Yep, and Mr Hunt clearly skipped the bit in the paper that said "to assume they are avoidable would be rash and misleading"
This is from the [url=
]"Letters for the NHS"[/url] Facebook feed, I thought it deserved a wider audience.
Read it and tell me that doctors are just being greedy:
Dear NHS,Death is an inevitable part of my working relationship with you.
Sometimes, dear NHS, there has been nothing I could do before it was too late. Nothing I could do would save the 14 year old girl brought in cold and blue having hung herself in her bedroom with no warning that she had reached the end of her abilities to cope with life. Nothing I could do would save the 8 week old baby whose meningococcal rash spread rapidly before my eyes as the antibiotics failed to take hold quickly enough to prevent her succumbing to overwhelming infection, just as her parents were getting to know her. Nothing I could do would save the 20 year old whose neck expanded in front of me as he bled to death from injuries sustained in a traffic accident. Nothing I could do would save the 65 year old who had worked hard in industry from the age of 14 but whose occupation slowly and irreversibly destroyed his lungs as he daily inhaled dust that would eventually result in him slowly suffocating. Nothing I could do would save my colleague who I was crash called to resuscitate after he chose to take his own life whilst on his nightshift. Nothing I could do would save my grandfather whose restricted mobility, due to injuries sustained as a Japanese prisoner of war, resulted in multiple blood clots that would eventually kill him. Nothing I could do would save many of the other patients I also cared for as a junior doctor and whose faces, at times, still haunt my dreams.
But despite their deaths, and my lack of ability to prevent them, you, dear NHS, fought and provided for each and every one of these patients and their families. You provided counselling and support for the parents of the 14 year old without asking if they could afford to pay for you to help them understand, and come to terms with, what had happened. You provided trained paramedics who administered what they hoped would be life saving antibiotics to the sick baby as soon as they arrived at the house, and who didn't ask for the parents’ credit card details first. You provided a helicopter to airlift the 20 year old to hospital in order to give him at least a chance of surviving, and a doctor to travel with him and look after him all the way - without wondering whether his family would have adequate insurance to cover it. You provided medications to try and keep the 65 year old comfortable as he desperately tried to suck air into his lungs, and oxygen to make it as easy as possible. You provided a specially trained nurse to talk him and his family through what was to come and to help them cope, and when they could no longer manage you provided a hospice bed and staff to reassure and comfort him and his family as he lived his last days. You never sent them a bill as they grieved his loss. You provided support to the family of the doctor who had given so much to you but could not take any more and ensured that his children were at least financially provided for as they faced a very different future. You sent district nurses regularly to tend to my grandfather's wounds and provided all the equipment and dressings he needed. When a large blood clot finally made him much sicker, you provided a bed in a community hospital just down the road where my grandmother could visit him daily. You enabled his GP, who knew him well, to continue to look after him locally rather than sending him somewhere where he knew no one. He passed away peacefully thanks to you.
But now, dear NHS, it is you who are dying and my heart breaks as much for you as it has for each one of my patients and their families. Just as so many of the dying days of my patients have kept me awake at night, now I lie there wondering just what else I can do to save you, and I'm struggling to come up with answers. I know my colleagues feel the same, but we keep on doing our best to fight for you because we, and the rest of the world, recognise just how good you are. Day to day our calls for help to resuscitate you seem to fall on deaf ears. No one seems to hear us or want to come to your aid. No one seems to want to provide the funding for the staff so desperately needed to keep you alive.
Some people seem determined to push you to your final breaking point by taking up your precious time with things that you were not designed to deal with - they make more and more inappropriate demands of you. Many even seem to want to let you die. But not in a good way. There is no hospice care for you. No planning for what will happen when you've gone - just a hope that you will slip away quietly without anyone noticing your demise and without any thought for 'what next?' Who will look after and take care of those you've left behind?
Dear NHS, it is you who now keeps me awake at night. It is you that I want to be able to save because you do so much for all of us even though we don't always acknowledge or recognise it. I love that you are indiscriminate in your care, providing for the last, the least and the lost in exactly the same way as you do for the great and powerful. I know we'll miss you when you're gone and I fear for my family, friends and patients in a world without you. But, dear NHS, I'm running out of ideas as to how to save you and I know I can't do it alone.
Dr Jo Kirkcaldy
Some people seem determined to push you to your final breaking point by taking up your precious time with things that you were not designed to deal with
Hmm, can't work out if she is referring to management, internal markets and budgeting... Or fertility treatment, cosmetic surgery and sex changes?
Or fertility treatment, cosmetic surgery and sex changes?
You mean treatments to improve people's health and well-being?
Or fertility treatment, cosmetic surgery and sex changes?
She could also, and I'd say this is more likely, mean the use of front line medical staff as a proxy for underfunded social and community care services and the traditional social structures which are eroding with time.
Some people seem determined to push you to your final breaking point by taking up your precious time with things that you were not designed to deal with
Hmm, can't work out if she is referring to management, internal markets and budgeting... Or fertility treatment, cosmetic surgery and sex changes?
If Dr Jo is who I think she is, then she'll be railing against people who are in her wards when they should be cared for at home. If the beds weren't blocked because of a lack of social care funding then the NHS would be going along just fine.
If the beds weren't blocked because of a lack of social care funding then the NHS would be going along just fine.
So we need to take money off the NHS and put it into social care? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Tell me, what do you think would be the reaction of the nurses unions and opposition parties if they did that?
lemonysam - Member
Or fertility treatment, cosmetic surgery and sex changes?
She could also, and I'd say this is more likely, mean the use of front line medical staff as a proxy for underfunded social and community care services and the traditional social structures which are eroding with time.
I agree. I ended up in A&E Monday night after my surgery, seems general anaesthetics don't get on, anyhoo.
In the next bed to me was a homeless woman. She was there when I was admitted, throughout the night all I could hear was her refusing treatment, obviously to get a bed for the night.
Eventually she left, but then no more than an hour later called an ambulance from the train station she was sleeping in and was re-admitted. The A&E staff were suitably frustrated and again struggled to get her to allow any examinations. I was discharged around 0400 and it was still ongoing.
But there is no other option at that time in the morning to assist them with situations like this.
ninfan - Member - Block User
So we need to take money off the NHS and put it into social care? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Why is it either/or?
so they are getting their unsocial hours moved towards the what the rest of sociaty have then. I start work at 4am and work every second weekend, I don't get extra for working unsocial hours.
Well, towards what you have.
Why is it either/or?
Because if he had said that then he couldn't keep the argument going.
so they are getting their unsocial hours moved towards the what the rest of sociaty have then
You think "the rest of society" regard 7am till 10pm Monday to Saturday as normal work hours?
Peak rush hour times would suggest otherwise.
I start work at 4am and work every second weekend
And do you honestly consider that "normal social hours"? Is your 3am commute pretty busy then?
You think "the rest of society" regard 7am till 10pm Monday to Saturday as normal work hours?
Peak rush hour times would suggest otherwise.
And do you honestly consider that "normal social hours"? Is your 3am commute pretty busy then?
no, its not "normal" social hours but I did accept the job knowing that. 9-5 isn't a standard working day anymore and sundays are no longer days of rest. When I worked in a lab I didn't get paid extra for working more hours or working weekends or having to do 24 hour experiments.
Sorry I just don't feel bad for junior doctors loosing a bit of cash.
p.s my morning commute is a 5 mins walk, I'm still sleeping at 3am 😉
I did accept the job [b]knowing[/b]
That is the keyword. If your employer changed your conditions so you worked longer for less money would you just say "Hey ho! It's Ok other people get paid just the same."
So we need to take money off the NHS and put it into social care? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.Tell me, what do you think would be the reaction of the nurses unions and opposition parties if they did that?
Depends how it's done to be honest. How do you suggest they do it?
My idea is something like this - take all of the funding away from Social Care that is related to providing care homes, residential homes, nursing homes, packages of care etc and give it to the NHS to spend. The NHS can then provide those services and not the private sector.
My feeling on this is that doctors provide an almost pivotal role in most of our lives and deserve our support in that. And part of that is the financial rewards. Yes they signed up for a very hard job requiring a lot of sacrifice but the payback was a certain level of monetary return.
Would i want a completely overworked, stressed out doctor who has had minimal sleep in the last 4 days making life and death decisions for me or my family. Not a chance. Reward them for exactly what the are and the service they provide.
We all seem to be pretty aware that the NHS is headed towards a level of privatisation, and it appears that nobody wants this. So what apart from voting for another political party can we do about it.Serious question.
