J Hunt and S Hawking - how do we know...
Discussion
sidicks said:
Rovinghawk said:
Four extra half days per week= 2 extra days per week.
Are you telling me that doctors all work 7 days per week & never have a day off? Really? That would be slightly illegal.
Or is it 2 extra days on top of a shorter working week? I don't think we're hearing the full story here.
Surely he means that, like many people, he is contracted to work for 7 hours per day, but actually works for 10 1/2?Are you telling me that doctors all work 7 days per week & never have a day off? Really? That would be slightly illegal.
Or is it 2 extra days on top of a shorter working week? I don't think we're hearing the full story here.
If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
As to doctors being undervalued, if you walked in to A&E with your dying child in your arms and the doctor said yes I can cure them just give me the deads to your house, you would just hand over both. Because the NHS is free at the point of delivery we, the great British unwashed, totally under value it and those that work in it.
Hunt the secretary has to go, he brought it to so close to imploding with the doctors strike, but the bit that is still festering is the scarcity of qualified staff and the rate they are leaving.
Dixy said:
Not quite but you have to be in it or associated to it to believe how wrong it is. Junior doctors, that is any doctor who is not a consultant will be on banding, so if they are on 150 banding they will be working about a 70 hour week, plus on call which means they could be asleep but as everywhere is short staffed they will be working. for this they will get about £45k per anum.
If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
Sounds like a bit of emotional rhetoric to me - on what charge would they be put in prison?If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
Regardless, a total package of £55k-£60k including pension benefit is fairly high up in the income percentile bracket!
Dixy said:
As to doctors being undervalued, if you walked in to A&E with your dying child in your arms and the doctor said yes I can cure them just give me the deads to your house, you would just hand over both. Because the NHS is free at the point of delivery we, the great British unwashed, totally under value it and those that work in it.
I think most people don't appreciate the benefits they get from the NHS compared to the cost they pay for it.However, I still don't think people under value those that work in it.
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 31st August 14:41
Dixy said:
Not quite but you have to be in it or associated to it to believe how wrong it is. Junior doctors, that is any doctor who is not a consultant will be on banding, so if they are on 150 banding they will be working about a 70 hour week, plus on call which means they could be asleep but as everywhere is short staffed they will be working. for this they will get about £45k per anum.
If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
...
Unlikely. Prior employers of mine/clients would be in chokey if so If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
...
(And I'd be locking myself up) That isn't to say the situation is acceptable. I don't do life and death work and wouldn't want people who are tired as I know that sort of working rota makes you handling them. But if there aren't enough doctors and getting them takes time, the only alternative I can see is cutting demand (a bigger salary wouldn't solve the immediate problem).
As for Hunt, both sides carry blame on the doctors strike debacle (not least the BMA from what I read). ANOther party minister won't be any better materially though (I admit he's damaged goods mind).
The general public take too much service provision for granted and understand the cost of nothing, nor do they value it properly. How you change this without being accused of targeting the weak/poor/disabled/old/etc is the bit I can't work out.
Murph7355 said:
How you change this without being accused of targeting the weak/poor/disabled/old/etc is the bit I can't work out.
It's not a popularity contest. A few of the people I deal with dislike me- more important is that fact that they think I'm competent & trustworthy. Respect can be more important than friendship in a working environment.sidicks said:
Dixy said:
Not quite but you have to be in it or associated to it to believe how wrong it is. Junior doctors, that is any doctor who is not a consultant will be on banding, so if they are on 150 banding they will be working about a 70 hour week, plus on call which means they could be asleep but as everywhere is short staffed they will be working. for this they will get about £45k per anum.
If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
Sounds like a bit of emotional rhetoric to me - on what charge would they be put in prison?If I treated my staff any where near as badly as clinical staff are treated every day by the NHS I would be in prison.
Regardless, a total package of £55k-£60k including pension benefit is fairly high up in the income percentile bracket!
968 said:
As to doctors being undervalued, if you walked in to A&E with your dying child in your arms and the doctor said yes I can cure them just give me the deads to your house, you would just hand over both. Because the NHS is free at the point of delivery we, the great British unwashed, totally under value it and those that work in it.
I think most people don't appreciate the benefits they get from the NHS compared to the cost they pay for it.However, I still don't think people under value those that work in it.
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 31st August 11:26
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 31st August 11:27
968 said:
That is not my post. I did not write that. You're mendacity is astonishing.
A genuine error, now corrected.I'm not sure quite why you'd decide to throw your toys out of the pram so violently, rather than simply highlight my mistake and ask me to amend my post, as any normal person would?!
Rovinghawk said:
sidicks said:
Surely he means that, like many people, he is contracted to work for 7 hours per day, but actually works for 10 1/2?
I don't know- I just believe that the statement is misleading.968 said:
It is not misleading. I am paid between 9 and 5 but work from 8am until 7pm or later sometimes. Out job plans and pay are a matter of public record and consultants are only paid for 12 PA. Most of us work at least 15 PA. It's slightly tangential to the topic discussed but illustrative of the value for money provided by the NHS staff.
Illustrative of the relative value of money provided by some NHS staff. But not dissimilar to many in the private sector.Murph7355 said:
I guess we'd need to define "government".
But in principle nobody in government needs to be responsible. Someone outside of government can be.
The whole point is to remove government from the loop as far as possible as that's the only way to stop it being a football.
Setting direction and priorities I would sooner was done by medical professionals generally. To think that "government" are equipped to do this without unnecessary meddling is nuts.
IMO no political party is healthy for the NHS. I don't think the electorate are either.
Let government be pivotal in setting out what can be afforded. Let a professional team then deal with what it gets spent on.
Nice idea but probably won't work. Mainly because the government will politicise it by deciding 'what can be afforded'. I agree in principle, however, that an ineffective and incompetent twunt like Hunt should never be placed in the position he is in, as he's so far out of his depth. I've worked and trained through many different health secretaries and this is no doubt the worst ever. The metrics of the NHS have plummeted under his tenure. Staff morale is at rock bottom, resources are scant, as the CCGs become more and more interested in doing everything on the cheap, despite the clinical risk. Lansley's £20bn reform has turned out to be a massive waste of money that has tipped the whole system over the edge and incredibly it was implemented during the recession.But in principle nobody in government needs to be responsible. Someone outside of government can be.
The whole point is to remove government from the loop as far as possible as that's the only way to stop it being a football.
Setting direction and priorities I would sooner was done by medical professionals generally. To think that "government" are equipped to do this without unnecessary meddling is nuts.
IMO no political party is healthy for the NHS. I don't think the electorate are either.
Let government be pivotal in setting out what can be afforded. Let a professional team then deal with what it gets spent on.
Murph7355 said:
The general public take too much service provision for granted and understand the cost of nothing, nor do they value it properly. How you change this without being accused of targeting the weak/poor/disabled/old/etc is the bit I can't work out.
It's difficult. I think that the first thing would be to exclude the elderly, chronically ill/disabled and children from charges. That still leaves a large cohort of patients who see the GP far too often for pointless things that waste everyone's time, despite advice to see a pharmacist or other professional for advice or call 111. Controversially, I believe GPs should charge a nominal fee maybe £10. I don't believe that even the poor are so poor that they cannot afford to pay that fee once in maybe 3 months when they need to see a GP? Additionally anyone going to A&E who is not treated or admitted does not need to be there and perhaps should be charged. As I said, it's controversial and would go down like a lead balloon, however would decongest the service at particularly difficult bottle necks.More difficult is the other side, ie social care. It's now on the media radar as has been horrendously underfunded and undermanaged for years. Consequently patients are stuck in hospital with no arrangements to leave safely. No matter what happens, this area needs funding and sadly will need to come from central govt, as revenue is difficult to generate. Additionally, Brexit could destroy this industry as many care workers are EU nationals, and if they are not able to remain, there are no trained staff to take their place.
Taking the whole shebang out of the hands of politicians will help as people may see it as 'their responsibility' rather than pointing the finger at the latest hapless health secretary.
968 said:
It's difficult. I think that the first thing would be to exclude the elderly, chronically ill/disabled and children from charges. That still leaves a large cohort of patients who see the GP far too often for pointless things that waste everyone's time, despite advice to see a pharmacist or other professional for advice or call 111. Controversially, I believe GPs should charge a nominal fee maybe £10. I don't believe that even the poor are so poor that they cannot afford to pay that fee once in maybe 3 months when they need to see a GP? Additionally anyone going to A&E who is not treated or admitted does not need to be there and perhaps should be charged. As I said, it's controversial and would go down like a lead balloon, however would decongest the service at particularly difficult bottle necks.
Charging for GP visits makes perfect sense, but when it's been raised in the past there has been push back (from GPs, I think), indicating that the admin would be onerous and costs would potentially outweigh benefits.It does seem entirely reasonable to try though.
968 said:
More difficult is the other side, ie social care. It's now on the media radar as has been horrendously underfunded and undermanaged for years. Consequently patients are stuck in hospital with no arrangements to leave safely. No matter what happens, this area needs funding and sadly will need to come from central govt, as revenue is difficult to generate.
So then we'd still need to decide which other public services incur cuts.968 said:
Additionally, Brexit could destroy this industry as many care workers are EU nationals, and if they are not able to remain, there are no trained staff to take their place.
No-one is proposing to send EU nationals back to the EU if they are doing jobs here that cannot otherwise be filled.968 said:
It is not misleading. I am paid between 9 and 5 but work from 8am until 7pm or later sometimes. Out job plans and pay are a matter of public record and consultants are only paid for 12 PA. Most of us work at least 15 PA. It's slightly tangential to the topic discussed but illustrative of the value for money provided by the NHS staff.
My personal experience aside, I think it's blindingly obvious that many NHS medical staff provide value far in excess of their pay, but saying you're contracted and paid for x hours and work x plus hours does not give any indication at all as to value for money. Saying it does sounds petty and weakens your case considerably, especially when you're talking to private sector types for whom contracted hours mean nothing. A qualified doctor making 50k, working 70 hours a week sounds like ridiculously good value to me (ignoring that those hours sound unsafe to me) but their value for money is the same if they are contracted to do 10 hours or 100. IMO framing the discussion in terms of contracted hours and unpaid overtime, like one would a minimum wage job, devalues the profession. As a profession you need to fire your negotiators!sidicks said:
968 said:
It's difficult. I think that the first thing would be to exclude the elderly, chronically ill/disabled and children from charges. That still leaves a large cohort of patients who see the GP far too often for pointless things that waste everyone's time, despite advice to see a pharmacist or other professional for advice or call 111. Controversially, I believe GPs should charge a nominal fee maybe £10. I don't believe that even the poor are so poor that they cannot afford to pay that fee once in maybe 3 months when they need to see a GP? Additionally anyone going to A&E who is not treated or admitted does not need to be there and perhaps should be charged. As I said, it's controversial and would go down like a lead balloon, however would decongest the service at particularly difficult bottle necks.
Charging for GP visits makes perfect sense, but when it's been raised in the past there has been push back (from GPs, I think), indicating that the admin would be onerous and costs would potentially outweigh benefits.It does seem entirely reasonable to try though.
I think I'd quite like it. I've felt the need to go to the GP more than usual recently and I'd far rather pay a bit if it did anything to stop me feeling like I was being considered as being a pointless waste of time.
968 said:
sidicks said:
968 said:
I did not say that or anything of the sort. You're dishonesty is quite amazing.
Dishonesty in what way? I quoted your post!Your= belonging to you
You're = abbreviation for "you are"
Can you please use the English language properly?
fblm said:
My personal experience aside, I think it's blindingly obvious that many NHS medical staff provide value far in excess of their pay, but saying you're contracted and paid for x hours and work x plus hours does not give any indication at all as to value for money. Saying it does sounds petty and weakens your case considerably, especially when you're talking to private sector types for whom contracted hours mean nothing. A qualified doctor making 50k, working 70 hours a week sounds like ridiculously good value to me (ignoring that those hours sound unsafe to me) but their value for money is the same if they are contracted to do 10 hours or 100. IMO framing the discussion in terms of contracted hours and unpaid overtime, like one would a minimum wage job, devalues the profession. As a profession you need to fire your negotiators!
Yes, our negotiators are atrocious and have always been thus. The issue also is it is easy to divide consultants as the priorities in working commitments differ with different specialities. Obviously I'd dispute that stating our time worked vs paid is petty, it's something we don't bring up or make an issue of, but is illustrative, and frankly our contracted hours are a joke and always have been since we qualified as doctors. However, the government engages in pettiness when negotiating the contracts and engages in pettiness when dealing with the various professional bodies, consequently the negotiations become poisonous as we have just witnessed with the juniors and Hunt, where Hunt's misuse of statistics and invention of a non-existent problem was used to force juniors into a ridiculous contract which is already having negative consequences in hospital rotas.968 said:
Obviously I'd dispute that stating our time worked vs paid is petty
I said it sounded petty to a private sector professional most of whom also work well in excess of their contracted hours, if they even know what they are. 968 said:
However, the government engages in pettiness when negotiating the contracts and engages in pettiness when dealing with the various professional bodies...
I think that is probably quite a deliberate and evidently successful strategy on the governments part; here you are talking about working more hours than your contract when you should be pointing out that you earn the same as your PR director and half as much as your CFO. (figures made up obviously)fblm said:
I said it sounded petty to a private sector professional most of whom also work well in excess of their contracted hours, if they even know what they are.
Eh? I get these bills from 'private sector professionals' who charge by the hour. Are you saying their firms are billing for less hours than they're doing???
Not a flippin' snowball's chance in hell m8.
In fact one of them (who I haven't seen in years) used to start a stopclock when you walked into his office.....
Edited by drainbrain on Thursday 31st August 17:57
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff