Junior Doctors row: 98% vote to strike

[max]

I'm getting a bit bored of this now.

 

The government have been generous in their offer to junior doctors as they have agreed they can earn more cash and work less hours. All they have to do is work more hours on a weekend so that hospitals are less busy during the week.

 

What's the problem? I could be missing something but I can't find non biased information.

 

Or, to put your words more simply, doctors are being asked to work the same hours as they do now but for less money.

 

Plus, safeguards to prevent hospitals forcing them to work longer hours are being removed.

[foxy lady]

This was about a comparison of mandates from respective groups.

 

Obviously there are going to be more people in a larger group so duh!

 

11,334,576 represents 36.9% of the vote cast on the day and 24.4% of those eligible to vote. The turnout was 66.1%

 

I like your figures and argument except they are garbage and false.

 

There were 37,155 people balloted and just over 28,000 voted. That means just over 9,000 didnt vote, but the turnout was just over 76%.

 

Of the 2 questions

Question 1

Are you prepared to take part in industrial action short of a strike?

It was 28120 in favour and 179 against. 99.4% v 0.6%

 

Question 2

Are you prepared to take part in strike action?

Number voting YES 27,741 (98% of valid vote)

Number voting NO 564 (2% of valid vote)

 

So your claim of it being less than 50% of the relevant group is false.

The idea they are holding the country to ransom is also nonsense. Its only right if they are to have their terms changed then they have a right to negotiate to get a deal that suits them. Its a question of supply and demand. If they arent worth it, then find replacements, just as they can decide if its not for them they will leave the NHS.

 

I suppose the next question would be how many of the doctors are prepared to work to the new contract and how many are prepared to seek employment overseas.

The next question would be. How many doctors work in Eastern Europe and beyond on $500 or less per month who would like to come and live in the UK.

[spilldig]

So employment contracts should mean nothing then?

 

I suppose it depends how the contract is worded. When I entered employment with Bass we had a contract that was many pages long. So long in fact, that it was brought out in the form of a book with its own binder and the last sentence of the last paragraph of the last page, stated,"the terms and conditions of this contract can be changed at any time by the management", thereby making the whole book irrelevant as far as us employees could see.

[999tigger]

I suppose the next question would be how many of the doctors are prepared to work to the new contract and how many are prepared to seek employment overseas.

The next question would be. How many doctors work in Eastern Europe and beyond on $500 or less per month who would like to come and live in the UK.

 

I would think quite a lot of them will work for the new contract, but you will have a less motivated workforce, which means you will get less out of them.

 

Depending which articles you read then about 3-5000 a year leave. Australia, NZ and the US seem to be the destinations. more money less hours.

 

Only 52 per cent of junior doctors chose to stay in the NHS after two years, the paper reported, the lowest amount ever and down from 71.3 per cent just four years ago in 2011. Reasons people choose to leave seem to boil down to extra pressure on staff and disenchantment among medics.

 

Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2015/12/05/almost-half-of-junior-doctors-left-the-nhs-after-their-training-5546031/#ixzz3zsHNAvgB

 

 

How many foreign Drs like to come to the NHS? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11375600/NHS-now-dependent-on-foreign-doctors-with-3000-more-in-last-year.html

 

It seems to be about 30% of Drs in the NHS were trained elsewhere. The question is whether they are as good and they are a long term solution.

[sutty27]

This was about a comparison of mandates from respective groups.

 

Obviously there are going to be more people in a larger group so duh!

 

11,334,576 represents 36.9% of the vote cast on the day and 24.4% of those eligible to vote. The turnout was 66.1%

 

I like your figures and argument except they are garbage and false.

 

There were 37,155 people balloted and just over 28,000 voted. That means just over 9,000 didnt vote, but the turnout was just over 76%.

 

Of the 2 questions

Question 1

Are you prepared to take part in industrial action short of a strike?

It was 28120 in favour and 179 against. 99.4% v 0.6%

 

Question 2

Are you prepared to take part in strike action?

