Junior Doctor's contracts petition

[Lucas CAV]

Strikes to happen
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35225918

[barryrs]

That BBC article seems to suggest the BMA have called a strike simply to avoid having to re-ballot it's members.

[VolvoT5]

barryrs said:

That BBC article seems to suggest the BMA have called a strike simply to avoid having to re-ballot it's members.

Seems strange if that is the case.......... they had such overwhelming support for strike action last time they surely wouldn't be concerned about balloting again really.

To be honest I think they should have gone ahead with the strike first time around, it is pretty obvious Hunt is not negotiating in good faith.

[glazbagun]

Surprised this thread didn't resurface today. I Guess nothing happened that wasn't expected. Was nice to see a small reminder of how our media are managed, if nothing else. I wonder if Darren McCaffrey will be getting any more interviews in future.

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-01-12/government-aide...

[VolvoT5]

I followed this on social media and the mainstream media yesterday. Seems like some dirty tricks went on at some hospitals with bosses trying to claim there was an emergency to force staff in.

Also noticed the government were trying to have it all ways up - suggesting the strike was an ineffective failure because 30 odd percent of doctors didn't strike (that number handily includes those who couldn't strike due to being classed as emergency workers anyway) but at the same time claiming the doctors were causing chaos and putting lives at risk.

Dan Hodges, although I can't stand the man, made a valid point in the telegraph that Labour fell into the trap of openly supporting the strikers and that will go against them in the future. They should have been a bit more spin smart there.

IMO the junior doctors are clearly going to get shafted in the long run. The government will ride this out as there is only so many times they can strike before public opinion will turn on them (right or wrong). I suspect long term many will fk off to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc, or shift into the private sector and non-clinical management if their skills allow.

[Quhet]

VolvoT5 said:

I suspect long term many will fk off to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc, or shift into the private sector and non-clinical management if their skills allow.

My other half is a junior doctor and has just started her training in psych.
I can't claim to understand all of what is going on and I certainly can't argue it as well as her but she is basically going to get shafted if the new deal comes in.

We spent last year in New Zealand and she worked over there. The system they have is not perfect but is so much better than ours. Higher pay, reduced hours, better working conditions and opportunities to progress more quickly.
We're seriously considering moving out there once she's completed her training and I get through my APC. Like you say, many others will go too.

[johnxjsc1985]

Quhet said:

My other half is a junior doctor and has just started her training in psych.
I can't claim to understand all of what is going on and I certainly can't argue it as well as her but she is basically going to get shafted if the new deal comes in.

We spent last year in New Zealand and she worked over there. The system they have is not perfect but is so much better than ours. Higher pay, reduced hours, better working conditions and opportunities to progress more quickly.
We're seriously considering moving out there once she's completed her training and I get through my APC. Like you say, many others will go too.

why not train in New Zealand ?

[sidicks]

Quhet said:

My other half is a junior doctor and has just started her training in psych.
I can't claim to understand all of what is going on and I certainly can't argue it as well as her but she is basically going to get shafted if the new deal comes in.

We spent last year in New Zealand and she worked over there. The system they have is not perfect but is so much better than ours. Higher pay, reduced hours, better working conditions and opportunities to progress more quickly.
We're seriously considering moving out there once she's completed her training and I get through my APC. Like you say, many others will go too.

What pension arrangements do they get in NZ?

[Quhet]

johnxjsc1985 said:

why not train in New Zealand ?

Family reasons. We both missed home massively last Christmas and it'd be a massive move to go permanently. Getting through training is quite stressful and she wants to be close to her support networks which is understandable. We'll be in a better position to decide once she's qualified and we've got a bit more money behind us. I'd love to out there again now though!

Regarding pensions, I'm not too sure. They have an opt out state saving account called Kiwisaver which gives very good interest so I'd imagine the pension provision situation is pretty good.

[sidicks]

Quhet said:

Family reasons. We both missed home massively last Christmas and it'd be a massive move to go permanently. Getting through training is quite stressful and she wants to be close to her support networks which is understandable. We'll be in a better position to decide once she's qualified and we've got a bit more money behind us. I'd love to out there again now though!

