Junior Doctors' Pay Claim Poll

[turbobloke]

AstonZagato said:

I don’t think anything has changed. 35% is the main reason nothing has changed <snip>

I agree.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

Dixy said:

Just to add one other line to the algorithm, when the consultants go on strike not only will it get worse because they are not there but also because the juniors are not filling their logs. Add that to what they missed because of covid and we lose 2 years of them CCT so less new consultants.

JDs will have to act up and be paid substantial sums. Consultants were covering for JDs at £3k a nightshift in additional to TOIL for those hours and normal pay. It’s bonkers.

No wonder the NHS is broken.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

Dixy said:

Just to add one other line to the algorithm, when the consultants go on strike not only will it get worse because they are not there but also because the juniors are not filling their logs. Add that to what they missed because of covid and we lose 2 years of them CCT so less new consultants.

JDs will have to act up and be paid substantial sums. Consultants were covering for JDs at £3k a nightshift in additional to TOIL for those hours and normal pay. It’s bonkers.

No wonder the NHS is broken.

That’s what happens when you reduce your staff pay so significantly. The good will dries up and retention goes wrong.

Pay hasn't been reduced, like everyone else (mostly, apart from some including some self-employed) pay hasn't kept up with inflation given a suitable starting point for the comparison.

[turbobloke]

djc206 said:

turbobloke said:

Pay hasn't been reduced, like everyone else (mostly, apart from some including some self-employed) pay hasn't kept up with inflation given a suitable starting point for the comparison.

Semantics. It has been reduced in real terms.

Pay? Semantics matter.

So has the pay of many workers, not the big deal it's portrayed as.

35% wasn't so much an opening gambit as silly posturing.

Scots offer FTW.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

loafer123 said:

Good chart, but it does beg the question “why are they asking for 35%”?

I think that’s because they are asking for RPI from 2008-2023 and those graphs are average wage inflation over a slightly different time period.

Different time periods tell different stories.

Back in 1975 the NHS consultant pay range is given in Hansard as £7,536–£10,689 which translates as £54,606 to £77,452 in 2023 using the BoE inflation calculator.

According to internet sources, NHS consultants in England currently earn between £88,364 and £119,133 which is a significant real-terms increase based on 1975 levels of pay.

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written...

https://www.imgconnect.co.uk/news/2022/12/nhs-cons...

Still looking for 1975 JD pay in Hansard, no luck as yet, even ChatGPT doesn't know.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

turbobloke said:

pghstochaj said:

loafer123 said:

Good chart, but it does beg the question “why are they asking for 35%”?

I think that’s because they are asking for RPI from 2008-2023 and those graphs are average wage inflation over a slightly different time period.

Different time periods tell different stories.

Back in 1975 the NHS consultant pay range is given in Hansard as £7,536–£10,689 which translates as £54,606 to £77,452 in 2023 using the BoE inflation calculator.

According to internet sources, NHS consultants in England currently earn between £88,364 and £119,133 which is a significant real-terms increase based on 1975 levels of pay.

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written...

https://www.imgconnect.co.uk/news/2022/12/nhs-cons...

Still looking for 1975 JD pay in Hansard, no luck as yet, even ChatGPT doesn't know.

Wow. Talk about clutching at straws.

Doctors are looking to get pay parity back to 2008 aligned with the general pay increase across the wider population during the same period, not 1975. 1975 and 2008 are not very comparable for many reasons.

Remarkable.

How do you explain the graph which shows how doctors have had much larger pay reductions than the general population between 2008-2023?

And what about before then?

Where's the straw? It's quoting data from Hansard against today's scale for consultants. That's evidence, which for some reason has touched a nerve.

I know what doctors are saying and that 2008 is being used as a cherry pick. What are these vague 'many reasons' you refer to when casually dismissing information you don't like, and in what way are they special?

ETA for extra entertainment take a look at how Labour did things with doc salaries and beyond, back then.

Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 27th May 13:38

[turbobloke]

Condi said:

In 1975 a train driver earnt £2165 according to your preferred source. Let's say a consultant earnt £8500, as a mid point, so the consultant earnt 3.7 times the train driver's earnings.

Today a train driver earns £57,000, according to Glassdoor, while lets say a consultant earns £100k, 1.7 times the earnings of a train driver.

So, relative to the train driver, the consultant has seen a considerable decrease in his earnings.


EDIT - why did you chose 1975 as a point? Interestingly inflation must have been very high then, because train drivers got a 30% pay rise in April of that year, from £41/week to £53/week. Wouldn't be cherry picking dates yourself, turbowaffle?

juvenile jolly japes name calling, super, turbowaffle has never been seen before.

Inflation high but no pandemic backdrop, Labour IMF years were spiffing, and what's inflation been like recently, condiwibble?

And we're out of the playground...

Apples and oranges strikes again, doctors and train drivers, now that's truly desperate. I get the picture, you prefer one cherry picked date to another, good for you! I'll take both as they both represent change over time.

Somebody earlier in the thread mentioned the date cherry pick, and pondered when / how far back data was available. From a search the w JD info wasn't readily available, but consultant data popped up, and it's hit quite a few nerves.

I'd give the JDs the Scots offer to mull on if it were down to me. Then again the 35% silly punt is still around.

[turbobloke]

Condi said:

What's desperate about it? I simply chose another job to compare to and that was the first which came to mind, but if there are any other professions you would prefer to use please feel free to do the sums yourself.

Comparing different jobs is desperate, when the issue is the consultants' real terms increase as at 2023 since 1975. Not consultants vs train drivers pay, or even Labour shill day rates which would be of interest 1975-2023. Any ideas?

JD pay wasn't even mentioned. Talk about nerve touching.

As per, it would be of interest to see the England JDs' response to being given the Scots offer.

Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 27th May 14:44

[turbobloke]

Somebody else might like to use the BoE inflation calculator on these figures for 1983 and 2023. Descriptors aren't the same so caution is needed.

Lowest starting BMA 2023 Foundation Year 1 £29,384 for 40 hours
Lowest starring BMJ 1983 House Officer £6,180 for ? hours

BoE https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/in...

BMA https://thumbsnap.com/sc/3o4Vrxez.jpg
BMJ https://thumbsnap.com/sc/B98pxuoM.png

[turbobloke]

It's natural for JDs to use 2008 as a baseline, the end of several years of overheating economy and the end of Labour's tax/borrow/spend sponkfest when Gordon was shown he hadn't abolished Tory boom and bust so much as created Labour's version (by the time the GFC exposed his inadequate tripartite regulatory system).

A cherry pick from the mid 70s or mid 80s, before the overheating, doesn't look so good. Likewise looking to their future as consultants, in a comparison with european equivalents where the UK is up there at 7th out of 25 according to Euronews.com in an article prompted by the JD strikes.

[turbobloke]

NHS staff across Hertfordshire and west Essex are appealing. It's surprising there aren't more appeals.

https://www.yourharlow.com/2023/06/08/nhs-issue-ap...

[turbobloke]

Flooble said:

Dixy said:

Barclay has told the JDs he does not recognise that they are overworked, that they are permanently covering for shortage of staff, that they are being pressurised by management, that they have taken an effective pay cut.
This is going to go on a while, hope none of you need elective treatment.

So which country would be the best bet to go to for private electric treatment? Poland perhaps? Spain maybe?

It's likely to depend on 'what for?' linked to 'what cost is acceptable' but this could help.

https://www.expatriatehealthcare.com/the-top-10-he...

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

Flooble said:

So which country would be the best bet to go to for private electric treatment? Poland perhaps? Spain maybe?

If you are private then get it in the UK. The good news is consultants on strike will have time to do private work.

Definitely more convenient to use the private side of what's rated as the10th best healthcare system. Others are available if the option exists for individuals.

[turbobloke]

Evanivitch said:

pquinn said:

Hants PHer said:

I wonder whether his motives are actually political

Of course the gimp is being political, that's why he spends his time doing union politics instead of being a doctor.

Instead of? No, as well as.

With all the doctoring and politicking he needs another holiday by now surely.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1757802/junior-d...

[turbobloke]

Dixy said:

86 said:

Junior doctors seem a very naive bunch wet behind the ears. They need some adults negotiating

86 you get all precious when people assume your gender but then are blatantly offensive in your posts.

Agree or disagree, how on earth is that post offensive? The irony in 'get all precious' runs deep.

The 35% barrier needs dismantling so who will lead on that, this co-chair chap from his deckchair?

[turbobloke]

crankedup5 said:

Thirteen years suppressing wages to such a derisory level, completely disregarding the skills and dedication required for the work. The complete reliance the public have in those skills. £14 hour is an insult to the Doctors, deep political manipulation to run down the quality of the NHS in the quest for privatisation. (and I voted Conservative)

Point taken on responsibility level compared to pay, but the £14 is engineered campaign spin.

[turbobloke]

Killboy said:

JagLover said:

It is the basic problem with PHs. Many think that salaries of £50k are what you pay the Butler, not a very good salary in most of the country.

And the rest think that 50k salaries mean you can afford a butler.

How many hours per week?

[turbobloke]

Hants PHer said:

FWIW, I agree that a substantial pay rise for junior doctors is merited and necessary. I just wish the BMA would stop acting like the RMT or ASLEF, and drop their inflation-proof pay demand. If I was Stephen Barclay, I'd indicate that a double digit two year pay deal was possible, and hope that common sense might prevail.

ISWYM

Negotiating with the 35-ers, though, is not something to be undertaken lightly, as adherence to a nonsense position for any reason shows the JD reps to be wholly unrealistic, and time with them before it's dropped could well be wasted.

As much as Barclay indicating this or that, JD reps indicating they have realistic expectations is also material.

[turbobloke]

pghstochaj said:

86 said:

djc206 said:

86 said:

Yesterdays news this strike. People have more important things to worry about. Are they still asking for the ridiculous 35%!! Shocking lack of awareness at the BMA. Government will just sit it out especially after recent inflation news no way are they going to put more petrol on that fire by agreeing a large doctors pay rise that boat sailed in the Spring.

Inability to access healthcare is likely to be of far more concern to the Tory faithful than mortgages they don’t have. When the consultants go on strike the st will well and truly hit the fan and the government will have no choice but to negotiate.

MP’s go on holiday till October don’t hold your breath. After the inflation news I can categorically say there will be no large pay increase for doctors even if they go on indefinite strike. Kill loads of people the government won’t give in

The irony in your comment is remarkable. The inflation news reinforces why proper pay rises are needed, not the opposite.

Some might say the irony in your irony comment is also remarkable.

Could you add a bit more detail for a non-economist as to how that works?

[turbobloke]

gangzoom said:

Most politicians understand the need to meet the expectations of their populations inorder to stay in their jobs.

The King's Fund latest publication I think makes it quite clear who ultimately will 'win' the current disagreement between the BMA and government.

Possibly so, in terms of politicians keeping their jobs it's approx 50:50 in any case.

Possibly not, as the source suggests the survey was undertaken in 2019 i.e. before covid, rampant energy inflation, major food inflation, other recent public sector settlements and clearly before the 35% pay claim.

O/T looking at the US / UK figures, either national pride levels are higher in the USA generally, or there's more national self-loathing in the UK taking the numbers down