Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

4 This is true of the joint Chairs who are more militant, but that is a swing of the pendulum from the previous ones who Hunt manipulated and if Barclay wins this times the next ones will be even more so.

You're asserting that in such circumstances JDs will be willing to repeat a past mistake - extremism having failed "if Barclay wins" - and follow even more extreme militants (than the 'more militant' joint Chairs) off a new cliff?

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

TB they old guard were arse lickers who Hunt played like a fiddle, the current are unskilled at playing the game but at least are trying, the next will be skilled and play hard ball. At the end of the day we cant manage without doctors.
They have said they are willing to talk, Barclay is playing Billy Big Balls. There job is to keep us well, his job is to run a health service. He is failing dismaly.

It takes two not to tango in this particular instance. BMA should have ditched the ludicrous 35% when they had the chance, their own militant big balls got in the way.

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

When they had the chance?
They do at least have the whip handle and will still be there January 2025.

How so when the tango is over?

Are JDs really pinning hopes on a Starmer sponkfest?

Starmer said:

Labour will rebuild broken Britain with big reforms, not big spending. That’s a promise

Click

The time to review is twofold, Feb 25 and a couple of years down the line with whoever wins the GE, likely Starmer's Labour atm unless they do a Kinnock and Sunak does a Major.

[turbobloke]

FiF said:

As far as I'm concerned, agree with they should have ditched the 35% which is based on mathematically illiterate calculations. When asked if they would accept same as Scottish doctors, their reply indicated what they're actually after is bringing down the Conservatives.

Latter capable of achieving that with little effort.

Aye. I see it as 2 x self-inflicted (Conservatives, BMA).

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

I always feel grubby when I agree with TB.

A healthy situation all round.

Where there's muck there's brass, and where there's politically motivated militancy in medicine there are losers and their hangers on.

[turbobloke]

Ruskie said:

poo at Paul's said:

Ruskie said:

Don’t be coming here with your factual posts and hefty dose of reality! These people want hyperbole, and people to work for £14 an hour for the rest of their lives because they chose their job and should just be happy.

Maybe you need a consult?
The whole point is they absolutely don’t work for 14 per hour for the rest of their lives, in fact they only work at that rate for a very short time. If you worked in the NHS, you’d know that.
You should also know that being a doctor isn’t he nhs is a highly skilled but a very highly paid career overall. It’s far from a job, it’s a proper career, with long term prospects and there’s precious few of them about in 2023 UK.

Edited by poo at Paul's on Sunday 16th July 10:01

17 years in the NHS for me, now what? The point still stands. They are underpaid at £14 an hour regardless of the time spent at that level.

I've already posted in favour of a Scotland offer, nothing to do with £14 or 35% nonsense. I think they're worth it for the level of responsibility taken on in such a key role. This was before the gov't implemented a pay rise for junior doctors at an average of around 8.8% which by chance happens to be in agreement with the PH poll.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/nhs-staff-recei...

The problem has been militant hard-left individuals in the BMA using and abusing members' valid demands for more pay for political agitation purposes. They failed, there's been no 35% increase and Sunak plus tories would likely be gone in 2025 without any help from the BMA. Sure there's a big fig leaf in the pay aspect, however, politicised statements from BMA activists posted in this thread give the obvious game away.

The emotive angles are inevitable. Somebody took exception to my mention of mortgage and porsche payments as to why indefinite strikes haven't happened. It was too realistic. Sticking to the events: 35% was a silly opener, keeping it alive was bad strategy, and as a result JDs have been let down by BMA political activism. The rank and file JDs deserved better.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

I see the Two Week Wait was doubled. Effective health care here. Lol.

Four weeks to see a JD in A&E, when a Consultant may well be made available if needed, doesn't seem at all likely, approaching zero likelihood.

If it's an O/T GP reference, it's been six weeks for some time in some places for non-emergency non-urgent 'routine' appointments. How is that related to the JD pay claim and strike action?

Starmer is going to reform, not spend, remember. He said so, it must be true.

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

This is how to end the strikes Mr Barclay.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66524465

Good news for JDs in Scotland and patients in Scotland.

The article mentions that the union had previously called for a rise of 23.5% was that their initial punt north of the border?

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

turbobloke said:

Four weeks to see a JD in A&E, when a Consultant may well be made available if needed, doesn't seem at all likely, approaching zero likelihood.

If it's an O/T GP reference, it's been six weeks for some time in some places for non-emergency non-urgent 'routine' appointments. How is that related to the JD pay claim and strike action?

Starmer is going to reform, not spend, remember. He said so, it must be true.

Just double, and then triple and targets. Works well fighting cancer. And consultants are cheaper than the JD pay requests too! So much winning

Gobbledegook.

[turbobloke]

poo at Paul's said:

How many have even noticed these strikes, I cannot say I even knew the latest one was actually on, only picked up after it started via social media posts from aggrieved doctors union people.
obviously some people in the Uk are being affected by this, but cannot help but think the percentage of the population is very low indeed. (Not that that is any comfort if you are affected!)

And even now no strike participation rates for each round can be located easily, or indeed at all. Nor patient health impact (as opposed to waiting list impact, delays) - including strike-related deaths if any have occurred.

Can't think why, as this information would be useful to both sides when considering next steps.

Edited to reduce brevity and hopefully increase clarity.

Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 16th August 20:00

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

spaximus said:

I think he was really hoping what he was told was true. The vote is overwhelmingly in favour and with the consultants now upping the ante the government needs to at least sort out the JD pay and quickly.
Hope common sense will see the government actually negotiate now as they were relying on the vote for strike not hitting the threshold

Tory gov & common sense?

For this gov, fair point.

[turbobloke]

Gecko1978 said:

turbobloke said:

Killboy said:

spaximus said:

I think he was really hoping what he was told was true. The vote is overwhelmingly in favour and with the consultants now upping the ante the government needs to at least sort out the JD pay and quickly.
Hope common sense will see the government actually negotiate now as they were relying on the vote for strike not hitting the threshold

Tory gov & common sense?

For this gov, fair point.

Rishi said no more negotiations.....an yet when bodies start to pile up of we have a bad winter I wonder if he will change his tune. It will be a humiliation

It would, not it will. We don't know the future, and must wait to see how things go from here. So far there are still no negotiations.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

turbobloke said:

It would, not it will. We don't know the future, and must wait to see how things go from here. So far there are still no negotiations.

Could you imagine taking this approach with the nation's health? Lol

Before the impasse I couldn't have imagined the BMA sticking to the ludicrous 35% stunt, the rest follows.

[turbobloke]

S600BSB said:

Killboy said:

turbobloke said:

It would, not it will. We don't know the future, and must wait to see how things go from here. So far there are still no negotiations.

Could you imagine taking this approach with the nation's health? Lol

Quite. Government need to start negotiating properly ASAP. Barclay really is a lightweight.

One side can't negotiate alone, it could equally be said that the BMA need to drop their ludicrous 35% silly punt.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

One side can't negotiate alone, it could equally be said that the BMA need to drop their ludicrous 35% silly punt.

It was a bit silly but the government could take the upper hand here by negotiating without insisting they drop the 35%.

That's the whole point - when negotiation was possible, the BMA was equally intransigent by not dropping it.

Gov't says that's it, and we'll have to wait and see if they cave in.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

One side can't negotiate alone, it could equally be said that the BMA need to drop their ludicrous 35% silly punt.

It was a bit silly but the government could take the upper hand here by negotiating without insisting they drop the 35%.

That's the whole point - when negotiation was possible, the BMA was equally intransigent by not dropping it.

Gov't says that's it, and we'll have to wait and see if they cave in.

Negotiation remains possible, inevitable really. <snip>

That's one view; if a principle arose from Scargill losing then it says otherwise. We must wait and see.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

That's one view; if a principle arose from Scargill losing then it says otherwise. We must wait and see.

I’m not sure that principle would apply given that scargill was representing a dying industry and the doctors see demand for their skills grow day by day.

That choice of words may return to haunt you, if accurate stats are ever available regarding the impact of JD and C strikes on patients. Once again, we'll have to wait and see.

[turbobloke]

Russ T Bolt said:

turbobloke said:

One side can't negotiate alone, it could equally be said that the BMA need to drop their ludicrous 35% silly punt.

On the news this morning they said that consultants hadn't made any specific claims, yet Barclay has still refused to negotiate with them.

Yes that makes no sense, news reports say consultants are looking for a 'credible offer' so Barclay has no excuse for not negotiating on that basis compared to JDs.

[turbobloke]

Electro1980 said:

pquinn said:

Killboy said:

I wonder if the Tory strategy is just to make this as big of a cluster f*** and hand if over to the inevitable incoming labor party to deal with?

No, you're right, that's what to sinister for them, they care about people right?

Not seeing much sign from the BMA side they care about people either, if anything they're even more keen to prioritise money over anything else. Some obvious political motivation too in certain quarters of the leadership.

So it's a bit tricky trying to sell one side as being virtuous and the other being evil bds.

The “care about people” argument is, and always has been, utter bullst. Just because people are striking doesn’t mean they don’t care about people. You could make the same argument about the government and NHS letting it get to the point of strike. It’s an idea that has been pushed for a very long time, with people claiming that those in the NHS, or the public sector more widely, should accept whatever they are given and have no right to negotiate on pay. Nothing more than a cheap attempt at emotional blackmail.

As outlined above, emotive angles can be applied to both sides, none of it helpful except maybe to the emoters, commenting from a distance and not involved at the sharp end. As per many of us, if we're not doctors or politicians, but emotion over reason is bad news any place any time.

Edited by turbobloke on Friday 1st September 16:13

[turbobloke]

sawman said:

turbobloke said:

As outlined above, emotive angles can be applied to both sides, none of it helpful except maybe to the emoters, commenting from a distance and not involved at the sharp end. As per many of us, if we're not doctors or politicians, but emotion over reason is bad news any place any time.

Edited by turbobloke on Friday 1st September 16:13

Without being intentionally emotive; what those of you who are not at the sharp end either as NHS staff, or current patient need to understand that is that if things continue as they have been for the last few years, and you are unlucky enough to need some care or support from the NHS in 5 or 10 years time, its very likely to be even less easily available to you than is it today. and that you may suffer pain for many more months or years than you needed to (or worse).

This is the end result of this governments shoddy custodianship of the NHS, this is the issue the JD's are highlighting, but unfortunately the media would rather concentrate on the "ooh 35% how ridiculous" angle without actually looking at the deeper issues

35% was and is ridiculous.

The current government has been less than sparkling for sure, however, all governments in recent political histpry have run scared from very necessary reform. As to our future needs, that's very much on individual basis in terms of health and options. What you say may apply to A&E on occasion - and even then probably not.