Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll
Poll: Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll
Total Members Polled: 1050
Discussion
MiniMan64 said:
Interesting that.
They offered the teachers 4.3% plus a grand bribe a few months ago as they’re best and final you’ll never get better offer.
And now they’ve been offered 6.5%.
I remember the 4% ish offer but can't recall it being described as a final offer, however I could have missed it. No sign here though afaics:They offered the teachers 4.3% plus a grand bribe a few months ago as they’re best and final you’ll never get better offer.
And now they’ve been offered 6.5%.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/mar/27/...
https://ifs.org.uk/articles/how-big-teacher-pay-of...
gruffalo said:
86 said:
How do the maths work on striking ? The BMA wants JD’s to strike to the next election at this rate then they will lose all their 6% and have a pay cut!! How much loss is say 20 days pa of salary? £3000? How much is strike pay - peanuts. So they will work for same money as last year. Genius
This is because they want to have a change of government.They know very well that 35% is not affordable but since the BMA has been taken over by a bunch of left wing activists their real desire is to get the conservatives out. The problem is that after nearly 25 years of socialism there is no money left in the pot to pay for anything.
crankedup5 said:
MrJuice said:
crankedup5 said:
Indeed, not only have our medical staff been subjected to decreasing pay year on year for a decade or more, we ask them to work in conditions that are for the most part falling apart.
Lying in a hospital bed staring up at temporary props holding up the roof of the building. It’s a very depressing environment to find oneself in for a week or two, working in it I can only guess it to be utterly demoralising.
Our healthcare system seems to be on life support.
My friend graduated from medical school 2005. Starting salary 36kLying in a hospital bed staring up at temporary props holding up the roof of the building. It’s a very depressing environment to find oneself in for a week or two, working in it I can only guess it to be utterly demoralising.
Our healthcare system seems to be on life support.
Graduate today. Starting salary 36k
Only current grads have paid 9k+ in fees per year. Friend paid 1k
Or, a worse option, write off any medical school debt for a period of NHS work, I know there are objections but it's what most would be doing anyway.
Dixy said:
turbobloke said:
gruffalo said:
86 said:
How do the maths work on striking ? The BMA wants JD’s to strike to the next election at this rate then they will lose all their 6% and have a pay cut!! How much loss is say 20 days pa of salary? £3000? How much is strike pay - peanuts. So they will work for same money as last year. Genius
This is because they want to have a change of government.They know very well that 35% is not affordable but since the BMA has been taken over by a bunch of left wing activists their real desire is to get the conservatives out. The problem is that after nearly 25 years of socialism there is no money left in the pot to pay for anything.
Thanks for sharing your infallibility viewpoint technique. Name-calling adds weight and makes such an approach even more convincing.
Dixy said:
Most are too busy working unbelievably hard with great skill to keep us free from pain, able to enjoy life and not die. Party politics does not come in to it at all.
At all? Absolute rubbish.Left-wing BMA activists are driving these poor innocent sheep, education no barrier, to repeated strike action. Baaaaa pass the grass we've been fleeced.
The BMA activists' own words show what reality is. The rhetoric is anti-tory. They say they want more money (as well), presumably JDs agree with these activists? If not, they should say so.
If your non-point dressed in a fallacy was attempting to point out that BMA activists don't represent rank and file JDs, and their attitudes in particular, just say so and acknowledge the nature of the strike for what it is. Political, and rank and file optimism for a Labour gov't isn't shared by their activist puppeteers for whom Labour isn't left wing enough.
From previously linked content:
"Their methods – an inner core of hard-Left figures (“Broad Left”) within a larger insurgent group (“DoctorsVote”) – will be familiar to students of caucus politics. They now control the BMA’s junior doctors’ committee, which is running the current ballots"
"Broad Left member of the BMA Council, Becky Acres, has attacked the Labour Party as proto-fascist and the Conservatives as almost genocidal”
"Emma Runswick, the 27-year-old Broad Left DoctorsVote and former Momentum activist, is now the BMA’s deputy chair"
JD strikes in in 2016 "which were shorter and mostly didn’t withdraw emergency cover – saw 71 extra hospital deaths, according to a previously unnoticed publication of the BMA"
What's Left of BMA activism.
isaldiri said:
sawman said:
Obviously you have not got experience of a teenager with a strong focus on something.
fundamentally, I don't think kids who go into medicine are heading for the money, ( I know that sounds odd on a 90 page thread about pay rises!) yes, there is acknowledgement that they will be comfortable. they are looking at the academic challenge, and maybe to help people.
in order to get into med school, its not as simple as banging in a few good A level and turning up. The application process demands these kids not only have top grades, but also have wider interests, can show leadership and teamworking from extra curricular stuff like duke of edinburgh, volunteering in the community, work experience in hospitals, etc' its all consuming for those later school years, I dont think the thought of not doing it after all would ever compute.
Whilst on placement she has seen morale in hospitals dropping by the year, she has seen those medics who were supposed to be mentoring and supporting students and foundation doctors leaving, such that getting competencies signed off got increasingly difficult.
As for choosing not to progress, a medical degree after 5 years at university opens some other doors, medical students are high performers in STEMM and so have lots of transferable talents, but really on its own is not worth much without completing the 2 year foundation program.
At present, I expect that she will leave the nhs, probably to go abroad once those 2 years are done.
A teenager with a strong focus on something deciding that they are owed something substantially different to what reality was like when they decided to sign up for that when going into university is something I clearly find harder to understand or sympathise with than you.. fundamentally, I don't think kids who go into medicine are heading for the money, ( I know that sounds odd on a 90 page thread about pay rises!) yes, there is acknowledgement that they will be comfortable. they are looking at the academic challenge, and maybe to help people.
in order to get into med school, its not as simple as banging in a few good A level and turning up. The application process demands these kids not only have top grades, but also have wider interests, can show leadership and teamworking from extra curricular stuff like duke of edinburgh, volunteering in the community, work experience in hospitals, etc' its all consuming for those later school years, I dont think the thought of not doing it after all would ever compute.
Whilst on placement she has seen morale in hospitals dropping by the year, she has seen those medics who were supposed to be mentoring and supporting students and foundation doctors leaving, such that getting competencies signed off got increasingly difficult.
As for choosing not to progress, a medical degree after 5 years at university opens some other doors, medical students are high performers in STEMM and so have lots of transferable talents, but really on its own is not worth much without completing the 2 year foundation program.
At present, I expect that she will leave the nhs, probably to go abroad once those 2 years are done.
At 13 - fine I get being idealistic and all. By 18, proceeding to continue take a medical degree as compared to something else (especially having done all this fancy leadership/teamworking/volunteering stuff just to enable one to get into med school would equally open up an easier path into other things that might have pay more commensurate with what they think they are worth which of course explains their popularity) but 5/7 years later not being happy that pay was not as good as it was relative to what it was at age 13 seems somewhat hard to justify (ie what connectionerror's initial post was about I believe).
pghstochaj said:
turbobloke said:
isaldiri said:
sawman said:
Obviously you have not got experience of a teenager with a strong focus on something.
fundamentally, I don't think kids who go into medicine are heading for the money, ( I know that sounds odd on a 90 page thread about pay rises!) yes, there is acknowledgement that they will be comfortable. they are looking at the academic challenge, and maybe to help people.
in order to get into med school, its not as simple as banging in a few good A level and turning up. The application process demands these kids not only have top grades, but also have wider interests, can show leadership and teamworking from extra curricular stuff like duke of edinburgh, volunteering in the community, work experience in hospitals, etc' its all consuming for those later school years, I dont think the thought of not doing it after all would ever compute.
Whilst on placement she has seen morale in hospitals dropping by the year, she has seen those medics who were supposed to be mentoring and supporting students and foundation doctors leaving, such that getting competencies signed off got increasingly difficult.
As for choosing not to progress, a medical degree after 5 years at university opens some other doors, medical students are high performers in STEMM and so have lots of transferable talents, but really on its own is not worth much without completing the 2 year foundation program.
At present, I expect that she will leave the nhs, probably to go abroad once those 2 years are done.
A teenager with a strong focus on something deciding that they are owed something substantially different to what reality was like when they decided to sign up for that when going into university is something I clearly find harder to understand or sympathise with than you.. fundamentally, I don't think kids who go into medicine are heading for the money, ( I know that sounds odd on a 90 page thread about pay rises!) yes, there is acknowledgement that they will be comfortable. they are looking at the academic challenge, and maybe to help people.
in order to get into med school, its not as simple as banging in a few good A level and turning up. The application process demands these kids not only have top grades, but also have wider interests, can show leadership and teamworking from extra curricular stuff like duke of edinburgh, volunteering in the community, work experience in hospitals, etc' its all consuming for those later school years, I dont think the thought of not doing it after all would ever compute.
Whilst on placement she has seen morale in hospitals dropping by the year, she has seen those medics who were supposed to be mentoring and supporting students and foundation doctors leaving, such that getting competencies signed off got increasingly difficult.
As for choosing not to progress, a medical degree after 5 years at university opens some other doors, medical students are high performers in STEMM and so have lots of transferable talents, but really on its own is not worth much without completing the 2 year foundation program.
At present, I expect that she will leave the nhs, probably to go abroad once those 2 years are done.
At 13 - fine I get being idealistic and all. By 18, proceeding to continue take a medical degree as compared to something else (especially having done all this fancy leadership/teamworking/volunteering stuff just to enable one to get into med school would equally open up an easier path into other things that might have pay more commensurate with what they think they are worth which of course explains their popularity) but 5/7 years later not being happy that pay was not as good as it was relative to what it was at age 13 seems somewhat hard to justify (ie what connectionerror's initial post was about I believe).
Pure hyperbole plus strawman equals gibberish. I didn't advocate not having doctors; the concept that the past offers an unreliable guide to the future in financial matters (the point I made) is well-known; and I've already commented today in this thread in support of incentives for STEMM degrees. Otherwise, great work!
86 said:
gangzoom said:
AstonZagato said:
Also, they can work as locum and/or do overtime to tackle the resulting waitlists - so financially are no worse off.
Very very few junior doctors can do waiting list initiatives, that's all Consultant work. In addition Consultants are paid 'Acting down' rates. My wifes had a few 12hr shifts to cover the rota, including some night shifts. The BMA rate card for suggest hr/rate is in the public domain, as you can see its not a token amount.https://www.bma.org.uk/pay-and-contracts/pay/rate-...
Junior doctors who strike are losing a reasonable amount of their monthly pay especially if they strike when rotaed to do a oncall/12hr shift. They cannot work locum shift when on strike, and there aren't that many junior locum shifts around outside of strike periods, not forgetting they have their contracted hours to complete before any locum work. The number of Junior Doctors taking part in the strike has reduced substantially in the current round versus the first strikes.
Edited by gangzoom on Friday 14th July 22:26
Dixy said:
You do know the difference between being on strike and being sacked.
If you do, chances are I do 
Anyway, back to the question you dodged - who replaces them when on strike?
BMA doc admitted 71 deaths from the 2016 strikes which were less, erm, comprehensive - wonder how many preventable deaths there have been so far this time, and as before we may have to wait to find out; transparency rules OK.
Link said:
The last junior doctors’ strikes, in 2016 – which were shorter and mostly didn’t withdraw emergency cover – saw 71 extra hospital deaths, according to a previously unnoticed publication of the BMA.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/01/14/secretive-hard-left-group-driving-nhs-junior-doctors-strike/86 said:
Dixy said:
I do find it funny that 86 and others think this is a contest that can be won. Either the NHS pays better and we have good doctors or it does not and we don't.
My daughter and daughter in law are in touching distance of CCT. They have both commented that last years F1s are taking the attitude of pay me like a nurse and I will perform like one and they are reluctant to do things that enable them to learn because that is above there pay grade.
Pay peanuts get monkeys.
Sounds like some of last years F1’s went into the wrong job. Manage them out maybe to Australia!My daughter and daughter in law are in touching distance of CCT. They have both commented that last years F1s are taking the attitude of pay me like a nurse and I will perform like one and they are reluctant to do things that enable them to learn because that is above there pay grade.
Pay peanuts get monkeys.
