Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

It's been quiet, ahead of the next round of JD strikes. A quick search reveals some impacts which made the headlines recently.

Junior doctor's strike cost Royal Stoke hospital trust £1 million
The first junior doctors' strike came with a £1m cost to the trust running Royal Stoke University Hospital, it has been revealed.
1 day ago

Junior doctors challenged over strikes care delay for three-year-old with cancer
An MP and doctor said the strikes were 'absolutely the wrong thing to be doing'.
14 hours ago

[turbobloke]

Venisonpie said:

JagLover said:

Venisonpie said:

I've recently moved to the public sector and am surprised at the generous package. However when I see the salaries being offered for junior doctors and GP's (60k is ludicrously low if correct) who have gone through far more training and will be way more skilled than I am it's way below where I'd expect it. The contractor rates seem more realistic which I imagine is driving a lot of GP's down this route so why not just pay them correctly in the first place?

Full time salaried GPs earn between £65K and £98K depending on location and experience

Venisonpie said:

Given there are clearly not enough doctors, junior, GP otherwise and yet there are claims medical training applications are oversubscribed then it seems they're taking the taxpayer funded training and then heading off to better remunerated positions around the globe. So the govt is doing half a job but getting significantly less benefit for the taxpayer and society than if it committed to the second part and retaining them by offering the right packages. Seems rather and obviously short sighted. Or, the govt would like to turn the public against the NHS and it's staff so it can claim it's not fit for purpose etc - private is better..

Recruitment was constrained for years by a cap on places at medical school. So we are more likely seeing the consequences of spending twenty years not training enough doctors.

Interesting points. Personally I don't think the salary band of a GP is nearly enough to match the calibre of individual required added to the not inconsiderable responsibility.

With regard to the 20 years of under investment in training junior doctors this would include 13 years under the current government which is pretty telling. I've always been relatively middle of the road politically with a bit of a lean to the right but I wouldn't trust the current govt with public health responsibility.

The calibre thing is over-egged but the responsibility level is under-egged by some margin, JDs warrant more for that alone. Not 35% which they won't get, but more. And yes we need to train more, and pay the price.

[turbobloke]

Pan Pan Pan said:

JagLover said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

I was in the queue
waiting to book a GP appointment, and read one of the notice boards, which had a small note stating that the average pay of GPs at this practice was seventy six thousand, seven hundred and forty pounds per annum. Is this the normal pay, for GP practices across the UK?

Depends on if they are a salaried GP or a partner.

Also depends on whether they are part-time or fulltime and most these days are part-time.

The notice stated the `average' salary of GPs at this practice. That could mean a whole lot of different variables.

It sure could. Even though the total number of GPs is likely to be in single figures or not much higher, they could still choose mean, median or mode to help get a lower number depending on what the distribution looks like. All are averages.They probably mean mean, if you see what I mean, but average could mean one of the other two.

[turbobloke]

pequod said:

spaximus said:

Just been posted on the BBC news website, Scottish Junior Dr's have been offered 14.5% pay increase over two years.

As always a complicated mix but that is the cumulative amount. So what will the English and Welsh NHS now do, watch Dr's who do not want to leave the UK move to Scotland or match it?

I suspect if they did the strike would end

There is only one Party who have a chance to stop this nonsense....

Vote Labour!

Starmer will sort the NHS before breakfast!

It'll be interesting to see wnat Scots JDs' response is.

[turbobloke]

spaximus said:

86 said:

spaximus said:

Just spoken to my Daughter who has had a text just now from the BMA.

After a few weeks negotiation the government have offered 5% to the English Junior Dr's which the BMA has rejected. The next strike days will be 14th to 17th June.

How they can see an offer to the Scottish Dr's in double digits made and expect the English ones to accept 5%.

Starmer will not sort this out he will stand on the sideline and say it is al the governments fault and not have an answer

The Scottish offer is only 6.5% this year. Looks like they are recommending accepting. No time for Doctors who strike. By the time they lose pay over the next few months they might have wished they had been more sensible and reasonable with their pay demands.

The reality is they can easily make up what they lose by doing the huge number of locum shifts that are available. These are available because we have too few Dr's and are losing more as Australia New Zealand and Canada are all trying to take advantage and offer better pay and conditions with them. Every day there are not enough Dr's and nurses to cover the wards as they should be and we are making it worse.

No Dr wants to strike but what alternative do they have when their pay has gone backwards and the government is refusing to give a meaningful offer. The Scottish offer as I said is 14.5% over two years, there has been no such offer to the English ones.

The alternative is to accept a reasonable offer, the issue is around what reasonable means in % terms..

[turbobloke]

loafer123 said:

pequod said:

spaximus said:

Just been posted on the BBC news website, Scottish Junior Dr's have been offered 14.5% pay increase over two years.

As always a complicated mix but that is the cumulative amount. So what will the English and Welsh NHS now do, watch Dr's who do not want to leave the UK move to Scotland or match it?

I suspect if they did the strike would end

There is only one Party who have a chance to stop this nonsense....

Vote Labour!

What would they get from Starmer? The full 35%?

Not sure what the parrot supply lines are like after brexit, or whether one is needed, but I think it is.

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

86 said:

Thought they were all burnt out !! Have no time for them. Lead by idiots at the BMA which is just a left wing group who want to bring down the government. In fact I’d say they were irresponsible with their 35 % demand now putting patients lives at risk again yeh really caring

Do make sure you start with that as you are lead in to ED with a heart attack.
You have no idea how wrong you are. The leaders of the BMA are all qualified doctors, you dont get there by being an idiot.
Bringing down the government is not even on their radar.
Consultants are covering so no one is at risk.
The civil servants have to decide pretty quick what they are going to do because the consultants are voting now.

It's not at all straightforward for outsiders to accept that radical left JD political movers aren't calling the high level shots at the BMA, and senior BMA figures agree apparently - here's a mix of biased sources aka newspaper reports.

"The political leanings and anti-Tory feelings expressed by those leading the doctors’ strike raise questions about the impartiality of those charged with negotiating with the Government."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12083717/Juni...

"What's more, senior figures in the BMA believe the junior doctors' dispute is now being cynically hijacked by a hard core of far-Left activists who have quietly gained power within the organisation and are using it to advance a radical political agenda."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3771685/E...

"The news sites have highlighted the success of Doctors Vote, which Runswick helped set up, and Broad Left, in getting pro-strike campaigners elected to 59 of the 60 seats on the junior doctors’ committee, and then to 26 out of the 69 positions on the union’s full council, as proof that far-left militants were now calling the shots at the BMA." (naturally The Guardian, itself a news site, downplays this by pointing out the bleedin' obvious that some JDs aren't politically Left)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/apr/10/an...

[turbobloke]

My pure guess is that most people have sympathy for JDs.
My pure speculation is that this support is decreasing not increasing over time, no matter how logical or emotive the case being made.

[turbobloke]

CoolHands said:

The govt solution is to bring in anti-strike legislation forcing people to work or be sacked. It’s like the dark ages

Dark ages hype is ironic.

There's clearly a better balance to be had between the rights of workers to strike and the rights of people to go about their personal lives and working lives without those lives being put at undue risk.

Workers' rights and employment legislation is already highly protective. The unions were a force for good in the real dark ages when change was needed, now as public sector mass market muscle they're political agitators for the Left with a ready made excuse in terms of their members, who are used as bullying fodder to disrupt personal and corporate daily lives, holding people, businesses and the state to ransom. A sell-by date issue is arising, and the legislation around minimum service levels in key sectors addresses that to a degree.

[turbobloke]

CoolHands said:

The solution being chosen is to force people to work, instead of negotiate a settlement. In my eyes that is not right. Why put the time & effort into that, rather than dealing with the actual issues. It stinks. No other country in Europe has laws that allow striking workers to be sacked.

A settlement will be negotiated at some point, and the legislation clearly isn't about stopping strikes.

This (link below) isn't Westminster, and it's posted for the historical perspective (2005) on current legislation in progress. It's only taken nearly 20 years and brexit but like British Rail we're getting there.

"The report’s central message is that, while strikes continue to form an essential ultimate tool for employees to improve their conditions, greater attention needs to be paid to the rights of ordinary citizens to pursue their daily lives unhindered and to the right of society to protect their well-being and its own essential functioning."

https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-View...

As to what public sector strikes are about, listening to union reps talking "blah, this government, blah" it's Arthur Scargill re-invented. Members get a mention eventually.

I'd like to see the Scottish Government offer put in full to our JDs not least as it may end the strikes. If it was offered and refused, I can't see support for JDs increasing.

[turbobloke]

SiH said:

Dixy said:

86 said:

Pay them the Scottish award and move on.

If Barclay had walked into the room and offered this the strike would not be happening.

If the word on the street is true then a 'Scottish Offer' wouldn't resolve things. A lot of JDs are still bitter about the previous industrial action in 2016 where they feel they were betrayed by the BMA and had their noses rubbed in it by Jeremy Hunt. The BMA JD leadership in 2016 included people like Jeeves Wijesuriya who now finds himself working at the GMC (careerism in action) and Johann Malawana who started off well but then turned out to be a turncoat. The new JD leadership at the BMA has done a good job of bringing together a sizeable majority of the JD workforce and they're out for blood.

Hackles are up, confidence is high and it seems that JDs now give fewer and fewer sts about public opinion. Jeremy Hunt and Steve Barclay haev done a good job of turning a previously docile group of professionals into a group that Mick Lynch would be proud of.

Public opinion matters more.

Negotiations need to re-start, with 35% off the table as iirc suggested by senior doctors.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

Public opinion matters more.

Negotiations need to re-start, with 35% off the table as iirc suggested by senior doctors.

Can someone explain to me why public opinion matters please

Because politicians are frightened by it.

djc206 said:

Junior doctors don’t need our support they need our cash, we need their services, seems they have us over a barrel ultimately.

We don't decide at the moment of truth, politicians do.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

Killboy said:

Killboy said:

86 said:

Most doctors couldn’t be a police officer or a prison officer etc.

Why?

Bump.

Did I miss the reply to this?

Looks like it.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

Killboy said:

Killboy said:

86 said:

Most doctors couldn’t be a police officer or a prison officer etc.

Why?

Bump.

Did I miss the reply to this?

Looks like it.

Where?

Earlier today, this morning iirc. Have a scroll down if you're that interested.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

Killboy said:

Killboy said:

86 said:

Most doctors couldn’t be a police officer or a prison officer etc.

Why?

Bump.

Did I miss the reply to this?

Looks like it.

Where?

Earlier today, this morning iirc. Have a scroll down if you're that interested.

Sure? The bump was early this afternoon.

i recall reading the bump and thinking something had been missed. Scanning back, try the reply at 10:28 and back to about 0930. Whether any reply from anyone goes down well is another, subjective, matter.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

i recall reading the bump and thinking something had been missed. Scanning back, try the reply at 10:28 and back to about 0930. Whether any reply from anyone goes down well is another, subjective, matter.

No, they are not replies to the question, just something loosely linked. He hasn't replied why a doctor could not be a police officer.

They are replies, as the nested quotes show. I did predict they may not go down well - it's a tough audience today etc In any case, take it up with the originator.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

i recall reading the bump and thinking something had been missed. Scanning back, try the reply at 10:28 and back to about 0930. Whether any reply from anyone goes down well is another, subjective, matter.

No, they are not replies to the question, just something loosely linked. He hasn't replied why a doctor could not be a police officer.

They are replies, as the nested quotes show. I did predict they may not go down well - it's a tough audience today etc In any case, take it up with the originator.

I was, I am not sure why you got involved on his behalf? It was his comment.

He hasn't answered it, he has replied to a loosely referenced point. If you believe otherwise, please be clear, why is he saying that a doctor couldn't be a police officer?

It's a public forum, and I replied to your reply to me! if you were expecting a restricted audience and reply options then you ought to have used PMs. HTH

[turbobloke]

News from Royal Surrey NHS where chiefs fear junior doctor strikes could become monthly.

https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/royal...

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

AstonZagato said:

I disagree with almost everything that 86 says but I would agree that the 35% was a stupid ploy which has backfired (whatever the merits of the calculation). If they had started with say, "15% and commitments to pay restitution over the next 5 years" then they wouldn't be in the mess that they are now. It gave the government all the political cover it needed (and more) to ignore them. They still don't seem to get it.

I had dinner last weekend with three consultants. They were all convinced that the NHS will collapse in the next few years. There was much debate on the problems and no consensus on the solutions, It was quite depressing. Pay was not one of the issues discussed.

It’s probably due a collapse but it likely won’t happen under a labour government, they’ll just throw money at the problem in the hope it goes away, which it won’t.

The Labour Party has a habit of running out of other people's money, if they're anticipating the GE result then reserving an appointment with the IMF would ironically revive Gordon's friend Prudence.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

Killboy said:

turbobloke said:

i recall reading the bump and thinking something had been missed. Scanning back, try the reply at 10:28 and back to about 0930. Whether any reply from anyone goes down well is another, subjective, matter.

Odd, the question was only asked at 09:51. pghstochaj quoted my post at 09:55. The bump was at 12:10 with no other replies. And then pghstochaj bumping again at 17:02.

Perhaps you could quote the reply you are referencing?

Bump for turbobloke

I gave a timeline to a post at 10:28 so no need to quote, there's only one post. The timings fit a reply to a question asked at 09:51 so why bump for me?
Is it you who can't tell the time?!