Junior Doctor's contracts petition
Discussion
selwonk said:
further 3 five-day strikes has now been announced:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37250258
The week of strikes by junior doctors later this month will be followed up by three further five-day walkouts in October, November and December.
On the flip side/upside the govt will be saving a significant amount of salary and pension contributions or nearly a whole months salary lost over the period of a year. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37250258
The week of strikes by junior doctors later this month will be followed up by three further five-day walkouts in October, November and December.
By sheer coincidence, both my daughters in law work in the NHS. One is a staff nurse , the other a junior doctor.
The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing.
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing.
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
Hosenbugler said:
By sheer coincidence, both my daughters in law work in the NHS. One is a staff nurse , the other a junior doctor.
The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. [b]The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing. [\b]
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
It's not astonishing in any way, shape or form. Thee is no new money. The money is just being spread around. There is not the money currently for what you describe.The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. [b]The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing. [\b]
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
Hosenbugler said:
By sheer coincidence, both my daughters in law work in the NHS. One is a staff nurse , the other a junior doctor.
The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing.
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
You are correct, it has been stirred up by Hunt who has an agenda to make it so bad that people will accept either massive tax increases, or some form of state top up or a completely private system. The first by another coincidence, is on maternity leave, the JD will work, as she has in previous strikes. Both feel the entire thing has been stirred up by people who have not got the NHS at heart. The mere fact that the NHS is not a seamless 7 day service, is , to me, astonishing.
I worked for a Utility company back in the latter 90's, and that was a seven day week , any 16 hour working day back then.
Seems like the NHS is still in the dark ages.
The BMA have been woeful in seeing what was being done and Hunt has had the full machine of Whitehall to make his lies appear truthful. I appreciate your Daughters choice and view but to me she must be special if she can accept a real pay cut and the prospect of being made to work more weekends and night for less money.
No one wants people to suffer but what choice do they have if the Hunt will not allow any further negotiation?
Looking at Hunt today he had the look of fear in his eyes as this dispute will get ugly and you can bet your last pound that the first death he can pin on a lack of Dr's due to strikes they will spin this to high heaven. Ignoring how many deaths the lack of 5000 hospital Dr's and thousands more GP's actually cause due to lack of real investment. Yes spending is up, but they are treating many more people with less staff so spending will rise.
Welshbeef said:
It's interesting to see the JDs say they are going to Oz or NZ once they are qualified but then they have taken the place at University of another individual who would have wanted to be a Dr in the UK.
Us the public pay towards the training of Dr - on a recent QTime it was stated the average cost to train a Dr to the state is £600k++ at that point one old chap asked directly to a young trainee Dr can you please pay back my tax which I've invested in our countries future. If you want to stay no problem but if your milking it here then shooting off elsewhere it doesn't work for the tax payer.
It's a fair challenge
Only if we can stop treatment when people have reached the limits of their NI contributions.Us the public pay towards the training of Dr - on a recent QTime it was stated the average cost to train a Dr to the state is £600k++ at that point one old chap asked directly to a young trainee Dr can you please pay back my tax which I've invested in our countries future. If you want to stay no problem but if your milking it here then shooting off elsewhere it doesn't work for the tax payer.
It's a fair challenge
glazbagun said:
I do wonder why Jeremy Hunt seems to get off lightly when we're talking about public support- he being the face of the government and all. He seems to me to be the first choice of human shield when pushing government ideas through regardless of the consequences. He's made a lot of comments, such as the 11000 deaths claim, which are as bad as some of the Brexit nonsense that was bandied about, and all of this "putting patients at risk" stuff really strikes me as the lowest form of politics, given his equal role in the whole debacle and the governments attacks on healthcare students in general. It could just be that noone else wants the job so are keeping their mouths shut in case they get it.
When was the last time a strike actually held any long term public support? With Labour being an utter shambles right now, it's not like the government need fear any drop in public support at the ballot box and there seems to be a well rehearsed process by now of the media initially supporting, then sympathising, then discouraging before actively opposing almost any industrial action that I can think of starting with (in my political memory) the fuel strikes back in 2000.
