisher of Pharmaceutical Field – to the charity Home from Hospital Care for every completed form.

Merck is set to cut jobs under new efficiency plans it aims will reduce costs and exploit new growth opportunities.

The measures are part of the Group’s comprehensive transformation programme which it says is needed to tackle unprecedented market shifts, competition and its own existing inefficiencies.

The number of jobs losses has not yet been decided, but Karl-Ludwig Kley, Merck’s Chairman, says that initial analysis may lead to “workforce reductions across all businesses and regions”.

A consultation process will now be conducted by the Group with employee representatives in different countries to seek solutions where possible.

Mr Kley says the approach reflects the company’s strong tradition it has with its employees at Merck. “We have specifically not published potential figures related to the efficiency programme as we are committed to engaging constructively with the relevant stakeholders to achieve a mutually acceptable solution,” he said.

The Group’s Executive Board plans to focus on all businesses and regions and consists of two phases.

The first phase, carried out in the next two years, plans to establish a new leadership organisation and install cost-cutting measures to develop long-term growth. The implementation of a new leadership committee began at the start of the year with the objective to increase decision making processes.

The second phase aims to exploit new growth opportunities. The company says that initial exploration of areas for future growth based on broader industry and macroeconomic trends has also commenced.

“Over the next two years, Merck needs to address unprecedented market shifts, increasing competition in key product areas and existing inefficiencies in its own organisation to ensure the long-term success of its business model,” said Mr Kley. “We will therefore progress with our planned efficiency program in order to deliver recurring cost reductions and free up resources for investment in promising growth areas.”

AstraZeneca will reduce its US sales force by nearly a quarter (24%) as part of new plans to operate its business more efficiently.

Approximately 1,150 leadership and sales representative positions will be axed in the plans which the company claims will cost between $50 and $100 million.

Rich Fante, President, AstraZeneca US, says the job cuts are “difficult decisions that impact valued employees”.

The reduction to the US sales force is incremental to the company’s second phase of its restructuring programme first revealed at the start of the year.

“The changes we are making, however, will help us deliver better results for our business and, most importantly, continue delivering on our mission of patient health,” said Mr Fante.

Employees will have the option of voluntary redundancy with all decision finalised by early February 2012.

Despite streamlining its US operations, AstraZeneca has revealed plans to expand its presence in emerging markets after agreeing to buy Chinese generics maker Guangdong BeiKang Pharmaceutical.

The deal is AZ’s second generic acquisition in the country after its partnership with Aurobindo Pharma. A $200 million manufacturing facility in China is also planned.

Between 1,000 and 1,500 jobs are expected to be lost at Teva Pharmaceutical Industries as part of the company’s cost-cutting measures.

Reports from Israel claim the majority of the layoffs will be made in the US and Europe and mainly focused in Teva’s recently acquired Cephalon’s generic business.

The reports say that Teva is hoping to raise $500 million in synergies from its takeover with job losses expected to raise the majority of its target.

Teva has already said it is planning to cut sales, marketing and administrative expenses by $300 million, R&D by between $120 million and $150 million, and production costs by $50 million to $80 million. R&D savings would be achieved by cutting duplicate operations, the company said.

Teva has a history of job losses following takeovers of generic companies. In 2008 it bought US generic specialist Barr and reduced its workforce by 10%, reports say.

A reduction of 1,000 jobs at Cephalon would represent a loss of 27% roles before the takeover. But one company where job losses will be made, the reports say, is at Mepha, the Swiss generics manufacturer Cephalon bought last year. The company had 620 jobs prior to the acquisition.

Sanofi plans to cut hundreds of jobs in its sales and R&D departments in the US over the coming months.

The job losses come as the company prepares to lose patent exclusivity on key products and fully absorbs Genzyme following its acquisition in February 2011.

The sales jobs cuts would be focused on Sanofi’s cardiovascular and oncology groups, aiming for cost savings of $2.9 billion per year, said CEO Christopher Viehbacher.

More than 9,000 jobs have been cut at the company over the last several years, including approximately 3,800 sales employees in the US.

The staff reductions in mature markets have been similar at many other pharmaceutical companies, adding vacancies in emerging markets.

According to Mr Viehbacher, Sanofi has added more than 3,700 pharmaceutical jobs in emerging markets since 2008.