A major study has revealed that most radiographers feel Agenda for Change (AfC) has impeded their career progression since it was introduced three years ago. But some feel that AfC has, at least, led to improved pay.
The question: How has the introduction of AfC affected career progression among the imaging and therapy workforce in England and Wales? formed the basis of a the study recently commissioned by the Society and conducted by University of Hertfordshire, in partnership with the Institute of Employment Studies and Oxford Radcliffe NHS Hospital.
The research was a response to Motion 12 at the 2007 Annual Delegates Conference, which called for clear advice on how career progression can be rewarded under AfC, and support of members where the employer avoids appropriate rewards due to financial constraints.
The results of the study have now been collated and analysed and the key findings have been drawn up. The researchers concluded:
• Agenda for Change promised much, but inequitable implementation has prevented the realisation of its full potential.
• The majority of the radiographic workforce is dissatisfied with AfC in relation to their career progression. A large proportion feels it has had no effect, and less than one in ten has a positive view of AfC.
• The Society of Radiographers’ Career Progression Framework (CPF) is viewed positively and there is more staff satisfaction with career progress in hospital sites where it has been adopted.
• Staff resent being defined by their salary band, and many feel that professional identity and status has been lost with the removal of the Whitley Council grades.
The study clearly shows a general dissatisfaction with AfC and its implementation. One respondent said: “There has been a failure of some trusts to adhere to the whole package of AfC...they are leaving out the bits they don’t like, such as Annex T.”
Another commented: “I believe a golden opportunity to recognise and reward people has been missed...AfC is now a barrier that trust boards can hide behind to stop paying fairly for work.”
However, the picture was a little brighter for one respondent who stated: “AfC has improved my financial position but not my career progression.”
Aside from general dissatisfaction with AfC implementation, the research also highlights divisions across the workforce in terms of optimism about future career prospects.
Those who are most confident are band five staff, breast imaging and therapeutic radiographers. Those who are least buoyant are band six staff generally, ultrasonographers, MRI radiographers and nuclear medicine radiographers.
Across the board, most staff feel that acquiring new skills will not speed their progression, and that promotions only come about via existing vacancies, rather than through professional development.
One radiographer said: “My progression to band seven will involve the retirement of the current post holder.”
It comes as little surprise that the research also shows that protected study time is a rare thing among the radiographic workforce, and diagnostic radiographers in particular.
No more than a tenth of the study’s respondents receive protected study time. For therapeutic radiographers, the outlook is slightly better at 20%. Many staff believe that a lack of funding or time off for training damages their morale.
Many also report barriers to career progression. These included:
• Poor management support;
• Lack of funding;
• Under-staffing;
• Appraisals not done.
Those in the higher bands are most likely to identify positive factors which help their career progression.
In view of the findings, the authors of the report make a number of recommendations, which the Society will explore. These are:
• Encourage and facilitate greater standardisation and harmonisation of roles across trusts in line with the spirit of AfC i) by pursuing high level discussions with the Department of Health ii) by working closely with the NHS Staff Council to guarantee as fair a system as possible in advance of the new on call arrangements;
• Expedite the integration of the CPF in all departments, and encourage the use of the KSF at appraisals;
• Increase support, and develop better training programmes to help managers value appraisals and conduct them more effectively;
• Promote the advantages and benefits of protected study time for the workforce, and promote radiographers’ active engagement with research;
• Develop a new contemporary system of professional titles, which may go some way to restoring professional identity, which many feel has been eclipsed by AfC banding;
• Through the use of the SCoR website, invite trust managers to provide information on whether they recognise the CPF and Annex T, whether they provide protected study time, and whether they appoint consultants. This will enable the mobile workforce to be more discerning as to where they seek employment.
Commenting on the study, Warren Town, the Society’s director of industrial relations, said: “These findings will come as little surprise to the profession. They back up and mirror the experiences of the majority of our officers, representatives and members.
“Nonetheless, this is an extremely important study as the findings give us the hard evidence we need to back up anecdotal evidence from the membership.
“We will be taking the findings forward through the relevant channels and forums. In particular, we will be using it in our evidence to the Pay Review Body, in meetings with health departments and ministers in England and Wales, and through our own career progression board, as well as the next annual delegates conference. This is a solid piece of research and it will, therefore, be very hard to refute or ignore.”
The full report is available to download online.
