Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

People are actually comparing cleaner salaries to doctors. Lol

Why would you Lol at the father of a JD making such a comparison? In their post alongside comparing cleaner salaries, they made some very pertinent points. I didn't agree with the cleaner pay comparison (or similar barista comparisons elsewhere) for reasons given. The rest I very much agree with.

Maybe you didn't read back a few posts in the thread, point scoring matters and all that.

[turbobloke]

JagLover said:

ConnectionError said:

Killboy said:

markbigears said:

Or move to a country that actually rewards their importance / skills / knowledge in society. This Government is a bloody disgrace.

Yup.

Do you think it will change if there is a different government?

I don't!

Given that some posters seem to object to the notion of career progression, and salaries rising with experience and qualifications...

They do? Missed that.

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

All the government have to do to stop this is make the same offer as Scotland.

That would be a good idea, if it's going to be enough - an agreement to look at further progress over the next two or three years would help.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

turbobloke said:

an agreement to look at further progress over the next two or three years would help.

OK You don't trust Starmer, and that's nothing like Sue Gray.

[turbobloke]

I was still half asleep but I thought I heard some mention of vaguely positive news on a very early morning radio news bulletin.

[turbobloke]

98elise said:

Killboy said:

JagLover said:

Many junior doctors will have been recruited from abroad as this covers all below consultant level. I think the proposal is to train more UK doctors not less.

Who wants to be a junior doctor? Sounds like an awful lot of work for no pay.

Plenty of people want to be a doctor. Courses are very oversubscribed and people who apply know what it pays. Being a doctor is actually well paid overall

UCAS said:

Medicine is an incredibly oversubscribed subject. There are currently three times as many applicants to medical school than there are places available.

[turbobloke]

Ruskie said:

This thread is a microcosm of society in some ways. People don’t actually respect, or understand what it takes to be a doctor. The wages are poor for the responsibility, and level of knowledge.

The responsibility element is why I've expressed the view, more than once, that the Scotland punt would be a good move here. Plenty of qualified specialists require a high level of knowledge, but not many operate (pun intended) in life-critical situations almost every day if not every day.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JuniorDoctorsUK/comments/...

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

272BHP said:

By the fifth year of training a doctor’s standard base salary has increased to over £51,000

These are the things that people alway gloss over.

They are still in training (doctors training is necessarily long) and this is their base salary with many opportunities for extra pay.

Few graduates in other sectors can either compete with those figures or get anywhere near the same level of pension provision.

£51k at age 26 with all that training and associated debt. You don’t even need a degree to make that kind of money.

True, then again many of those options won't include the same future prospects for pay, or an equivalent pension scheme, or easy extras such as Ash Cash gicen Drs can still sign paper when on strike. As below. mind the optics. There's been talk of the latter going away.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JuniorDoctorsUK/comments/...

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

Fast Bug said:

if you're negotiating and you're at say 10% and the other person is at 35% and won't budge, then there's not much point carrying on with negotiations is there?

You have fallen for the media/government spin on this.
When the Scots settled it was widely expected that the same offer would be made and accepted. Although the BMA front it, any offer has to be put to the members. The government could have then said they negotiated a hard deal and discredited the current BMA negotiators. The fact that it suits the government to blame all failings and extended waiting times on striking doctors is a win for the government who clearly don't give a stuff about people in pain.

How can the gov't spin a contnued demand from the BMA for a ridiculous %? If that blockage was gone there may well have been a settlement by now along the Scots lines. Was the demand from north of the border not 23.5% which as we've seen wasn't going to happen, but it was significantly lower than in England. Despite a cote to accept, there's an article claiming 97% of junior doctors believed the pay award from the Scottish Government was too low. There's a perceived lack of realism on the part of the BMA.

[turbobloke]

Hants PHer said:

djc206 said:

Everyone else hasn’t suffered the effects, particularly not at that level of expertise and end of the jobs market. I don’t think you can necessarily view it as them demanding the lost earnings that they weren’t employed for (that would invoke a back pay claim) more that the role generally is worth more than it currently pays and that pay erosion is the source of that disparity. Never ascribe to malice that which can be ascribed to greed mixed with a touch of naïveté I would suggest.

Well, if the BMA had said something like: "You know, our salaries have not kept pace with inflation in recent years and that should be rectified", then I'd agree with you. But they haven't. They've been very specific about 2008 and RPI which 'mathematically' leads to their 35% figure. Setting aside the RPI/CPI issue, it cannot make sense to demand a specific pay uplift that has a starting point 16 years ago. I mean, why not go back to, say, 2001? Or 1953 or something? My suspicion is that the BMA has deliberately chosen the year that gives them the biggest number.

It's an arrogant demand based on an illogical idea with cherry picked numbers. I'd expect better from highly educated people such as Rob Laurenson. Unless, of course, the agenda is actually about political activism against the Nasty Tories.

1953 might be worth a look...

Long ago in the thread, after locating gov't and BMA numbers for the 1970s, looking ahead to 2023 shows above-inflation salary positions for JDs. It'll still be on the thread, somewhere. The arbitrary date is another problem for the BMA position, linked to 35% obviously.

[turbobloke]

Vasco said:

gangzoom said:

Fast Bug said:

Lack of opportunities, intelligence, social back ground there are numerous. But you want to be obtuse, so I'll leave you to it

Back in the 80s I couldn't speak a word of English aged 9, OFSTED shut down the primary school I went to because it was so bad, we lived in subletted accommodation for quite a while whilst my parents every year worried about not been able to get a valid UK work visa. To top it all off, I was very 'average' in everything I did. The report card was a consistent 'Good effort, and average isn't a bad mark', add in always been the last kid to be picked for any team sports we're my defining memories of school........

Some 4 decades on and I've some how managed to end in a job where I'm lucky enough to work with some the most intelligent people around, with everyone dedicated to improving health care.

I would say a total lack of social upbringing, very average intelligence and work ethic can get you very far in the UK. Good health however is one thing I count my blessings for. I cannot comment on opportunities as I only have my own experiences to go on, what I have learnt is opportunities don't come along often, so when they do, you need to grab it with both hands and never let go.

How any of this has anything to do with industrial action I don't know .

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 16th February 07:25

Excellent stuff, well done you!!

Indeed, particularly seeing the primary school Ofsted consequences later on, the school in question was clearly far from good and in decline. Research shows that a high quality of primary education is vital and is linked to outcomes and destinations for years afterwards.

[turbobloke]

gangzoom said:

turbobloke said:

Indeed, particularly seeing the primary school Ofsted consequences later on, the school in question was clearly far from good and in decline. Research shows that a high quality of primary education is vital and is linked to outcomes and destinations for years afterwards.

Writing off kids because of which school they go to...........If I'm not in the position to be appointable as MD of our organization (£1billion+ turnover) by 45 I would consider myself as a failure. It's a good thing I'm too uneducated to care, or understand the validity of research into predicting life time potential based on childhood circumstances .

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 16th February 09:57

There are many ways to avoid a statistically expected result, sometimes expressed as the jaggedness principle of individuality, as you may well know following your experiences.

If neither Sunak nor Starmer (depending on election date) can manage a settlement with JDs by 2025 then they could consider themselves as failures. Not that they would.

[turbobloke]

irc said:

On the other hand it takes two to get an agreement.

Agreed. With the BMA few still giving the appearance of militancy rather than leadership it seems reasonable at this point to look elsewhere for it. There's only one other relevant place to look. The BMA may end up recommending rejection of an offer that JDs vote to accept.

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

The longer the government plays hard the more likely a rejection by the JDs is
The Irish have just voted by 98 % to continue.
This will only go away when the state makes a substantial offer.
JDs have other options, the state does not and neither do the patients.
And for those with short memories watch Breathtaking

For all of the above, and I agree that JDs should receive a pay rise which reflects the responsibility level of the job (not 35%), it's inappropriate for any sector to hold the country via its government, and the electorate here as patients or potential parients, to ransom.

[turbobloke]

Hungrymc said:

Dixy said:

The longer the government plays hard the more likely a rejection by the JDs is
The Irish have just voted by 98 % to continue.
This will only go away when the state makes a substantial offer.
JDs have other options, the state does not and neither do the patients.
And for those with short memories watch Breathtaking

That is a fully reasonable view point. And is surely right in many peoples eyes.

But the tactics the government are playing is that while the JDs are demanding 35%, there will be plenty of belief that this is a ridiculous demand and they can point to the JDs / the BMA as refusing to move from a ridiculous start point.

I'm not saying the government is right. In fact, they are playing politics with a topic that causes huge suffering - no surprise in modern politics unfortunately. I only raise it to show there is a different position at play to that which you presented. And I have a fear that this is a leaver to a discussion about a smaller NHS with a smaller scope to make it more affordable.

It reads like both sides are over confident in their leverage and are quite prepared to do serious damage with that leverage. No one is winning this at the moment.

The playing politics comment is relevant to the BMA activism also.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

"Do it for the love of it, not the money" doesn't sound very respectful.

Given made-up slogans that don't reflect an earlier post aren't quite accurate (!) and replying in the same vein, does "do it for the money not the love of it" sound any better, it doesn't sound very vocational, caring, respectful to patients.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

spaximus said:

There are many Dr's who do similar, who care, who work longer hours than they are paid and they are in the majority not the minority that some on here would want us to believe but does that mean we should abuse them and not pay them appropriately?

Appropriate is subjective, just like the other undefined favourite, fair. Both are waffly and neither are of any use. How much? 35%?

We're told that public support for JD strikes doesn't matter, so this slippery slope revealed by YouGov won't be important. Out of date polls taken some time ago are in the same dump as dumped RPI as opposed to CPI.
https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov....

I'd still prefer to see the BMA reaction to a Scotland offer, rather than the ongoing stand-off, after they dump the ludicrous 35% claim based on RPI plus a cherry picked starting date when many striking JDs were in primary school.

[turbobloke]

One of the BMA's lead activists was on local radio over cornflakes, laying the emotional blackmail on thick, far too much for a slice of toast. Pay up or there might not be anyone to treat your loved ones. Not likely. The public are in support, he said..possibly it's still so, but support has been falling fast. The article mentions a 'slip', but that's quite a downslope. If public support doesn't matter, why is it mentioned? Not a confident look.

Reminder.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48279-publi...

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

loafer123 said:

The lady from the BMA this morning said they had only been offered 3%.

Needless to say that is disingenuous - they have already had the 9% determined by the pay board, and the 3% offered would take them to 12%.

There was also reference to public support.

I certainly support a good pay deal for the JDs, but not striking, and not 35%.

I agree with your last sentence except for the not striking. This government has shown with all NHS staff that it’s not willing to negotiate in good faith or make sensible offers at the outset. It’s no coincidence that the nurses, junior doctors and consultants have all been forced into taking strike action. I fully support their withdrawal of their labour, it was the only option they had left available.

Of course it's not, accepting over 10% is an option, but the BMA activists are punting 35% while agitating against the government. When listening to BMA committee activists being interviewed it sounds like a politician replying to questions as a politician would - which describes the situation very well.

Will JDs be given a vote by their union on the 12%, it may be turned down but who knows.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

Vasco said:

I appreciate that we're only going over the same ground, time and again.

Essentially, this new, more militant, doctors union has handled this 35% very badly.
Rightly or wrongly, such regular striking by doctors has harmed their cause - and achieved nothing.

I fully support that the doctors should be well paid - and also aim to recoup poorer rewards over some previous years -
but the union should now accept the 9% (plus some extras/fine tuning if possible).

I'm a bit puzzled that many on PH must be doctors but they're generally rather quiet on this key issue.

Indeed. I think 9% plus some tinkering is too low. I doubt it would take much more to see the strikes end though.

If it were my union/profession striking I would be very careful about what I posted.

WTF? Was that a comment or a hint to potential contributors? It doesn't read well. Thought management? Censorious control freakery? PoliticsЯus? Midnight knocks on the door? Is stand-over thuggery just a word away?

Shame, but symptomatic. It's about time the deluded marxist minority of t'JD BMA commitee received a call from the WideAwake Club.

PH (a mere tyre kicker assembly): open for thought.