Policy of Labor Management and Health Education: a ProgeSUS experience

Magnago, Carinne; Pierantoni, Celia Regina; França, Tania; Vieira, Swheelen de Paula; Miranda, Rômulo Gonçalves de; Nascimento, Dayane Nunes

doi:10.1590/1413-81232017225.32962016

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ARTICLE • Ciênc. saúde colet. 22 (5) • May 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232017225.32962016 copy

Policy of Labor Management and Health Education: a ProgeSUS experience

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Aim

To evaluate the stage of labor management and education policies in municipal and state health secretariats (SMS and SES, respectively), having as reference the adherence to a qualification and structuring program of work management and education in the Unified Health System.

Method

A descriptive and quantitative study, developed with 519 representatives from the Human Resources (HR) area of SMS and SES, through a survey composed of 56 questions, via a computer-assisted telephone interview in 2012. Responses were processed in a computerized database and the data treated by descriptive statistics.

Results

Changes in professional qualification, the establishment of job and salary plans and negotiation processes were identified; on the other hand, there was no progress related to the financial and budgetary autonomy of the area of work management and health education.

Conclusion

It is observed progress in the incorporation of innovations in the management in SES and SMS from the process of training of managers and financial induction. It is necessary to monitor and periodically evaluate the operationalization of labor and education policies aimed at strengthening them, correcting directions and implementing innovative actions.

Human resources in health; People management; Decentralization; Public health policies

Types of hiring	SES		Capitals SMS		SMS		Total

	N = 27	%	N = 26	%	N = 466	%	N = 519	%
Statutory	25	92,6	25	96,2	399	85,6	449	86,5
Comissioned Position	23	85,2	25	96,2	390	83,7	438	84,4
Temporary Contract	20	74,1	20	76,9	328	70,4	368	70,9
Provision of service contract	19	70,4	19	73,1	325	69,7	363	69,9
CLT	14	51,9	16	61,5	247	53,0	277	53,4
Stage Scholarships	16	59,3	19	73,1	211	45,3	246	47,4
Cooperatives	14	51,9	9	34,6	46	9,9	69	13,3
Public Foundation	7	25,9	6	23,1	46	9,9	59	11,4
Social Organization	8	29,6	3	11,5	46	9,9	57	11,0
OSCIP	7	25,9	2	7,7	34	7,3	43	8,3
ONG	2	7,4	2	7,7	34	7,3	38	7,3
Verbal agreement	0	0,0	2	7,7	10	2,1	12	2,3

Actions	Evaluations	SES		Capitals SMS		SMS		Total

		N = 27	%	N = 26	%	N = 466	%	N = 519	%
Reorientation National Program for Professional Training in Health (Pro-health)	Good	16	59,3	18	69,2	163	35,0	197	38,0
	Regular	0	0,0	3	11,5	64	13,7	67	12,9
	Insufficient	1	3,7	1	3,8	18	3,9	20	3,9
	Doesn’t know	7	25,9	2	7,7	201	43,1	210	40,5
	DK/DR	3	11,1	2	7,7	20	4,3	25	4,8
Education Program for Working for Health (PET-Health)	Good	19	70,4	19	73,1	149	32,0	187	36,0
	Regular	1	3,7	3	11,5	48	10,3	52	10,0
	Insufficient	0	0,0	0	0,0	15	3,2	15	2,9
	Doesn’t know	7	25,9	2	7,7	234	50,2	243	46,8
	DK/DR	0	0,0	2	7,7	20	4,3	22	4,2
National Program of Support to the Training of Physicians Specialists in Strategic Areas (Pro-residencies)	Good	18	66,7	11	42,3	93	20,0	122	23,5
	Regular	0	0,0	4	15,4	32	6,9	36	6,9
	Insufficient	1	3,7	1	3,8	18	3,9	20	3,9
	Doesn’t know	8	29,6	6	23,1	303	65,0	317	61,1
	DK/DR	0	0,0	4	15,4	20	4,3	24	4,6
Middle Level Professional Training Program for Health (PROFAPS)	Good	20	74,1	6	23,1	70	15,0	96	18,5
	Regular	0	0,0	3	11,5	37	7,9	40	7,7
	Insufficient	1	3,7	3	11,5	14	3,0	18	3,5
	Doesn’t know	6	22,2	10	38,5	325	69,7	341	65,7
	DK/DR	0	0,0	4	15,4	20	4,3	24	4,6
Training/ Specialization Programs	Good	14	51,9	9	34,6	203	43,6	226	43,5
	Regular	6	22,2	6	23,1	69	14,8	81	15,6
	Insufficient	1	3,7	2	7,7	30	6,4	33	6,4
	Doesn’t know	6	22,2	4	15,4	144	30,9	154	29,7
	DK/DR	0	0,0	5	19,2	20	4,3	25	4,8
Position, Career and Salary Plan	Good	16	59,3	13	50,0	182	39,1	211	40,7
	Regular	7	25,9	4	15,4	72	15,5	83	16,0
	Insufficient	2	7,4	2	7,7	50	10,7	54	10,4
	Doesn’t know	2	7,4	3	11,5	144	30,9	149	28,7
	DK/DR	0	0,0	4	15,4	18	3,9	22	4,2
Negatiation Table of SUS	Good	15	55,6	19	73,1	160	34,3	194	37,4
	Regular	4	14,8	0	0,0	61	13,1	65	12,5
	Insufficient	3	11,1	2	7,7	49	10,5	54	10,4
	Doesn’t know	4	14,8	1	3,8	173	37,1	178	34,3
	DK/DR	1	3,7	4	15,4	23	4,9	28	5,4
Reward InovaSUS	Good	20	74,1	18	69,2	154	33,0	192	37,0
	Regular	1	3,7	1	3,8	47	10,1	49	9,4
	Insufficient	1	3,7	1	3,8	17	3,6	19	3,7
	Doesn’t know	5	18,5	2	7,7	226	48,5	233	44,9
	DK/DR	0	0,0	4	15,4	22	4,7	26	5,0
Program for the qualification and structuring of labor and education management in SUS (ProgeSUS)	Good	21	77,8	17	65,4	240	51,5	278	53,6
	Regular	1	3,7	5	19,2	72	15,5	78	15,0
	Insufficient	3	11,1	0	0,0	23	4,9	26	5,0
	Doesn’t know	2	7,4	1	3,8	111	23,8	114	22,0
	DK/DR	0	0,0	3	11,5	20	4,3	23	4,4

ABRASCO - Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva Av. Brasil, 4036 - sala 700 Manguinhos, 21040-361 Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brazil, Tel.: +55 21 3882-9153 / 3882-9151 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: cienciasaudecoletiva@fiocruz.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Collaborations

C Magnago worked on designing, collecting, interpreting data, writing the article and final approval; CR Pierantoni worked on designing, data interpretation, article writing and final approval; SP Vieira worked on designing, collecting, interpreting data and writing the article; T França, RG Miranda and DN Nascimento worked on data collection, interpreting data and approval of the final version.