Do we really want the type of care you get in the US where every single part comes with a very hefty price tag.
That is the keyword. If your employer changed your conditions so you worked longer for less money would you just say "Hey ho! It's Ok other people get paid just the same."
they change the numbers we have to achive all the time and they do change contracts. you have the choice to accept them or not. The doctors aren't getting paid less though are they as the basic wage isn't changing as its only the overtime and extra cash they can get is. It sucks but life sucks so if they don't like it change job or move country.
or, don't change the system to make it more sucky.
most other people are having to suffer pay cuts in real terms so what makes doctors any different?
Why is it either/or?
Because if he had said that then he couldn't keep the argument going.
Nonsense - the reason its not either/or is because theres no point keeping things that we don't need - like how the penny pinching bastards closed all the TB sanatoriums!
Your game is incredibly poor today.
Nonsense - the reason its not either/or is because theres no point keeping things that we don't need
Define need for me please.
There's plenty things that people ask the NHS for when they dont really need it. Blame the patients, not the NHS.
There's plenty things that people ask the NHS for when they dont really need it. Blame the patients, not the NHS.
I am the first to agree on that being a really important discussion that needs to be had.
The doctors aren't getting paid less though are they as the basic wage isn't changing as its only the overtime and extra cash they can get is.
That "overtime" isn't optional. Those shifts are part of their contract.
if they don't like it change job or move country.
They can. And that would be a disaster for the NHS. No one wants that (except possibly those trying to break the system so they can privatise it).
Fortunately many doctors are committed to the principle of social health care.
And others don't fancy giving up a job they have trained their entire adult lives for.
most other people are having to suffer pay cuts in real terms so what makes doctors any different?
For one thing "most other people" don't have the government pretending it is actually a pay rise and misleading the public about the hours that they already do.
Likewise most people's pay banding doesn't also serve as the financial safeguard that protects them from unusually long and unsociable hours, and by extension protects the safety of their "customers".
Likewise most people's pay banding doesn't also serve as the financial safeguard that protects them from unusually long and unsociable hours, and by extension protects the safety of their "customers".
Surely the European working time directive does that?
instead of acting like a bunch of petulant teenagers threatening to ago on strike, why don't the junior doctors just collectivley withdraw their working time opt-outs?
[url= http://m.bma.org.uk/working-for-change/junior-and-consultant-contract/ddrb-recommendations-analysis-for-juniors/removal-of-vital-safeguards ]According to the BMA[/url] the Working Time Regulations aren't nearly as effective as the current system and could see doctors only being entitled to one twenty minute break in an eleven hour shift.
instead of acting like a bunch of petulant teenagers threatening to ago on strike, why don't the junior doctors just collectivley withdraw their working time opt-outs?
So rather than debating and voting on carefully considered industrial action they should just act unilaterally and pull the rug from the very health service that they are trying to protect?? How is that less "petulant"?
That "overtime" isn't optional. Those shifts are part of their contract.
how can it be overtime if its part of their contract? (actual question)
Likewise most people's pay banding doesn't also serve as the financial safeguard that protects them from unusually long and unsociable hours, and by extension protects the safety of their "customers".
at least they get paid for it. lots of jobs are salaried and you dont get overtime. when I worked in science I got paid the same wither I worked 20 hours or 50 hours.
how can it be overtime if its part of their contract? (actual question)
Because it is not overtime.
Contrary to what Jeremy Hunt tells you, the NHS is 24/7 and requires doctors working shifts to cover all hours.
Their current contract recognises that shifts at anti-social hours are, well, anti-social so it adds additional pay bands for junior doctors whose current position means they are working a lot of those shifts.
So the government's "plan" to afford its "new" 24/7 NHS is to massively penalise the doctors providing the current 24/7 NHS, call it a pay rise and then pretend to be incredulous at the "greedy doctors".
at least they get paid for it. lots of jobs are salaried and you dont get overtime
It's not a race to the bottom.
Some other jobs are shit so their job should be shit too is not a good argument.
Their job is shit enough!
(and I say that as someone sat alone in an office at 9pm on a Saturday working unpaid overtime)
<Oops, sorry, late to the party>
Poah 'overtime' means normal work really. Standard full time posts are 48 hours a week - which in reality usually means 50-60. Depending on specialty weekends are 1 in 3 to 1 in 5 where you usually do three thirteen hour days or nights fri to sun with normal week either side.
100 hour weeks of nights although not common still happen as 'standard hours' so it is in effect overtime but not optional.
Doctors get paid fairly well but being expected to work those kind of hours, and if JH gets his way more weekend/late night working and a pay cut of up to 30% is a bit of a joke.
when I worked in science I got paid the same wither I worked 20 hours or 50 hours.
Yeah, well, me too. But when I was tired and made a mistake, I got a calculation wrong, or my programme crashed. Nobody died.
Or they do the Mash.
The monster mash?
I think the "hunt effect" thing is pretty fascinating tbh. People say that politicians and the press can't strongly influence public opinion but here's evidence that by just repeating the same lie about the 24 hour NHS over and over, Hunt has convinced people so thoroughly that they're actually putting their health in jeopardy.
It's a new and exciting way for a secretary of state for health to kill people. Got to hand it to the man, he's innovative. I wonder if they saw this coming, with hindsight it's pretty inevitable, if you lie about the service available people won't use it. What's next?
(and I say that as someone sat alone in an office at 9pm on a Saturday working unpaid overtime)
And also having now returned home to find my wife sat in front of the PC also doing unpaid overtime, working on her Junior Doctor ePortfolio. It's nearly 1am. I'm in bed. She's still working. The kids will be up a half six. 🙁
The monster mash?
Do the Mash!
It is pretty fascinating tbh. People say that politicians and the press can't strongly influence public opinion but here's evidence that by just repeating the same lie about the 24 hour NHS over and over, Hunt has convinced people so thoroughly that they're actually putting their health in jeopardy.
Unfortunately it is not a new game. To quote Nye Began "How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century."
Yeah, well, me too. But when I was tired and made a mistake, I got a calculation wrong, or my programme crashed. Nobody died.
I could quite easily kill someone or myself in the lab if I was tired and made a mistake.
It's not a race to the bottom.Some other jobs are shit so their job should be shit too is not a good argument.
Their job is shit enough!
thats not what I said.
From next year we're going to be paying MPs £74,000 a year (currently £67k), plus expenses for food, travel and second homes, whilst they also have enough spare time for second jobs such as regular column writing and consultancy work. The argument for this is that it's a very important job that wants to attract the best, an argument which strangely doesn't apply to other areas of public service, such as the NHS or the education system.
I'd argue that looking after the health of other human beings is not just important, but vital, whether that's nurses, doctors or surgeons. Cock up as an MP and you get lambasted by the papers, have the mickey taken on Have I Hot News for You, and maybe, just maybe, you'll lose your job. Cock up as a doctor, and you're risking other people's health and possibly their lives.
A doctor requires years of study and training, and will continue to have to learn and adapt throughout their career. An MP has to basically win a couple of popularity contests. An overworked, tired doctor can make mistakes that costs lives. An overworked, tired MP nods off on the cushioned benches of parliament.
I'm thinking that if there are savings that need to be made, we're looking in the wrong place.
Decent summary here:
I think you need to get your basic definitions sorted,tbh..
OVERTIME - as a junior doctor, this would be time over and above your scheduled hours. I.e.your shift finished at 8am, but you take part in the ward round/continue looking after a sick patient. You WOULDN'T get paid a penny for this. Frequently doctors try claiming for the overtime by managers manage to get out of it.
UNSOCIAL HOURS - This is what the deal refers to. Your Rota will include day work, night work, evening work, weekend work. It's the nights and evenings (you know, un social times, that attract extra pay above and beyond the basic pay. Often 40% more.
This is what's going...
DrP
And the other definition that confuses people:
JUNIOR DOCTOR - isn't just a spotty-faced new graduate or a "petulant teenager". It's all doctors until they reach Consultant level. My wife is a 40 year old mother of two. She is a Junior Doctor and has been for fifteen years.
How many hours do junior doctors work? Is it the 48 that is in the headlines or is it way more than that?
Are GPs junior doctors? Given that they've completed their training.
Standard full time posts are 48 hours a week - which in reality usually means 50-60.
Are GPs junior doctors? Given that they've completed their training.
No, they are General Practitioner that means no longer a Junior.
Wanmakylung - full time is 48 hours but that's an average over six month rota. Currently it's up to 91 hours a week officially but often 100 for week of nights, days off elsewhere then bring average down,
Many jobs are over 48 hours on average but the only way to reduce that is more time off in daytime hours which no one wants as impacts on training.
One of key issues is nights/weekends etc need minimal levels of cover and cannot be cut.
We probably need to change the way we deliver some stuff - lots of stuff that is done by a doctor does not need a doctor to do it of that makes sense,
GPs are not juniors. Shortest route to being a GP is five years post med school. Some specialties nearer fifteen years post medschool hence you can be a junior doctor for a lot time depending on career route.
Junior just means not consultant or GP.
Sorry yes, I should probably have said "all [i]hospital[/i] doctors until they reach Consultant level".
GPs have a different path.
Some specialties nearer fifteen years post medschool hence you can be a junior doctor for a lot time depending on career route.
And longer when you factor in maternity/paternity leave and/or less-than-full-time working.
See if I was asked to do 90 or 100hrs in a week i would cease to function. i cannot see how it can be in the best interests of patients for them to be looked after by people in that state. You could not pay me enough to put myself in a position where I knew that my mistakes could cost someone their life and that I had to make those decisions while exhausted.
The other definition that people should know is what we get our 'banding' for. This is the "extra" 40% over the basic rate. [b]It is not just because our hours are antisocial.[/b]
So when you're fresh out of medical school, you're paid £22,636/yr* (gross, of course) for working a 37.5hr week. I think we can all agree this is a pretty low wage for someone who's spent such a long time in education. Some jobs will just have basic rate and no out-of-hours commitments (on calls). I.e. they're unbanded so that wage is what you get. Most new doctors will do three four-month rotations in their first year, and usually not more than one of these rotations will be unbanded. Many doctors doing these jobs will of course stay later to help out and not get paid a jot for this - much like in any other 9-5 career. Of course, there is all of the other career progression / continuing professional development stuff which is quite burdensome and done outside of these hours, plus most people I know will spend yet more time reading / learning.
For rotations involving weekends, evenings, nights you get paid more. Your hours are increased to 48hrs/wk (a 28% increase over a standard 37.5 hr working week) and you get paid (a bit) more because these hours are antisocial, so your pay packet increases by 40%. As you can see, most of that extra comes from just working more salaried hours.
Regarding antisocial hours: My wife and I are both doctors, and we will each work on average 1 weekend in 4 or 5, though these weekends are rarely 'in sync'. Organising any social event at the weekend involves lots of planning because weekend where we're both free are a luxury. Worse still is when she's on "long days" (09.00-21.30 or similar) and I'm on nights (21.00 - 09.00). In those situations we don't see each other for a week. Don't tell me that's not antisocial. If I could drop all my on calls, have a basic salary and keep my evenings / weekends free, I'd do that in a heartbeat. Contrary to what Ceremy says, this is never an option. I've never met a doctor who could opt out in that way.
I haven't really written about the effect that the new contracts are likely to have on patient care...
Anyway, I don't mean to rant. I love my job and I get great satisfaction out of doing something tangibly worthwhile. But new contracts imposed from the top that amount to a complete lack of respect for one of the most educated, hardworking and selfless groups of people is a disgrace.
*NHS Doctors' payscales are published and easily found online. This is the starting figure for 2015/16.
So new grad drs are paid the same as a physio/nurse/OT/SALT etc who has been in post for 6 months or so. That surprises me.
Like!
Correct. Nurse practitioner posts often better paid too than many more 'senior' junior docs of you look at pay for mon to fri hours
That surprises me
And then you get nurse specialist who are the flavour of the month. They replace middle tear doctors, earn about £45-50k. They are great at specific tasks, but do not have the rounded understand that docs do, just hope you don't have a complication, or a history that doesn't fit the norm
Doctors cost more for a reason
That's slightly patronising FunkyDunc. The Nurse Specialists I've met certainly don't struggle with such things, they tend to have a vast amount of experience before getting to that level.
If you're after a hate figure then look at some of the advertisements for "physicians' assistants" - a non-doctor role with similar responsibilities to junior docs, except they get paid £48k after a couple of years of subsidised training.
But these people, and nurse practitioners mentioned above, are not the enemy here. Don't get caught up in squabbles that detract from the bigger picture.
