Bob's Board: New Contracts - Bob's Board

Jump to content

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

New Contracts Rate Topic: -----

#21 Guest_Dema Reborn_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 12 February 2016 - 11:58 PM

View PostMiddle East, on 12 February 2016 - 11:32 PM, said:

Just teasing Dema!

As I said fair play to her but unfortunately public sector workers (nurses aside) rarely get any public support and the government know this, know it won't affect votes and thereby get free reign to s..t all over us!

As the junior doctors have just found out....


I know you are, but the scary thing if the whole lot gets privatised could you fund cancer treatment, hip or knee replacements etc these cost thousands of pounds and i have had done and you have thought you have paid for this through national insurance, these tories are evil and need stopping now....
2

#22 User is offline   trickytrevsfanclub 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,803
  • Joined: 20-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbold

Posted 13 February 2016 - 05:09 PM

Having not really read anything about this can anyone sum up briefly what these new contracts are and why they are bad for the junior doctors. Ta.

View PostDema Reborn, on 12 February 2016 - 11:58 PM, said:

I know you are, but the scary thing if the whole lot gets privatised could you fund cancer treatment, hip or knee replacements etc these cost thousands of pounds and i have had done and you have thought you have paid for this through national insurance, these tories are evil and need stopping now....

And your evidence of the move to privatise the whole thing is? Just interested as as I say don't really know a lot about it.

This post has been edited by trickytrevsfanclub: 13 February 2016 - 05:10 PM

0

#23 Guest_Dema Reborn_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 13 February 2016 - 09:24 PM

View Posttrickytrevsfanclub, on 13 February 2016 - 05:09 PM, said:

Having not really read anything about this can anyone sum up briefly what these new contracts are and why they are bad for the junior doctors. Ta.


And your evidence of the move to privatise the whole thing is? Just interested as as I say don't really know a lot about it.


Some things have already gone private and it is what the Tories do.....
0

#24 User is offline   trickytrevsfanclub 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,803
  • Joined: 20-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbold

Posted 14 February 2016 - 12:53 AM

View PostDema Reborn, on 13 February 2016 - 09:24 PM, said:

Some things have already gone private and it is what the Tories do.....

What things?

Just had a bit of a read. Am I right in thinking that the issue is they won't be getting paid more for working weekends? I work many weekends as do millions of other people for no extra pay, can't see what the issue is there.
It also seems to be about moving the NHS towards a 24/7 service. Again can't see much wrong with that either. Also can't see how that fits in with this privatisation malarkey you're on about.
It would also appear that only around 1% of Drs will earn less and these are the ones that probably work far too many hours anyway and won't be working as many hours under the new contracts. There's also an 11% pay rise in there as well. So far can't see a major problem. This is all from the BBC website.
From this I'm struggling to have any sympathy so if anyone can point out the downsides for them other than the it's the Tories, they're scum therefore it must be bad argument, it would help me understand the issue more. Ta

This post has been edited by trickytrevsfanclub: 14 February 2016 - 01:08 AM

0

#25 User is offline   Search & Destroy 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members with edit own post
  • Posts: 14,947
  • Joined: 05-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Korea

Posted 14 February 2016 - 11:33 PM

View Posttrickytrevsfanclub, on 14 February 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

What things?

Just had a bit of a read. Am I right in thinking that the issue is they won't be getting paid more for working weekends? I work many weekends as do millions of other people for no extra pay, can't see what the issue is there.
It also seems to be about moving the NHS towards a 24/7 service. Again can't see much wrong with that either. Also can't see how that fits in with this privatisation malarkey you're on about.
It would also appear that only around 1% of Drs will earn less and these are the ones that probably work far too many hours anyway and won't be working as many hours under the new contracts. There's also an 11% pay rise in there as well. So far can't see a major problem. This is all from the BBC website.
From this I'm struggling to have any sympathy so if anyone can point out the downsides for them other than the it's the Tories, they're scum therefore it must be bad argument, it would help me understand the issue more. Ta



It's all about patients safety.

