Doctor's strike.

[Webbo]

And the way that Hunt and the rest of the Tories are choosing to deal with the NHS (as they have in the past) isn't politically motivated?

 

There are pretty big ideological differences on both sides.

In what way? They're giving more money to the NHS and trying to spend that money in the most efficient way. Why is that a bad thing?

[Rincewind]

[leicsmac]

In what way? They're giving more money to the NHS and trying to spend that money in the most efficient way. Why is that a bad thing?

 

Because it seems that the drive for this efficiency has resulted in a loss of confidence and subsequent brain-drain regarding skilled junior personnel in a way rarely seen before. When was the last time junior doctors took even threatened this extreme a measure?

 

I totally agree that there needs to be accountability for how taxpayers money is spent, but speaking personally I'm far more concerned about other areas of Government spending that have efficiency issues.

 

Also...

 

 

Most will be better off.

 

Citation really, really needed.

[Webbo]

 

 

 

 

Citation really, really needed.

I'm on a tablet so I can't link atm. It's the govt claim, is there any point putting it up if it's just going to be dismissed as lies?

 

Doctors have been moving abroad for years. They love the NHS so much that they can't wait to move to a foreign private health care system.

[Strokes]

All of a sudden ken can find low skilled jobs at a decent rate

[Rincewind]

In london

[Strokes]

In london

you are killing me Ken.

[Rincewind]

That's not hypothetical, that's written into the contract.

I mean "more" in the sense of an increased amount of antisocial hours, not "more antisocial than the hours we work now".

I reiterate at this point that I feel we doctors at this point need to take a breath and reassess the evidence before taking further strikes; if the only remaining issue is truly Saturday pay, I have no intention of voting for strikes for that alone.

That is how I see  it which is why I said in my original post that I would be interested in junior doctors POV rather than repeat what jeremy Hunt has said. Unless I cram seven years of med school into one night I do not feel I am qualified to see both points of view.

Obviously the doctors need to study the contract to ensure that the deal is fair and will not have any adverse affect on patient care.

[Alf Bentley]

If you are going to accuse me of dishonestly Alf then at least provide a reason why, you can throw that accusation around but my opinion on this is formed by what I've seen and read; quoting numbers means little, the doctors seem to act on advice of the BMA as they are entitled to, you are starting to sound like one of the Corbynistas when you talk about smears and the Murdoch press, we heard the same nonsense 6 months ago, it wasn't that Miliband was totally shit that didn't get him elected, it was the smears and lies of the Murdoch press that's failed to recognise the wonderful qualities and statesmanlike statue of Ed.

You had absolutely no problem smearing Farage and UKIP last year, you had no problem smearing the out campaign just last week resorting to an argument trying to claim they were talking about nig nogs etc when no one had mentioned anything like that tone of language, The Times has a right to report the truth, truth is never smear.

 

 

Happy to oblige re. dishonesty:

- It's a fact that most racists will support the "Out" campaign in the EU referendum, but it would be dishonest of me to refer to it as a campaign "backed by racists" and to concentrate on Far Right, or even UKIP figures involved.

- It's a fact that the SWP and other hard left militants will involve themselves in any strike going, but it is dishonest of you to refer to the doctors' strike as "backed by militants" and to concentrate on those militants, who are untypical of those involved.

 

It's also dishonest of you to raise my "nig nogs" comment again. I responded to you before and explained my point: that the terminology changes, but attitudes don't - "nig nogs / illegal immigrants" in the 70s/80s; "Pakis / bogus asylum seekers" in the 90s/2000s; "migrant rapists / Muslim extremists" now (which is not to deny the serious issues involved). I presume you have raised that again now as you see some mileage for smearing and distortion?

 

On a more trivial note, the other day you ridiculed Corbyn for speaking at an election launch for elections that weren't happening. This was completely untrue, as I pointed out. I can only imagine the scorn that you'd have heaped on someone like Ken if he had posted blatant lies without checking them.

 

It is also dishonest of you to keep slyly commenting about the doctors' dispute "not being about money" - clearly implying that they're just greedy bastards after more cash and that they are faking their concerns about long shifts and patient safety....as if there's anything wrong with wanting a decent pay deal and compensation for weekend working, anyway.

 

I'm not sure what you're referring to re. Farage and Miliband. I was annoyed by Farage's "AIDS tourist" comments during the election debate (mud-slinging, Matt-style) but otherwise am quite glad that we have UKIP as a magnet for mild xenophobes, grumbly malcontents, saloon bar reactionaries, aging curtain-twitchers and people pissed off with failing, out-of-touch mainstream parties. Rather UKIP than the BNP or similar. I've never thought that Miliband's defeat was caused by the Murdoch press - I've said in the past that the press probably has less influence now than ever. Well before the election, I was criticising Labour's failure to tackle the big Tory lie that Labour over-spending caused the global crash - and Miliband's preference for policy gimmicks over an alternative vision to present to the electorate. I did criticise the media focus on the potential Lab/SNP coalition, but that was all the media, including the BBC, and just one factor.

 

Sidetrack: a film recommendation - "The Big Short" (all about different blokes gambling on the 2007-2008 financial crash before it broke in the US). Saw it the other day - very good, and right up your street, I'd have thought. 

 

That's enough - and more response than you offered to my points on the health dispute. You prefer smears, distortion and dishonest debate far too often, Matt. It's a shame, as you're well capable of good posts and arguing your corner honestly. I've often repped posts of yours in the past for that reason (reciprocated, I know).

 

Anyway, there's far too much smearing and dishonest propaganda in these politics threads recently - and I've far too much serious "real life stuff" to focus on. So, I'll concentrate on football and comedy threads for an extended period.

 

Bryn is clearly much better informed than any of us about the doctors' dispute, anyway.

[Thracian]

I certainly don't have a utopian view of the NHS. After 14 months of frustration and NHS mismanagement, I'm finally close (I think) to getting a proper explanation of why my mother died suddenly in hospital. My wife has lost most of the sight in one eye due to delay and complacency by NHS and private GP practice alike. I've spent 14 months of stressful frustration dealing with 15+ different health and social care agencies about my father's ongoing decline - partly due to their lack of resources, but partly due to mismanagement, an over-attention to systems and procedures, and a lack of common sense, as far as I can tell. In contrast, my own medical issues have been handled quite efficiently so far.

 

All sorts of arguments can be made about the NHS and the doctors' strike, but I'm afraid your post is the biggest pile of unsupported, spittle-flecked garbage I've ever read. It is honestly a candidate for the worst post I've read in 7+ years on FoxesTalk.

 

Some quick questions:

- If "you can't overstate labour activism in the NHS", how come the last junior doctors' strike was in 1975?

- If it's just Corbynites with their own agenda, how come 98% of junior doctors voted for the strike? Are they really that dim, that brainwashed by Corbyn - when the rest of the nation isn't?

- If "the service is getting worse and worse", shouldn't this Govt have done something about it over the past 6 years? 

- You quote £100k+ salaries for GPs, but how much do junior doctors earn?

- If high salaries for GPs in private practice can be used to justify changes in pay & conditions for NHS junior doctors, can high salaries at arms companies be used to justify changes to the pay & conditions of squaddies?

- You say that junior doctors "don't want to accept the responsibilities for which they are employed". So how many hours per week do these lazy sods work? 10? 15? I bet they never work overtime, eh? What are their absenteeism rates?

- Is the BMA a "Labour-backing trade union"? It's not even affiliated to the TUC, never mind the Labour Party, is it?

- You link to the site of the "International Marxist Tendency" as evidence of the "ideology" behind the strike....Does that mean that I could link to the BNP as evidence of the ideology behind Tory Eurosceptics? 

 

You seem to see junior doctors as idlers and Marxist radicals inspired or brainwashed by Corbyn and hell-bent on conflict. I thought they were mostly from conventional backgrounds and motivated by vocation or career - and were striking for the first time in 40 years.

 

I'm more concerned about Leicester market being taken over by the Monster Raving Loony Party, led by a bonkers would-be Enoch Powell. 

 

Seriously, I really miss MooseBreath. He was a right-winger able to argue a decent case - something now sorely missing (Webbo & MattP have their good moments, but I see you've repped Thracian's post, Matt?! WTF?!).

I might stick to football and comedy threads in future, the standard in here is getting so low. Hats off, Thracian, that's some of the most worthless garbage I've ever read! 

It's a great pity I can't link you into the source of my views on the subject.

You'd be staggered by their officially recognised level of influence in the medical profession and how rabidly Leftist they are - and quite openly - along with so many of their friends and colleagues.

To read the constant moaning of so many well-paid people is dispiriting.

But I'm not about to get on a hobby horse about the health service.

There's so much wrong now that I'd never stop.

The NHS shouldn't be about politics at all but about patients and the people who deal with them.

But that's not how it seems at the moment.

And if you believe otherwise it's certainly not the message I've been getting from the medical professionals themselves.

However "conventional" their background, the dominant flag is a vivid shade of red that's blowing pretty vigorously in the current wind. Perhaps I'm connected to the wrong medics.

[Bryn]

I've got literally no idea what Thracian is trying to say so I'm not sure how to respond.

[Rincewind]

I've got literally no idea what Thracian is trying to say so I'm not sure how to respond.

Surprised at that.

[leicsmac]

I've got literally no idea what Thracian is trying to say so I'm not sure how to respond.

Basically, the NHS is full of commies that value pushing their political agenda over helping patients and saving lives, despite having spent years of effort and training to do exactly that.

So, you know...slander.

[MC Prussian]

Basically, the NHS is full of commies that value pushing their political agenda over helping patients and saving lives, despite having spent years of effort and training to do exactly that.

So, you know...slander.

 

Figure me this: If Thracian should ever need medical attention, can you imagine what he'd ask his doctor or nurse on the very first day?

 

"Sir/madam, are you a Socialist? Do you vote Labour or Communist? If so, you're absolutely not going to lay hands on me!"

[Nick]

I can understand Thracians desire to only have Tory men lay their hands on him. We all have our preferences, after all.

Figure me this: If Thracian should ever need medical attention, can you imagine what he'd ask his doctor or nurse on the very first day?

 

"Sir/madam, are you a Socialist? Do you vote Labour or Communist? If so, you're absolutely not going to lay hands on me!"

[Jon the Hat]

It makes complete sense to do away with this higher pay at weekends contract we have now.  This is the only way I can think of to improve staffing at weekends.  The problem of course isn't likely to be doctors refusing to work weekends, it will be managers trying to provide services at lower costs who roster when they have to pay less.  If you remove that differential then the weekend becomes the same marginal cost, and you can get much better utilisation of your facilities.  This doesn't stop at doctors, but also other clinical staff - how much usage do we get out of the vastly expensive MRI. CAT etc equipment if you are only using it during the week in working hours?

 

if you assume a flat 10 hour day, 5 days a week then you are using your facility for 30% of the time.  If you add Sat & Sunday that increases to 42% of the time - a 40% increase in utilisation.  Very rough figures of course, but even if you can achieve half that improvement, you can deliver a lot more services from the same hospital and equipment.  This would also drive demand for more medical and non medical staff of course, but I think the BMA line that the government is trying to do 24/7 NHS without spending more is nonsense anyway, they just don't see why they should pay more for the same work on a weekend, to professionals who have chosen a career which routinely involves shift work.

[Bryn]

I posted this on another forum and it's the most articulate I've managed to be in my assessment of the situation so I'll post here.

 

I'm a BMA member but not a part of the BMA's organisation and my only input into the course of action taken by the BMA has been my vote for strike action last year. These views are my own.

 

Firstly, bear in mind we voted to take strike action last year before ANY progress was made. At that point negotiations were indefinitely suspended because the Government wanted almost all the points to be non-negotiable. What kind of negotiation is that?

I do think the patient safety card has been a tad overplayed. Not fabricated, but overplayed. There are wider issues than that. The problem is we're not really subject to the same judgement as other industries. I think most of us would find it harder to reconcile ourselves to strike action if patient safety wasn't a factor. It's not the only one though and I think there the BMA is guilty of a bit of spin. We are up against the weight of the UK Government and the Murdoch media empire though so we have to play some of the cards in our hand if we want to achieve what we want, and we do genuinely believe that for the service to best serve patients it requires an adequate motivated and protected workforce.

We've been subject to some despicable slander in the media and from the Government in the last few years. Working conditions not just for junior doctors but other members of NHS staff have been appalling for years, it's really only still functioning because we go above and beyond every single day and we still have to read shite in the papers about how we're lazy and workshy.

You have to understand the baseline we're coming from. We already work a massive amount of antisocial hours. I work every other weekend, I work 7 nights in a row at times. Our contract is structured such that a huge amount of our pay comes from these antisocial hours, which are not something we can opt in and out of. The combination of reduced rate for those hours, reduced hours which count as antisocial and cutting our overall hours adds up to a MASSIVE pay cut. We're NOT asking for MORE money, we're NOT asking for LESS antisocial hours. We all accept that that's an inevitable part of our job.

The Government want a 7/7 service. Fine. So do we. I'd love to do my weekends with a full roster of staff (not just doctors but everything that goes with it. What's the point in having 12 doctors in ED on a Saturday if we can't discharge patients to the community because the services aren't available?). The public wants 7/7 access to their GP (irrelevant to our contract) and to specialist clinics (irrelevant to our contract). Emergency care is already well staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you want the rest to be the same, we need MORE STAFF. You cannot stretch what is there any thinner without compromising care for the ENTIRE WEEK.

Couple that with the negligent and wilful misinterpretation of the evidence available and the total irrelevance of our contract to what the Goverment wants to achieve and the true intention of the Government is clear; to beat us down further as part of the insidious attempt to dismantle our public health service. There is no doubt in our minds that that is the Government's mission and it would be a lie to say that political motivation directly related to the care patients receive wasn't a factor in striking.

Our contract has been shite for years. We're adequately paid but we work ridiculous hours, we have no safeguards to stop us doing so. We should have been in a position to demand a better contract and a better deal for ourselves and our patients but as it stands we're battling to protect the status quo.

Now onto the proposed contract. AS A CONSEQUENCE of our strike action and protests, the contract currently on offer has taken reasonable shape. It STILL amounts to a massive paycut, for the aforementioned, and still does not guarantee a safe 7/7 service, but there are significant improvements. I personally do not advocate further strike action over Saturday pay in isolation but I do think it's scandalous we're having to take that on the chin.


The bottom line is, this contract is a paycut, it does not significantly improve our working life, it makes no economic sense to further incentivise the brain drain of our finest doctors abroad if you want a fully staffed, effective, 7 day a week NHS service. We will vote with our feet, life is too short to take this punishment lying down.

[Nick]

I posted this on another forum and it's the most articulate I've managed to be in my assessment of the situation so I'll post here.

 

I'm a BMA member but not a part of the BMA's organisation and my only input into the course of action taken by the BMA has been my vote for strike action last year. These views are my own.

 

Firstly, bear in mind we voted to take strike action last year before ANY progress was made. At that point negotiations were indefinitely suspended because the Government wanted almost all the points to be non-negotiable. What kind of negotiation is that?

I do think the patient safety card has been a tad overplayed. Not fabricated, but overplayed. There are wider issues than that. The problem is we're not really subject to the same judgement as other industries. I think most of us would find it harder to reconcile ourselves to strike action if patient safety wasn't a factor. It's not the only one though and I think there the BMA is guilty of a bit of spin. We are up against the weight of the UK Government and the Murdoch media empire though so we have to play some of the cards in our hand if we want to achieve what we want, and we do genuinely believe that for the service to best serve patients it requires an adequate motivated and protected workforce.

We've been subject to some despicable slander in the media and from the Government in the last few years. Working conditions not just for junior doctors but other members of NHS staff have been appalling for years, it's really only still functioning because we go above and beyond every single day and we still have to read shite in the papers about how we're lazy and workshy.

You have to understand the baseline we're coming from. We already work a massive amount of antisocial hours. I work every other weekend, I work 7 nights in a row at times. Our contract is structured such that a huge amount of our pay comes from these antisocial hours, which are not something we can opt in and out of. The combination of reduced rate for those hours, reduced hours which count as antisocial and cutting our overall hours adds up to a MASSIVE pay cut. We're NOT asking for MORE money, we're NOT asking for LESS antisocial hours. We all accept that that's an inevitable part of our job.

The Government want a 7/7 service. Fine. So do we. I'd love to do my weekends with a full roster of staff (not just doctors but everything that goes with it. What's the point in having 12 doctors in ED on a Saturday if we can't discharge patients to the community because the services aren't available?). The public wants 7/7 access to their GP (irrelevant to our contract) and to specialist clinics (irrelevant to our contract). Emergency care is already well staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you want the rest to be the same, we need MORE STAFF. You cannot stretch what is there any thinner without compromising care for the ENTIRE WEEK.

Couple that with the negligent and wilful misinterpretation of the evidence available and the total irrelevance of our contract to what the Goverment wants to achieve and the true intention of the Government is clear; to beat us down further as part of the insidious attempt to dismantle our public health service. There is no doubt in our minds that that is the Government's mission and it would be a lie to say that political motivation directly related to the care patients receive wasn't a factor in striking.

Our contract has been shite for years. We're adequately paid but we work ridiculous hours, we have no safeguards to stop us doing so. We should have been in a position to demand a better contract and a better deal for ourselves and our patients but as it stands we're battling to protect the status quo.

Now onto the proposed contract. AS A CONSEQUENCE of our strike action and protests, the contract currently on offer has taken reasonable shape. It STILL amounts to a massive paycut, for the aforementioned, and still does not guarantee a safe 7/7 service, but there are significant improvements. I personally do not advocate further strike action over Saturday pay in isolation but I do think it's scandalous we're having to take that on the chin.

The bottom line is, this contract is a paycut, it does not significantly improve our working life, it makes no economic sense to further incentivise the brain drain of our finest doctors abroad if you want a fully staffed, effective, 7 day a week NHS service. We will vote with our feet, life is too short to take this punishment lying down.

 

Great post.

[Charl91]

 

We've been subject to some despicable slander in the media and from the Government in the last few years. Working conditions not just for junior doctors but other members of NHS staff have been appalling for years, it's really only still functioning because we go above and beyond every single day and we still have to read shite in the papers about how we're lazy and workshy.

You have to understand the baseline we're coming from. We already work a massive amount of antisocial hours. I work every other weekend, I work 7 nights in a row at times. Our contract is structured such that a huge amount of our pay comes from these antisocial hours, which are not something we can opt in and out of. The combination of reduced rate for those hours, reduced hours which count as antisocial and cutting our overall hours adds up to a MASSIVE pay cut. We're NOT asking for MORE money, we're NOT asking for LESS antisocial hours. We all accept that that's an inevitable part of our job.

 

 

 

As a Teacher who up until last Saturday (half term; I get a weekend off, hooray) worked a minimum of 8 hours a day for 6 weeks straight (and averages about 70 hours a week) this really struck home. 

 

When you know how much effort, and how many hours you put into your job, it's infuriating to be labelled as lazy and work-shy. However, it's no surprise, as it suits the Government's agenda to push that narrative.

[Strokes]

I posted this on another forum and it's the most articulate I've managed to be in my assessment of the situation so I'll post here.

 

I'm a BMA member but not a part of the BMA's organisation and my only input into the course of action taken by the BMA has been my vote for strike action last year. These views are my own.

 

Firstly, bear in mind we voted to take strike action last year before ANY progress was made. At that point negotiations were indefinitely suspended because the Government wanted almost all the points to be non-negotiable. What kind of negotiation is that?

I do think the patient safety card has been a tad overplayed. Not fabricated, but overplayed. There are wider issues than that. The problem is we're not really subject to the same judgement as other industries. I think most of us would find it harder to reconcile ourselves to strike action if patient safety wasn't a factor. It's not the only one though and I think there the BMA is guilty of a bit of spin. We are up against the weight of the UK Government and the Murdoch media empire though so we have to play some of the cards in our hand if we want to achieve what we want, and we do genuinely believe that for the service to best serve patients it requires an adequate motivated and protected workforce.

We've been subject to some despicable slander in the media and from the Government in the last few years. Working conditions not just for junior doctors but other members of NHS staff have been appalling for years, it's really only still functioning because we go above and beyond every single day and we still have to read shite in the papers about how we're lazy and workshy.

You have to understand the baseline we're coming from. We already work a massive amount of antisocial hours. I work every other weekend, I work 7 nights in a row at times. Our contract is structured such that a huge amount of our pay comes from these antisocial hours, which are not something we can opt in and out of. The combination of reduced rate for those hours, reduced hours which count as antisocial and cutting our overall hours adds up to a MASSIVE pay cut. We're NOT asking for MORE money, we're NOT asking for LESS antisocial hours. We all accept that that's an inevitable part of our job.

The Government want a 7/7 service. Fine. So do we. I'd love to do my weekends with a full roster of staff (not just doctors but everything that goes with it. What's the point in having 12 doctors in ED on a Saturday if we can't discharge patients to the community because the services aren't available?). The public wants 7/7 access to their GP (irrelevant to our contract) and to specialist clinics (irrelevant to our contract). Emergency care is already well staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you want the rest to be the same, we need MORE STAFF. You cannot stretch what is there any thinner without compromising care for the ENTIRE WEEK.

