Heated disputes at the Doctors' Syndicate have done little to clarify the situation, writes Hala Sakr An emergency general assembly of the Doctors' Syndicate was called last Friday amid growing differences among the medical profession on how best to pursue their demands for better pay and conditions. The general assembly convened after the syndicate council suspended a strike planned for 15 March and agreed at the general assembly of 1 February. The limited two-hour strike was to take place in all public hospitals, except for emergency and intensive care units, between 9 and 11am. The council's decision to abandon the strike, agreed unanimously by the general assembly, triggered anger and frustration among doctors. During Friday's emergency meeting Syndicate Chairman Hamdi El-Sayed defended the council's decision, saying that had the strike gone ahead the "battle would have then been about securing the release of arrested doctors and defending them in court rather than focussing on the main issue, an appropriate wage cadre". He also announced that the syndicate council was scheduled to discuss the issue with Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif on 24 March. El-Sayed insisted the syndicate's goals remained strictly professional, with no political component, and criticised the use of inflammatory terms such as "treason" which the daily Al-Masry Al-Yom quoted from the website of the Doctors Without Rights group. Rashwan Shaaban Rashwan, a member of the group, apologised for any unintended offence, while Mona Mina told Al-Ahram Weekly that the furore was a result of misunderstanding. "Our blog serves as an open platform for doctors to express their views and offer suggestions. This was an individual view posted by one doctor and does not represent the opinions of the group. It should not have been posted in the first place," she explained. During the general meeting Doctors Without Rights distributed a statement underlining their commitment to maintaining unity in the struggle for common goals, though "this does not mean giving up the principles of union work, particularly respecting the resolutions of general meetings". Members of the syndicate council brushed away any negative allegations, arguing that they had come to their decision after receiving a letter from the prime minister pointing out that strikes in "vital and strategic institutions", including hospitals and medical facilities, were illegal. The syndicate council then made its decision in order to protect doctors' interests and avoid any legal and administrative pitfalls until its own legal team could advise on the situation. Mohamed Saad, an ophthalmologist from Kafr Al-Sheikh governorate, was not alone in questioning the council's argument. "Do we expect to be given permission for a strike? Doctors should realise that they will get an appropriate and fair wages cadre only when freedom and democracy prevails." The strength of doctors' lies in their unity, said Mina, who called for protests to be staged in local branches of the syndicate as well as government hospitals, as happened in Gharbiya governorate on 15 March, the day of the suspended strike. Doctors at three public hospitals took to the hospital yards, leaving a single doctor running each clinic. They were joined by nurses and other hospital workers in a demonstration of solidarity. Mohamed Gamal Hishmat, professor of medicine at Alexandria University and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, seconded Mina's suggestion that the Gharbiya protest forms a model for action across the country. He criticised the council's decision, arguing that "had any doctor been arrested, then it would have been the time the whole legal and constitutional issue was taken to court and not vice versa". Hishmat then called for the minister of health to be suspended from the syndicate, a suggestion that was greeted with applause. Furious, El-Sayed announced that he was withdrawing from the meeting but was convinced to return to his seat and chaired the meeting till its end. Syndicate treasurer Essam El-Erian explained that the suspension of members was beyond the authority of the general meeting and was the sole prerogative of the disciplinary committee. He then read out the resolutions for voting. The final resolutions of the emergency general assembly comprised four articles, one mandating the union council to examine the legality of the prime ministerial decree prohibiting strikes in vital and strategic institutions and to take action accordingly. The council was again mandated to negotiate with the government for a new wages cadre and for the improvement of doctors' conditions. The convening of emergency general meetings for local union branches in Beni Sweif on 24 April and in the Nile Delta on 9 May were once again ratified and the Wednesday 23 April was selected the day of general protest. On Monday the syndicate council met with the prime minister as planned. According to El-Sayed it was a positive meeting during which Nazif promised to put already existing incentive-related procedures and decisions into effect. "The minister of health repeatedly announced that LE450 million had been allocated to improve doctors' conditions. Yet doctors have as yet received nothing because of various obstacles," said El-Sayed. So what's new? El-Sayed explained that doctors have little trust in government promises. "The importance of this meeting was that it helped rebuild that trust -- an important first step." He further explained that there is no alternative to an appropriate wages cadre but that negotiations must be pursued in a way that ensures doctors' benefit. "We must give negotiations an opportunity to work. A strike should be the end, not the beginning of the journey." Some doctors see things differently. "We are far from the beginning of our struggle. The cadre issue dates back to 1988. And withholding labour is one way to force negotiations through different stages," says Mina. She believes that doctors have tried every possible means of persuasion to convince the government of their case but to no avail. "What exists now is an illusory contract between doctors and the government under which doctors get an illusory salary and provide an illusory service. This has adverse implications on the health system as a whole, and the main victims are the people seeking medical services."
