wrx300scooby

What are your thoughts? Me personally I'm on their side, they are, after all, intelligent people and know what's best for us don't they?

JGlanzaV

iTrader: (3)

A doctor wanting a normal working week? Because people don't get I'll after 5pm or at weekends?

It is a 24hr profession, they get paid **** loads of money for it, and should work to the needs of the people they serve. If that means more out of hours and weekends so be it, they chose that profession, so like it or lump it

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

I'm in different minds on this; Part of me says this is a work environment that is very unforgiving and pressured where pay and conditions should reflect this. Part of me says the NHS cannot continue to operate in the way it currently does (free healthcare for all) and another part of me says it depends on if they are British.

I noticed on some TV interviews some heavy accents (East European etc), which isn't what I take issue with, but if I was interviewing I'd ask where they came from and what are the pay and conditions for the same job role would be in their country of origin....

wrx300scooby

I don't think they want a normal working week, they are happyish with things as they are from what I can deduce. What they do not want is to be contracted to working unsociable hours and choose to do them as they are now. Yes you're right they did choose the profession but not with the contracted hours the government is trying to impose.

dpb

The worst possibility imo is someone administering the wrong dosage simply because theyre too tired cos they've done too many hours on the trot

the government has to hire more , but thatll damage their popularity since the public want to pay the same ,even though population is putting ever more strain on the system

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Government bullying a minority group? Whatever next?

steve05wrx

Hi,
I believe there is a huge hidden agenda here - privatisation by stealth!
My wife is a consultant surgeon and funnily enough when she was a junior Doctor - she often worked 72 hours per week.
This all stopped due to the European working time directive.
She notices that trainee surgeons these days don't get the same surgical skills as they used to - because they are forced to work shorter hours and don't therefore get to perform as many operations as she did.
Cheers
Steve

Shax

Back the Junior Doctors and Nurses! The government is trying to ruin the NHS so that privatisation can take over! Ive been working in a Dr's surgery for almost 7 years now and the doctors are so stretched year after year, Yes they signed up for the work, yes the pay is higher compared to your average job BUT you have no idea the number of hours they work unpaid. Jeremy Hunt the Unt took a big chunk of funding away from surgeries which are now under threat of closing down! thats 1000's of residents about to be left without care.(these patients will go to other nearby surgeries who are under threat and stretched as it is)

Providing a 7day service and continuity of care is very difficult for the GP's as they have a life too! as mentioned in above posts stretching the GP's is a very high risk and will cause them to make more mistakes and IVE SEEN THIS TIME AFTER TIME!

I also think the NHS should only be free for residents of the UK only so we can look after ourselves before running out of funds! Our surgery took NHS England to court and won our case so we have funding to run for at least the next 2 years.(SaveOurSurgeries Banners if you've seen them)

Another thing also is med students are using the funding in the UK and then going off abroad which is a waste but this is all because of poorer working conditions over here! Respect to the GPs training and then going off to help in the 3rd world countries though. sorry for going on a bit but THANK GOD for OUR NHS! - it pays for my scooby

NOCK

I'm on the Doctor's side regardless of where they originate from. They are not paid enough relative to the pressure they are put under. At my local hospital 66 operations were cancelled today due to the Juniors striking, so they're obviously very much needed and the government should make sure they keep them!

So what if they earn 5 times more than they would have done in their country of origin... everything costs 100 times more than it would in their country of origin anyway so they're still worse off.

Turbohot

Good post.

NOCK

Thank you sir

Midlife......

iTrader: (2)

The Government want to run a full 7 day service for the current cost so people have to work more for less......... the numbers just don't add up.

Shaun

Turbohot

Let me correct you:

"Thank you, madam. "

NOCK

Oooh, sorry miss. *slaps self on wrist*

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

If you want it like that it can be achieved....you pay more taxes to fund the NHS....simples.

Turbohot

LOL no worries, NOCK.

PaulC72

I think it only matters if you are ill / going to be ill....

NOCK

There are other ways of raising NHS funds, like not giving dole-ees with 97 kids million pound mansions to live in. Or maybe they could stop wasting money on MP's scams etc.

Maybe all the tax from these carrier bags could go to the NHS; that really gets my goat that does!