Apparently if they get paid more for Saturday's, patients are safer.
JRID
-1

#26 User is offline   trickytrevsfanclub 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,803
  • Joined: 20-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbold

Posted 15 February 2016 - 06:59 PM

Search and Destroy said:

1455492834[/url]' post='1186559']
It's all about patients safety.

Apparently if they get paid more for Saturday's, patients are safer.


Hmm seems that way to mePosted Image. Still waiting for someone to explain why these new contracts are badPosted Image
0

#27 User is offline   Bonnyman 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19,221
  • Joined: 23-September 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brockwell

Posted 15 February 2016 - 07:50 PM

View Posttrickytrevsfanclub, on 15 February 2016 - 06:59 PM, said:

Hmm seems that way to mePosted Image. Still waiting for someone to explain why these new contracts are badPosted Image

I thought you were a copper trev,imagine your overtime being taken away :windup ...anyway








The junior doctor contract governs the pay and conditions of work from doctors’ foundation year to registrar level. All doctors who are not consultants or fully qualified GPs are considered ‘junior’ doctors. This contract was scheduled for renegotiation, but the British Medical Association (BMA) – the largest representative body of doctors – walked away because the offer on the table was not fair to doctors and not safe for patients.

The government’s initial response was brazen, and threatened to impose the new terms without consultation – a position it has had to water down since the BMA decided to ballot its members for strike action. Here’s why the BMA has done so the first time in 40 years:

1. An NHS in crisis: overworked and undervalued.

Britain’s doctors have had enough. In a stretched and underfunded health system which doesn’t train enough doctors and nurses to meet its own needs – or invest in the infrastructure needed for new hospitals and facilities unless a private contractor is taking a nice slice of the pie – the solution seems to have been ‘work harder and take up the slack’. According to the Royal College of Physicians, the NHS “remains reliant on doctors working longer than their contracted hours…the amount of ‘goodwill work’ is increasing year-on-year.”

Trusts struggling to pay their tithes to the private owners of NHS hospital buildings have responded by reducing staff salaries, meaning fewer doctors and nurses are covering more patients and expected to do so for free. The situation has reached crisis point and doctors are experiencing enormous burnout, with more doctors applying to live abroad every year. Into this context came the new contract.

2. It’s not about the money.

The ‘offer’ of the new contract has been condemned first and foremost as fundamentally unsafe. Just as with the recent tube strike, the new contract threatens to force doctors to work longer and later with fewer safeguards.

The BMA approached negotiations acknowledging financial limitations but determined to improve safety: it wanted no doctor to work more than 72 hours in a week; no more than four nights in a week on-call; a rest day either side of nights before starting back on day shifts; and facilities to sleep-in for those who otherwise make a dangerous long drive home.

The government was unwilling to accept these terms, and furthermore wanted to reduce breaks to just one 30 minute break in a ten hour on-call shift. As a recent viral video asked, could you save a life if you’d been up all night?



3. But it is, also, about the money.

The new contract would mean a 15-40% pay-cut depending on your specialism, with GPs and emergency care doctors being some of the hardest hit. Let that sink in.

With wages starting beneath the national median and decreasing yearly like all public sector pay, and out of pocket expenditure for licensing, exams and indemnities, junior doctors earn significantly less than the tabloids would have you believe. Their reports often use a cunning sleight of hand: taking the figures for the pay of those doctors doing the most private work – GPs who run a private practice and some consultants who run private clinics – and presenting the data as proof of ‘greedy’ public sector workers.

There are two ways doctors’ starting wages increase: extra pay for unsociable hours, and pay advancement as you progress through the ranks of seniority and responsibility. Both of these are under threat in the new contract.

The government has suggested that working from 7am until 10pm Monday to Saturday are sociable hours – and therefore should not be paid extra – which is funny considering MPs just reduced their own working hours and increased their own pay. As for pay progression with seniority, no actual offer was made.

4. The changes hit women hardest.

The contract changes penalise those who take time out to start a family and those who work part-time – overwhelmingly affecting women in both cases. Additionally there are concerns that changes to breaks will make work more dangerous for pregnant women. As noted above GPs will be amongst those taking the largest wage cut, one of the few specialisms with more women than men.

5. No confidence in Jeremy Hunt.

More than 200k people signed the petition to debate a vote of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt. He wrongly and infamously implied that doctors don’t work at night or weekends. After blaming the A&E crisis last winter on people attending inappropriately (rather than, say, the reduction of roughly 13k hospital beds over the last five years), Mr Hunt felt it was appropriate to take his own children to A&E rather than wait for an appointment like, you know, the rest of us commoners.

But most of all:

6. This was an imposition, not a negotiation.

Hunt and the government have shown a complete disdain for even the barest semblance of actual negotiation. When the BMA walked away from negotiations a year ago, it wasn’t as a strategy to get better terms, it was because the negotiations were a farce. It has taken the threat of industrial action for a pathetic attempt at reconciliation to come from the Department of Health, full of vague, unconvincing rhetoric. It is too little, too late. No fruitful discussions can continue with Hunt as health secretary. We have no reason to believe in his word or his competence.

We deserve more. Doctors do not take strike action lightly. Whilst we will always maintain emergency and essential services, the BMA will be balloting its members to strike against the contract in the next month. We hope to see you on the picket lines.


a bit more detailed than brain dead search and destroys response.
ITS NOT THE WINNING,ITS THE TAKING APART
2

#28 User is offline   trickytrevsfanclub 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,803
  • Joined: 20-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbold

Posted 15 February 2016 - 09:49 PM

Firstly Overtime, what overtime?
Secondly all very interesting but where is that copied and pasted from? Like everything there's 2 sides to every story and depending on what you read by which side there are 2 completely different stories. One side says pay rise, the other says cut. One side says more hours the other says less. I'm still none the wiser as to what this is all aboutPosted Image

0

#29 User is offline   Bonnyman 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19,221
  • Joined: 23-September 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brockwell

Posted 16 February 2016 - 08:19 AM

Having been involved in several industrial disputes and losing several thousands of pounds fighting to save conditions of service for future employees,I can say safely say that change is brought about to save money at our expense ,when the government prune the tree its the roots they clip first.
ITS NOT THE WINNING,ITS THE TAKING APART
0

#30 User is offline   Goku 

  • Super Saiyan and saviour of the universe
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 35,016
  • Joined: 10-August 07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 February 2016 - 10:11 AM

Which makes you wonder why we don't do something about it really, doesn't it.
0

#31 User is offline   Misnomer 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8,001
  • Joined: 30-August 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brampton

Posted 16 February 2016 - 11:52 AM

View Posttrickytrevsfanclub, on 15 February 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

Firstly Overtime, what overtime?
Secondly all very interesting but where is that copied and pasted from? Like everything there's 2 sides to every story and depending on what you read by which side there are 2 completely different stories. One side says pay rise, the other says cut. One side says more hours the other says less. I'm still none the wiser as to what this is all aboutPosted Image


Hilarious! It was only last summer that a report highlighted the £1 billion rise in police overtime pay (last three years, roughly £300 million a year) and the £6 million rise over the last year!

Some coppers pulling in circa £70k a year; no wonder you rejected the Winsor recommendations....
0

#32 User is offline   calvin plummers socks 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 18,425
  • Joined: 29-April 10

Posted 16 February 2016 - 01:38 PM

View Posttrickytrevsfanclub, on 15 February 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

Firstly Overtime, what overtime?
Secondly all very interesting but where is that copied and pasted from? Like everything there's 2 sides to every story and depending on what you read by which side there are 2 completely different stories. One side says pay rise, the other says cut. One side says more hours the other says less. I'm still none the wiser as to what this is all aboutPosted Image


http://www.dailymail...d-overtime.html
0

#33 User is offline   firedodger 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,984
  • Joined: 14-May 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brampton

Posted 17 February 2016 - 10:29 AM

View PostBonnyman, on 16 February 2016 - 08:19 AM, said:

Having been involved in several industrial disputes and losing several thousands of pounds fighting to save conditions of service for future employees,I can say safely say that change is brought about to save money at our expense ,when the government prune the tree its the roots they clip first.

Meanwhile aren't MPs in for another pay rise soon? Further boosting their final salary pension pot and costing the taxpayers a bit more.
If you do what you always do, you'll get what you always get.
0

#34 User is offline   trickytrevsfanclub 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,803
  • Joined: 20-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbold

Posted 17 February 2016 - 10:37 AM

Misnomer said:

1455623534[/url]' post='1186922']
Hilarious! It was only last summer that a report highlighted the £1 billion rise in police overtime pay (last three years, roughly £300 million a year) and the £6 million rise over the last year!

Some coppers pulling in circa £70k a year; no wonder you rejected the Winsor recommendations....


I don't get any of it. I suspect most of that is used to cover protests and those stupid operations like Midland and the press one. Complete waste of public money.

calvin plummers socks said:

1455629891[/url]' post='1186938']
http://www.dailymail...d-overtime.html


That lot are complete idiots and need sacking.
0

#35 User is offline   Johnnyspireite7 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15,535
  • Joined: 20-August 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halfway from the Gutter to the Stars
  • Interests:Town, Formula 1, England & Yorkshire Cricket.

Posted 17 February 2016 - 12:44 PM

View Postfiredodger, on 17 February 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

Meanwhile aren't MPs in for another pay rise soon? Further boosting their final salary pension pot and costing the taxpayers a bit more.

Didn't they reject the last one, from memory?
"Do you think I'm here for your amusement" & good riddance to bad rubbish
0

#36 User is offline   Bonnyman 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19,221
  • Joined: 23-September 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brockwell

Posted 17 February 2016 - 12:50 PM

No they left it in the hands of an independent review board who by some strange coincidence voted in favour of a double figure percentage pay increase.
ITS NOT THE WINNING,ITS THE TAKING APART
0

#37 User is offline   Andy Spireite 

  • First Team Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,793
  • Joined: 30-June 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brampton
  • Interests:Er..............Town!

Posted 17 February 2016 - 12:52 PM

View PostJohnnyspireite7, on 17 February 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Didn't they reject the last one, from memory?


I don't believe they can, the pay level is set by an independent body and it just happens. I think some said they'd give it to charity when they were paid it but whether they really did or not is another thing.

Edit: A quick google search suggests most didn't follow through on their promises, surprise surprise

http://www.telegraph...to-charity.html

This post has been edited by Andy Spireite: 17 February 2016 - 12:54 PM

0

#38 User is offline   firedodger 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,984
  • Joined: 14-May 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brampton

Posted 17 February 2016 - 09:30 PM

View PostJohnnyspireite7, on 17 February 2016 - 12:44 PM, said:

Didn't they reject the last one, from memory?

I suspect the rejection was all for show, knowing full well they would get it anyway.
I read somewhere that Cameron qualifies for his MPs pension this year having served 14 years in the house.
If you do what you always do, you'll get what you always get.
0

#39 User is offline   Ernie Ernie Ernie 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30,467
  • Joined: 06-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 February 2016 - 09:36 PM

View PostBonnyman, on 17 February 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

No they left it in the hands of an independent review board who by some strange coincidence voted in favour of a double figure percentage pay increase.



and if NHS staff, council staff, firefighters etc had their pay done by an independent review board they would also be offered large pay rises. The difference would be the government would say there wasn't enough money in the kitty to pay it, so here's your 1% and your increased national insurance contributions, reduced pensions etc
1

#40 User is offline   Wooden Spoon 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 42,686
  • Joined: 07-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 February 2016 - 11:10 AM

fishini said:

1455217837[/url]' post='1185150']
Thoughts on the Junior Doctors having new contracts forced on them?


Right wing dictatorship
A new hope.
0

Share this topic:


  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users