Strike Action

[ECCOnoob]

4 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Does it matter?

A NHS boss on TV today has said that, even if the unions did not exist, and there were no strikes, The NHS has  30,000 vacancies.

It cannot continue to operate at this level so,  how do you recruit staff, and how do you get them to stay.

Any Tory lovers care to answer both of those questions?

 

I agree it cannot continue to operate at this level.

 

However, there is other more pressing questions to be answered. Are all those 30,000 vacancies actually essential and necessary to the service.  Are there any services, treatments or clinic types that in the real world are non-essential luxuries and shouldn't be bankrolled by taxpayers?  Are there areas of wastage and abuse of service which should be culled before recruiting more personnel?  Are some of those vacancies outdated pen pushing jobs that could be dealt with by more efficient or alternative methods?  Are those vacancies, duplications or extensions of things which could and have been more cost effectively and efficiently done by external private companies?

 

The NHS is not some protected bubble. It is ripe for absolute reform. Top  to bottom.  

Edited January 21, 2023 by ECCOnoob

[Dromedary]

1 hour ago, Mister Gee said:

No you’re wrong, it’s this rancid Tory government who drew up the ideas and implemented them that encouraged the workers to strike.

As we were talking about nurses and the NHS the problems with recruitment started in 2013 with a Labour government that decided all new nurses now needed to go to university and get a degree.

Edited January 21, 2023 by Dromedary
did a slinny

[Mister Gee]

1 minute ago, Dromedary said:

As we were talking about nurses and the NHS the problems started in 2013 with a Labour government that decided all new nurses now needed to go to university and get a degree.

Really?

[Mister Gee]

15 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I agree it cannot continue to operate at this level.

 

However, there is other more pressing questions to be answered. Are all those 30,000 vacancies actually essential and necessary to the service.  Are there any services, treatments or clinic types that in the real world are non-essential luxuries and shouldn't be bankrolled by taxpayers?  Are there areas of wastage and abuse of service which should be culled before recruiting more personnel?  Are some of those vacancies outdated pen pushing jobs that could be dealt with by more efficient or alternative methods?  Are those vacancies, duplications or extensions of things which could and have been more cost effectively and efficiently done by external private companies?

 

The NHS is not some protected bubble. It is ripe for absolute reform. Top  to bottom.  

Ripe for what, Profiteering? 

[ECCOnoob]

22 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

Ripe for what, Profiteering? 

^^^^^

Perfect example of why the NHS will always remain a wasteful, flabby, mismanaged, over protected, overused, political football, bottomless money pit.  

 

Even the mere faintest hint of a possible informal discussion regarding maybe the word  "reform" and instantly come along the hysterics screaming profiteering and corporate greed 🙄

 

Sometimes I feel it deserves to fail and collapse. Might be the only thing needed for people to properly wake up and get in the real world about what it should be offering, what isn't essential, how much is being wasted, how badly its being abused and taken for granted and what it should actually be providing. 

Edited January 21, 2023 by ECCOnoob

[Mister Gee]

1 minute ago, ECCOnoob said:

^^^^^

Perfect example of why the NHS will always remain a wasteful, flabby, mismanaged, over protected, overused, political football, bottomless money pit.  

 

Even the mere faintest hint of a possible informal discussion regarding maybe the word  "reform" and instantly come along the hysterics screaming profiteering and corporate greed 🙄

 

Sometimes I feel it deserves to fail and collapse. Might be the only thing needed for people to properly wake up and get in the real world about what it should be offering, what isn't essential, how much is being wasting, how badly is being abused and taken for granted and what it should actually be providing. 

Who mentioned owt about that? 

[hackey lad]

48 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I agree it cannot continue to operate at this level.

 

However, there is other more pressing questions to be answered. Are all those 30,000 vacancies actually essential and necessary to the service.  Are there any services, treatments or clinic types that in the real world are non-essential luxuries and shouldn't be bankrolled by taxpayers?  Are there areas of wastage and abuse of service which should be culled before recruiting more personnel?  Are some of those vacancies outdated pen pushing jobs that could be dealt with by more efficient or alternative methods?  Are those vacancies, duplications or extensions of things which could and have been more cost effectively and efficiently done by external private companies?

 

The NHS is not some protected bubble. It is ripe for absolute reform. Top  to bottom.  

[Mister Gee]

5 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

You really are pathetic.

[Mister Gee]

19 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

^^^^^

Perfect example of why the NHS will always remain a wasteful, flabby, mismanaged, over protected, overused, political football, bottomless money pit.  

 

Even the mere faintest hint of a possible informal discussion regarding maybe the word  "reform" and instantly come along the hysterics screaming profiteering and corporate greed 🙄

 

Sometimes I feel it deserves to fail and collapse. Might be the only thing needed for people to properly wake up and get in the real world about what it should be offering, what isn't essential, how much is being wasted, how badly its being abused and taken for granted and what it should actually be providing. 

You’re a right nasty bit of work.

[hackey lad]

15 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

You really are pathetic.

Thank you . Are you done ?