Junior Doctors row: 98% vote to strike

[unbeliever]

To be honest I find your position very odd. You're trying to argue that the junior doctors are striking because they being forced to work less hours for more pay.

 

Emoticons aside, the junior doctors putting in 91 hours would have been on overtime pay for a lot of those hours. The overly generous overtime pay was creating a perverse incentive for a subset of doctors to take on all the weekend shifts.

[redfox]

Jeremy hunt isn't the negotiator, the chief negotiator is David Dalton.

 

 

why don't you bring your "special" expertise to the party - maybe the Government Minister has some say in what the parameters of the negotiations are -

[sutty27]

why don't you bring your "special" expertise to the party - maybe the Government Minister has some say in what the parameters of the negotiations are -

 

David Dalton is the expert, I just happen to agree with him and not with the union.

[redfox]

David Dalton is the expert, I just happen to agree with him and not with the union.

 

Well I can certainly agree your not an expert on this topic -

[sutty27]

Well I can certainly agree your not an expert on this topic -

 

Clearly you are less of an expert, you didn't even know who conducted the negotiations. You are just on the attack Jeremy Hunt bandwagon.

[unbeliever]

Clearly you are less of an expert, you didn't even know who conducted the negotiations. You are just on the attack Jeremy Hunt bandwagon.

 

Spot on. .

[JFKvsNixon]

The facilities surely continue to operate at weekends.

There are still patients after all. And any patient successfully treated on Saturday, won't need that treatment on Monday. Job done.

 

Currently the situation at the moment is that the majority of weekend work in theatres is emergency stuff. This can range from the non urgent treatment of accesses right up to very long life saving operations. With the odd over time sessions thrown in.

 

So there will be less facilities used, such as less electricity, heating, air-conditioning etc at the weekends.

 

Also, a lot of the time, because the hospitals get paid for every operation that they carry out, operating theatres are seen as a cash revenue for the hospital, the more operations it carries out the more money is brought into the hospital.

 

So during the week, as much effort is put into having as many theatres running for as long as possible, so non urgent emergency operations are encouraged to come into the hospital at the weekend when there is a good chance that they won't be waiting too long for a theatre slot.

 

Mothballing the theatres for a couple of sessions during the weekdays, could get in the way of this work for no practical reason than furfulling a political pledge. It would be madness.

 

Now if the government wants to hire more staff to cover the extra working days, then I would applaud their actions. They would after all be investing in the NHS in an effort to treat more patients. What the government is doing though is trying to do it on the cheap, this is what has me, and a lot of other people concerned.

 

Because, if it is done on the cheap, then nobody in the NHS it's staff or it's patients will come out of it well.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 15:35 ----------

 

Emoticons aside, the junior doctors putting in 91 hours would have been on overtime pay for a lot of those hours. The overly generous overtime pay was creating a perverse incentive for a subset of doctors to take on all the weekend shifts.

 

Weekend shifts would have been covered by the normal working rota. It would have been expected since the working time directive came into force.

[redfox]

Clearly you are less of an expert, you didn't even know who conducted the negotiations. You are just on the attack Jeremy Hunt bandwagon.

 

:hihi::hihi:

 

I am not sure how my knowledge of the negotiating team on either side is of consequence to the facts over which they are in dispute - if you do then thats fine. I prefer the real issues and the evidence but don't let small details get in the way of your partisan bile

[sutty27]

:hihi::hihi:

 

I am not sure how my knowledge of the negotiating team on either side is of consequence to the facts over which they are in dispute - if you do then thats fine. I prefer the real issues and the evidence but don't let small details get in the way of your partisan bile

 

But you choose to ignore them in order to score political point attacking an MP and party you hate.

[unbeliever]

Currently the situation at the moment is that the majority of weekend work in theatres is emergency stuff. This can range from the non urgent treatment of accesses right up to very long life saving operations. With the odd over time sessions thrown in.

 

So there will be less facilities used, such as less electricity, heating, air-conditioning etc at the weekends.

 

Also, a lot of the time, because the hospitals get paid for every operation that they carry out, operating theatres are seen as a cash revenue for the hospital, the more operations it carries out the more money is brought into the hospital.

 

So during the week, as much effort is put into having as many theatres running for as long as possible, so non urgent emergency operations are encouraged to come into the hospital at the weekend when there is a good chance that they won't be waiting too long for a theatre slot.

 

Mothballing the theatres for a couple of sessions during the weekdays, could get in the way of this work for no practical reason than furfulling a political pledge. It would be madness.

 

Now if the government wants to hire more staff to cover the extra working days, then I would applaud their actions. They would after all be investing in the NHS in an effort to treat more patients. What the government is doing though is trying to do it on the cheap, this is what has me, and a lot of other people concerned.

 

Because, if it is done on the cheap, then nobody in the NHS it's staff or it's patients will come out of it well.

 

The number of doctors employed by the NHS has risen by over 27% in the last 12 years. 7/5-1=0.2 (20%). So they already have the extra doctors to cover an extra day of the week.

http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs

 

Perhaps a 7 day NHS would be going too far (from the arguments you're making).

But for now we're talking about a 6 day NHS w.r.t. a subset of doctors.

It's clearly reasonable. And it looks nothing like a threat to the NHS.

 

---------- Post added 26-04-2016 at 15:42 ----------

 

:hihi::hihi:

 

I am not sure how my knowledge of the negotiating team on either side is of consequence to the facts over which they are in dispute - if you do then thats fine. I prefer the real issues and the evidence but don't let small details get in the way of your partisan bile

 

You haven't commented on the real issues.

All you've done is attack people who disagree with you.

Other than posting a link which actually said the opposite of what you say.

Oh and got your finger stuck down on the emoticon button apparently.

 

You're not in a strong position to criticise others for poor debate tactics.

Please, if you have a case to make, you know using facts and such, by all means make it.

Edited April 26, 2016 by unbeliever