|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: New Junior Doctors' Contract
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The reasons given are workload and the continual monitoring .... a 10% wastage rate in teachers across the profession.
The government managed to downgrade teachers a few years back as education has always been a lower hanging fruit than the health service.
The "wastage" rate reflects a number of factors. One aspect is that until a couple of years ago, it was all but impossible to get rid of a "bad" teacher. Stealing money or abusing children were pretty much the only ways you could do it - for other matters, the disciplinary process was so long winded and biased towards the employee that most heads adopted a "give a reference when asked" approach and moved the teacher along.
Now, performance targets have been introduced for the first time and failure to meet those without good reason means that a teacher is subject to conduct/capability procedures. If unaddressed after support this will mean loss of employment.
It is weeding out the poorly performing teachers who have remained "hidden" perhaps for years. That's produced a bulge in leavers reflecting the different practice from years past.
It's not ideal but would you want your child taught by someone who is less than effective? You wouldn't want your heart surgeon to be the same, so why a teacher?
By the by, it's only bringing teaching conditions into the same place as that experienced by the vast majority of parents.
Like Doctors there's an element of special pleading going on and also like Doctors, a singular lack of support for others who have gone through the same thing in the past. Why expect support from others now?
[ 05. October 2015, 07:29: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
My argument works just fine. If good people who are motivated to do the work, and love the work, are nevertheless leaving to do something else, the pay is clearly too low. (I'd expect to see the effect on recruitment first, because potential new recruits have less invested in the career.)
And you're right - the "market rate" for people who believe that job X is a good thing and worth doing is lower than the market rate for people who just see it as a job, and are looking for whatever career will maximize their income.
Yeah, okay I'll concede that point as far as it goes. But no one is asking for or expecting more money. No one.
What we're talking about is unsafe rotas coupled with a pay cut.
The money matters in the sense that it's really bad for morale in an already terrible morale situation. And because for people who are very time poor and have to pay own costs and move a lot, the pressures of that will be really felt.
Junior doctors are really committed but my argument is that we're being pushed too far. Burn out will increase.
How is that unreasonable?
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
The situation with the number of junior doctors is very tricky because of the number trained.
As I understand it the NHS subsidises training for doctors although this is limited to a set number. The number of places available to study medicine is limited by that whereas for many subjects, if the demand is there, universities can run extra classes and fund them from tuition fees.
For medicine however, if more than the expected number of doctors under training falls, there is no real alterntive and the NHS will not have enough doctors. It'll start with juniors, then consultants and eventually the professors of the medical schools.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
My argument works just fine. If good people who are motivated to do the work, and love the work, are nevertheless leaving to do something else, the pay is clearly too low. (I'd expect to see the effect on recruitment first, because potential new recruits have less invested in the career.)
And you're right - the "market rate" for people who believe that job X is a good thing and worth doing is lower than the market rate for people who just see it as a job, and are looking for whatever career will maximize their income.
Yeah, okay I'll concede that point as far as it goes. But no one is asking for or expecting more money. No one.
What we're talking about is unsafe rotas coupled with a pay cut.
The money matters in the sense that it's really bad for morale in an already terrible morale situation. And because for people who are very time poor and have to pay own costs and move a lot, the pressures of that will be really felt.
Junior doctors are really committed but my argument is that we're being pushed too far. Burn out will increase.
How is that unreasonable?
AFZ
I'd have a lot more sympathy if this weekend's experience was a one off and not a regular occurrence.
A large teaching hospital somewhere in south central england .... the patient a mid 80's man, with a diagnosis of terminal cancer to bladder, prostate, urethra etc.
1. There is no evening or weekend cover to recheck a pacemaker after an op
2. Tablets take hours to produce because"it's the weekend" (said at 4 pm)
3. After 4 pm the only Doctor we can see is working for the Colorectal team not urology. He has less clue than I about the operation.
4. Consultant seen on ward round (admittedly on Saturday am - thats good) - goes all round the houses with a terminal diagnosis. Time scale short. I have to almost make him spell it out. "You don't know and you can't say" "Yes."