Number voting YES 27,741 (98% of valid vote)

Number voting NO 564 (2% of valid vote)

 

So your claim of it being less than 50% of the relevant group is false.

The idea they are holding the country to ransom is also nonsense. Its only right if they are to have their terms changed then they have a right to negotiate to get a deal that suits them. Its a question of supply and demand. If they arent worth it, then find replacements, just as they can decide if its not for them they will leave the NHS.

 

My figures are correct.

 

If you read it as 98% of all junior doctors voting to strike, that's incorrect, but it is correct that 98% of junior doctors who voted on the issue backed the strike.

 

Out of over 37,000 doctors balloted, about 28,000 voted to strike and about 600 voted against. 98% is the proportion of votes in favour of a strike among those who responded.

 

9,000 people who received ballot papers didn't vote (so the response rate was 76%, as media coverage mentioned). Roughly 16,000-23,000 additional junior doctors weren't balloted. About 3,000 of these are members of the BMA but weren't eligible to vote as they won't be affected by the changes. The remainder aren't BMA members. We don't know if they'll be affected by the changes.

 

Up to about a third of junior doctors aren't members of the BMA

 

Just over 37,000 junior doctors in England who were members of the BMA were balloted. The BMA told us it didn't ballot a further 3,000 or so of junior doctors in its membership because they won't be affected by the contract changes. For example, it said doctors in the army have a different contract.

 

The total number of junior doctors is thought to be somewhere roughly between 53,000 and 60,000. The BMA told us it's about 53,000, but the Department for Health gave us the 60,000 figure.

 

So there are about 13,000-20,000 more junior doctors (somewhere between one in four and one in three) who may or may not be affected by the changes, whose opinion we don't know.

 

Adding all these figures in (so including some not affected by the changes), somewhere between about 46% and 52% of all junior doctors voted to strike.

https://fullfact.org/health/did-98-junior-doctors-vote-strike/

 

In total, there are 55,000 junior doctors in England - representing a third of the medical workforce. The BMA has just over 37,700 members.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34775980

[foxy lady]

I would think quite a lot of them will work for the new contract, but you will have a less motivated workforce, which means you will get less out of them.

 

Depending which articles you read then about 3-5000 a year leave. Australia, NZ and the US seem to be the destinations. more money less hours.

 

 

 

Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2015/12/05/almost-half-of-junior-doctors-left-the-nhs-after-their-training-5546031/#ixzz3zsHNAvgB

 

 

How many foreign Drs like to come to the NHS? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11375600/NHS-now-dependent-on-foreign-doctors-with-3000-more-in-last-year.html

 

It seems to be about 30% of Drs in the NHS were trained elsewhere. The question is whether they are as good and they are a long term solution.

 

It's called the brain drain and it has been going on for decades. I believe it is one of the reasons Tony Blair's government introduced tuition fees because thousands took a free education here and then cleared off to work in the USA and Canada. 3000 to 5000 leaving per year is normal wastage. It's the same in every profession and every profession also claims they are hard done to.

The NHS has for decades recruited staff abroad which is why we have so many foreign born doctors and nurses.

So I doubt this contract will make a great deal of difference. The UK is a rather attractive place to live. That's why there are folk trying to board lorries in Calais. Some doctors might think about the USA, but there they risk Donald Trump and red necks with guns as the forum so frequently reminds us.

Edited February 11, 2016 by foxy lady

[Andbreathe]

Some doctors might think about the USA, but there they risk Donald Trump and red necks with guns as the forum so frequently reminds us.

 

And quite rightly so.

[999tigger]

My figures are correct.

 

If you read it as 98% of all junior doctors voting to strike, that's incorrect, but it is correct that 98% of junior doctors who voted on the issue backed the strike.

 

Out of over 37,000 doctors balloted, about 28,000 voted to strike and about 600 voted against. 98% is the proportion of votes in favour of a strike among those who responded.

