Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

I am not against the idea of 2 years compulsory but that has to be for everyone, degree in fine art 2 years late shift at Mcdonalds etc.
How many civil servants can we recruit to organise it.
Here is an idea, just pay them properly and treat them with the respect they deserve.

That only looks from the JD side.

Respect is earned, JDs included. It involves more than A-levels almost like a veterinarian, and med school, it includes dealing with other people (colleagues, patients) and so on.

It looked ^ a bit like expectation of bowing and scraping but clearly that's just appearance.

[turbobloke]

Murph7355 said:

Dixy said:

I am not against the idea of 2 years compulsory but that has to be for everyone, degree in fine art 2 years late shift at Mcdonalds etc.
How many civil servants can we recruit to organise it.
Here is an idea, just pay them properly and treat them with the respect they deserve.

If students are covering the costs themselves then no need for lock in, IMO.

What I'd be inclined to do is for the govt to pay the fees and even give a bursary to those studying medicine or other key subjects that the country needs (STEM etc). The flip side of that, however, should be some form of lock in, or it gets paid back as if you'd studied something that didn't attract the same arrangements.

Pay and respect are two different things really.

On pay, what does "properly" constitute? The set up here means there has to be a balance between what is "deserved"/"warranted" and what can be afforded from the public purse. It's down to the electorate at large to demand better services of govt which is what may see increases in pay. If we all do not do this, then the salaries will reflect it. This, IMO, is where the JDs and their representatives have made mistakes in the way they have gone about their requests - I don't sense they have the public on side at all, and that damages/destroys their position.

The "best" long term approach on this will be for those who would have done medicine to go and study other subjects and get their first jobs in other sectors. Eventually govt and the electorate will have to make choices. Things will get worse in the short to medium term, but IMO it's the only sustainable way to force decisions and choices.

On respect, I think there is still massive respect for what these guys do (and nurses etc). There are a minority (possibly a growing one) who abuse the system and do not respect it or the people who work in it, and they need weeding out and punishing. But generally I think respect is very much there.

Are students covering the costs themselves?

Yes respect is still there in terms of the medical profession, but it still has to be earned / justified / maintained on an individual basis.

Agreed about the general thrust on STEMM and the need for more circumspection with the pay claim % award.

[turbobloke]

That's one example of the respect thing going south, and an indication of the political nature of action spurred by BMA activists at JD and Consultant levels.

[turbobloke]

June fun in the Sun. A senior BMA surgeon remoaner on t'committee taking it out on millions of patients and certainly more than a few fellow surgeons - unless none voted Leave and none vote Conservative, the chances of which are close to zero.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22854637/doctor-behi...

It's about pay and conditions, not politics, remember.

Disrepute calling.

[turbobloke]

It's not just that word seen on PH occasionally these day - optics - if the surgeon believes his own hype.

The political angle behind these strikes won't go away due to the BMA activists themselves drawing attention to it.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

It's not just that word seen on PH occasionally these day - optics - if the surgeon believes his own hype.

The political angle behind these strikes won't go away due to the BMA activists themselves drawing attention to it.

Why not spend a few minutes reading what he said and comprehending it, rather than reading tabloid nonsense on it.

Your assumption on my not reading the article is wrong, and the view he's given from those activist words and phrases on brexit etc are unaffected.

Government tells consultants that it ‘cannot be right’ to do private work whilst taking ‘strike action’
Click

NHS doctors working in private healthcare 'on the side' is directly harming health service, says senior consultant
Click

That's all well and good but did the senior consultant then vote Leave and/or vote Tory in elections? These are key issues according to a senior BMA activist.

Are striking JDs still pocketing ash cash?

[turbobloke]

JDs and Consultants need to keep their BMA activist loose cannons on a short leash.

Who are they meant to be acting for, their members or HM Opposition?

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

86 said:

Tough life being a consultant they clearly need to strike to get a decent wage !

https://nybreaking.com/how-striking-nhs-consultant...

You are a bot and I claim my ten shillings.

Not bad, but it pales against a six figure claim. Striking for more makes sense suddenly. It's not political at all. Despite vilification of the gov't in political terms.

Earn good money, good; strike for lots more, jog on.

Although it's not for money when a change of gov't is in the mix.

[turbobloke]

BMA 35% out-hyped by ASLEF with their '20 more years' boast.

[turbobloke]

pavarotti1980 said:

86 said:

Yes that’s how much it went up. Nice being employed by the Government !

The state pension went up 10.1% not consultant you buffoon . I would log off now if I were you

"The UK government has confirmed that from 10 April 2023 the value of NHS pensions will increase by 10.1%, in line with the CPI inflation"

https://www.sor.org/news/government-nhs/nhs-pensio...

Is that relevant to the discussion?

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

pavarotti1980 said:

turbobloke said:

"The UK government has confirmed that from 10 April 2023 the value of NHS pensions will increase by 10.1%, in line with the CPI inflation"

https://www.sor.org/news/government-nhs/nhs-pensio...

Is that relevant to the discussion?

Yep apologies 86 didnt see that.

Don't let him think he is correct. The pension has not been increased anymore than the state pension has.

?
Was a pension increase more than the state pension claimed? The figure 10.1% was mentioned, it's correct is it not?

[turbobloke]

valiant said:

turbobloke said:

Not bad, but it pales against a six figure claim. Striking for more makes sense suddenly. It's not political at all. Despite vilification of the gov't in political terms.

Earn good money, good; strike for lots more, jog on.

Although it's not for money when a change of gov't is in the mix.

What’s the cut off for taking strike action then?

£30k? £50k? Where’s the line?

The cut off is not taking lucrative private work on strike (consultants) or easy money ash cash (JDs).

Govt spokesperson said:

If consultants choose to take strike action, it cannot be right that some continue to only treat their fee-paying private patients and benefit financially from that while patient care is put at risk in the NHS. We would urge those consultants considering this approach to seriously consider the impact on the NHS. It would not be right to put profit before patients.

In the BMJ Cardiologist Dr John Dean said:

No matter how high I set my own moral and ethical standards I could not escape the fact that I was involved in a business where the conduct of some was so venal it bordered on criminal – the greedy preying on the needy.

If / when JDs and Consultants are on strike, NHS patients are facing increased risk, makng the situation more acute and more questionable.

[turbobloke]

Murph7355 said:

pavarotti1980 said:

Ah bless jealous again. Like I said should have tried harder at school.

The pension paid retired doctors (an important distinction).

Need to be careful with that line of argument (“ah bless... ") as the same could be used ref pay rises.

As in don't strike just because you didn't try harder and go equipped for a better job that paid even more and without the need to strike? Interesting.

If the 'vocation' response is forthcoming, then why is pay such an issue at the pay levels in question - 2008 cherry pick or otherwise - and it would shift the focus towards politics.

Alternatively, I've got completely the wrong end of the parrot.

[turbobloke]

AstonZagato said:

My wife is an NHS consultant. I can tell you exactly (to the penny) how much she has earned out of private practice over the last 25 years. £0.00. Her speciality is paediatrics - saving the lives of children, giving them quality of life. So nothing important or worthwhile...
The reason is that the NHS (rightly) has historically thrown resources at paediatrics and so her patients have no need to go private. Her service (when she was clinical director) was rated "Outstanding".
No need to worry about her pay because some plastic surgeons can coin it in Harley Street.

Not forgetting cardiologists, urologists, endocrinologists...enterprise isn't all about plastic. Interesting point about paediatrics and resources. Nevertheless there are quite a few paediatricians 'riding a Harley'...in the NHS, and elsewhere, such work with young people will surely have great ups and some challenging downs.

[turbobloke]

86 said:

poo at Paul's said:

pavarotti1980 said:

86 said:

Friend of mine who works for NHS got pulled aside by their peers as they hadn’t taken any sick leave for 3 years, colleagues were concerned it was making them look bad !!

Well that is a complete and utter crock of made up ste right there.

And yet, the average sick leave in the NHS is 17 days per year. For what, 1.5 million of them?
It's over 3 times the sick leave in the Private Sector generally, but yeah, it must be bks just like the 10% increase in pension.

Suggest you think before you type but I will accept your apology

Gat the parrot ready...it looks like poo at Paul's was posting in agreement.

[turbobloke]

spaximus said:

poo at Paul's said:

Dixy said:

So Poo At Pauls you have criticised others, what is your solution to the problem. And other than being a tax payer and a patient what is your reason for being against the JDs.

I believe we should all feel just as sorry for them as we do junior bankers, lawyers, pilots, hedge fund managers etc.
Anyone embarking on a professional career starts by shed loads of stressful training, then doing long hours, for low pay. Of course, a few years down the line, it is not like that anymore.

It is not just the medical profession and it has always been this way.

This thread astounds me as so many experts who have never worked in the NHS or understand the pressure.

All of those people you mentioned yes no doubt work hard, have debt but the pressure of trying to save lives and the abject sorrow from loosing a patients hits hard. This is why they suffer mental issues as to be honest there is no help for medics. To compare those outside is simply wrong.

Working in A&E when a small child comes in and regardless of your efforts and the paediatric crash team they die. The sound of a mothers scream still haunts many Dr's who have had this happen.

I get some think this is all political, but for the vast majority of Dr's it is not. The government do not care about the problems they just care about the votes that they see being won or lost. If they did care they would never have allowed it to get to the state where both Junior Dr's and Consultants are prepared to strike.

The shortages of medics and the number leaving is too high and there answer is to hack people off more and try to come up with gimmicks like AI instead.

The 35% was an opening salvo, the 5% from Barclay is an insult. As someone else said, it appears that now the consultant vote has come back affirming their dissatisfaction and frustration, has made him soften his tough guy stance.

Hopefully this will not drag on until we get into the winter issues of flu etc.

I understand the level of responsibility aspect, yet it's hardly ever if ever raised by BMA strike leaders, who talk about pay then talk politics later.

The 'vast majority' aren't leading the strikes, that's the work of political activists in the BMA and why, alongside the political slogans spoken and written by such people, the political element is obvious.

If so many medics don't have or want political motives in play, how do they sack the zealots who got themselves on committee duty and now make the wrong noises? From your post, they don't represent the average doctor, yet they do exactly that. Large numbers voting 'No' at the next ballot seems unlikely, so their political activist colleagues will consider themselves vindicated.

[turbobloke]

spaximus said:

turbobloke said:

spaximus said:

poo at Paul's said:

Dixy said:

So Poo At Pauls you have criticised others, what is your solution to the problem. And other than being a tax payer and a patient what is your reason for being against the JDs.

I believe we should all feel just as sorry for them as we do junior bankers, lawyers, pilots, hedge fund managers etc.
Anyone embarking on a professional career starts by shed loads of stressful training, then doing long hours, for low pay. Of course, a few years down the line, it is not like that anymore.

It is not just the medical profession and it has always been this way.

This thread astounds me as so many experts who have never worked in the NHS or understand the pressure.

All of those people you mentioned yes no doubt work hard, have debt but the pressure of trying to save lives and the abject sorrow from loosing a patients hits hard. This is why they suffer mental issues as to be honest there is no help for medics. To compare those outside is simply wrong.

Working in A&E when a small child comes in and regardless of your efforts and the paediatric crash team they die. The sound of a mothers scream still haunts many Dr's who have had this happen.

I get some think this is all political, but for the vast majority of Dr's it is not. The government do not care about the problems they just care about the votes that they see being won or lost. If they did care they would never have allowed it to get to the state where both Junior Dr's and Consultants are prepared to strike.

The shortages of medics and the number leaving is too high and there answer is to hack people off more and try to come up with gimmicks like AI instead.

The 35% was an opening salvo, the 5% from Barclay is an insult. As someone else said, it appears that now the consultant vote has come back affirming their dissatisfaction and frustration, has made him soften his tough guy stance.

Hopefully this will not drag on until we get into the winter issues of flu etc.

I understand the level of responsibility aspect, yet it's hardly ever if ever raised by BMA strike leaders, who talk about pay then talk politics later.

The 'vast majority' aren't leading the strikes, that's the work of political activists in the BMA and why, alongside the political slogans spoken and written by such people, the political element is obvious.

If so many medics don't have or want political motives in play, how do they sack the zealots who got themselves on committee duty and now make the wrong noises? From your post, they don't represent the average doctor, yet they do exactly that. Large numbers voting 'No' at the next ballot seems unlikely, so their political activist colleagues will consider themselves vindicated.

As I have written before the big issue is that the old guard, let the government ignore the pay review body which led to the reduction in real term pay. This opened the door for people who pointed this out and they got elected to sort that out.

The problem is they have no experiance of negotiating with anyone. They also have no media training or have given advice to dr's who get asked questions on the issues of strikes.

This has allowed to Government to twist the narrative without actually anyone from the BMA holding them to account. Instead of pushing home why are so many leaving, why are the waiting lists growing because so many have left, why do we have so few ambulance staff, midwives and record waits to see a GP, why are other countries so keen to take our Dr's and they want to go, instead they have been reported as only thinking about the money and bringing down the government. That is simply not true but there lack of experiance of the new leaders has left them at a disadvantage.

However now the consultants have decided to step into the fray that may well change. People like 86 who claim all consultants do masses of private work and are so rich they have multiple homes are spreading this rubbish and the press lap it up.

No one I know who are medics, I am not one myself, thought 35% was winnable but no one thought Barclay would not negotiate or try to look at the problems until now.

My thoughts if they offered something reasonable now with guaranteed rises over the next few years it would be over. Scottish Dr's were offered more and still turned it down so who knows what it will take to end this mess.

I get that. I've posted before that as Scots JDs turned down 14.5% (iirc) I'd like to see firstly the 35% error removed, an offer of 15% from Barclay, with further clawback over time (realistic but no more) then see ballot result. If that was rejected in England I suspect even fewer JDs would be participating, beyond the current drop. Public support may well start to fall away at that point.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/19/junior...
I appreciate some PHers don't have access to the DT.

[turbobloke]

86 said:

pghstochaj said:

86 said:

My knowledge of the topic is great the thing is you don’t like the answers!! Anyway keep striking to 2025 it will just be factored in as business as usual like rail strikes. In the meantime doctors will go from being considered great people to just a bunch of greedy people who held the country to ransom. A bit like cricket you can win but it’s the way you win that is just as important

Done your own research on dailymail.com? That doesn’t result in great knowledge. If you have great knowledge, when will you start sharing it?

Oh dear is that your best response ?!

I just checked, being only an occasional visitor and often from links in PH threads - it's not .com/ it's .co.uk/

We can be 110.1% sure of that.

[turbobloke]

oddman said:

On the issue of pensions 86 is mistaken

The pension drawn by retired NHS staff rises by September CPI so retired consultants enjoyed 10.1% this year - funnily enough retired staff don't strike

Pension growth for existing members is related to CPI as well - However this is a hypothetical figure on which pension tax is calculated - Individual circumstances vary.

How does the 10.1% rise not impact as favourably on say a consultant retiring next year, as opposed to one who retired last year?

Given that a consultant retiring next year may go on strike this year.

[turbobloke]

Dblue said:

Killboy said:

This is what happens when you fail to keep paying people what they are worth. You end up in the situation where what's needed to too high a jump a company can afford, and people simply leave and you are left with the desperate. Not a good situation for any company, and certainly not for a nations healthcare.

Exactly.

And there has to be a deep breath and a correction made. The reason they are striking is that not striking ended up with 15 years of a big fat nothing.

Honestly, the false economy of putting it off for year after year costs lots more than just giving them regular small rises

It may do so, we'll have to wait and see.

As posted at least twice at this point, my preferred solution with no more skin in the game than the next patient, is for the 35% nonsense to be withdrawn, an offer slightly bigger than the Scots offer (say 15%) with consideration of future rises as part of the deal, and the offer being accepted.

Taking the psss on both sides ought to stop.