Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

FNG said:

And my point is that junior doctors wanting 35% is excessive given a similar level of erosion in earning power has happened across the board.

So MPs didn't suffer the same erosion. Colour me shocked.

So you expect junior doctors to be passive and ignore that pay has been substantially cut in real terms, just because it has happened to you? Or the doctors should enter into a negotiation process starting out asking for less than they would have been paid if pay had received pay rises in line with inflation? I am assuming you are not in a negotiation role.

Back to facts though, rather than opinion or anecdote.

Using consultant salaries as my indicator as I already have the numbers from above and I know that the terms and conditions have not substantially changed in this time period. Median pay (2008-2023) in the UK for full time employees has gone from £25,165 to £35,145 according to the data below and accounting for the reported 2022-2023 increase:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1002964/averag...

That is a 40% increase (for info, your salary has grown substantially less than the UK average despite you presumably increasing in experience so the growth should have been much higher to reflect promotion etc., the average increase does not account for this of course). Therefore, using the consultant example above, the salary should have gone from £82,590 to £115,343 to maintain performance with the general population salary inflation. This is less than the £125,000 inflation adjusted figure but far more than the actual current pay of £99,425.

The ONS data paints an even worse picture. Using data from 2008 to 2023 and inflating a salary of £82,590 brings out a salary of £120,581. This is still behind inflation but £20,000 more than the actual pay.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/p...

It is completely wrong to say that doctors have only suffered the same erosion as the general public.

This is why consultants will probably vote for action. Being a consultant used to be a very well paid job but now, what is asked of a consultant versus the remuneration makes it less competitive.

I agree with the last point and would like to raise another. How many consultants top up NHS work, as a % say, what's their income today on average, and how does it affect the overall average? To be clear I have no objection to use of state backed training and experience being used for raising income levels in that way by those who choose to do so.

AIUI from BMJ, those on whole time contracts (58% of all consultants) cannot receive more than 10% of their NHS salary from private practice. Those with a maximum part time contract (24%) receive 10/11 of the NHS salary and have no limit on their private earnings. It's not as easy to find any info on what this does to actual income levels, so maybe you can help, or maybe not?

[pghstochaj]

SWoll said:

crankedup5 said:

Killboy said:

FiF said:

I'll believe that killboy read those articles but only because he claims to have done because clearly didn't understand what was being said as evidenced by the resulting vacuous comments.

Bit of an odd statement to then go on and agree with me

Let me drop another statement that will rustle everyone's jimmies. 99k isn't a great salary either anymore

At last I can agree with something you have stated, £99k is not a great annual salary. Remove the tax take from that together with basic living costs and see what’s left. But I’m being flippant tbh, look at the wages in the football premier league where the players are on an average wage of
£60,000 and that’s a weekly wage btw. Funny old World.

Living in a bubble much there guys?

£99k is 3 times the national average FT wage, I'd suggest millions would consider it a great wage.

That's £5600 a month after tax. That would cover a £350k mortgage payment (£1800), a decent car payment (£500), CT (£200), Utilities (£400), insurance (£100), 1000 miles of fuel (£150) food (£400) and leave around £2000 a month for discretionary spending,

I think you have forgotten the £13.5k employee contribution for the pension, reducing the take home to £4,890 for a consultant on £99k, not £5,600.

Regardless, it's all relative, a doctor on £99k probably has a larger than average house so council tax would be more than £200, utilities would be far more than £400, private school or childcare and so on.

Oh and I forgot professional memberships and MDU. I don't know if this varies between disciplines but my wife must be paying £3k/year for these. In the private sector, my employer pays for all mine.

I am glad I didn't go into medicine. Being a junior doctor sucks and being a consultant is not what it was.

[ukwill]

SWoll said:

120 houses between £250-350k available within 1 mile of where I live in Lichfield. Plenty of them in nice areas and surrounding villages, 3-4 bedrooms etc.

Like I said, bubble.

Why bother arguing with people who state that £100k is not a decent salary? Pigeon chess.

This thread is worn out. Inflation has caused living costs to increase. Everyone has to deal with inflation - from all walks of life. Naturally, Unions are going to be busy during these periods - just as they were in previous era's, when inflation caused wage/price spirals to almost bring the UK economy to its knees (thanks to the IMF for that bailout).

Inflation forecasts suggest we will be pretty much back to normal next year. No Govt worth its salt is going to pander to ridiculous wage demands when inflation is beginning to right itself. If some Jnr Drs want to emigrate, crack on. Heard it all before.