When was the last time a strike actually held any long term public support? With Labour being an utter shambles right now, it's not like the government need fear any drop in public support at the ballot box and there seems to be a well rehearsed process by now of the media initially supporting, then sympathising, then discouraging before actively opposing almost any industrial action that I can think of starting with (in my political memory) the fuel strikes back in 2000.
Dixy said:
As far as sympathy goes, the JDs would like it but at the end of the day when you are having your heart attack, will you say "I'm not going to a doctor cos they went on strike"
Interesting points about the whole public support and sympathy factor but then what is the end game for the medics? They need some leverage over the government to try and make them change their minds and other than the support of the general public and their NHS colleagues what else is there?sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
Ah the dots. Did you get that from order-order too, or was that original thought?
I bolded the part for you.
It matters not at all if that belief is justified or not, if they decide to act on it. With recent changes, imo, they would be stupid to believe anything else.
So do you think they are well-informed or not on this issue - after all, you raised it...I bolded the part for you.
It matters not at all if that belief is justified or not, if they decide to act on it. With recent changes, imo, they would be stupid to believe anything else.
jjlynn27 said:
Still doesn't make your bitterness towards 'public sector' any less entertaining.
Ah, coming back to your false claims about 'bitterness' - how dull, and yet predictable. And still wrong, as always.jjlynn27 said:
Maybe better idea, to listen to your own advice and stick to the threads where you even barely know what you are talking about.
The discussion was about a comparison of remuneration in one country versus another. A key part of the remuneration was the pension benefit in the UK, something that I know far more than a little about.Remind me why you're on this thread?
You first asked for the source of my statement that people that I know believe that govt will scrap the DB benefit scheme, so I have to bold out the 'believe' part. Good, at least you got that now.
As for bitterness it's my perception of your posts. And it is entertaining. Judging by the few threads where you whine about public sector pensions, I'm not alone.
Once again, for jds that I know, pensions are not the key part, as they believe (I'm sorry no links to order-order to 'prove' that) will be phased out. I think that they are right.
To remind you why I'm on this thread; I thought we already covered that, to stop people like yourself from posting links containing downright lies.
I spoke to a friend just now who's leaving position of paed A&E in Nhampton trust for a position in Perth. More than double the salary, car allowance on top of that and non-contributory pension of 12%. (Non-contributory is my wording, in her words; pension contributions are paid by the hospital and are not out of her salary).
Welshbeef said:
The point is that it's a qualification for the state NHS.
Am I concerned about others coming into the UK - no. Frankly the quality of degrees in other countries is not equivalent some notably lower (take Eastern Europe - I visited a hospital there recently it was disgusting and the treatment was shocking). Given we take these "Doctors" I'd not want one of the ones I saw to treat anyone.
Did you visit that hospital in 944 from ebay or was that result of scoffing some '95 Ch Margaux?Am I concerned about others coming into the UK - no. Frankly the quality of degrees in other countries is not equivalent some notably lower (take Eastern Europe - I visited a hospital there recently it was disgusting and the treatment was shocking). Given we take these "Doctors" I'd not want one of the ones I saw to treat anyone.
spaximus said:
Looking at Hunt today he had the look of fear in his eyes
With public support for the JDs likely to get very shaky very quickly and any ill effects equally likely to be laid squarely at the door of the BMA, what does he have to fear?The Guardian said:
Speaking to Sky News, Hunt said: “Patients will be asking why it is that the BMA, who only in May said ‘this deal is a good deal for doctors, a good deal for patients, it’s good for the NHS, it’s good for equality’, are now saying it is such a bad deal that they want to inflict the worst doctors’ strike in NHS history.”
Prime minister Theresa May accused the BMA of playing politics and backed Hunt, saying he was an “excellent health secretary”. She said the deal was “safe for patients”, adding that the NHS had “record levels of funding” and “more doctors than we’ve seen in its history”.
“The Government is putting patients first, the BMA should be putting patients first - not playing politics,” she said.
Dr Mark Porter, chair of the BMA council, said the decision to announce five consecutive days of strike from 12 September was made after “long and difficult debates”.
