Sir David Nicholson will retire from his role as Chief Executive of NHS England, and from the NHS altogether, in March 2014.

The announcement of his retirement will relieve the pressure on him to resign following the Francis report, which implicated him in the Mid Staffordshire tragedy.

It also means that he will not have to deal with growing anger over revelations that the ‘Nicholson challenge’ of cutting £5bn from the NHS budget each year means an absolute cut in the NHS budget.

A former Communist Party member, Nicholson has been a strong supporter of current Conservative health policy: he began implementing the Health and Social Care Act prior to its approval by Parliament.

However, last autumn he warned that “carpet bombing” the NHS with private sector providers would lead to “misery and failure”. NHS reform needed to support clinical decision-making, he argued.

The Francis report into the unnecessary deaths at Stafford Hospital between 2005 and 2009 found that Nicholson, as head of the region’s SHA, had not acted on warnings about the hospital’s high death rate.

While the Francis report blamed inadequate staffing levels and bad management for the tragedy, Nicholson pinned the blame on the Labour Government’s infection control and waiting time targets.

Nicholson has worked in the NHS for 35 years, and was NHS Chief Executive for almost seven years. In April this year he became Chief Executive of NHS England, a role effectively continuous with his previous one.

In a letter to Professor Malcolm Grant, Chair of NHS England, Nicholson declared his continued support for the NHS reform process: “I still passionately believe in what NHS England intends to do. My hope is that by being clear about my intentions now [I] will give the organisation the opportunity to attract candidates of the very highest calibre so they can appoint someone who will be able to see this essential work through to its completion.”

Nicholson’s retirement will quieten the controversy over his role in the NHS reforms of this and the last government, and allow recognition of his lifelong commitment to the NHS.

Eli Lilly has appointed key appointments to its senior management team after the retirements of Bryce D. Carmine, Senior Vice President and President of Lilly Bio-Medicines, and Frank Deane, President of Manufacturing Operations (both pictured below).

The two will step down at the end of the year with Dave Ricks, President of Lilly USA, replacing Mr Carmine and Maria Crowe, Senior Vice President for Global Drug Product Manufacturing, succeeding Mr Deane.

John C. Lechleiter, Chairman, President, and CEO, Lilly, says the outgoing pair have been “pillars of the company who have had a lasting, worldwide impact”.

Mr Deane, who has let the Bio-Medicines division since 2009, and Mr Carmine, the leader of global manufacturing since 2007, have a combined 69 years of experience at the company.

“We’re grateful for their dedicated service,” said Mr Lechleiter. “We'll certainly miss Bryce and Frank and the extraordinary leadership they provided.

“At the same time, we're very fortunate to have talented leaders who are well-prepared and ready to step into these critical roles.”

As a result of Mr Ricks’ promotion, Alex Azaz is being promoted to President of Lilly USA.

Bryce Carmine

Frank Deane

Merck’s chairman of its board of directors, Richard T. Clark, has decided to take retirement in December.

The former president and CEO of Merck will be replaced by Kenneth C. Frazier as the board’s new chair.

Mr Frazier thanked the outgoing chairman for the “leadership and the innumerable contributions he has made to our company and our industry”.

He first joined Merck back in 1972 and went on to lead the company for five years between 2005 and 2010. Mr Clark has served as a director at the company since May 2005 and became chairman in 2007.

“I have been a part of Merck for more than 39 years – I always have and always will consider Merck to be an important part of my life and my extended family,” said Mr Clark. “It has been a great pleasure to work with the talented, dedicated people of Merck who are so committed to our mission of saving and improving lives around the world.

“I am confident that under Ken Frazier's leadership, the company is well positioned for continued success in the future.”

By Di Spencer, Pf Web Editor

No one wants to think about getting old, but with state pension provision likely to dwindle in the future, ‘planning for retirement’ is becoming an all-important financial priority.

The government’s decision to remove the default retirement age (DRA) will take effect in a few weeks (5^th April) and will mean that employers will no longer be able to insist that an employee retires, unless there are issues with their ability to perform in their role.

There will be a transitional period however, so that between 6 April and 1 October, only those people who were told before 6 April, and who are due to retire before 1 October, can be compulsorily retired using DRA.

In a recent poll, 66% of visitors to the Pf website said that yes, the removal of the DRA will be good for UK employees.

The government hopes that the change in the law will benefit individuals but also the economy.

The Pf website poll reveals a certain amount of optimism in pharma about the effect the changes will have. On a positive note, the population in generally living longer and enjoying better health in old age, so many people will appreciate the ability to stay in work for as long as they wish to. According to Flexibility.co.uk, 100,000 are forced to retire against their will each year.

Employees may also welcome the new rules due to concerns over pension provision or a lack of savings. Although it is probably advisable now to start a personal pension as soon as you begin to earn, it can be difficult to have that much foresight in your early twenties when there are so many other things you’d rather spend your money on! Removing the default retirement age will give us all longer to save for when we actually do retire, whenever that might be.

Companies have expressed concerns about the pace of the changes and a lack of clarity in some areas. However, it seems that for employees, it’s good news all round.

What do you think? Got a different view? Share it below.

Contact the author: diana.spencer@healthpublishing.co.uk