 

9,000 people who received ballot papers didn't vote (so the response rate was 76%, as media coverage mentioned). Roughly 16,000-23,000 additional junior doctors weren't balloted. About 3,000 of these are members of the BMA but weren't eligible to vote as they won't be affected by the changes. The remainder aren't BMA members. We don't know if they'll be affected by the changes.

 

Up to about a third of junior doctors aren't members of the BMA

 

Just over 37,000 junior doctors in England who were members of the BMA were balloted. The BMA told us it didn't ballot a further 3,000 or so of junior doctors in its membership because they won't be affected by the contract changes. For example, it said doctors in the army have a different contract.

 

The total number of junior doctors is thought to be somewhere roughly between 53,000 and 60,000. The BMA told us it's about 53,000, but the Department for Health gave us the 60,000 figure.

 

So there are about 13,000-20,000 more junior doctors (somewhere between one in four and one in three) who may or may not be affected by the changes, whose opinion we don't know.

 

Adding all these figures in (so including some not affected by the changes), somewhere between about 46% and 52% of all junior doctors voted to strike.

https://fullfact.org/health/did-98-junior-doctors-vote-strike/

 

In total, there are 55,000 junior doctors in England - representing a third of the medical workforce. The BMA has just over 37,700 members.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34775980

 

I can hardly see how the BMA can be blamed for balloting just its members. Not sure why you are repeating to me figures ive already posted? If those 3000 were not eligible to vote because they werent affected, then I cant see why they would need to be considered. The issue was about junior Drs in the NHS not those in the armed forces.

 

As it stands 98% of those balloted junior Drs in the NHS voted for action.

You cant say what the Drs who arent in the BMA would have voted because they chose not to be in their union. If you want to go along the total number of Drs, then you would have to follow a similar route with the governments mandate, which would reduce down to 21% of people eligible voted for the government or just over 1 in 5, when you include the 7 million not on the electoral register.

 

---------- Post added 11-02-2016 at 17:33 ----------

 

It's called the brain drain and it has been going on for decades. I believe it is one of the reasons Tony Blair's government introduced tuition fees because thousands took a free education here and then cleared off to work in the USA and Canada. 3000 to 5000 leaving per year is normal wastage. It's the same in every profession and every profession also claims they are hard done to.

The NHS has for decades recruited staff abroad which is why we have so many foreign born doctors and nurses.

So I doubt this contract will make a great deal of difference. The UK is a rather attractive place to live. That's why there are folk trying to board lorries in Calais. Some doctors might think about the USA, but there they risk Donald Trump and red necks with guns as the forum so frequently reminds us.

 

Brain drains are not good for the country. Each Dr that leaves is a waste of hundreds of thousands of £s for the tax payer. What we are essentially doing is training larger numbers of Drs for the destination countries and replacing them with in many cases much poorer foreign Drs. The contract will make a difference to some but an effect on morale is just as important as less motivated people are less productive. The UK is an ok place to live, but if they get offered better jobs on fewer hours for more money, then its understandable the leave. In the meantime the shortage of medical staff continues. Theres more to the USA than Donald Trump and Red Necks.

[sutty27]

I can hardly see how the BMA can be blamed for balloting just its members. Not sure why you are repeating to me figures ive already posted?

 

I didn't blame them and I posted to prove that my figures were accurate, not garbage and false as you claimed.

[Eric Arthur]

Or, to put your words more simply, doctors are being asked to work the same hours as they do now but for less money.

 

Not quite right. They are being asked to work fewer hours for a better hourly rate. The problem is that they are having their hours capped at 72 instead of ninety odd and the BMA wants their members to have their cake (fewer hours) and eat it (more money).

 

Junior doctors have rightly been banging on for years about the hours that they work, but when a government finally sees sense to limit the hours, the doctors suddenly realise that their pay might go down with the hours, just like everyone else in the real non NHS world.

 

I'm still unaware of any concessions the BMA has made in this so called negotiation. The government rightly wants a 24/7 NHS but again, doctors don't want to do what's right for patients. It is just an old fashioned union led pay dispute.