Jump to content

Junior Doctors row: 98% vote to strike


Recommended Posts

Fine, you may feel that it's a straw man argument to ask in essence whether you'd be happy to to take a pay to fund improvements where you work, on a thread that's discussing the pay cut that junior doctors have been asked to take to help fund improvements in their service, but I feel it's a relevant question.

 

Indeed. Because senior doctors are currently extremely highly paid and I'm not.

 

And it's not a pay cut. It's a change in terms and conditions which will mean that whether they earn more or less will depend on what shifts they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Because senior doctors are currently extremely highly paid and I'm not.

 

And it's not a pay cut. It's a change in terms and conditions which will mean that whether they earn more or less will depend on what shifts they do.

 

They are getting their hour rate for times that they're regularly rostered to work cut. Dress it up however you like, it's a pay cut.

 

The thing is, if Hunt was open and said that the DoH was going to shaft the junior doctors to in an effort to try to offer a better service without increasing the NHS's budget, then I'd bet that a lot of the public may have supported him.

 

Hunt's spectacular incompetence has managed turn the BMA into the NUM! It takes a special political skill to get the general public behind a sector of the population that will go on to earn a good deal of money, and you have to take you hat off to Hunt, he's managed it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Because senior doctors are currently extremely highly paid and I'm not.

 

And it's not a pay cut. It's a change in terms and conditions which will mean that whether they earn more or less will depend on what shifts they do.

 

Just how highly paid do you think JUNIOR doctors are... (Odd that you mentioned senior doctors, those would be consultants and are not part of this discussion).

 

It's an effective pay cut, they will be guaranteed to take home less pay for the same working hours (which are no doubt considerably longer than yours).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just how highly paid do you think JUNIOR doctors are... (Odd that you mentioned senior doctors, those would be consultants and are not part of this discussion).

 

It's an effective pay cut, they will be guaranteed to take home less pay for the same working hours (which are no doubt considerably longer than yours).

 

The same thing happens to junior people in my field.

I'm not comparing myself with junior doctors. I'm comparing junior people in my field with junior people in medicine and senior people in my field with senior people in medicine.

I'm doing this because my field requires the same level of training.

 

Junior people in my field have better pay and conditions than junior doctors, and senior people in my field have worse pay than senior doctors.

Therefore the pay scale in medicine is highly slanted and can be adjusted to give a better deal to doctors in their early years at the expense of not quiet so generous a deal in later years.

Total career earnings of a physician would remain the same.

 

It's not practical to just keep throwing money at public services. Whenever you do that you're taking money from other public services, or you're taking it from hard working people who don't have endless money to spare.

 

Just think about it will you? It's not a crazy idea.

I don't think that Hunt's proposals reduce the overall physicians pay bill to the state. It's all about trying to see that the people are better served by public servants, but of course you do want to treat public servants reasonably.

 

I would have thought this could be implemented over a period of years over which pay rises are biased toward junior physicians rather than a sudden cut in the pay of their senior colleagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly.

They're striking to maintain the current deal (including being paid more at weekends).

 

I have a PhD and I work for the state. I've been doing it a while. If I had a MD instead I would be paid quite a lot more.

Perhaps its time to bring senior physicians' pay into line with others of the same level of education elsewhere in the state sector, and at the same time bring junior doctors pay up similarly.

Somebody starting in my line of work having just completed their PhD, would be paid more than a junior doctor. But my boss makes less than a senior doctor.

I'm just suggesting that the pay curve in the NHS is perhaps too steep and that's why staff costs are so high overall, but junior doctors feel hard done by.

 

The average career earnings of a physician could remain the same. Nobody would have to lose out overall. You just start them on more, but increase their pay more slowly as they progress. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

I agree with you on this. But that's not *directly* what they are striking over, or not all they are striking over. There will be changes to the hours they can legally be rota'd for so they could have to work 76 hours a week. Of course they would be paid for the extra hours that they worked at either the new or the old rate but do you honestly feel comfortable being treated by a doctor coming to the end of a 76 hour week?!?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His proposal is indeed supposed to reduce the overall pay bill, by reducing the pay of junior doctors. Once he's managed that, I've no doubt he'll go after consultants.

