[Search & Destroy]

Any Labour voters had loved one’s operations cancelled?

Apparently Labour would have resolved this by now, presumably that means paying the 34% demands (plus the gold plated pension with a 20% contribution)

Picking this week is an absolute disgrace

[Westbars Spireite]

Which week would you have picked?

[Search & Destroy]

Probably not the busiest week of the year with flu admissions for elderly people at yearly highs

Aiming for maximum impact/avoidable deaths

The folk that get their knickers in a twist over Gaza will be all for this of course

Collateral damage will be ok on this occasion

[isleaiw1]

I dont profess to understand the dispute - it seems the 35% is to put them back in the same real position (allowing for inflation over last 10 years or so). I get that no one wants to be worse off each year. Its normal not to be paid much when training as you get the rewards when qualified - but equally that doesnt mean it should be abused.

I'd give them more cash and trade it for their pension - they get more cash when training and then when their salary increases anyway they can opt back in to the DB pension and get the best of both worlds - and they shouldnt be needing to retire at 55 to avoid punitive tax bills on their pension pots (which Labour are going to reintroduce)

When I started my training for my profession, I was paid less than my wife who was a receptionist, they dont know they are born....

I'd also start giving tax breaks for people taking out private health cover so that more people use other provision and the govt has to pay less and only cover those who wont or cant...we cant afford an NHS as we have known it going forward, too few people working and paying in, too many new wonder drugs and ops to extend life at huge cost, something has to give. A hybrid private and public sector provision seems the start... As it stands you pay extra tax for private health cover provided by your employer - so you can not use a service you are already paying tax for. Makes no sense...

[oldgoat]

I know you have a " slight " obsession with nhs pensions .
It was good before they " reformed " it twice , luckily I was old enough to stay in the original one and took my pension 5 years ago at 60 and still work very part time .
I once worked it out how much I had paid in over the years , I'm sure it was around 200k , what happened to it , probably successive governments used it as a piggy bank .
Will we be happy to go back to the old days when guys worked till knackered in there mid 60's then dropped dead a few years later after contributing to their pension for 40 odd years , very cost effective for the state

[isleaiw1]

oldgoat, on 03 January 2024 - 10:36 AM, said:

I know you have a " slight " obsession with nhs pensions .
It was good before they " reformed " it twice , luckily I was old enough to stay in the original one and took my pension 5 years ago at 60 and still work very part time .
I once worked it out how much I had paid in over the years , I'm sure it was around 200k , what happened to it , probably successive governments used it as a piggy bank .
Will we be happy to go back to the old days when guys worked till knackered in there mid 60's then dropped dead a few years later after contributing to their pension for 40 odd years , very cost effective for the state

My obsession is that we (the taxpayer) are paying for a scheme (defined benefit) that no private employer can afford, and in the case of the NHS watching it fall apart as it doesnt have enough money. That seems a bit wrong. And then we have doctors retiring early as the pension scheme they are in drives them to it - when we need more doctors. Joined up thinking it most certainly is not...

So in my world where people are treated fairly (I know, but I live in hope) then we move the public sector to the same sort that the private sector get (defined contribution) and that frees up money - some to pay them better in the short term and some to fund improvements to the service...I'll let them keep DB pensions at higher age so they can still retire earlier than the private sector...

Life expectancy has increased by over 10 years since the 70s, which means pension pots have to pay out a lot longer. With a DC scheme that risk is with the employee, with a DB scheme its with the employer - or in the case of the public sector the taxpayer....

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Search & Destroy, on 03 January 2024 - 09:53 AM, said:

Probably not the busiest week of the year with flu admissions for elderly people at yearly highs

Aiming for maximum impact/avoidable deaths

The folk that get their knickers in a twist over Gaza will be all for this of course

Collateral damage will be ok on this occasion

So the bloke who didn't give a flying fornication over spiralling Covid deaths, those resulting from austerity driven NHS shortcomings or Boris the Liar calling for the elderly to be somehow sacrificed is now wringing his hands about democratic strikes?

And yeah, some of the most dedicated professionals in the world taking regrettable action equates exactly with the IDF indescriminately slaughtering civilians.

But hey, on the bright side, many of those at risk might be brown or black or trans or women or migrants or...or...or...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 03 January 2024 - 12:46 PM

[Valley Blues]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 03 January 2024 - 12:36 PM, said:

So the bloke who didn't give a flying fornication over spiralling Covid deaths, those resulting from austerity driven NHS shortcomings or Boris the Liar calling for the elderly to be somehow sacrificed is now wringing his hands about democratic strikes?

And yeah, some of the most dedicated professionals in the world taking regrettable action equates exactly with the IDF indescriminately slaughtering civilians.

But hey, on the bright side, many of those at risk might be brown or black or trans or women or migrants or...or...or...

Your need, again, for your last paragraph sums you up, unfortunately.

[Goku]

Search & Destroy, on 03 January 2024 - 09:53 AM, said:

Probably not the busiest week of the year with flu admissions for elderly people at yearly highs

Aiming for maximum impact/avoidable deaths

The folk that get their knickers in a twist over Gaza will be all for this of course

Collateral damage will be ok on this occasion

So you care about old white people with the flu but not brown children being eviscerated. Good to know where you stand.

