header-logo header-logo

27 April 2020
Issue: 7884 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: single payout for bereaved families

The Health Secretary’s death in service benefit for families of healthcare workers may not go far enough, the British Medical Association (BMA) has warned

Matt Hancock announced this week that a single sum of £60,000 will be paid to the dependants of health and social care workers who die from COVID-19 in the course of essential frontline work. The time-limited scheme is for the duration of the pandemic, starting on 25 March, but claims for deaths before this will be considered.

The BMA, Royal College of Nursing (RCN) and other health unions have lobbied the government to provide full death in service benefits to all NHS staff regardless of whether they are a member of the NHS pension scheme.

However, the BMA said that, while the sum may provide immediate financial relief, it could leave families bereft of longer-term financial security, particularly if their loved one was not a current member of the NHS pension scheme or had only recently joined the scheme.

Dr Vishal Sharma, BMA pensions committee chair, said: ‘Whilst this single payment may seem a sizeable sum, it comes nowhere near compensating families for the lifetime income their loved one may have earned if they hadn’t died prematurely, fighting this crisis on the frontline.

‘This is particularly true for young or recently qualified staff. The BMA will be examining closely the detail of the government’s life assurance scheme.’

Dame Donna Kinnair, General Secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said: ‘We will examine the detail closely.

‘It must be easily accessed, open to those in social care and primary care too and be paid promptly―no family should face a lengthy or complex process.’

Meanwhile, Bindmans partner Jamie Potter is acting for two doctors in a judicial review to challenge the government’s PPE guidance and sourcing. Pre-action correspondence was sent last week.

Potter said: ‘There needs to be a public inquiry in due course, but what those workers deserve right now is transparency as to the risks they are facing with different levels of PPE and confirmation they are entitled to refuse to work where they consider the risks too great.’

Issue: 7884 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll