Deputy Medical Director of Sally’s Atos
Centre:
“You’d better throw your principles out the window otherwise you won’t be able to work here.”
My
previous post outlined my conclusion that Atos acts as a ‘shield’ for the
government, and that by having them as a ‘middle man’ between claimants and the
DWP facilitates the deflection of criticism that should rightly be aimed at
warped government policies. In this
recording for LBC Radio Sally, a former Atos employee, describes her
experience with that ‘horrendous organisation’, which she alleges cares as
little for its employees as it does the vulnerable people pushed through its WCA
process.
This timely appearance of a radio
interview with ex-Atos nurse ‘Sally’ goes a long way towards validating my
assertion. Sally is yet another ‘whistleblower’ emerging
from this firm, and her testimony is even more damning of the bad practice that
is rife within, indeed is deliberately built into, their process. It is one she
describes as being factory-like, with
“…no regard for your clinical skills…and most of the people who go there haven’t got any because they’ve been out of practice for so long.”
For example most GPs occupied in an Atos role, she
asserts, are “…retired or semi-retired,
nearing their time…”. Considering the high remuneration for
doctors taking up these positions its not unreasonable to suppose that many
facing retirement might see it as somewhat of a ‘pension booster’.
Aside from GPs she criticises the substandard
quality of many of the (highly paid) doctors who tend in one way or another to
be among the less competent, or less experienced, of medical professionals.
This, she says, is because the majority (estimated by her as between 90-95%) are
foreign nationals unable to secure NHS employment, or who have failed exams that
might qualify them to work legitimately in our healthcare system.
Sally also confirms previous allegations about how
ratios are set, the ‘targets’ that pre-determine how many claimants should go
into each group, so that considerable file ‘juggling’ must be done to make sure
those targets are kept to. That revelation met with a gasp of shock by the
interviewer, she goes on to say “If you
didn’t get those figures right, within your file, then there was repercussions
on you…”, and likely ‘disciplinary’ action taken. Its
glaringly obvious to anyone that if you’re working to targets you’re not
authentically assessing the patient, you’re focusing instead on how people’s
data can be manipulated to fit the rigid categories set for you. If you’re led
by that then you can’t possibly be led by the evidence in front of you, the
claimant’s unique health circumstances.
The part most relevant to my post, however, is
when she questions why the DWP does not employ the doctors and nurses directly,
a common sense idea, which, considering the huge profits creamed off by Atos,
would be more economically sound.
I think the answer to that is now plainly
clear.
It is clear too, that those medical professionals
employed by Atos are not there for utilisation of their medical skills, but
merely to lend an aura of respectability to a process that has no medical
legitimacy, nor even medical relevance, whatsoever.