Repeatedly challenged on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme about the level of support for the strike, Porter did not dispute a claim that the council backed five-day strike action by only 16 votes to 14. But he denied that there had been block voting by consultants and GPs to reject the strike.
16 to 14 - also shaky.Prime minister Theresa May accused the BMA of playing politics and backed Hunt, saying he was an “excellent health secretary”. She said the deal was “safe for patients”, adding that the NHS had “record levels of funding” and “more doctors than we’ve seen in its history”.
“The Government is putting patients first, the BMA should be putting patients first - not playing politics,” she said.
Dr Mark Porter, chair of the BMA council, said the decision to announce five consecutive days of strike from 12 September was made after “long and difficult debates”.
Repeatedly challenged on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme about the level of support for the strike, Porter did not dispute a claim that the council backed five-day strike action by only 16 votes to 14. But he denied that there had been block voting by consultants and GPs to reject the strike.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/01/je...
jjlynn27 said:
LOL.
You first asked for the source of my statement that people that I know believe that govt will scrap the DB benefit scheme, so I have to bold out the 'believe' part. Good, at least you got that now.
So what you are now suggesting is that (anecdotally) some poorly informed doctors are potentially making decision with incomplete information. But their beliefs are not supported by evidence. Indeed, if the proposal wa implemented, it's hard to believe that the government would not compensate them (at least partially) in some way through salary or DC benefits, so anyone trying to do a credible comparison between pay in different countries would still want to take this into account.You first asked for the source of my statement that people that I know believe that govt will scrap the DB benefit scheme, so I have to bold out the 'believe' part. Good, at least you got that now.
Unless of course they want to do a biased analysis rather than a fair one...
jjlynn27 said:
As for bitterness it's my perception of your posts. And it is entertaining. Judging by the few threads where you whine about public sector pensions, I'm not alone.
Educating people on the value of these benefits isn't the same as whining. Sorry you don't understand the difference!jjlynn27 said:
Once again, for jds that I know, pensions are not the key part, as they believe (I'm sorry no links to order-order to 'prove' that) will be phased out. I think that they are right.
Strange these apparently intelligent people believe this, based on almost zero evidence. And, as above, apparently would just accept that these benefits will be removed with no compensation!jjlynn27 said:
To remind you why I'm on this thread; I thought we already covered that, to stop people like yourself from posting links containing downright lies.
Priceless - on a subject you know nothing about...And yet you are apparently oblivious to the misleading claims on the recent links made by others which show a highly misleading comparison between doctors in two different countries. Or do you not understand why the comparison is misleading?
jjlynn27 said:
I spoke to a friend just now who's leaving position of paed A&E in Nhampton trust for a position in Perth. More than double the salary, car allowance on top of that and non-contributory pension of 12%. (Non-contributory is my wording, in her words; pension contributions are paid by the hospital and are not out of her salary).
So basically the pension is less than half as generous, and much more risky, than her current scheme (at best).I wonder if she understands that - you apparently don't!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 1st September 19:51
t?spaximus said:
Looking at Hunt today he had the look of fear in his eyes as this dispute will get ugly and you can bet your last pound that the first death he can pin on a lack of Dr's due to strikes they will spin this to high heaven.
And the BMA, as a Union with keen links to Corbyn will also spin the first death as the fault of Hunt, rather then the JD strike. As before, it'll come down to who you believe more/who you believe less. No one is likely to believe the party that said it was all about protecting patients and the NHS, then the veil dropped, and they were revealed as grasping self-serving and only wanting more cash. No sympathy. Accept the terms and get back to work before you have blood on your hands.
sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
LOL.
You first asked for the source of my statement that people that I know believe that govt will scrap the DB benefit scheme, so I have to bold out the 'believe' part. Good, at least you got that now.
So what you are now suggesting is that (anecdotally) some poorly informed doctors are potentially making decision with incomplete information. But their beliefs are not supported by evidence. Indeed, if the proposal wa implemented, it's hard to believe that the government would not compensate them (at least partially) in some way through salary or DC benefits, so anyone trying to do a credible comparison between pay in different countries would still want to take this into account.You first asked for the source of my statement that people that I know believe that govt will scrap the DB benefit scheme, so I have to bold out the 'believe' part. Good, at least you got that now.