[JagLover]

Killboy said:

Guess you've got a lot of doctors living there then.

I don't see why you wouldn't have doctors who are based in Staffordshire living there if they wanted?. Surely the whole point is the NHS is national and so doctors will be based everywhere in the country.

£400k buys you a nice house virtually everywhere outside of London and its commuter belt.

[pghstochaj]

turbobloke said:

I agree with the last point and would like to raise another. How many consultants top up NHS work, as a % say, what's their income today on average, and how does it affect the overall average? To be clear I have no objection to use of state backed training and experience being used for raising income levels in that way by those who choose to do so.

AIUI from BMJ, those on whole time contracts (58% of all consultants) cannot receive more than 10% of their NHS salary from private practice. Those with a maximum part time contract (24%) receive 10/11 of the NHS salary and have no limit on their private earnings. It's not as easy to find any info on what this does to actual income levels, so maybe you can help, or maybe not?

I think you are using information there from 2000. The rules around consultants doing private work changed in 2004 to the following:

The key contractual points are:

- you must ensure that your private practice or fee-paying services do not result in a detrimental effect on NHS patients or services, nor diminish the public resources that are available for the NHS. There must be no conflict of interest between your NHS and private work

- you are obliged to disclose any private practice commitments to your employer. You do not require their permission to undertake private practice

-if you wish to undertake private practice, you must first offer your employer an additional programmed activity (PA) over and above your standard commitment. If you choose not to offer this additional PA, this would be one of the grounds for an employer deferring pay progression in a given year. If you decide to cease your private practice, you can also give up the additional PA for your employer with three months’ notice (England & NI).

So for my wife who does 7 PAs, she would have to offer 1 PA to the NHS prior to doing any private work before she works a single private hour, hence many part time NHS consultants do not bother. Out of the group of doctors she is friendly with and that I know, probably 25% do private work. One earns several hundred thousand per year doing it but he works 6 days a week and most evenings (and is a world leader in his discipline). The others just use it as a top up. GPs are different again as some of their income comes from owning the surgery.

It would be my observation that many consultants work evenings and weekends to raise their salary back to what it would have been if inflation matched. Not many consultants are making big money working privately whilst still working for the NHS.

Edited by pghstochaj on Friday 14th April 10:31

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

I agree with the last point and would like to raise another. How many consultants top up NHS work, as a % say, what's their income today on average, and how does it affect the overall average? To be clear I have no objection to use of state backed training and experience being used for raising income levels in that way by those who choose to do so.

AIUI from BMJ, those on whole time contracts (58% of all consultants) cannot receive more than 10% of their NHS salary from private practice. Those with a maximum part time contract (24%) receive 10/11 of the NHS salary and have no limit on their private earnings. It's not as easy to find any info on what this does to actual income levels, so maybe you can help, or maybe not?

I think you are using information there from 2000. The rules around consultants doing private work changed in 2004 to the following:

The key contractual points are:<snip>

Thanks for the info, that BMJ extract may well be outdated, it's what could be found online in a coffee break and there was no date clearly associated with it.

ETA something else dug up in a couple of minutes said "junior doctors in Cambridge may engage in private medical practice for no more than the equivalent of one NHS session (one half day) each working week" which may also be outdated. Odd impression - local differences?

Edited by turbobloke on Friday 14th April 10:36

[pghstochaj]

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

I agree with the last point and would like to raise another. How many consultants top up NHS work, as a % say, what's their income today on average, and how does it affect the overall average? To be clear I have no objection to use of state backed training and experience being used for raising income levels in that way by those who choose to do so.

AIUI from BMJ, those on whole time contracts (58% of all consultants) cannot receive more than 10% of their NHS salary from private practice. Those with a maximum part time contract (24%) receive 10/11 of the NHS salary and have no limit on their private earnings. It's not as easy to find any info on what this does to actual income levels, so maybe you can help, or maybe not?

I think you are using information there from 2000. The rules around consultants doing private work changed in 2004 to the following:

The key contractual points are:<snip>

Thanks for the info, that BMJ extract may well be outdated, it's what could be found online in a coffee break and there was no date clearly associated with it.

ETA something else dug up in a couple of minutes said "junior doctors in Cambridge may engage in private medical practice for no more than the equivalent of one NHS session (one half day) each working week" which may also be outdated. Odd impression - local differences?

Edited by turbobloke on Friday 14th April 10:36

I don't remember a single person in her "cohort" that worked privately whilst a junior doctor (assuming you don't mean taking on extra shifts as a locum). I am not sure it would be practical. Some people do not become consultants but complete their junior doctor training and they are referred to as staff grade. They often pretend to be consultants in private work (check the speciality register to check) and perhaps these people are categorised as junior doctors. Sometimes these are people that are not good enough to become consultants in the NHS, sometimes they are people that just don't want to do it.

[Killboy]

JagLover said:

I don't see why you wouldn't have doctors who are based in Staffordshire living there if they wanted?. Surely the whole point is the NHS is national and so doctors will be based everywhere in the country.

£400k buys you a nice house virtually everywhere outside of London and its commuter belt.

Ah, so now people on good salaries have to buy outside of where they work and commute?

Like I said, its not a great salary. 99k would not get you much beyond a 1 bed flat in Brixton - the area that PH is so afraid of.

[SWoll]

Killboy said:

SWoll said:

120 houses between £250-350k available within 1 mile of where I live in Lichfield. Plenty of them in nice areas and surrounding villages, 3-4 bedrooms etc.

Like I said, bubble.

Guess you've got a lot of doctors living there then.

No idea. Just pointing out that £99k is a great salary to most, and £350k is enough to buy a new family home in a nice village.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

I don't remember a single person in her "cohort" that worked privately whilst a junior doctor (assuming you don't mean taking on extra shifts as a locum). I am not sure it would be practical. Some people do not become consultants but complete their junior doctor training and they are referred to as staff grade. They often pretend to be consultants in private work (check the speciality register to check) and perhaps these people are categorised as junior doctors. Sometimes these are people that are not good enough to become consultants in the NHS, sometimes they are people that just don't want to do it.

Thanks again. This link (to a pdf doc on consultant pay gap) was of interest, but why don't authors put a date on the cover page, my coffee break is already on borrowed time and scrolling past points of interest was too much hassle and I missed it anyway. It's in the url fortunately.

https://www.bma.org.uk/media/3429/bma-consultant-w...

[Mr Whippy]

djc206 said:

gangzoom said:

I didn’t realise we still judged people by ‘stations’, but its views like yours I have to thank for pushing me to apply to Medicine in the first place so I suppose I should be ‘grateful’ .

Doctors are already paid much higher than nurses, this isn’t/shouldn’t be about paying/judging one group in the NHS more than another. Everyone needs their pay to reflect the work/demands. I suspect the nursing ballot result out later today will reflect how staff feel about the current 5% ‘offer’ from the government.

It’s likely the RCN, BMA, UNISON will end up calling back-to-back strikes going into May.

Someone, somewhere in power is going to have make some very hard decisions very soon.

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 14th April 08:43

Playing devils avocado, is it not the case that if nurses are truly underpaid to the degree they say, and this applies to all striking persons actually, that they can be worn down as soon enough they simply won’t be able to afford to continue their action?

There’s also the potential for a change in public opinion. I happen to think the nurses and everyone else in the NHS for that matter deserve a decent pay award and I would gladly pay a penny on the £ to fund it but that’s not going to happen.


Where does this stalemate end?

Where does a penny on the pound end?

There are structural issues and strategic long term issues all working against society here.

The divergence of wealth is probably symptomatic of that.

No person is an island, and for very wealthy people to keep taking, and our government sitting by allowing it, they’re compounding the inevitable crunch point.

To have wealthy people, they need vast numbers of willing participants in a thriving economy to provide that wealth.

Without willing participants, everyone loses.

[gangzoom]

Mr Whippy said:

Where does a penny on the pound end?

There are structural issues and strategic long term issues all working against society here.

The divergence of wealth is probably symptomatic of that.

No person is an island, and for very wealthy people to keep taking, and our government sitting by allowing it, they’re compounding the inevitable crunch point.

To have wealthy people, they need vast numbers of willing participants in a thriving economy to provide that wealth.

Without willing participants, everyone loses.

This all way above my pay grade, but the BMA recommendations linked here is a 31% pay rise for consultants. At 41, for me, with pretty much 100% job security for life, with a very good pension, would translate to a gross salary figure not that far short of a number starting 2 with a just a few zeros on the end if the BMA recommendations are followed through. I have NOT worked to try and maximise my income, I just do my NHS job.

But MPs don't go into politics for £££££, I honestly don't know how those in power will come up a resolution.

[crankedup5]

SWoll said:

crankedup5 said:

Killboy said:

FiF said:

I'll believe that killboy read those articles but only because he claims to have done because clearly didn't understand what was being said as evidenced by the resulting vacuous comments.

Bit of an odd statement to then go on and agree with me

Let me drop another statement that will rustle everyone's jimmies. 99k isn't a great salary either anymore

At last I can agree with something you have stated, £99k is not a great annual salary. Remove the tax take from that together with basic living costs and see what’s left. But I’m being flippant tbh, look at the wages in the football premier league where the players are on an average wage of
£60,000 and that’s a weekly wage btw. Funny old World.

Living in a bubble much there guys?

£99k is 3 times the national average FT wage, I'd suggest millions would consider it a great wage.

That's £5600 a month after tax. That would cover a £350k mortgage payment (£1800), a decent car payment (£500), CT (£200), Utilities (£400), insurance (£100), 1000 miles of fuel (£150) food (£400) and leave around £2000 a month for discretionary spending,

Yup, I was being flippant.

[Carl_Manchester]

gangzoom said:

I didn’t realise we still judged people by ‘stations’, but its views like yours I have to thank for pushing me to apply to Medicine in the first place so I suppose I should be ‘grateful’ .

My view is irrelevant, if you live in the U.K you live in a partial-Meritocracy, you are judged daily by who you are and the role you play in society. I did not invent the system but that the reality of the country we live in.

Some of the hard-left that are organising these strikes want to change that system and good luck to them, I will be watching from afar with a beer in my hand.

In terms of what is 'fair' to pay a fully qualified doctor , 100k not being a good salary and 'PH Bubble' etc. I always look at what the Japanese and the Germans are doing. Therefore, in specific regards to doctors salaries 125k-135k GBP base seems about right, that would place newly qualified junior doctors around the 85k mark.

[julian64]

Carl_Manchester said:

My view is irrelevant, if you live in the U.K you live in a partial-Meritocracy, you are judged daily by who you are and the role you play in society. I did not invent the system but that the reality of the country we live in.

I would have to strongly disagree with you on this. The uk is not a meritocracy when we have a government run NHS which is free at the point of service. Its a system which can set pay knowing that the degree to which it marginalises private medicine means it has a monopoly.

If you did away with the NHS and all medicine became private the the UK would be a meritocracy for medics, and in a situation where the NHS can't fill posts, (and there are a lot) the costs would have to rise.

[skwdenyer]

julian64 said:

I would have to strongly disagree with you on this. The uk is not a meritocracy when we have a government run NHS which is free at the point of service. Its a system which can set pay knowing that the degree to which it marginalises private medicine means it has a monopoly.

If you did away with the NHS and all medicine became private the the UK would be a meritocracy for medics, and in a situation where the NHS can't fill posts, (and there are a lot) the costs would have to rise.

I doubt it would be a meritocracy for medics or, if it were, the criteria for judging “merit” wouldn’t be the ones we’d like. Yelp reviews, ability to bring in lucrative drug trials, systematic over-billing and needless tests; this lists of things connoting “merit” to a private health provider are legion and mostly unrelated to the needs of society.

[turbobloke]

skwdenyer said:

julian64 said:

I would have to strongly disagree with you on this. The uk is not a meritocracy when we have a government run NHS which is free at the point of service. Its a system which can set pay knowing that the degree to which it marginalises private medicine means it has a monopoly.

If you did away with the NHS and all medicine became private the the UK would be a meritocracy for medics, and in a situation where the NHS can't fill posts, (and there are a lot) the costs would have to rise.

I doubt it would be a meritocracy for medics or, if it were, the criteria for judging “merit” wouldn’t be the ones we’d like. Yelp reviews, ability to bring in lucrative drug trials, systematic over-billing and needless tests; this lists of things connoting “merit” to a private health provider are legion and mostly unrelated to the needs of society.

Yes to that, i.e. I agree with almost all of the above criticism of what might be termed untrammelled private healthcare practices - not sure what was meant in the detail of drug trials, probably my fault - however, could there not be some trammel applied?

[MiniMan64]

Unison accept but RCN haven’t although it’s a bit narrow so the nurses are probably going out again along with the teachers.

[Jockman]

MiniMan64 said:

Unison accept but RCN haven’t although it’s a bit narrow so the nurses are probably going out again along with the teachers.

There seems to be a fear now by the RCN that there may now be an attempt to reduce the rejected offer. Where on earth did that come from?

[MiniMan64]

Jockman said:

MiniMan64 said:

Unison accept but RCN haven’t although it’s a bit narrow so the nurses are probably going out again along with the teachers.

There seems to be a fear now by the RCN that there may now be an attempt to reduce the rejected offer. Where on earth did that come from?

I don’t get why they’d be a fear. Teachers were told our offer would be removed if we even said a bad word about it…