What S&D is doing is called Concern Trolling, for those of you at home.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Valley Blues, on 03 January 2024 - 12:54 PM, said:

Your need, again, for your last paragraph sums you up, unfortunately.

And your pursuit of petty personal snipes rather than addressing the point ditto...

This post has been edited by The Earl of Chesterfield: 03 January 2024 - 01:18 PM

[Valley Blues]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 03 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

And your pursuit of petty personal snipes rather than addressing the point ditto...

You felt the need to contribute.

What have you offered this thread?

[Search & Destroy]

Goku, on 03 January 2024 - 01:00 PM, said:

So you care about old white people with the flu but not brown children being eviscerated. Good to know where you stand.

What S&D is doing is called Concern Trolling, for those of you at home.

Thought as much, Unions causing collateral deaths acceptable


Thanks for confirming what we already knew

[calvin plummers socks]

Valley Blues, on 03 January 2024 - 01:27 PM, said:

You felt the need to contribute.

What have you offered this thread?

About 13,000 x more than you?

[Search & Destroy]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 03 January 2024 - 12:36 PM, said:

So the bloke who didn't give a flying fornication over spiralling Covid deaths, those resulting from austerity driven NHS shortcomings or Boris the Liar calling for the elderly to be somehow sacrificed is now wringing his hands about democratic strikes?

And yeah, some of the most dedicated professionals in the world taking regrettable action equates exactly with the IDF indescriminately slaughtering civilians.

But hey, on the bright side, many of those at risk might be brown or black or trans or women or migrants or...or...or...

Regrettable action?

Just like Israel then

[Valley Blues]

calvin plummers socks, on 03 January 2024 - 01:35 PM, said:

About 13,000 x more than you?

And here’s the other one.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Valley Blues, on 03 January 2024 - 01:27 PM, said:

You felt the need to contribute.

What have you offered this thread?

I addressed the issue.

The doctor's strike.

Alongside the Farage fanboy's performative hypocrisy, of course.

Whilst you've chosen to once again peddle pointless personal jibes instead.

So please, at least pretend to discuss the topic and save your all too predictable sneers for the PM facility...

[Valley Blues]

Anyway, after the attempted derailment of the thread by the usuals, back on topic.

It was interesting that the BMA are stating they are not valued, reflected in their pay, and NHS bosses say things are going to be hit hard this week as they are already depleted due to high numbers of staff off sick before the strikes.

NHS staff get six months full pay sickness leave. SIX MONTHS FULL PAY.
No wonder there’s a problem with sickness within the NHS.

They can do private work whilst off and being paid maternity leave. Claiming maternity leave from the NHS and working at a higher rate in the private sector.
It beggars belief.

Would a compromise be to award the pay rise but cut the sickness leave to something actually financially viable, stop the luxury of the private work on maternity leave and put a substantial period they have to dedicate their time to the NHS after qualifying?

I get the issue on pay, we all want more but the sickness leave entitlement in itself is worth thousands a year, surely?

[Search & Destroy]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 03 January 2024 - 01:55 PM, said:

I addressed the issue.

The doctor's strike.

Alongside the Farage fanboy's performative hypocrisy, of course.

Whilst you've chosen to once again peddle pointless personal jibes instead.

So please, at least pretend to discuss the topic and save your all too predictable sneers for the PM facility...

Hypocrisy?


I thought I’d given a perfect example of yours


Union led collateral damage ok

Israeli not ok

[isleaiw1]

Valley Blues, on 03 January 2024 - 02:09 PM, said:

Anyway, after the attempted derailment of the thread by the usuals, back on topic.

It was interesting that the BMA are stating they are not valued, reflected in their pay, and NHS bosses say things are going to be hit hard this week as they are already depleted due to high numbers of staff off sick before the strikes.

NHS staff get six months full pay sickness leave. SIX MONTHS FULL PAY.
No wonder there’s a problem with sickness within the NHS.

They can do private work whilst off and being paid maternity leave. Claiming maternity leave from the NHS and working at a higher rate in the private sector.
It beggars belief.

Would a compromise be to award the pay rise but cut the sickness leave to something actually financially viable, stop the luxury of the private work on maternity leave and put a substantial period they have to dedicate their time to the NHS after qualifying?

I get the issue on pay, we all want more but the sickness leave entitlement in itself is worth thousands a year, surely?

I get (more than) six months sick leave. They dont have to use it. Although I do remember someone who worked for the DHSS once saying to me he had another x days of leave left for that year - 2 days holiday and 6 days sick leave to use

Working for other orgs should require approval and only when it doesnt impact your day job.

And most orgs require you to pay back of your training costs if you leave within 12 months of qualification, I assume the NHS is the same (although when does qualification occur?)

We need more doctors if we are going to have better treatments and an ageing population - but the number seems to be stable or declining. That needs to change - you cant even get in privately these days as the docs are too busy. Maybe we need more medical schools and more training and make the entry requirements a bit lower to encourage more people to want to do it...

[isleaiw1]

The tube is also on strike next week, now that would be an interesting discussion....
Save me a few quid, I'll either not go in or I'll walk between places in London, its often not that hard. Feel sorry for the low paid on frontline jobs who cant wor from home and have to be there at a set time... they will be most affected. Like nurses. Care workers. Shop workers. on less than half what a tube driver gets....