Unless of course they want to do a biased analysis rather than a fair one...
jjlynn27 said:
As for bitterness it's my perception of your posts. And it is entertaining. Judging by the few threads where you whine about public sector pensions, I'm not alone.
Educating people on the value of these benefits isn't the same as whining. Sorry you don't understand the difference!jjlynn27 said:
Once again, for jds that I know, pensions are not the key part, as they believe (I'm sorry no links to order-order to 'prove' that) will be phased out. I think that they are right.
Strange these apparently intelligent people believe this, based on almost zero evidence. And, as above, apparently would just accept that these benefits will be removed with no compensation!jjlynn27 said:
To remind you why I'm on this thread; I thought we already covered that, to stop people like yourself from posting links containing downright lies.
Priceless - on a subject you know nothing about...And yet you are apparently oblivious to the misleading claims on the recent links made by others which show a highly misleading comparison between doctors in two different countries. Or do you not understand why the comparison is misleading?
jjlynn27 said:
I spoke to a friend just now who's leaving position of paed A&E in Nhampton trust for a position in Perth. More than double the salary, car allowance on top of that and non-contributory pension of 12%. (Non-contributory is my wording, in her words; pension contributions are paid by the hospital and are not out of her salary).
So basically the pension is less than half as generous, and much more risky, than her current scheme (at best).I wonder if she understands that - you apparently don't!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 1st September 19:51
Why would you do that? Why would you deliberately post the link containing outright lie? Or you can keep dodging that question.
It's not 'now' it was there from the start. Do you understand how stupid it is to ask for a source of belief of people that I know?
You are not educating anyone. People like alpinestars do. You whine. Or you can keep relying on echo chamber of NP&E to agree with you. Still funny (for me).
So, the non-contributory pension of 12% of more than double the salary is less than half as generous as the contributory pension on less than half the salary? Really? Or to put it another way, if she decides to put all of the extra money, every penny above her current salary into the pension pot (obviously in addition to 12% of the total) will she have better or worse pension?
The main question, since you seem to need reminders; Why would you post the link that you knew that contains outright lie? What was the purpose of that. JDs salaries are public info, so, as informed as you are, and posting just about things that you know, why do that?
Have another one
. jjlynn27 said:
Junior doctors are not sponsored by NHS. So not sure how 'sponsored armed forces' would be in any way relevant.
The do / don't take loans to pay for studying just like any other student, only they themselves pay more as their courses are longer.
As for private sector, see above.
When jds start to work for NHS, in order to practice, they themselves need to pay for their professional insurance, currently > £600 pa for ST2/ST3. On top of that, they have to pay out of their own pocket for any training AND exams that they need to pass in order to progress.
Most people would be pretty cheesed of if they were asked to pay for their own indemnity insurance while working for a company, not that I've ever heard that any private company is asking employees to stump up for their own insurance.
HTH.
The cost of training a medic far, far exceeds the tuition fees they pay. And that includes NHS resource such as personnel, facilities and consumables. It's huge. That can easily be changed and become a sponsorship that sees medics having a buy-out clause if they wish to terminate early.The do / don't take loans to pay for studying just like any other student, only they themselves pay more as their courses are longer.
As for private sector, see above.
When jds start to work for NHS, in order to practice, they themselves need to pay for their professional insurance, currently > £600 pa for ST2/ST3. On top of that, they have to pay out of their own pocket for any training AND exams that they need to pass in order to progress.
Most people would be pretty cheesed of if they were asked to pay for their own indemnity insurance while working for a company, not that I've ever heard that any private company is asking employees to stump up for their own insurance.
HTH.
Plenty of professionals take out professional insurance when they are allowed to moonlight freely. Which is what many doctors choose to do.
Many other professions that value continuous professional development also pay for their own training, tools and resources. Otherwise you stall and you fall behind.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff