Doctor's strike.

[Guest MattP]

Think you need to go back and read the posts of Jon the Hat (allegiance is clear but his tone is neutral and reason) and Thracian (impassioned, perhaps to the point where his rationale is unclear but at least you respect where he's coming from) and compare it to your own posts. The only person in this thread colouring anything as Tories v the world is you, you want to bring everything back to that. I do hate this government, I hate pretty much the whole lot of them sitting in that hall, most of them got to where they are by kissing arse and taking backhanders, the labour government was no better. I still chose to take my time to read what was being offered and discuss with my colleagues, warning them to be cautious in spite of that.

 

I've never stated it's the Tories v The World, it isn't that clearly, it's The Tories v The BMA and the Junior Doctors, you talk at times like it's a crusade against the NHS, the Chief Executive of NHS employers has made another statement to say the contract is safe, fair and reasonable.

 

Danny Mortimer, chief executive of NHS Employers, said: "It is disappointing that the BMA has decided to announce further industrial action despite the majority of the BMA's concerns being addressed and reflected in the final contract.

"This disruption to patient care is unnecessary. I strongly believe that the final contract is safe, fair and reasonable.

"For the sake of the NHS and patients, I urge all junior doctors to take a look at the contract in detail before taking part in any future action."

 

 

Probably best we just leave it here though, we aren't going to agree and you seem to have absolutely no intention of asking any questions I ask you.

 

The man you're putting your faith in doesn't even bother to disguise his blatant lies.

 

My "faith" isn't in anyone.

[Thracian]

Out of pure nosiness, who have you voted for on the other occasions?

 

In the interests of parity, I've mainly voted Labour, but voted Lib Dem a couple of times and Green in a couple of council elections.

Labour once, long ago, and UKIP once.

[Alf Bentley]

Labour once, long ago, and UKIP once.

 

 

You've only voted 4 times by your vast age (Con 2, Lab 1, UKIP 1)?

 

Counting General Elections alone, I've voted in 8 (Lab 6, LD 2) and I'm a spring chicken.   

[Thracian]

You've only voted 4 times by your vast age (Con 2, Lab 1, UKIP 1)?

 

Counting General Elections alone, I've voted in 8 (Lab 6, LD 2) and I'm a spring chicken.

That's it as far as I can remember. I've mostly been disappointed with politicians and their parties and cannot usually bring myself to vote for any specific party when I only agree with part of their manifesto.

I usually find I agree with some bits of everyone's proposals but have tended to err towards the Conservatives most of the time because they seem to manage the economy best and, without money, you can't do much without mounting debts for people.

[The Railway Man]

You've only voted 4 times by your vast age (Con 2, Lab 1, UKIP 1)?

 

Counting General Elections alone, I've voted in 8 (Lab 6, LD 2) and I'm a spring chicken.   

 

 

I done 6.

 

Bit embarrassed to say I voted for Kinnock in 92 though, since then I think it's been 97 (I hated Major as you can guess) Been Tory since apart from 2010 when I was taking in by Clegg, can see it being UKIP in 2020 though if we vote to remain.

[Thracian]

Did I say it was? I find it funny when attacking Corbyn Cameron cites 'The last Labour government' which was a government Corbyn was against. Blair and co. Corbyn did not agree with a few of the things they did which is some cases was a carry on from the Tory govt before Thatcher etc. So in fact Cameron is speaking against the Tories.

Also Corbyn has always said the Iraq war was wrong, something the Tories on here have also said.

The reason for my post was that a previous post said the news about Jeremy Hunt co-authoring a book which had sections backing privatisation of the NHS was made up. In other words. I wanted to check up on this so I did a search and found results that did indicate that parts of the book did favour a private system for all and in the list of contributors.

 Hunt's name was there. I do not know if he has the same views now as I cannot read his mind but I think it is a concern when we are keep being told it will not happen. I am skeptical of all politicians by the way from all parties.

 

Me too. I am more Liberal than Labour. I mean the real Liberals not Lib Dems who sold their souls for a piece of the action. I am a Humanist.before aligning myself to anypolitical party and view each politician on their ability to show caring and empathy towards others. Unfortunately I feel Cameron and IDS seem to have failed on both accounts.Quite a few Labour MP's are just as bad appearing not to live in the real world.

Sorry if my post upset anyone but I am not taken in by false smiles and rehearsed speeches and answers.

There's not much to be said for the sort of humanism which seeks to solve one kind of human problem by creating countless others which affect the safety, social harmony and wellbeing of other humans.

Advocates seem to deny or totally ignore the problems created yet whenever you ask how they'd feel if anyone in their family became a victim of those problems they usually feel as concerned or uncomfortable as anyone else. It's called hypocrisy.

There is plenty of room and money for refugees in the Middle East where people and nations are forever publicising their charitable benevolence and should surely be honoured to help.

Well now's their chance to show how charitable they can be and I've no objections to our assisting them in particular ways. Quite the contrary. It would be a pleasure.

PS: What problems some might say:

Well read this and wonder how many other places it applies..... http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4698955.ece

Why would any true Brit want to stay in the kind of political union that helped create (and sustain) this through its laws? Sits back waiting for all the distancing excuses and glossovers!

[Rincewind]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/02/25/question-time-junior-doctor-hunt-take-down_n_9322312.html

[DJ Barry Hammond]

A further 3 strikes announced, emergency care only, and we're going to launch a legal challenge against the threat of imposition. Sounds like Hunt might not have filled the paperwork in properly... Bold action from an organisation which has been previously criticised by its membership for being too passive.

Since I've seen the new rotas, which confirm our worst fears (significant pay cuts affecting the worst rotas, no protection against recurrent antisocial shift patterns, days with night work of up to 10 hours and more being classed as zero hours, and worse) I'm in favour.

As you're closer to this Bryn, can I ask - is there also a fear that this is the first of a trickle down attack on other hospital staff?

For the "7 day thing" to work it I would imagine a whole variety of other contracts would need to be looked at and aligned with Junior Doctor contracts - and that is possibly why there's such a resistance from the government to move towards you on this, because it would compromise their position in future agreements with other sector staff?

And are you aware of any other health care system that provides a full 7 day service? Mean do the Private Sector do this? I'd have thought it'd be so more costly to do that most places would provide essential care over 7 days and leave the other stuff within a week day window?

[Rincewind]

If they get away with this it will be other services next. Fire police teachers etc.

[Bryn]

As you're closer to this Bryn, can I ask - is there also a fear that this is the first of a trickle down attack on other hospital staff?

For the "7 day thing" to work it I would imagine a whole variety of other contracts would need to be looked at and aligned with Junior Doctor contracts - and that is possibly why there's such a resistance from the government to move towards you on this, because it would compromise their position in future agreements with other sector staff?

And are you aware of any other health care system that provides a full 7 day service? Mean do the Private Sector do this? I'd have thought it'd be so more costly to do that most places would provide essential care over 7 days and leave the other stuff within a week day window?

We're firmly backed by other health professionals and that is partly motivated by the knowledge that they won't stop with doctors. There's already been moves on nursing staff and pharmacists.

By full service I assume you mean elective and emergency care? Perhaps in private health care systems you can gain access to a specialist clinic whenever you like but I doubt it.

To reiterate, the NHS already provides a world class 7 day a week emergency service which is stretched thin and requires safeguards for its staffing and retention. The Tories were elected on a manifesto promise to provide a 7/7 NHS, whatever that means, and their approach it this based on wilful misinterpretation of the evidence available.

There is no weekend effect. Junior doctors work 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, are stretched to their limits and are already quitting and leaving because they're struggling to cope. Our allied heath professionals are the same.

Worsening our conditions will break the NHS.

[Bryn]

And before the Conservative members say it, we were no better cared for by Labour.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

We're firmly backed by other health professionals and that is partly motivated by the knowledge that they won't stop with doctors. There's already been moves on nursing staff and pharmacists.

By full service I assume you mean elective and emergency care? Perhaps in private health care systems you can gain access to a specialist clinic whenever you like but I doubt it.

To reiterate, the NHS already provides a world class 7 day a week emergency service which is stretched thin and requires safeguards for its staffing and retention. The Tories were elected on a manifesto promise to provide a 7/7 NHS, whatever that means, and their approach it this based on wilful misinterpretation of the evidence available.

There is no weekend effect. Junior doctors work 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, are stretched to their limits and are already quitting and leaving because they're struggling to cope. Our allied heath professionals are the same.

Worsening our conditions will break the NHS.

Well I'm quite aware the NHS doesn't stop being available... but equally I understand that certain non urgent procedures would be scheduled in through the normal working week yes?

And that's what I wondered - do any other health care models, say schedule a hip op for a Sunday? I'd be amazed if they did.

[Thracian]

Just in case anyone doubts my view on the subject I'd probably sack Hunt if I believed he'd deliberately offered inaccurate statistics - or deliberately misled people with his interpretation of accurate statistics - in support of an argument.

I don't know if this is the case at all, and am certainly not in a position to analyse the situation myself, but few things irritate me more.

I understand that statisistics are iffy things and always open to interpretation but they should be referred to honestly, after proper consideration, and in complete, or at least reasonable, belief that they are defensible.

What matters for the NHS, Trident, Immigration and anything else that's important are the right answers not the prevailing of the right flag wavers.

PS: Where our NHS emergency services are concerned my latest experience has been outstanding. My grandaughter had an aeffectively instant 3.5 hour operation when she broke her arm and disclocated her elbow in an accidentat the end of last week and was home the same evening and at her friend's party the next day.

Everyday services are quite another thing but credit where it's due on emergencies - and that's been my consistent view. At its best the NHS is brilliant. Sadly it's not always at its best. Maybe Ranieri should become a motivational consultant!

[Bryn]

Trying to find you a good summary article on the above.

[Strokes]

Why don't you all just quit and join the bank/agency, they'll have to succumb to your demands then.

[Jon the Hat]

It may just be because what they have is a perfectly reasonable contract and an overly stroppy Union.

[Rincewind]

You took the words right out of Jeremy Hunt's mouth there.

[Bryn]

It may just be because what they have is a perfectly reasonable contract and an overly stroppy Union.

Our contract is crap now and even worse to come.

Our union has been savaged by the medical profession for being far too passive for years and junior doctors haven't taken union mandated action in decades.

Good post mate.

[Jon the Hat]

Our contract is crap now and even worse to come.

Our union has been savaged by the medical profession for being far too passive for years and junior doctors haven't taken union mandated action in decades.

Good post mate.

 

That depends on whether you think you should be paid for overtime or working weekends.

The BMA are certainly being pretty stroppy now don't you think?  Striking over a contract they would probably have accepted a year ago?

[Bryn]

What's overtime? Concept doesn't exist in medicine. You go home when your patients are safe, sometimes that's hours after you're meant to. Nothing is ever done about it. This contract does nothing to address it?

The way our payments are structured, as I've said before, is such that a huge chunk of our pay comes from working out of hours, because we have to do it. You want to play us a flat rate, that's fine, but you have to pay us far, far more than 13% to make up what we'd lose and all that would mean us you're paying doctors that do an 8-6 job like genitourinary medicine as much as you pay your acute physicians and emergency doctors for doing far less work.

The pay cut is clearly demonstrable, the government completely acknowledges it as they're pay protecting us all several thousand pound for the first year or so. In my rota it's around 10%

You have to understand that we know full well what the rota coordinators will do with the changes because we've dealt with them for years, they'll roster the exact same amount of bloody doctors at the weekend as they do now for less money. Or they'll cut the roster in midweek to put more on a Saturday and leave Sunday the same as ever, and mean we'll won't be able to take advantage of plain time to keep patients flowing to make up for the times when we can't move patients, overnight and at the weekend, because no Government ever considers proper investment in community services, respite services, mental health services etc, a priority.

We're not striking for the pay and the Governent and the Telegraph can say whatever the **** they want, they're lying through their teeth. This contract is a pay cut, does nothing to address patient safety or the crippling staffing and retention issues facing the NHS.

Edit: That should say we're not striking for EXTRA pay, clearly having a pay cut for no gain in quality of life is an issue .

[Bryn]

I find it striking that people try and crowbar the way our industry works into similar terms as other, often private, industries, but when push comes to shove we are expected to behave differently and take certain injustices on the chin even when they compromise patient care because we're doing it for the vocation.

[Guest MattP]

Can you nail this 11,000 accusation Bryn?

 

Very similar on Radio 4 now to Question Time last week, one doctor is saying that the figure isn't 11,000 deaths extra at weekend and it's a total lie, another doctor is saying the figure probably is actually true, but the reason for that is people who come in at weekends are generally much more poorly and there are fewer services avaliable.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/sep/05/bruce-keogh-hospital-patients-risk-death-admitted-weekends

[Bryn]

Can you nail this 11,000 accusation Bryn?

Very similar on Radio 4 now to Question Time last week, one doctor is saying that the figure isn't 11,000 deaths extra at weekend and it's a total lie, another doctor is saying the figure probably is actually true, but the reason for that is people who come in at weekends are generally much more poorly and there are fewer services avaliable.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/sep/05/bruce-keogh-hospital-patients-risk-death-admitted-weekends

Accusation is a disgusting choice of word.

How surprised are you that more people from a population admitted on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday, four days of which two are days when only the sickest patients enter hospital, than one from three weekdays?

The lie is the claim that "there are more deaths at the weekend (since when we're Friday and Monday the weekend?) because there are less staff". That is a complete fabrication and the authors of the study advised those reading it that that cannot be inferred.

The day of admission you're statistically most likely to die following is Wednesday.

[Bryn]

Again, that's not to say weekend services don't need improving.

[Guest MattP]

Accusation is a disgusting choice of word.

How surprised are you that more people from a population admitted on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday, four days of which two are days when only the sickest patients enter hospital, than one from three weekdays?

The lie is the claim that "there are more deaths at the weekend (since when we're Friday and Monday the weekend?) because there are less staff". That is a complete fabrication and the authors of the study advised those reading it that that cannot be inferred.

The day of admission you're statistically most likely to die following is Wednesday.

 

Why? It's an accusation from the government. That is the claim they are making.

 

Still didn't really answer the question either, is it an extra 11,000 (with mitigating circumstances) or not?