Junior Doctor's contracts petition
Discussion
968 said:
They don't get paid to go to medical school. They finish med school with at least £30-40k debt. They then start working as juniors and certainly give back far in excess of what they are paid in terms of time and effort. The training thereafter is largely self directed and certainly requires a significant investment from the JDs to attend courses, buy books and pay extortionate fees for professional exams, all the while the work incredibly hard, more than paying back what is given to them. If you think that signing up doctors to enforced terms would make conditions better then this dispute shows you how patently wrong that position is. The govt have no interest in the working conditions of doctors or their welfare. All they care about is spending the least amount of money possible. This applies to all politicians of all colours as I worked as a JD under different colour govt and was utterly exploited by all of them.
But they choose to do that profession. Just because someone has the intelligence to go down a career route doesn't mean he has to take it. A person chooses to sign a contract for a job with or without future training ties.
The NHS is a service but it is still however a business. Think of a smaller scale. If you employed a cleaner and you had to pay for training (perhaps Chemical handling for the bleach - Safety these days gone mad) and the cleaner left your emplyment the day after completing the training, you would not be happy.
Instead of letting big companies off with their tax bills, and costing up to their cronies and making as much money for themselves, why can't the government invest more in the NHS and truly make it a 24/7 service like they want? They want it on the cheap is all... By not providing funds for all the other services the weekend needs, then it will become what they want. Instead they are just alienating the doctors that are the workhorses of the NHS and in turn it will quicky turn into a vastly depleted service and just in time for the crony private health companies to jump in and 'save' the day - profits galore! Disgraceful!
finnie said:
968 said:
They don't get paid to go to medical school. They finish med school with at least £30-40k debt. They then start working as juniors and certainly give back far in excess of what they are paid in terms of time and effort. The training thereafter is largely self directed and certainly requires a significant investment from the JDs to attend courses, buy books and pay extortionate fees for professional exams, all the while the work incredibly hard, more than paying back what is given to them. If you think that signing up doctors to enforced terms would make conditions better then this dispute shows you how patently wrong that position is. The govt have no interest in the working conditions of doctors or their welfare. All they care about is spending the least amount of money possible. This applies to all politicians of all colours as I worked as a JD under different colour govt and was utterly exploited by all of them.
But they choose to do that profession. Just because someone has the intelligence to go down a career route doesn't mean he has to take it. A person chooses to sign a contract for a job with or without future training ties.
The NHS is a service but it is still however a business. Think of a smaller scale. If you employed a cleaner and you had to pay for training (perhaps Chemical handling for the bleach - Safety these days gone mad) and the cleaner left your emplyment the day after completing the training, you would not be happy.
They study and then get a training post as an F1 where they get a contract which they agree to. Same the next year a new contract depending upon where they are on rotation.
Hunt has just torn up those contracts, it is that simple as he has decided that he knows best. Now those on here who say suck it up, would not be happy for them to be treated that way, but somehow this is fair?
No trouble is brewing as those who run hospitals are now aware that if the Doctors simply work their "new" lower paid contracts and get paid overtime which they did not before, they will have less Doctors available that now. They will then have to employ locums at greater expense. That is why there is now a rush to distance them selves away from Hunt as 14 so far of the alleged signatories to the letter he quoted, and many others not asked.
Hunt is gambling that the medical profession do care about people so much they will not strike completely. will he be right?.
At the moment he has attacked the Junior Doctors, he has fired warning shots at GP's, nurses and consultants as well as all the other ancillary staff needed to run hospitals. How will this play out.
IanA2 said:
Dear God, that is just so stupid.....
One, why pick on doctors?
Two, why limit "pay back" to further eduction/training? Primary and secondary schooling costs a lot.
Three, how would a doctor "pay back" fifteen years of education/training even if it was thought remotely reasonable.
Off to chew my desk.....
One - I'm not picking on Doctors, this is simply the subject of this thread. Any voluntary training which will in turn benefit the recipient should POSSIBLY have some kind of tie in. Therefore you agree to undertake the training - you agree to stay a certain period.One, why pick on doctors?
Two, why limit "pay back" to further eduction/training? Primary and secondary schooling costs a lot.
Three, how would a doctor "pay back" fifteen years of education/training even if it was thought remotely reasonable.
Off to chew my desk.....
Two - A person has no choice where their parents/guardians choose to live or put their children in to education. That is history and not the responsibility of that indivuidual and so he cannot be held accountable. In general though, an individual in this country earns his money and pays his taxes for the provision of certain fascilities - healthcare and schooling being two. That payment also covering for the training of such provision. It is assumed there will be a return in this. Pay taxes get schooling for your children - Have trained doctors/ teachers in place. NOT train some and hope they down run away!
Three - I'm not saying it's reasonable but everything is quantifiable. There is a real cost and there should be some kind of return in investment even if only a percentage. To compare to another topical subject. An asylum seeker seeks assistance and it is assumed he will becomea worker in this country and pay his share of taxes.
finnie said:
But they choose to do that profession. Just because someone has the intelligence to go down a career route doesn't mean he has to take it.
A person chooses to sign a contract for a job with or without future training ties.
The NHS is a service but it is still however a business. Think of a smaller scale. If you employed a cleaner and you had to pay for training (perhaps Chemical handling for the bleach - Safety these days gone mad) and the cleaner left your emplyment the day after completing the training, you would not be happy.
But that isn't the case at all. Particularly when the govt choose to change the terms of the contract to make it entirely exploitative. They aren't chattel or slaves. The NHS is not a business in any sense as no revue is created from it. Your example is absurd. By your logic we shouldn't attempt to train the cleaners as they might leave, so better to keep them in relative ignorance with no incentives rather than treat them as values employees?A person chooses to sign a contract for a job with or without future training ties.
The NHS is a service but it is still however a business. Think of a smaller scale. If you employed a cleaner and you had to pay for training (perhaps Chemical handling for the bleach - Safety these days gone mad) and the cleaner left your emplyment the day after completing the training, you would not be happy.
finnie said:
IanA2 said:
Dear God, that is just so stupid.....
One, why pick on doctors?
Two, why limit "pay back" to further eduction/training? Primary and secondary schooling costs a lot.
Three, how would a doctor "pay back" fifteen years of education/training even if it was thought remotely reasonable.
Off to chew my desk.....
One - I'm not picking on Doctors, this is simply the subject of this thread. Any voluntary training which will in turn benefit the recipient should POSSIBLY have some kind of tie in. Therefore you agree to undertake the training - you agree to stay a certain period.One, why pick on doctors?
Two, why limit "pay back" to further eduction/training? Primary and secondary schooling costs a lot.
Three, how would a doctor "pay back" fifteen years of education/training even if it was thought remotely reasonable.
Off to chew my desk.....
Two - A person has no choice where their parents/guardians choose to live or put their children in to education. That is history and not the responsibility of that indivuidual and so he cannot be held accountable. In general though, an individual in this country earns his money and pays his taxes for the provision of certain fascilities - healthcare and schooling being two. That payment also covering for the training of such provision. It is assumed there will be a return in this. Pay taxes get schooling for your children - Have trained doctors/ teachers in place. NOT train some and hope they down run away!
Three - I'm not saying it's reasonable but everything is quantifiable. There is a real cost and there should be some kind of return in investment even if only a percentage. To compare to another topical subject. An asylum seeker seeks assistance and it is assumed he will becomea worker in this country and pay his share of taxes.
arp1 said:
Instead of letting big companies off with their tax bills, and costing up to their cronies and making as much money for themselves, why can't the government invest more in the NHS and truly make it a 24/7 service like they want? They want it on the cheap is all... By not providing funds for all the other services the weekend needs, then it will become what they want. Instead they are just alienating the doctors that are the workhorses of the NHS and in turn it will quicky turn into a vastly depleted service and just in time for the crony private health companies to jump in and 'save' the day - profits galore! Disgraceful!
We are getting away from one statement that is in this comment.They want it on the cheap.
More NHS, better service....but cheaper. Something had to break and it is the junior doctors. They are right to refuse!
NHS needs more investment. end of story
spaximus said:
The Doctors chose the path they took, from school in most cases choosing the right science subjects and then med school.
They study and then get a training post as an F1 where they get a contract which they agree to. Same the next year a new contract depending upon where they are on rotation.
Hunt has just torn up those contracts, it is that simple as he has decided that he knows best. Now those on here who say suck it up, would not be happy for them to be treated that way, but somehow this is fair?
Yes, it is. I'm a contractor, every time I sign a new contract with the same organisation there's the possibility that the terms will (and they do) change. If I don't like it I negotiate and if that doesn't result in terms I was looking for I suck it up or move on. I don't take it personally or band together with other contractors to strike either.They study and then get a training post as an F1 where they get a contract which they agree to. Same the next year a new contract depending upon where they are on rotation.
Hunt has just torn up those contracts, it is that simple as he has decided that he knows best. Now those on here who say suck it up, would not be happy for them to be treated that way, but somehow this is fair?
0000 said:
spaximus said:
The Doctors chose the path they took, from school in most cases choosing the right science subjects and then med school.
They study and then get a training post as an F1 where they get a contract which they agree to. Same the next year a new contract depending upon where they are on rotation.