To avoid misunderstanding I would agree nurse practitioners are excellent,
They earn equal and in some cases more than the 'junior' docs who may often have to give advice in some roles - just trying to make the point that juniors (I.e. All non consultant docs) are fantastic value for money when you compare pay for mon-fri for other groups.
That said there is no doubt that cutting pay of all other NHS staff will be the next target.
Unfortunately I feel this situation will just be the first of many to come. The NHS is struggling for many reasons:
- A population living longer than ever before.
- People living longer with chronic conditions than they ever have
- The availability of more complex, and hence expensive, treatments.
- Increased demands on social care - and when they fail to meet the needs, the NHS tends to pick up the slack
- A more demanding patient population than ever before.
While this may have impacted the ability of the NHS to carry out certain functions, such as elective surgeries/clinics/GP care etc - it's ability to treat the acutely unwell patient remains unrivalled - possibly anywhere in the world, and certainly anywhere that has a free at the point of care health system. However, how long this can continue remains to be seen.
I'm not entirely convinced the NHS can continue to exist in it's current form, as it simply cannot without massive increases in financial investment. However, this government do not seem to be in the slightest bit interested in preserving it in any form. The government claim their current actions are about allowing trusts to maintain a 7-day a week service and removing financial penalties for rostering doctors out-of-hours - but if they roster more doctors to work out of hours - who does the jobs they were doing during routine hours?!?!
Sadly I can't see any other explanation other than the government attempting to set up the NHS to fail, and fail spectacularly. Private health-care systems are set up to make a profit - not provide the patient with the best care. Elective work, clinics etc are far more profitable than acute services - so I wonder which will become the priority?
I'm not going to get into the "are they paid enough" debate, as although that's what the current argument surrounds I think there are far bigger issues at play. All I'll say is that if we end up in a private system - I can assure you the pay will only go one way!!
I'm a junior doctor. I love my job. I think the NHS is one of the gems this country has, and I'm not willing to let this government run it to the ground without a fight!
E
That said there is no doubt that cutting pay of all other NHS staff will be the next target.
They're coming after the unsocial hours pay.
Jeremy Hunt was co-author of a book called [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/jeremy-hunt-and-privatisation-are-no-recipe-for-saving-the-nhs-but-try-telling-the-blairites-that-8120781.html ]Direct Democracy: An Agenda for a New Model Party[/url].
If you were in any doubt of his intentions then these extracts may help:
"We should fund patients, either through the tax system or by way of universal insurance, to purchase health care from the provider of their choice. The poor and unemployed would have their contributions supplemented or paid for by the state."
...
"Our ambition should be to break down the barriers between private and public provision, in effect denationalising the provision of health care in Britain."
...
"Instead of tinkering with a fundamentally broken machine, it (the Conservative Party) should offer to update the model."
Nice link. Didn't know that. U.S. Style healthcare would be a disaster.
Equally current NHS format either needs more money or less services as it is not sustainable.
Guess the question is is any politician prepared to stand up and have that difficult conversation....
Like this you mean?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/17/junior-doctor-nhs-jeremy-hunt
But new contracts imposed from the top that amount to a complete lack of respect for one of the most educated, hardworking and selfless groups of people is a disgrace.
your pay for someone fresh out of uni is pretty standard - it goes up a lot quicker and higher afterwards.
p.s you forgot to add god complex and arrogant to the end of your sentance above 😉
Our starting graduate average salary is £23,285, higher than a doctor's starting salary. This despite being a 3/4 year undergrad base rather than the longer doctoral qualification.
Yes but the average "salary" for the junior doctos is only part of a remuneration package that typically includes an additional 30-50% of supplements and allowances on top of the salary, and a pension scheme that would equate to an employer contribution of around 25%. So the average junior doctor actually earns twice what the average graduate makes in salary. That's not to say this is wrong, more that a sensible discussion should at least include relevant facts.
The BMA have consistently made their comparisons on base salary alone which says a lot about the level of integrity and ethics behind the current "campaign" which is precisely why they've refused to even discuss it with the dept of health since June.
I mention it just because people keep pointing at starting grad salaries; but
just5minutes - MemberSo the average junior doctor actually earns twice what the average graduate makes in salary.
But the average junior doctor is working longer and more unsociable hours than the average graduate, and has spent longer in higher education, making them both more qualified and more in debt and with a shorter overall career earning period. (a fairer comparison is with postgrads tbh but even then it's uneven)
just5minutes - correct but the allowance is only if working 48 hours, and weekends/nights/evenings but yes fair comment
So the average junior doctor actually earns twice what the average graduate makes in salary. That's not to say this is wrong, more that a sensible discussion should at least include relevant facts.
Indeed. Where are your facts though? Where do you get this from?
Average uk graduate starting salary is £28k according to this ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-34186954). A fully banded FY1 doctor will earn slightly more than this (c£29k) after banding for all the antisocial hours etc. Bear in mind that the average doesn't take into account whether you're a straight A at A level student doing 5-6years at a decent Russell group university or whether you did some non-subject at the University of Nowheresville.
If you're going to spout the need to check facts, please check your own.
Don't misinterpret me, though. I'm not saying we deserve to be better-paid. I'm just saying that the perceptions of our pay are (mostly) overestimated and a further cut (over the 25% cut we've seen since 2008) is insulting.
The BMA have consistently made their comparisons on base salary alone which says a lot about the level of integrity and ethics behind the current "campaign" which is precisely why they've refused to even discuss it with the dept of health since June.
Your posts read like press releases from the govts PR department
Your posts are not impartial statements of facts either they are highly selective to further your agenda and then you have the nerve to criticise them for the same thing
you are an irony and self awareness free zone
just5minutes
The BMA have consistently made their comparisons on base salary alone which says a lot about the level of integrity and ethics behind the current "campaign" which is precisely why they've refused to even discuss it with the dept of health since June.
[url= http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/in-depth-junior-and-consultant-contract/ddrb-recommendations-analysis-for-juniors/10-reasons-for-not-reentering-2015-junior-contract-negotiations ]10 reasons why the BMA are not entering re-negotiations[/url]
The Government has told us that they want to introduce the new contract for the August 2016 intake, and that they are prepared to impose it if no agreement can be found. The BMA cannot be held to ransom with threats of imposition – if we go back to a pseudo-negotiation we are being defeated. A return to talks under these terms is not compatible with upholding the integrity of the profession or the BMA.
want to introduce the new contract for the August 2016 intake,
Hang on, so it only applies to NEW entrants?
These arguments are going round and round in circles! We have been very clear what a first year Doctor earns before and after banding throughout this thread. The reason that the before banding salary is relevant is because its the only directly applicable thing to what other graduates earn. Do you think if other graduates regularly worked the weekend and nights they would be content with putting it down as overtime and doing it for the basic salary?
ninfan - government said they would impose on all. Not just new starters.
Yes but the average "salary" for the junior doctos is only part of a remuneration package that typically includes an additional 30-50% of supplements and allowances on top of the salary
...
The BMA have consistently made their comparisons on base salary alone which says a lot about the level of integrity and ethics behind the current "campaign"...
I don't think that's true at all.
The BMA's main objection regards the changes to those [i]"30-50% of supplements and allowances"[/i] which come from the unsociable hours bandings.
They've been pretty clear about that.
May be the Doctors/BMA should pose this question to Mr Jeremy Hunt, to use the words of Robin Day.
"But why should the public, on this issue, as regards the future of the NHS, believe you, a transient, here-today and, if I may say so, gone-tomorrow politician"
Painful as it is for me to say it.
I agree with Junkyard. You're a real parody of the government propaganda just5minutes spouting bullet points you have no idea about.
We should stand with them - and against the liar Hunt (who denied suppressing the news on most Health Trusts being in the red until after the Tory conference, although it is clear that this is what happened.)
All in the interests of fragmenting the NHS and letting his nasty corporate friends in to really screw things up (as they undoubtedly will.)
But FunkyDunc - I agree with Drac, you underestimate nurse specialists and practitioners, who in my area (neuro) are much needed and in some cases better and certainly more accessible than consultants. But also, if we fight and blame each other, we are allowing Hunt a way in. Together we are stronger.
Re nurse specialist, sorry I wasn't trying to belittle them. It is however an odd government agenda to reduce doctor numbers, but increase these type of nursing post, which cost slightly less than a doctor, but further reduce the pool of more 'middle' doctors.
Once a doctors post gets taken away, you don't get it back. ( This is direct experience of an ED department )