GMB claims more than 40 workers - employment advisors and support service advisors - who were recently brought in-house, have significant concerns related to their pay owing to 'the BMA's refusal to recognise their years of service when determining pay grades'.
All staff will be treated as day one employees and placed on the lowest salary band, regardless of how long they have worked for the union, the GMB claims.
An indicative ballot of members saw 91% vote in support of the dispute and indicate their willingness to take strike action if necessary.
Gavin Davies, GMB senior organiser, said: ‘The BMA proudly declares itself a trade union, but it seems to have forgotten its principles when dealing with its staff.
‘We are calling on BMA management to commit to paying their staff fairly and recognising their years of dedication to the union.
He added: ‘If the BMA does not put a better deal on the table, we are prepared to ballot our members for industrial action.'
In response, a BMA spokesperson, told Healthcare Management that the union is working closely with the GMB staff representatives to resolve their remaining concerns, which it hopes to conclude soon.
The BMA has 'carefully followed the TUPE legislation to create sustainable and permanent positions within the BMA for staff who have moved across from the outsourced provider', the spokesperson said.
They added: ‘Following a service review and consultation period - which we know created a period of uncertainty for affected staff - staff in the new roles, who are not the lowest paid employees, have been moved to the appropriate BMA pay grades which offer substantial pay increases of between 12% and 25%, depending on the job role. Those staff have also moved to BMA working hours and paid breaks and improvements to their terms and conditions include increased annual leave, and the doubling of pension contributions and enhanced life assurance and sick pay.
‘We will continue to support the transition to BMA staff employment but we have to look at the remaining GMB concerns, and the substantial impact they would have on the overall staffing budget, against our obligations to all of our 540 plus staff.'