5. Told that the specialist cancer nurse has spoken to us and wrote in the file to say so. In 15 years of treatment, no conversations of that ilk with anyone. Debate whether to raise a clinical incident: decide otherwise treatment more necessary than dealing with idiocy and lies.
6. Discharge Sunday. Monday contacted by Nurse who says she has spoken to us. No. Find we have to arrange palliative care, District Nurses GPs. The latter do not of course work after 6 pm.
7. Thank God that Mrs M is an ex Palliative Care/elderly Nurse. That Miss M 2 is an infection control specialist and Miss M 3 works on a cancer unit. Even with that knowledge we are on the edge, God knows how many lives the NHS screws p with the collateral damage caused by cock ups and restrictive working practices.
Addenbrookes - ow in special measures had a novel way of doing it: they failed to report clinical incidents. Are they the only ones or is this a structural issue? In Addenbrookes case it only came to light as a result of a formal complaint on other matters, thankfully Miss M1 a mental health specialist had recorded her conversation about the incidents (sharps left where a child picked it up).
It was all denied until the segment was played at a haring where an 8 (!) page letter of apology was discussed detailing a catalogue of failures at this flagship hospital. If that hapens there - and Mrs and Misses M know enough of it elsewhere - then it's surprising that there's any sympathy left for the NHS.
There are many good people there - but they need to make their voices heard beyond the time servers and the fossils.
Go to hospital? At this moment, I'd rather die, thanks.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Yes, there do appear to be issues with weekend/night cover at hospitals. How do you deal with that? I would suggest forcing already hard working doctors to work even longer shifts isn't the answer. Hiring more doctors is. Which means a contractual system that doesn't encourage hospitals to cut costs by working their doctors for excessive hours rather than hiring more staff. Which means adequate funding for the hospitals to pay more staff. It means making medicine sufficiently attractive to get people through university studying medicine, which means adequate funding to universities to support a larger intake of medical students. It probably (at least in the short to medium term) means hiring more staff from overseas (perhaps attracting back those who were so abused by slave contracts they quit for better conditions elsewhere), but that also means addressing the stupidity of government immigration policy.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
In contrast, Mrs Tor 'enjoyed' a four-hour operation to plate and pin her forearm and elbow, with two consultants and a full theatre staff.
On a Sunday afternoon.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Dan Poulter, former (Conservative) Health minister writing in the Observer.
Interesting...
AFZ
Sure is, but Poulter used to be a junior doctor and the policy has changed ince last year, ie, before the election that gave the Tories a majority.
The more time goes by, the more one realises the extent to which the LibDems reined in the Conservatives in the coalition government. Health, education and welfare have all been cut far more enthusiastically since May this year.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The more time goes by, the more one realises the extent to which the LibDems reined in the Conservatives in the coalition government. Health, education and welfare have all been cut far more enthusiastically since May this year.
Yes and no.
At the risk of starting a new topic, whilst it is true that the LibDems moderated the Tories they are still primarily Tory-enablers. At the heart of the election results of both 2010 and 2015 is the Tory lie of TINA* Had the LibDems not gone into coalition in 2010 and maintained their pre-election anti-austerity platform, I believe we'd be a very different country.
AFZ
*There is no alternative.
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Meanwhile, in the land where common sense is more usually found ... Scottish government intentions to cut doctors hours. Currently limited to an average of 48h per week, working towards and actual limit of 48h per week, and to working no more than 7 days in a row.
quote:
Making sure that there are proper safeguards on how long doctors work is not just about the wellbeing of doctors, it is also a vital component of patient safety and ensuring that someone is not being treated by an exhausted doctor.
Dr Chris Sheridan, chair BMA Scotland junior doctors committee
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
And, the the Government has responded to the Parliamentary petition.
quote:
The Government wants a fairer contract with stronger safeguards. Patient safety is our paramount concern. Average earnings will be maintained and doctors won’t be required to work longer.
.