NOCK

...or pregnant.

greenonedave

There are thousands of people who have waited possibly weeks or months in pain or in a worried state,to have their operation.
some need to lose time of work, others have to arrange child care and others rely on friends or family to transport them to and from the hospital who had there operation cancelled today. The doctors have no right to put these people through that stress and pain. The people who need the service the most suffer.

^Qwerty^

There is also a political element to this strike. The top of the BMA is not without it's Corbyn sympathisers.

I don't doubt there are some genuine concerns about the impact the new contracts would have, but I've not seen or heard a single interview with a JD where they have put across a cohesive and concise argument about why they are striking.

mrtheedge2u2

The problem with the British public in large is that they want amazing paid for services for no cost.

I pay 52% tax here in Holland and do not begrudge a single cent. We have far better services here than in the UK (with the exception of health care. regardless of what you think the NHS is very very good) and hence my standard of living is far better here than it ever was there. You get what you pay for.

Miniman

iTrader: (2)

As far as I can see this is a row over job contracts and renumeration. It's not about privitisation (though some are trying to shoe horn that in there), or safety (tiredness) - as having a 24 hour contract is surely better than a service that is currently being used 24/7 and yet only having staff with 24x5 contracts and working the extra hours as "unsociable".

None of us like our contracts changing and if I take the BBC analysis at face value, then many will not be worse off. I'm sure lots on here have been in a similar situation (contracts changed to meet new business hours), but it's often pushed through. I think part of the issue may be the way that the BMA controls the majority of renumeration in a blanket form - but as many don't want to ever see privitisation and NHS in the same sentence (but it could bring a competitive market that would bring allowing doctors to move if they were unhappy with their current contract).

So they want to keep the status quo, because having to change to delivery a truely 24/7 service will mean changes and that they don't like.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

The way I read it, the only times when they are worse off is if they hammer the overtime; The new contracts mean they don't get double pay anymore...its limited to time and a half.


This deficit could be addressed to bring more money into the NHS in many way;...charging people who visit hospital for minor injuries during non-socialable hours would be a good start.

NOCK

Until the minor injury turns into a major one and then that'll cost more money to sort out.

However, timewasters who visit the hospital regularly because they coughed once, well they should be charged £50/time!

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Let's just put ourselves in the place of some of the junior doctors?

We have spent quite a lot of time earning NOTHING since 16 years old in order to qualify.

Now we are qualified and have a contract. We work to the contract and are paid quite well for it....but not any more than we deserve, taking into account our responsibilities and the number of years it took to qualify.

Then along comes a very large financial headache, and suddenly, the government wants to change our contracts, without letting us negotiate.

Now it either IS a contract...or it's not? They cannot have it both ways...which they always seem to want to do.

How do we feel now? We are paid £x per month and get some overtime at double time when we do overtime, but we don't HAVE to take too much overtime.
THEY want us to do MORE overtime, for less per hour and no more pay?

Stuff 'em, say I.

Miniman

iTrader: (2)

Er most analysis shows that majority of JD's will either stay on same pay or see pay rises.

Contract stays the same forever? Other businesses make changes to their existing contracts and you are told that if you don't like it then there's the door. Problem in this instance is that a JD would only be able to get a job elsewhere that will have the same contract! Welcome to the 21st Century, contracts change.

Seems like they are striking because someone is changing a bit of paper regardless of whether it is good or bad for them and they don't like being told to change their business practices to meet 21st century demands.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Contracts change? Sure they do, but NOT without negotiation. Otherwise it's NOT a contract, it's a con-trick. A contract ties BOTH sides.

And it's usually government that pull the con-trick.

What if JD's suddenly "changed their contracts" without asking government and had to be paid an extra £10,000 a year as a result? Reckon we'd hear anyone moaning?

Yeah, so do I.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

But they get an increase in pay for normal hours.

Contracts aren't lifetime. There will be a review date on them; And if not, then whoever penned the original contract was an idiot.

trevsjwood

iTrader: (2)

by taking the lid off the number of hours JD's are asked to work and lowering the pay for the overtime worked, that equals a lot more hours worked on top of a very demanding job. This argument is about working hours and fatigue. If I was a JD I would be very worried by a situation levered by a geek of a conservative politician and so should the rest of us.
Trev