Junior Doctors row: 98% vote to strike

[Andbreathe]

Some Doctors may be at the hospital for over 80 hours per week which doesn't mean they are actually working . My observations are that there are far too many NHS staff doing very little and don't know the meaning of an hard days work .

 

---------- Post added 11-02-2016 at 12:34 ----------

 

The sooner the better .

 

 

:hihi::hihi:

[Orzel]

Many doctors work over 80 hours per week, anyone got any figures?

 

90% of doctors say they may resign over their new forced contract, that was a facebook headline in the Indie.

 

And they will go to work where exactly?

NHS holds monopoly on healthcare positions.

There are private services, but all put together are still not enough to hire 90% of them.

And if they would that would bring massive competition in private sector.

That could be beneficial to all of us.

[999tigger]

The point is that NHS bosses are urging Jeremy Hunt to unilaterally impose the new contract.

 

Arent you stating the obvious and something thats already been discussed? He can try and impose it as a gambit and now the Drs have to decide what they want to do. Umposing it doesnt mean it will be successful, especually if they all resign en masses. Its going to be hard to run the NHS without junior Drs. The only reason they could function during the strike is becayse they had agreed to provide emergency cover.

 

 

We will have to see how annoyed the Drs are. Imposing soemthing could understandably really get their backs up. The differences in this industrial dispute is that the Drs are vital and they arent stupid.

 

---------- Post added 11-02-2016 at 12:43 ----------

 

And they will go to work where exactly?

NHS holds monopoly on healthcare positions.

There are private services, but all put together are still not enough to hire 90% of them.

And if they would that would bring massive competition in private sector.

That could be beneficial to all of us.

 

It wouldnt take all 90% of them resigning to cause massive problems.

 

In the medium term they can work in wales and scotland.

They can also work as locums.

Move abroad as per the current brain drain. Canada, Aus/NZ, USA.

Leave the profession.

[sutty27]

Arent you stating the obvious and something thats already been discussed? He can try and impose it as a gambit and now the Drs have to decide what they want to do. Umposing it doesnt mean it will be successful, especually if they all resign en masses. Its going to be hard to run the NHS without junior Drs. The only reason they could function during the strike is becayse they had agreed to provide emergency cover.

 

 

We will have to see how annoyed the Drs are. Imposing soemthing could understandably really get their backs up. The differences in this industrial dispute is that the Drs are vital and they arent stupid.

 

If it was obvious Hunt would be sharing the flack with the NHS bosses that want it imposed on the doctors, I get the feeling hunt is taking the flack because he is a Tory MP.

[999tigger]

If it was obvious Hunt would be sharing the flack with the NHS bosses that want it imposed on the doctors, I get the feeling hunt is taking the flack because he is a Tory MP.

 

Because its his policy that is being implemented and he is the Secretary of State.

Oh and the fact the Drs think its a bad deal for them.

[sutty27]

Because its his policy that is being implemented and he is the Secretary of State.

Oh and the fact the Drs think its a bad deal for them.

 

They don't all think its a bad deal.

 

Why this junior doctor won’t be on strike today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12093767/Why-this-doctor-wont-be-on-strike-today.html

 

Government does have a democratic mandate to attempt this. Of course, doctors have a right – even a duty – to challenge that plan. But they need to do so constructively, not by walking out of talks.

 

Unfortunately, doctors and especially the BMA have become intransigent. In recent months we have inflamed grievances with misinformation and anti-Government rhetoric on social media. The debate has become emotive and ideological.

 

But we would do well to count our blessings. When lamenting how little we earn, we might remember that taxpayers have subsidised our medical education. We all leave with debts, but they are a fraction of what they would be elsewhere. Nor are we bound to stay here, repaying the Government with our labour. Indeed, it has been threatened that Jeremy Hunt’s reforms will drive Britain’s doctors to Australia, where a massive private sector makes for better pay and conditions.

 

But there is a problem with this threat. Junior doctors have identified their own cause with that of the NHS as a whole. Hunt’s reforms have been challenged as an attack not only on doctors but on the institution. Many doctors even claim that there is a deliberate plot to vitiate the NHS so completely that arguments for its privatisation become irresistable.

 

This is all very well. But if you’re threatening to leave the country because of a better deal elsewhere, you can’t also play the martyr to the cause of free healthcare.

 

We doctors have a unique perspective on the NHS that should be taken into account in any effort at reform. But ours is not the only view, nor the most important. Ultimately we must accept political leadership even when we disagree with it – that is the whole point of a nationalised health service. It will often be a bitter pill to swallow – it was in 1948.

Edited February 11, 2016 by sutty27

[999tigger]

Ofc they dont all thinklike that because some will be affected more than others. Some can afford to be so.

98% voted to strike, so that seems pretty overwhelming.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34859860

 

In contrast the government won its mandate on 36.9% of the vote.

[Orzel]

Government won its mandate on 36.9% of whole population. Not of one small group.

 

---------- Post added 11-02-2016 at 13:48 ----------

 

Well whole voting population to be exact.

Still more than 98% of doctors.

[999tigger]

Government won its mandate on 36.9% of whole population. Not of one small group.

 

---------- Post added 11-02-2016 at 13:48 ----------

 

Well whole voting population to be exact.

Still more than 98% of doctors.

 

Doesnt matter. The government makes decisions affecting far more people, still doesnt detract only 36.9% voted for their policies.

 

Its not more than a 98% mandate from the relevant group , which for the purposes of the discussion is about Dr's support for a strike amd the relevant group being elgible boting members of the profession.

[sutty27]

Ofc they dont all thinklike that because some will be affected more than others. Some can afford to be so.

98% voted to strike, so that seems pretty overwhelming.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34859860

 

In contrast the government won its mandate on 36.9% of the vote.

 

That means 11,334,576 people gave the government their mandate to rule and make decisions on our behalf.

In contrast there are roughly 60,000 junior doctors working in the NHS and only 28,000 voted to strike, the remainder either didn't vote or they voted against, so less than 50% of junior doctors working in a protected industry are trying to hold the country to ransom.