I suspect that was dictated by a government minister. Their lips were moving. To quote some wisdom recently posted in Purgatory
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
this basic, fundamental political truth: never trust a tory.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
Jeremy Hunt on t'radio at 8.10 this morning. Whatever the rights & wrongs of his argument - and for my part, I come down on the side of him being a disingenuous nasty piece of work who has a political interest in dismantling the nhs, which he is using skewed statistics to try to prove in an after the fact type of way - I do so wish he could conduct an interview without mentioning Mid Staffs. If it carries on much longer, I'm going to have to design a bingo card.
[ 17. October 2015, 07:37: Message edited by: Jemima the 9th ]
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Dan Poulter, former (Conservative) Health minister writing in the Observer.
Interesting that Dan Poulter left the Government after the election, ostensibly so he could continue in medical practice while remaining a backbencher (one might say he was hedging his career bets, but his is an ultra-safe Tory seat). His place was taken by his colleague in the constituency to the south, Ben Gummer. He is in many ways an excellent MP (I must say that although I do not share his political philosophy) - but he is a historian, not a doctor.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
Today, I received an email from my Royal College.
The Royal Colleges have various roles but primarily they regulate the post graduate exams and provide various educational/research opportunities.
In order to take up higher training in any specialty, one has to pass the membership exam from the relevant Royal College. In most specialties there is second exam prior to being eligible to be a consultant. It is an historical accident really that in Surgery there are 4 colleges. For the record, for those who don't know and might care, it is membership of one of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons that means a Doctor is entitled to be addressed as 'Mr' (or Miss/Mrs/Ms).
Anyway, as such these are very conservative organisations. I think the following is therefore very note worthy.
quote:
The following statement has been issued by the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, the Royal College of Surgeons of England, and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow:
The current dispute between the UK Government and doctors in training in England and Wales has caused considerable unrest across our profession and with the general public. The Surgical Royal Colleges are concerned by the ongoing impasse.
The new contract proposed by the Government today represents a potential starting point for negotiation and we urge all those involved to take this opportunity to re-engage in discussion. However, it is crucial that both sides approach these negotiations with openness and honesty. As we have stressed before, an imposed settlement is the wrong way to bring about contractual changes.
For the first time in many years, the spectre of industrial action has arisen in healthcare. The Colleges are unanimous that such action would be damaging to all those concerned, both doctors and patients. As organisations dedicated to upholding standards for training and practice in surgery, we ask all concerned to re-enter negotiations afresh.
Doctors in training are vital to the ability of the NHS to provide 7-day care for patients. They are integral to the delivery of safe, high-quality patient care and we value them as the future providers of healthcare for all of us.”
Mr Ian K Ritchie, President Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh
Miss Clare Marx, President Royal College of Surgeons of England
Dr Frank Dunn, President Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow
(Emphasis mine)
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
Fuck, are you still looking for sympathy? For your information, the provincial government SETS how much of a wage increase I get (even though they provide less than half the funding for my institution) and has done so for the last 20 years. Ditto for public health care, the K-12 education sector and all but the most senior government employees. If we're really lucky, we might get 2% in a 5-year contract. Our provincial government has cancelled existing contracts, imposed new contracts and legislated workers back to work. This is usually followed up by a court injunction outlawing any further protest or job action.
You're not special. This is what collective bargaining is like for all public sector employees. Don't like it? Emigrate to the USA. Work in Dubai for a few years. Join Medecins sans Frontieres. Or go to Home Depot, get a 10-foot ladder, and get over yourself.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The point is, it's not "collective bargaining" when the workers representative organisations (whether that be a union or a professional body) has no input into the discussion. There is no "bargaining" when the employer calls them to a meeting, gives them a document saying "here's the new contract" and doesn't hang around for responses.
In a sense, you're right. Doctors are nothing special. The right to workers representatives to be engaged in the process of contractual changes has been significantly eroded, and the junior doctors aren't the first and won't be the last to have a new contract imposed on them.
That doesn't make it any less wrong that this is happening.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
OK, let me say this one last time:
IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY
Whatever Hunt says about mythical increases and pay-protection. It is not about the money. It is about how the contract is structured and the increases in anti-social hours and total hours that will inevitably follow.
Let me put it like this: Under the current contract if trusts don't sort out their rotas and don't have enough Junior Doctors it costs them oodles of money.
Under this proposed contract official limits on hours will come down but the mechanism for enforcing this is being removed. Moreover any extra hours worked by doctors above the limit will not be paid.
Now, doctors will not just leave at the end of their shift and leave patients uncared for. So the trusted will suddenly have a supply of very valuable free labour.
The hospitals are under extreme financial pressure, so tell me, what will they do? Move heaven and earth to make sure the junior doctor's rotas are OK or not make it a priority when it's far cheaper to exploit the doctors they have?
And even if you don't believe the hypothetical I've put there, then it's a matter of history - this is what happened in the UK in the 1990s.
Let me put it like this:
IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY
It is blatantly unfair and a slap in the face to hard working, dedicated people. But first and foremost it is about patient safety. This is doctors doing what they are supposed to do: standing up for patients. In return for which the Health Secretary is lying about and demonising us.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Contracts are never just about pay. Contracts are always pay and conditions. The acceptability, or otherwise, of a contract is a balance of "is the pay sufficient compensation for the conditions?". A new contract that reduces pay and imposes worse conditions will rarely be acceptable by anyone who actually has to work to it - though it might be great for the bean counters.
I can quite accept that a change of doctors contracts that will reduce quality of care received by patients will be unacceptable to doctors irregardless of the impact on pay. It's quite reasonable to me to say that no amount of pay is worth it if patients lives are put at risk.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
You're not special. This is what collective bargaining is like for all public sector employees.
Alienfromzog has if I remember correctly been denouncing the present government's austerity measures on threads before he started this one, so I don't think it's fair to characterise him as singling out his own profession as special.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
It's always about the money. Until a threshold of valuation is considered. Once the pay is perceived as reasonable, then it isn't about the money so much.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
It's just the Tories that want to make you think it's just about money. Don't believe their lies.
It isn't just about money. It's about quality of service. Whether that's doctors and nurses caring for the sick, teachers educating our children, social workers protecting the vulnerable in society, fire fighters, ambulance drivers, front line staff in the benefits agency ... all these people try, first and foremost, to provide us with a quality of service.
If it was just about money they wouldn't be there. There are a lot of easier ways to make money than public services.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
OK, let me say this one last time:
IT IS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY
If it's not about the money, why is it that all the headlines, facebook comments and the like that I see are going on about "Jeremy Hunt's 11% pay rise is a 25% pay cut" (usually referring to Mr. Hunt in rhyme).
If it's not about the money, why are you arguing about the money?
The answer, obviously, is that it is about the money. I accept that it is not only about the money, and this new structure will encourage hospitals to plan to overwork doctors in an unsafe manner.
If it "wasn't about the money", we should be seeing doctor's representatives saying "we wouldn't take this contract with a 100% increase in base pay, because it will lead to unsafe conditions in hospitals." What we see is "this will cause unsafe practices and it's less money", which is not the same thing.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
It's because money does make a difference.
If you work long hours then it's good to be able to afford to run a car so you don't have to rely on a bus at 4am, or even not think twice about a taxi home. It's useful to be able to afford a home based on location, ease of getting in and out of hospital at odd hours, rather than just price. To be able to afford to eat out, or get carry out, rather than have to cook (and wash up afterwards) at the end of a long shift. Money can make life practical if working conditions are shit, but it can only go so far. much better if the conditions weren't so shit to start with.
Most of the FB comments I've seen have been mostly of the "liar, liar pants on fire" variety. Hunt says "you'll get an 11% pay rise, quite complaining" when the truth is that junior doctors may gain in basic pay but the cuts in their pay for long, antisocial hours will be cut so much that the amount the actually take home will be cut considerably. If Hunt can't be trusted to tell the truth about money, which is after all easily quantified, how can he be trusted about the much harder to quantify patient care?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
To say that doctors who are complaining should get another job is totally stupid. If you are under attack from the government, you stand together, fight the proposals, and try to get support from other sections of the NHS, and also the labour movement. This is basic collective self-defence.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
And when was the last time you saw an MD on a picket line?
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
And when was the last time you saw an MD on a picket line?
Another stupid comment. I expect that they will do what they think is required, and will try to get support from the public. And I think they will, as many people are very wary of this government in its treatment of the NHS.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Abbreviations should only be used when not ambiguous.
In the above post does "MD" stand for "Managing Director" or "Doctor of Medicine"?
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
And when was the last time you saw an MD on a picket line?
When's the last time you saw anyone on a picket line? The government's made it virtually illegal to picket, another legacy of That Woman.
Wouldn't a doctor who's not on strike be "secondary picketing" or whatever the law they enacted to stop people standing up in solidarity for rights of others (something the Tories would never understand) was called?
[ 06. November 2015, 13:42: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
Anyone can join a picket line on their own free time to show support.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
Anyone can join a picket line on their own free time to show support.
Really? Do you really think that? Is that what you actually believe the law of the land is? Have you been living in a cave for the last thirty-odd years? Or perhaps you've been stuck on a generation ship heading towards our nearest star?
Welcome back to reality, where seven people now counts as 'a mass picket'.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alisdair
Shipmate
# 15837
|
Posted
What we've got is a 'sick' society with totally screwed up priorities over who gets paid what relative to the contribution they make to the well being of society.
Remember, in a world predicated on 'survival of the fittest' it's all about looking after number one, then those you care about, then screw everyone else.
Those charged with governing us know which side their bread is buttered, and those who beg to differ either wake up quickly or find themselves singing from the sidelines.
The NHS is a societal sacred cow that could well do with being hosed down, cleaned up, and seen for what it really is; how we look after the most vulnerable is certainly indicative of our priorities and values generally.
Posts: 334 | From: Washed up in England | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
Anyone can join a picket line on their own free time to show support.
Not in the UK they can't, it is illegal. Under the new legislation the government is bringing forward, unions will even have to pre-register who is going to be in the picket line.
Current guidance is this: https://www.gov.uk/industrial-action-strikes/going-on-strike-and-picketing
So six people, who work in a given place, may stand outside that place - providing they don't cause an obstruction and are members of a union in dispute with that employer at that time - and politely ask people not go in, and advertise their greivance.
A doctor picketing a hospital because cleaning staff are on strike, would be in breach of the law. A me,ber of the public picketing a place they don't work at would be in breach of the law.
Is the law repressive ? Yes it is.
[ 06. November 2015, 17:08: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alisdair:
The NHS is a societal sacred cow that could well do with being hosed down, cleaned up, and seen for what it really is...
And what in your opinion is the NHS really?
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
We crossposted, but I couldn't be arsed to edit and add a crosspost tag.
Timetags make that seem implausible - but I am very distractible.
[ 06. November 2015, 19:42: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
If it's not about the money, why is it that all the headlines, facebook comments and the like that I see are going on about "Jeremy Hunt's 11% pay rise is a 25% pay cut" (usually referring to Mr. Hunt in rhyme).
If it's not about the money, why are you arguing about the money?
Ok, so I am of course using hyperbole here. But, only just. Seriously the key issue is the structure of the contract. However, let's take this step by step.
1) Mr Hunt invites the BMA to negotiate on a new contract but stipulates in advance they must agree to not negotiating the key points
2) The BMA say no.
3) Mr Hunt says he will impose new contract.
4) BMA say this is unacceptable and when the government carry on ballot members on industrial action
5) Mr Hunt declares that the new contract is an 11% pay rise when it really isn't
6) The BMA point out it isn't a pay rise and will probably be a pay cut for many.
Now, I wonder if debating the 'pay-rise' was a good tactical move by the BMA but a strategic error. Tactically, Hunt wants the public to think junior doctors are being greedy and holding the NHS to ransom. The BMA were seeking to simply point out that Hunt's statements are blatantly and demonstrably untrue. But by doing so they keep the focus on pay rather than the (even) more troubling parts of the contract... This is good for Hunt as he probably will win if the public believe it's just about money.
Hunt talks about doctors earning the 'big money' by working the longer hours as if it was a choice. Seriously, we have very little direct say on the hours we work. When we start a new job (on average every 6-12 months) we turn up and get told what rota we're working. The trust decides what we work, we really don't. The only reason these higher bandings exist is because the hospitals have failed to put in place the necessary set up and sufficient doctors to make the rota compliant (to use the official term). The reason band 3 rotas (the top banding) have almost completely disappeared is because they were meant to - it's this financial pressure that forced the trust to comply. Now Mr Hunt wants us to believe that all rotas will magically become compliant when a) It will no longer cost the trusts not to be and b) the statutory check on rotas will be removed. Seriously? He cannot be that stupid. The thing is, he isn't that stupid.
AFZ
P.S. Dafyd, thank you.
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
Now, I wonder if debating the 'pay-rise' was a good tactical move by the BMA but a strategic error.
I think it may have been, because, as you say, it puts the focus in the wrong place. It's always going to be a hard sell convincing the public that doctors are poorly paid, because "everyone knows" that consultants have big houses and flash cars.
quote:
This is good for Hunt as he probably will win if the public believe it's just about money.
Yes, probably.
quote:
it's this financial pressure that forced the trust to comply. Now Mr Hunt wants us to believe that all rotas will magically become compliant when a) It will no longer cost the trusts not to be and b) the statutory check on rotas will be removed. Seriously? He cannot be that stupid. The thing is, he isn't that stupid.
As you say, if you remove the disincentive for dangerous levels of overwork, it's pretty obvious what you're going to get.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alisdair
Shipmate
# 15837
|
Posted
@Jack o' the Green - The NHS is the clearest/largest manifestation---embodiment, if you like---of our society's attitude towards illness and dying (and, to a lesser extent, health).
Posts: 334 | From: Washed up in England | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
I have just received an email from the BMA with the industrial action ballot results.
The ballot consisted of two questions:
- 1. Are you prepared to take industrial action short of a strike?
- 2. Are you prepared to take industrial action including strike action – giving us a clear mandate to call for industrial action short of a strike and a full walkout?
The turnout was 76% of junior doctor BMA members
Results:
1. yes: 99.4%
2. yes: 98%
Two personal comments: firstly whilst I was expecting a vote in favour, I am surprised by how overwhelming the vote is. Secondly, in my training program, I rotate through Bristol, Birmingham and Cardiff. As I currently work in Wales I did not get a vote - currently the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish governments have said that they will not impose the new contract and so the strikes will be in England only. I would have voted yes to 1. and probably no to 2. but I am not sure. I hate being put in this position.
The following is the BMA plan for action:
− Emergency care only – 8am, Tuesday 1 December to 8am, Wednesday 2 December 2015
− Full walkout – 8am to 5pm, Tuesday 8 December 2015
− Full walkout – 8am to 5pm, Wednesday 16 December 2015
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
We either expect more from the people in the system, or we just close hospitals overnight and at weekends.
Or we recognise the original set of statistics on which this ludicrous decision has been made as misleading, and leave things as they are.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
We either expect more from the people in the system, or we just close hospitals overnight and at weekends.
Or we recognise the original set of statistics on which this ludicrous decision has been made as misleading, and leave things as they are.
Or we properly fund and staff the system instead of asking doctors to work unsafe hours (unsafe not only for themselves but, more importantly for their patients).
However, I think the first thing to do here is to acknowledge that Jeremy Hunt is doing an excellent job. His job is to destroy public confidence in the NHS so that privatisation begins to look acceptable, and thanks to the collusion of the mainstream media in continually running bad news stories about the Service, he's right on target. I think the junior doctors are right to take industrial action, but they need to be careful that the Tories don't turn it into more pro-privatisation spin.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
AFZ--
Wishing you the best possible outcome, whatever that might be.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
That's a very big exclusive. I would be surprised if the average Sun 'reporter' had the intelligence to troll Facebook. Though, maybe the collective mental ability of four of them ...
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