He's also cancelled nursing bursaries (they work 37.5hr weeks whilst training without pay, the bursary covered this).

And eventually the conservative end goal is to declare the NHS unfit for purpose and to sell it off to their mates.

WE will then have to start paying for our medical care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you on this. But that's not *directly* what they are striking over, or not all they are striking over. There will be changes to the hours they can legally be rota'd for so they could have to work 76 hours a week. Of course they would be paid for the extra hours that they worked at either the new or the old rate but do you honestly feel comfortable being treated by a doctor coming to the end of a 76 hour week?!?!!

 

Not really no.

I don't want my physician to be running on a caffeine overdose when he comes to see me.

Still that seems to be the way with junior doctors throughout the west.

 

I've not seen the details of the new working hours rules myself. I assume that they're allowed time recuperate both from such a long week and each day within that week?

 

---------- Post added 22-01-2016 at 10:17 ----------

 

His proposal is indeed supposed to reduce the overall pay bill, by reducing the pay of junior doctors. Once he's managed that, I've no doubt he'll go after consultants.

He's also cancelled nursing bursaries (they work 37.5hr weeks whilst training without pay, the bursary covered this).

And eventually the conservative end goal is to declare the NHS unfit for purpose and to sell it off to their mates.

WE will then have to start paying for our medical care.

 

We're paying for it now.

Just because it's called a tax rather than a bill, doesn't mean we're not paying for it.

 

Does this idea that the Conservatives have a secret plan to privatise UK healthcare come from anywhere in particular, or is it a conspiracy theory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly.

They're striking to maintain the current deal (including being paid more at weekends).

 

I have a PhD and I work for the state. I've been doing it a while. If I had a MD instead I would be paid quite a lot more.

Perhaps its time to bring senior physicians' pay into line with others of the same level of education elsewhere in the state sector, and at the same time bring junior doctors pay up similarly.

Somebody starting in my line of work having just completed their PhD, would be paid more than a junior doctor. But my boss makes less than a senior doctor.

I'm just suggesting that the pay curve in the NHS is perhaps too steep and that's why staff costs are so high overall, but junior doctors feel hard done by.

 

The average career earnings of a physician could remain the same. Nobody would have to lose out overall. You just start them on more, but increase their pay more slowly as they progress. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

Medical Doctor and someone with a real doctorate aren't comparable at all.

You could have a PhD in art history, that doesn't make you worth as much as a junior doctor I'm afraid, even though you'd have a real doctorate.

The pay is little to do with the level of education, and more to do with the demands of the job, the high level of skill required, the level of responsibility and the shortage of people who can do that job (that's a different issue, we should be training more doctors, then pay could naturally go down).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medical Doctor and someone with a real doctorate aren't comparable at all.

You could have a PhD in art history, that doesn't make you worth as much as a junior doctor I'm afraid, even though you'd have a real doctorate.

The pay is little to do with the level of education, and more to do with the demands of the job, the high level of skill required, the level of responsibility and the shortage of people who can do that job (that's a different issue, we should be training more doctors, then pay could naturally go down).

 

My PhD is in particle astrophysics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

We're paying for it now.

Just because it's called a tax rather than a bill, doesn't mean we're not paying for it.

Obviously it is paid for, and we as a collective pay for it.

However if I walk outside and get hit by a car, I won't be landed with a bill for £50,000 for emergency treatment.

Does this idea that the Conservatives have a secret plan to privatise UK healthcare come from anywhere in particular, or is it a conspiracy theory?

 

Well, they keep privatising bits around the edges whenever they can. Many of them have investments and links to healthcare companies. They keep denying that they want to privatise it (which in general for politicians means that it's high on their TODO list). They have a history of privatising state run institutions...

You might as well call it a conspiracy theory when a known burglar is accused of planning to burgle a house he's been hanging around outside of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.