Couple that with the negligent and wilful misinterpretation of the evidence available and the total irrelevance of our contract to what the Goverment wants to achieve and the true intention of the Government is clear; to beat us down further as part of the insidious attempt to dismantle our public health service. There is no doubt in our minds that that is the Government's mission and it would be a lie to say that political motivation directly related to the care patients receive wasn't a factor in striking.

Our contract has been shite for years. We're adequately paid but we work ridiculous hours, we have no safeguards to stop us doing so. We should have been in a position to demand a better contract and a better deal for ourselves and our patients but as it stands we're battling to protect the status quo.

Now onto the proposed contract. AS A CONSEQUENCE of our strike action and protests, the contract currently on offer has taken reasonable shape. It STILL amounts to a massive paycut, for the aforementioned, and still does not guarantee a safe 7/7 service, but there are significant improvements. I personally do not advocate further strike action over Saturday pay in isolation but I do think it's scandalous we're having to take that on the chin.

The bottom line is, this contract is a paycut, it does not significantly improve our working life, it makes no economic sense to further incentivise the brain drain of our finest doctors abroad if you want a fully staffed, effective, 7 day a week NHS service. We will vote with our feet, life is too short to take this punishment lying down.

To be honest, that's a detailed and well structured post and I can see where you are coming from. I spoke to my wife about this yesterday (she is a nurse) and she was telling me that it's almost impossible to get prescriptions at the weekend because the hospital pharmacy doesn't do antisocial hours. You are right if the services aren't their how can this all work?

[act smiley]

I don't have the figures on me but an extra 8 billion a year into the NHS cannot be below inflation surely?

I don't think anyone will disagree with you regarding managers though, the organisation clearly has far too many and it's something that needs serious reform.

For a start off inflation is around zero!

For £8bn/yr in 2020 to be at-inflation,  it would mean an inflation rate of about 2%, by my rough figures. So yeah, it's a rise because the economy's failing. Yay.

[Bryn]

To be honest, that's a detailed and well structured post and I can see where you are coming from. I spoke to my wife about this yesterday (she is a nurse) and she was telling me that it's almost impossible to get prescriptions at the weekend because the hospital pharmacy doesn't do antisocial hours. You are right if the services aren't their how can this all work?

 

There will always be an out of hours pharmacy service but it's limited so we have to use it judiciously. I would love to be able to give any patient any prescription they need irrespective of time of day but that's not always realistic, especially for those without their own transport. Fully mobile people can begrudgingly drive 20 miles to a 24 hour pharmacy if they need to (they shouldn't have to, but it's physically possible) but our most vulnerable patients cannot and are often admitted to hospital because this is the only way they can get the medicine they need.

 

Pharmacists will be amongst the next to be hit by the Government by the way. We underuse them spectacularly, their knowledge is brilliant and they can avoid hospital admissions in themselves when consulted and able to do so.

[Jon the Hat]

I really don't buy the argument that the Government wants to privatise the NHS, it is scaremongering.  I'm sure it feels like that from the inside though, as frankly the public sector is appalling at any sort of change management.  What the government does want is to get more for less, by improving the efficiency of the NHS, and it is hard to argue with that as a principle.

 

On another note, I understand that doctors cost the best part of a million pounds to train, so I think you need to be comparing yourselves to other professions where you work your way up the tree to get to a decent salary, usually with stupid hours and personal commitment to your job.  Agreed most of them don't have life and death decisions to make, and aren't in a complete shit storm of an organisation that the NHS is, but still.

 

I don't know what the answer is, every direction seems beset by vested interests who are not necessarily willing or wanting to move or compromise.  I don't envy Jeremy Hunt his job that is for sure.  Paid a quarter of an NHS trust chief exec salary to try and hold it all together?  No thanks.

[Bryn]

The Government would love to privatise the NHS, what better way to remove it from their balance sheet? Not a shred of doubt in my mind.

Hunt is vile. Is that really where your sympathy lies? Christ.

[Bryn]

Also, why do we need to compare ourselves to other industries? I have no desire to make any such comparison, it's got bugger all to do with our working conditions. If we were demanding more money and fewer hours then yes I could see it's use on a moral level but as I've stated multiple t times now that's not what we're trying to do.