Regarding pensions, I'm not too sure. They have an opt out state saving account called Kiwisaver which gives very good interest so I'd imagine the pension provision situation is pretty good.

The 'interest rate' is based on what the underlying markets are doing - no guarantees.

This is a DC scheme so all the risks lie with the individual - totally opposite to the public sector pension she would get in the UK. The employer/taxpayer contribution rate is worth 30% or more - are salaries 30% higher in NZ?

[Oceanic]

My wife is Swedish and when I told her about this she was not that impressed, she works in a supermarket (anti social hours) and they don't get any extra pay, they also would never seen a 11% payrise!

Personally every business / organisation needs to adapt over time and people sometimes have to accept that.

[spaximus]

This a very complicate situation, Hunt has decided he is going to slash the wages of Junior doctors by removing bandings. This is not overtime, it reflects the amount of work done in hours considered anti social. The Nett result is Doctors will be worse off. Hunt says the changes will reduce some working 90 hours a week down to a maximum of 71. Now in what world are those reasonable hours?

My Daughter is a Junior Doctor, she was in A&E all day yesterday as that was agreed. it was also agreed that Junior Doctors would work in intensive car, cancer treatment as well as A&E, but hunt forgot that bit when trying to claim people had ignored the strike.

He has refused to negotiate for many months, and once again today has said he will enforce the contract, how is that negotiation? There is spin and lies beyond belief from the DOH, the articles from the DM have been truly shocking.

How you can also compare a supermarket worker to Doctors is laughable. I am sure your wife is wonderful but a supermarket is not a hospital yet. It may be when you have lost the NHS and you then have to choose what treatment you can afford, branded quality care, or poundland surgery?

And one final point, when seven day opening was first allowed, staff would not be forced to work, were paid over time and would not be disadvantaged, guess what they lied about all that and now nothing is out of bounds.

[petrolsniffer]

Oceanic said:

My wife is Swedish and when I told her about this she was not that impressed, she works in a supermarket (anti social hours) and they don't get any extra pay, they also would never seen a 11% payrise!

Personally every business / organisation needs to adapt over time and people sometimes have to accept that.

Work's at the wrong supermarket then? As the majority of the big ones pay extra for anti social hours if we're talking nights.

[Ian Geary]

I sat next to a colleauge at work today whose husband is a junior doctor. Her husband's basic pay is less than £30k, which he makes up wiht the anti social hour payments to about double this.

With the combined effects of 11% payrise and lack of antisocial pay allowances, it's a 15-20% pay cut.

I don't think £60k is an unfair salary to earn: not after 6 years of medical school, and that we do actually rely on Doctors to prescribe the right drug, not take the wrong kidney etc so expect them to be quite knowlegable. I think the recent attempts by the media to shame doctors that own £450k houses or go skiing, is pretty low.


I can't quite work out why the proposed pay cuts make the NHS "unsafe for patients": hospitals do and will continue to have policies about hours of work.

Junior doctors may be referring to the fact they'd have to increase hours to get back to their current pay levels...which to me is a different issue...


I also can't work out how or why Jeremy Hunt has made the link that:
a) a 24/7 NHS will reduce death rates, and
b) cutting the pay of junior doctors is vital to get a 24/7 NHS
c) junior doctors refusal to accept the new pay terms are the only thing preventing a 24/7 NHS

All are wrong as far as I can tell, and Jeremy is just bandying "24/7 NHS" about like some sort of self-justifying mantra to basically claw a huge chunk off spend out of the NHS budget. Luckily for him, the media are either to stupid, or too lazy to challenge him on this.

But I also think the NHS does need to be included within the requirement to reduce public spend, preferably with the NHS offering its own alternative options about how to achieve savings, rather than fighting everything tooth and nail (and IMO nurses, senior doctors and other medical staff will quickly follow should the junior doctor proposals go through).

Oceanic said:

My wife is Swedish and when I told her about this she was not that impressed, she works in a supermarket (anti social hours) and they don't get any extra pay, they also would never seen a 11% payrise!

Personally every business / organisation needs to adapt over time and people sometimes have to accept that.

I would say that market forces don't quite apply to the NHS as they do supermarkets, given its monopsony position. Also, I don't feel this comparison is that fair to junior doctors: supermarket work is hardly in the same ballpark as medicine (though will concede self service checkouts are more complicated than they appear!)

Also note that the 11% pay rise still represents a large pay-cut to most doctors, as they use the antisocial allowances to make up quite a low level of basic pay.

In some ways its like the MPs pay issue: why not scrap allowances, but put the basic pay up to a decent amount....


Ian

[sidicks]

Ian Geary said:

I would say that market forces don't quite apply to the NHS as they do supermarkets, given its monopsony position. Also, I don't feel this comparison is that fair to junior doctors: supermarket work is hardly in the same ballpark as medicine (though will concede self service checkouts are more complicated than they appear!)

Also note that the 11% pay rise still represents a large pay-cut to most doctors, as they use the antisocial allowances to make up quite a low level of basic pay.

In some ways its like the MPs pay issue: why not scrap allowances, but put the basic pay up to a decent amount....


Ian

I thought there was some underpin so no-one would be worse off?

[mikebradford]

Most people coming out of uni with a professional qualification, Architects , solicitors etc expect to be on relatively low pay relative to their perceived social standing.
But its part of the career path. Their wages ramp us as they gain additional experience and time in the job etc.

I personally don't understand the principle of junior doctors having a so called low basic wage , but then having set pay rates for what appear to be very lucrative overtime options. Which allow them too double their salaries.

I feel its simply the unions protecting a pay system that can prove lucrative.

Junior doctors know given time in the job their wages will increase such that after a reasonable amount of time they will be nearer the top end of the average wage table.

This simply smacks of them complaining about losing something a public body with financial constraints shouldn't have in the first place.

Like any profession, if they are not happy with what is on offer take their services elsewhere. It appears their services are in demand at higher levels elsewhere. Usually abroad.
So stop complaining and get on with doing the job your paid to do.

[tdog7]

mikebradford said:

Most people coming out of uni with a professional qualification, Architects , solicitors etc expect to be on relatively low pay relative to their perceived social standing.
But its part of the career path. Their wages ramp us as they gain additional experience and time in the job etc.

I personally don't understand the principle of junior doctors having a so called low basic wage , but then having set pay rates for what appear to be very lucrative overtime options. Which allow them too double their salaries.

I feel its simply the unions protecting a pay system that can prove lucrative.

Junior doctors know given time in the job their wages will increase such that after a reasonable amount of time they will be nearer the top end of the average wage table.

This simply smacks of them complaining about losing something a public body with financial constraints shouldn't have in the first place.

Like any profession, if they are not happy with what is on offer take their services elsewhere. It appears their services are in demand at higher levels elsewhere. Usually abroad.
So stop complaining and get on with doing the job your paid to do.

There are so many things wrong with your post its difficult to know where to begin. It honestly astonishes me that someone would get involved in a discussion, with such a polarised view, with such little knowledge of the dispute.

They are not overtime options, and doctors don't choose them. Doctors work a rota which includes shifts during antisocial hours, nights, weekends etc. We are paid a banding supplement based on the amount of antisocial hours we work. We do NOT choose the hours. The NHS trust we work for does.

To summarise the issues with the proposed contract
1) The new contract removes safeguards that prevent trusts forcing doctors to work unsafe hours. The new contract allows a trust to police its doctors own working hours, with no independent assessment. The system will therefore rely on junior doctors to whistle blow themselves if they are asked to work unsafe hours, and as I'm sure you can imagine there will be huge pressure on junior doctors not to do this, even if they are working unsafe hours.....hence why the current contract with financial penalties for trusts that overwork their doctors has been so effective in cutting hours down to safer limits.

2)The new contract rebrands Saturdays as a normal working day. Under the new contract doctors could be asked to work 1:2 Saturdays, as well as Monday - Friday. 9pm on Saturday is not the same as 9am on Tuesday, it IS antisocial, and any suggestion otherwise is quite frankly laughable. A lawyer, plumber, electrician, builder, architect, mechanic and any other trade/profession you choose to name will charge more for their services at 9pm on a saturday than at 9am on a Tuesday. Why should Doctors be any different. If you ask Doctors to accept a contract that forces them to work 1:2 saturdays you will find fewer and fewer who will sign that contract. The quality staff will choose to work elsewhere, leaving the NHS with lower quality staff.

3)The new contract claims to increase the number of doctors available to work at the weekend, without increasing the number of doctors.....simple maths dictates this must mean either increased working hours for doctors, or a reduced number of doctors available during the week. Both of which are dangerous for patients. There are already not enough doctors during the week. This really is simple maths, it is not complicated.

4) Doctors already work 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The current contract is NOT a barrier to the '24/7' NHS, as the 24/7 NHS already exists!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you want to expand elective services to the weekend you need to INVEST in the NHS

and finally, just before you come back at me with 'the NHS is expensive and inefficient'....IT IS NOT, the OECD found it the most efficient healthcare system assessed, and we spend a lower percentage of GPD on healthcare than most developed countries.

[mikebradford]

tdog7 said:

and finally, just before you come back at me with 'the NHS is expensive and inefficient'....IT IS NOT, the OECD found it the most efficient healthcare system assessed, and we spend a lower percentage of GPD on healthcare than most developed countries.

I thank you for giving me an informed response. This is simply my perspective based on nothing more than this thread, some media and hopefully a bit of common sense based on my own industry.

Point 1 ) Considering the nhs has historically had a large degree of union members, i would imagine that staff will feel reasonably confident to bring to light unsafe working practice etc.
point 2 ) For me its simply a change to the job. Many jobs / professions have a shift pattern. I accept you may consider this worse.
As long as your basic pay reflects this i see no issue. (in this case the basic increasing admitably masks the overall likely reduction in pay)
In reality the issue is that no matter which way the new contract is seen it results in a pay decrease. As is logical as ultimately they government is trying to save money, whilst altering your working hours.
point 3 ) makes complete sense

I also believe that their are likely to be substantial savings within the nhs that do not require any change to pay or hours for the NHS staff.

[IanA2]

Two points:

1. The pressure put on juniors (and seniors for that matter) by Managers to work excessive hours is immense. The talk of installing a "Guardian" to make sure managers don't do this is risible. Remember, juniors rotate every six months and you're only as good as your last reference.

2. The idea of enhanced rates (remember for years any hours over 40 were paid at ONE THIRD of basic rate) for unsocial/extensive hours were in part to disincentivise Managers from making juniors work excessive hours. By extending "plain time" to Saturdays and 22:00hrs on weekdays it will make the pay bill lower whilst allowing for increase in rostered hours. How else will you move from a 5 day to a 7 day service (not that it is not already in important areas) without increasing the salary costs.

[IanA2]

mikebradford said:

tdog7 said:

and finally, just before you come back at me with 'the NHS is expensive and inefficient'....IT IS NOT, the OECD found it the most efficient healthcare system assessed, and we spend a lower percentage of GPD on healthcare than most developed countries.

I thank you for giving me an informed response. This is simply my perspective based on nothing more than this thread, some media and hopefully a bit of common sense based on my own industry.

Point 1 ) Considering the nhs has historically had a large degree of union members,) i would imagine that staff will feel reasonably confident to bring to light unsafe working practice etc.
point 2 ) For me its simply a change to the job. Many jobs / professions have a shift pattern. I accept you may consider this worse.
As long as your basic pay reflects this i see no issue. (in this case the basic increasing admitably masks the overall likely reduction in pay)
In reality the issue is that no matter which way the new contract is seen it results in a pay decrease. As is logical as ultimately they government is trying to save money, whilst altering your working hours.
point 3 ) makes complete sense

I also believe that their are likely to be substantial savings within the nhs that do not require any change to pay or hours for the NHS staff.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The NHS is run like a Stalinist State. Speak up and that's the end of your career. Gulag Unemployment Forever for you. Check out Freedom to Speak Up Review by Sir Robert Francis. Check out HSC committee whose report said that the treatment of whistleblowers was a "stain of the reputation of the NHS. Check out Kevin Beat, Raj Mattu, Sharmlia Chowdury, Stephen Bolsin, Ed Jesudason. Lats two are professors. Happy reading. Unions haven't helped any of them....