Hunt has just torn up those contracts, it is that simple as he has decided that he knows best. Now those on here who say suck it up, would not be happy for them to be treated that way, but somehow this is fair?
Yes, it is. I'm a contractor, every time I sign a new contract with the same organisation there's the possibility that the terms will (and they do) change. If I don't like it I negotiate and if that doesn't result in terms I was looking for I suck it up or move on. I don't take it personally or band together with other contractors to strike either.They study and then get a training post as an F1 where they get a contract which they agree to. Same the next year a new contract depending upon where they are on rotation.
Hunt has just torn up those contracts, it is that simple as he has decided that he knows best. Now those on here who say suck it up, would not be happy for them to be treated that way, but somehow this is fair?
Without being rude, contractors may well be in need, but they are ten a penny in most industries, with the ability to replace easily, Doctors are not.
Do you want people you know and love being treated by second rate imported Doctors, which has been shown over and over again, to be true, or well trained, alert, motivated and valued Doctors and medical staff. It is a simple choice.
CorbynForTheBin said:
Meanwhile, similar happens in the private sector regularly.
The NHS really needs to come into the present.
The longer it waits the worse it will get.
Ok, I'm coming into the present - tell me how all the supporting services and roles (not all roles are supporting to junior Drs but are other roles that assist in the care of patients) will be funded for weekend service like it runs Monday to Friday? Less staff midweek? Or cutting pay and stretching hours? The public/private sector argument is invalid as this is not a business, much like the emergency services, but of course the comparisons are still belched out...The NHS really needs to come into the present.
The longer it waits the worse it will get.
The demand for doctors in Australia is not as universal as you might believe. In the major cities the demand is patchy and resistant to 'Pommie' influx, but in the sticks the demand is greater and less discipline selective. A member of my family is an orthopaedic consultant in London (or was until last December) and has moved to Sydney not entirely for career reasons (cherchez la femme!). The UK qualifications are not universally accepted in Oz and a consultant here will not be able to go straight into a consultant's job there. The pay vs property price in Sydney is challenging as it is in London and there is most certainly some prejudice against British medics in Australia. If the dissidents think they can shove off to the antipodes with gay abandon then they could be in for a surprise. Tears before bedtime...
sawman said:
PRTVR said:
My mistake, I was under the impression they were paid up to £40000 during training.
Unfortunately, the spin created by the Government and the media, has lead to this misapprehension among the public.I dont think they will be making 40k until they are a few years into specialist training probably registrar level working 60hrs+ per week
http://www.bma.org.uk/support-at-work/pay-fees-all...
arp1 said:
CorbynForTheBin said:
Meanwhile, similar happens in the private sector regularly.
The NHS really needs to come into the present.
The longer it waits the worse it will get.
Ok, I'm coming into the present - tell me how all the supporting services and roles (not all roles are supporting to junior Drs but are other roles that assist in the care of patients) will be funded for weekend service like it runs Monday to Friday? Less staff midweek? Or cutting pay and stretching hours? The public/private sector argument is invalid as this is not a business, much like the emergency services, but of course the comparisons are still belched out...The NHS really needs to come into the present.
The longer it waits the worse it will get.
Efficiency?
Quality of service?
Sustainability?
Do you think those three exist at present? Especially point three...
arp1 said:
Ok, I'm coming into the present - tell me how all the supporting services and roles (not all roles are supporting to junior Drs but are other roles that assist in the care of patients) will be funded for weekend service like it runs Monday to Friday? Less staff midweek? Or cutting pay and stretching hours? The public/private sector argument is invalid as this is not a business, much like the emergency services, but of course the comparisons are still belched out...
And see how better things are up here in scotland now we have removed ALL tory controlsBoth red and blue
You lot will be begging to come into scotland once the NHS is privatised
CorbynForTheBin said:
Which general tenets of 'business' do you think don't apply?
Efficiency?
Quality of service?
Sustainability?
Do you think those three exist at present? Especially point three...
Not for profit, kinda a biggy! You failed to answer how we will sustain a 24/7 service without the funding...Efficiency?
Quality of service?
Sustainability?
Do you think those three exist at present? Especially point three...
arp1 said:
CorbynForTheBin said:
Which general tenets of 'business' do you think don't apply?
Efficiency?
Quality of service?
Sustainability?
Do you think those three exist at present? Especially point three...
Not for profit, kinda a biggy! You failed to answer how we will sustain a 24/7 service without the funding...Efficiency?
Quality of service?
Sustainability?
Do you think those three exist at present? Especially point three...
You seem to be putting words in my mouth...
Edited by CorbynForTheBin on Saturday 13th February 10:41
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff