Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[Biggy Stardust]

CrgT16 said:

It is a shoestring… NHS is the world‘s bigger employer. 20% of that pie doesn’t really mean that much.

20% of the nation's finances might not be much to a rich person like you but to many of us it's a lot of money.

[ukwill]

CrgT16 said:

It is a shoestring… NHS is the world‘s bigger employer. 20% of that pie doesn’t really mean that much. I think the entire expectation of what it delivers needs readjusting. Anyways…

I believe it's currently 5th. And therein lies part of the problem that we have - it's turned into a monster. The problem is, it's so big that no Govt dare contemplate resolving the structural issues that are so desperately required.

I think 20% means that we're spending more on the NHS than any other area of public spending. Either we continue on in the belief that chucking evermore money (that we don't have) at it will somehow resolve "things", or we face up to what we all know is happening - people are living longer. And that isn't a good thing in terms of public spending on healthcare. There is no easy way out of this - and we're certainly not alone in dealing with this issue.

[Killboy]

ukwill said:

I believe it's currently 5th. And therein lies part of the problem that we have - it's turned into a monster. The problem is, it's so big that no Govt dare contemplate resolving the structural issues that are so desperately required.

I think 20% means that we're spending more on the NHS than any other area of public spending. Either we continue on in the belief that chucking evermore money (that we don't have) at it will somehow resolve "things", or we face up to what we all know is happening - people are living longer. And that isn't a good thing in terms of public spending on healthcare. There is no easy way out of this - and we're certainly not alone in dealing with this issue.

I'm not sure measuring employment size really means anything. What other nations of our size provides this level of "free" healthcare?

As a measure of GDP, the UK seems to be behind Austra, Germany (who people have suggested we take a leaf from their book regarding costs of appointments) and then those are all dwarfed by the US.

[ukwill]

Killboy said:

I'm not sure measuring employment size really means anything. What other nations of our size provides this level of "free" healthcare?

As a measure of GDP, the UK seems to be behind Austra, Germany (who people have suggested we take a leaf from their book regarding costs of appointments) and then those are all dwarfed by the US.

We don't provide free healthcare. Other countries who provide similarly "free" healthcare do so by different methods of taxation/insurance. I have no qualms whatsoever in the UK following suit in this regards. So long as ultimate tax burdens remain somewhat similar.

[Tycho]

CrgT16 said:

It is a shoestring… NHS is the world‘s bigger employer. 20% of that pie doesn’t really mean that much. I think the entire expectation of what it delivers needs readjusting. Anyways…

The problem with changing expectations is that it always comes down to "Keep your hands off the NHS, don't you dare to let it go private." rather than actually having an adult conversation about how it can be improved and then maybe the Drs. could get a better pay rise (although I think 35% is a piss take.)

[Tommo87]

I see that the inflationary delta is the most popular choice in the poll.

[Tommo87]

ukwill said:

I'm not sure its about expecting "work to be done on a shoestring" - it's the biggest single expense of our public expenditure. Perhaps it's a case of "how would you chop up the pie"?

Interesting chart. Thanks for finding it.

Does anyone (who isn’t the resident forum melt) have an idea of what represents the 18% pensions payment.

Is it just the old age pension, or does it include civil service pensions as well?

[Biggy Stardust]

Tommo87 said:

Interesting chart. Thanks for finding it.

Does anyone (who isn’t the resident forum melt) have an idea of what represents the 18% pensions payment.

Is it just the old age pension, or does it include civil service pensions as well?

I'd anticipate NHS pensions being in the NHS budget, servicemen's in the defence budget & teachers in the education budget. 'Other' public sector stuff probably comes from the part you're asking about as I don't see a better place.

[ukwill]

Tommo87 said:

Interesting chart. Thanks for finding it.

Does anyone (who isn’t the resident forum melt) have an idea of what represents the 18% pensions payment.

Is it just the old age pension, or does it include civil service pensions as well?

I got it from here:
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2...

Breakdown suggests it does not include Pub Sec occupational pensions:

[FiF]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/ne...


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/what-is-...

[Killboy]

FiF said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/ne...


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/what-is-...

Lol. 6 figure salaries

[s1962a]

Tommo87 said:

ukwill said:

I'm not sure its about expecting "work to be done on a shoestring" - it's the biggest single expense of our public expenditure. Perhaps it's a case of "how would you chop up the pie"?

Interesting chart. Thanks for finding it.

Does anyone (who isn’t the resident forum melt) have an idea of what represents the 18% pensions payment.

Is it just the old age pension, or does it include civil service pensions as well?

Is there a slice to show how much of that budget is spent on agency workers, at (sometimes) multiples of what permanent staff get?

[s1962a]

I found some numbers of what agency staffing of doctors costs the NHS

...the NHS has spent £4.6 billion on agency doctors in the past five years and as much as £5,200 for a single agency doctor shift

https://www2.staffingindustry.com/%20eng/Editorial...

[CrgT16]

s1962a said:

I found some numbers of what agency staffing of doctors costs the NHS

...the NHS has spent £4.6 billion on agency doctors in the past five years and as much as £5,200 for a single agency doctor shift

https://www2.staffingindustry.com/%20eng/Editorial...

That’s why the NHS will not work in the current form.
They need to pair down the expectations, increase job retention. (How you do that is debatable, short term is paying for people to stay but that’s not sustainable either) and date I say it…. Privatise some if it!

[s1962a]

CrgT16 said:

s1962a said:

I found some numbers of what agency staffing of doctors costs the NHS

...the NHS has spent £4.6 billion on agency doctors in the past five years and as much as £5,200 for a single agency doctor shift

https://www2.staffingindustry.com/%20eng/Editorial...

That’s why the NHS will not work in the current form.
They need to pair down the expectations, increase job retention. (How you do that is debatable, short term is paying for people to stay but that’s not sustainable either) and date I say it…. Privatise some if it!

Paying for people to stay is not sustainable? it seems to work fine in every other sector (demand vs supply) so why wouldn't it work here? Assuming in the short term (next 10 years) you can't really change the expectations, rather than paying billions on agency staff, why not try to increase doctor retention by paying them more? Chances are you increase their pay now, and the the agency bill might come down to cover that over the next few years.

[CrgT16]

Biggy Stardust said:

20% of the nation's finances might not be much to a rich person like you but to many of us it's a lot of money.

The NHS employs around 1.7M people and has a budget of £162M pounds.

Amazon employs 1.6M people and as an operating budget of half a million dollars… round numbers.

Different business, not comparable but the scale of money involved in similar sized companies is obvious….

[272BHP]

s1962a said:

...the NHS has spent £4.6 billion on agency doctors in the past five years and as much as £5,200 for a single agency doctor shift

Instead of having parliamentary committees investigating if someone had a slice of cake why can't we haul in everyone involved in that £5.2k for a single shift?

That's our money.

[s1962a]

CrgT16 said:

Biggy Stardust said:

20% of the nation's finances might not be much to a rich person like you but to many of us it's a lot of money.

The NHS employs around 1.7M people and has a budget of £162M pounds.

Amazon employs 1.6M people and as an operating budget of half a million dollars… round numbers.

Different business, not comparable but the scale of money involved in similar sized companies is obvious….

I found some other numbers

the NHS spends £56.1bn on total staffing costs
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/audio-video/key-facts...

Increasing Junior doctor salaries by 35% would cost £1.65bn
https://www.bma.org.uk/media/6665/junior-doctor-pa...

the NHS spends £4.6bn on agency doctors
https://www2.staffingindustry.com/%20eng/Editorial...

Seems like the £1.65bn extra might be offset by the reduced number of doctors leaving the NHS for better paying jobs, and thus less money spent on agency doctors.

[Biggy Stardust]

CrgT16 said:

Amazon employs 1.6M people and as an operating budget of half a million dollars… round numbers.

31 cents each- if this is per year then I'll dispute your numbers.

Hey- if it's per hour I'll still dispute them.

You are Dianne Abbott AICMFP

[gangzoom]

s1962a said:

I found some other numbers

the NHS spends £56.1bn on total staffing costs
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/audio-video/key-facts...

Increasing Junior doctor salaries by 35% would cost £1.65bn
https://www.bma.org.uk/media/6665/junior-doctor-pa...

the NHS spends £4.6bn on agency doctors
https://www2.staffingindustry.com/%20eng/Editorial...

Seems like the £1.65bn extra might be offset by the reduced number of doctors leaving the NHS for better paying jobs, and thus less money spent on agency doctors.

A hospital doesn't run without porters, nurses, physios, admin staff, consultants, why would do only one group deserve a 35% pay rise??

If junior doctors are deemed worthy of a 35% pay rise so should everyone working in a hospital, after all its a team effort.

So you need apply 35% to the entire work force.....nurses are been offered 5% and vote results due soon. No one in their right mind can think its fair to even consider a 35% pay rise for one group of your employees and only 5% for the other - who happened to be lowered paid too.

A resolution has to be found some how, am not sure how....