Australia can be an awful place for Oz and UK medics.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/sep/27/aust...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX6baLpuKAo
gangzoom said:
Consultants had to stop doing clinics/operations, etc, to do the jobs like taking bloods, writing letters, making referrals, etc. Operationally, for acute care, the strikes have been manageable - just. 50 year olds Consultants don't manage x5 12-hour night shifts physically as well 20 year old junior doctors.
However because Consultants have been on the wards, outpatients, theaters, transformation projects have all been delayed. So overall a massive impact on organisational performance.
Yes indeed, consultants is the answer as per reports - with consequences you can describe from first-hand experience and / or seeing the consequences around you. However because Consultants have been on the wards, outpatients, theaters, transformation projects have all been delayed. So overall a massive impact on organisational performance.
My previous interlocutor didn't want to respond with an answer, just another (rhetorical) question. Thanks for confirming / clarifying.
Presumably we - outsiders - will have to wait to discover what the impact on patients has been, as per 2016.
Dixy said:
...Strange that you like that 86 as you think JDs are greedy....
It's more strange still that you think you know what other people think, but not strange that it's convenient to your position and also not strange that you're wrong.FWIW what I think should have happened is that the BMA activists should have removed their ridiculous 35% demand, and the gov't should have considered something like the Scots offer as a possible response. Now, thanks to activist intransigence (and delusion) the outcome is different. Pay up or patients (don't) get it, most edifying. Scargill made a similar mistake in thinking he could hold the country to ransom.
Dixy said:
turbobloke said:
Dixy said:
...Strange that you like that 86 as you think JDs are greedy....
It's more strange still that you think you know what other people think, but not strange that it's convenient to your position and also not strange that you're wrong.FWIW what I think should have happened is that the BMA activists should have removed their ridiculous 35% demand, and the gov't should have considered something like the Scots offer as a possible response. Now, thanks to activist intransigence (and delusion) the outcome is different. Pay up or patients (don't) get it, most edifying. Scargill made a similar mistake in thinking he could hold the country to ransom.
The BMA have said countless times they do not expect to get 35% but it does not suit MSM to give clear dull facts, just like what is being reported and what is being paid in Scotland are very different.
If England offered what Scotland have the vote in August would be accept but despite AZs feeling that the JDs are loosing resolve my feed back from them is the opposite.
Some have interpreted my post about it suiting me to abolish the NHS as what I want. That is the opposite of what I believe. I think the NHS is probably the greatest of Great Britain's achievements. I am arguing so vociferously to sort the dispute from an altruistic point of view.
The person that says the time is not right is not wrong but this is a perfect storm going back to Hunt screwing the JDs.
Scargill lost because we did not have to have coal miners, are you suggesting we will do away with doctors.
Thatcher noted how miners had brought down her predecessor, it could hardly be missed. After coming to power in 1979, her ministers were told to draw up plans to keep coal moving around the country (in case the miners attempted to hold the country to ransom via another strike) together with stockpiling, to ensure nothing similar to 1972 or 1974 could happen on her watch. It worked.
There's no stockpiling of JD services (obv) however coal isn't medical care either, and within a strategy of letting the BMA shoot itself in the foot, it's not needed. No interest group including doctors should be allowed to hold the country to ransom.
Edited by turbobloke on Monday 17th July 10:05
Dixy said:
It is already happening, consultants are going to Ireland where they are paid three times as much.
It's bound to vary from specialism to specialism, as well as the experience level of the individual, and sources will vary - this source puts the ratio for 'specialists' at around 1.3 x rather than 3.0 xhttps://www.euronews.com/next/2023/06/14/doctors-s...
Dixy said:
Or you could try talking to real doctors with real pay slips. Just an idea.
That's what a survey does for you, and as I pointed out, the result will depend on how and what specialism(s) are represented as well as the experience levels.The issue with looking at pay slips is that no individual outside a couple of payroll officers one in each of the two countries will be looking at a sufficiently representative sample. It may be that looking at a few payslips will involve outliers, where will that lead - to claims of 3x when 1.3x would be more accurate?
pork911 said:
He didn't ask for 35% though, so he got 45% that's the way to do it 
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff