Junior doctors to escalate industrial action to all-out strike next month

[Brian Fantana]

I support them. My girlfriend is a nurse and no doubt they have a rough time and are over worked.

But - just don't strike in A&E. Putting people's lives at risk is morally wrong in my book and the militants could turn public opinion against them. This crosses the line between genuine grievance and politics.

Consultants can cover - but to me a strike in an A&E department just doesn't comprehend.

Absolutely this.

Striking and avoiding giving emergency care is going to be the moment that the public starts to turn against them. Poor show from the junior doctors.

 

[The Rivet]

No-one will die because of this, cover will be provided by consultants and, if it came to it, do you really think doctors would stand on a picket line while someone bled to death in the hospital they are picketing ?

If Hunt is still so intransigent that he won't come back to the negotiating table, then Cameron should sack him. I fear he won't.

I contacted the PET scanning dept at the NHS Sussex uni site yesterday to be told they are closing for a week for the Easter break. It's not part of the strike but, do you know how important that machine is to those with developing diseases like cancer? Cancer doesn't stop multiplying or mutating because staff want a holiday. Delayed treatments/diagnosis can mean people WILL die. Additionally consultants rely on these JD's to provide initial assessments. Who will do that work over the strike? You think consultants will? Unlikely. Snail paced at best. I don't like Hunt or this Government OR the risk JD's are subjecting the public to.

 

[beorhthelm]

So everyone's taken sides, but no-one can explain to me why? Seems trying to understand things isn't as popular as it should be.

no one who supports the strikes will explain what its about, they say its justified and thats that. neither side fully explains their position, reverting to sound bites they've troted out a dozen times.

 

[DumLum]

Middle class who think they are too good to work weekends happy to risk people's lives to make their point.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

I have offered my services on a voluntary basis in the Gynocology Department at my local hospital during the strike.

 

[Igzilla]

I did read somewhere, in the Indy I think, that the DoH was "talking" to the Consultants about imposing a similar stylee contract on them as per the JD's, but has gone under the radar as the Consultants, who do earn big money, fear the public may not be so understanding if they strike, but were just as unhappy with Mr Hunt as their colleagues.

Ultimately, this is about shifting parts of the NHS to a point where they can be sold off to private health companies. The end user may not end up paying for it directly at point of use, but when profit becomes the motives, these companies will have to be paid and where will it come from?

http://www.lbc.co.uk/junior-doctor-perfectly-explains-why-you-should-back-them-124912

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Utter rubbish.

Well argued.

 

[beorhthelm]

Ultimately, this is about shifting parts of the NHS to a point where they can be sold off to private health companies. The end user may not end up paying for it directly at point of use, but when profit becomes the motives, these companies will have to be paid and where will it come from?

http://www.lbc.co.uk/junior-doctor-perfectly-explains-why-you-should-back-them-124912

ah yes, its all about privitisation. problem here is that if you privatise, the new employer is no longer held to the contracts that the government has with the doctors. the fact that this is the case, and breaks the national bargining, is often used as a reason for how and why privitisation could save money (and why its so bad, paying people in some areas less). the link has a similar confusion, suggesting moving to weekend is purely for the benefit of private companies, so they can run non-urgent clinics at the weekend.

 

[Igzilla]

ah yes, its all about privitisation. problem here is that if you privatise, the new employer is no longer held to the contracts that the government has with the doctors. the fact that this is the case, and breaks the national bargining, is often used as a reason for how and why privitisation could save money (and why its so bad, paying people in some areas less). the link has a similar confusion, suggesting moving to weekend is purely for the benefit of private companies, so they can run non-urgent clinics at the weekend.

TUPE.

 

[El Presidente]

do you know how important that machine is to those with developing diseases like cancer?

Yes I do. They can make such a difference to those suffering this cruel and indiscriminate disease.

Let's buy more of them. Scrap the big ticket nonsense projects like Trident and HS2 and £150 billion more for the NHS.

It would get my vote.

 

[El Presidente]

I have offered my services on a voluntary basis in the Gynocology Department at my local hospital during the strike.

Just wait until you have to deal with an unattended clopper that resembles Terry Waite's allotment though.

 

[drew]

Middle class who think they are too good to work weekends happy to risk people's lives to make their point.

 

[drew]

I contacted the PET scanning dept at the NHS Sussex uni site yesterday to be told they are closing for a week for the Easter break. It's not part of the strike but, do you know how important that machine is to those with developing diseases like cancer? Cancer doesn't stop multiplying or mutating because staff want a holiday. Delayed treatments/diagnosis can mean people WILL die. Additionally consultants rely on these JD's to provide initial assessments. Who will do that work over the strike? You think consultants will? Unlikely. Snail paced at best. I don't like Hunt or this Government OR the risk JD's are subjecting the public to.

Are you sure they are closing just because staff are on holiday or could it be that the scanner has to undergo some maintenance and the Easter week with two bank holidays is the best time? Furthermore, are both depts closing or is it just the Brighton site?

 

[Creaky]

The whole dispute seems full of anomalies.

We have a group of workers who aren't in dispute with their employers for more pay but over an offer that their employers unilaterally proposed which they say will give employees a pay rise.

The employers claim that their offer will mean the organisation can be working at full capacity for longer, (24/7), but that it will also mean employees working less hours.

The employees are called 'juniors' but on average have trained for 15 years to get to where they are.

A vote for strike action was supported by 98% of voters but only one or two days of action have been called with not all employees going on strike.

Strike action was suspended whilst discussions between employers and employees took place - discussions which the employer subsequently refused to take further part in.

The employers say that their offer is no longer an offer but a fait accompli and will come into force in August.

Employers now say they are 'saddened' by the employees proposed resumption of strike action.

 

[Waynflete]

So everyone's taken sides, but no-one can explain to me why? Seems trying to understand things isn't as popular as it should be.

My wife is a junior doctor, so let me take a stab at explaining, as I understand it...

The objections to the current proposals are in large part because of a total (justified) lack of trust in the government on behalf of doctors.

As you know, this is all part of the government's plan to have a '7-day NHS' for non-emergency care. (We already have a 7-day NHS for emergency care). This idea is based on a misuse of statistics to assert wrongly that there are more deaths at weekends because of staffing.

To achieve a 7-day NHS for non-emergency care you have to do one of three things:

1. Pay for more doctors, nurses and other staff to increase care by two days per week - which would cost a lot more money (and the trained staff don't exist because there are already shortages in key areas).
2. Get existing staff to work for longer hours to cover the extra two days - which is unsafe and unfair on those existing staff.
3. Spread the working hours of existing staff more thinly over the week, to cover the extra two days - which will reduce the quality of care.

Now, the government is claiming that it can deliver a 7-day NHS with no significant increase in total budget, with no doctor being paid less, with no-one having to work longer hours and no reduction in quality of care. That so clearly doesn't add up, and doctors have been rightly suspicious of these proposals as a result.

Lo and behold, when NHS Employers released some sample rotas for junior doctors under the new contract, they were found to be full of things like claiming a day immediately after a night shift was a 'day off', despite the doctor having worked for probably about ten hours on that day, from midnight to 10am, and having to return to work that evening. Also, breaking promises on not working consecutive weekends. They are also very worried that, although current junior doctors are being offered this contract, there is no protection for doctors in a few years' time from an updated contract that would be even more unacceptable. In short, what the junior doctors are being asked to do is not fair or safe - and when the government says they won't be paid less or work more hours they simply don't believe it.

Fundamentally, this is about a government trying to push through an uncosted and ill-thought-out manifesto pledge, not listening when the experts expected to deliver it tell them it won't work, carrying on regardless, then spinning against doctors by claiming it's all about pay - which is absolute rubbish. It is also absolute nonsense that changing the junior doctor contract will deliver 7-day NHS, of course, because they will also have to change the contracts of everyone else working in the NHS, too.

The end result is likely to be fewer doctors recruited, more doctors leaving the NHS to work abroad or in private practice, worsening shortages in key specialist areas like paediatrics, an overall worse service - and ultimately a recourse to more private medicine to fill the inevitable gaps, which will be more expensive for all concerned, especially the taxpayer.

So, support our junior doctors! They genuinely don't want to strike. They have been backed into a corner, and have judged that this is worth doing in the short term in an attempt to stave off something that would be much worse for patients in the long term.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I feel like I instinctively want to support the junior doctors, but I'm a bit confused as to what the problem is. Basic pay is going up, the only people who will lose financially are those that specifically choose to work more antisocial than social hours. Trainees all to be paid the same depending on where they are in training rather than how long they've spent getting there. Maximum hours down from 91 to 72 hours in a 7 day period.

What have a missed? I see BMA references to removal of safeguards but without any details.



Don't jump on me for being anti JD cause I'm certainly not. Had an op on Monday and full of praise for the staff. I'd just like to understand a bit more.

working saturday is not an option. it is required . and no time and a half. and no debate. wrong.

 

[brightn'ove]

My wife is a junior doctor, so let me take a stab at explaining, as I understand it...

The objections to the current proposals are in large part because of a total (justified) lack of trust in the government on behalf of doctors.

As you know, this is all part of the government's plan to have a '7-day NHS' for non-emergency care. (We already have a 7-day NHS for emergency care). This idea is based on a misuse of statistics to assert wrongly that there are more deaths at weekends because of staffing.

To achieve a 7-day NHS for non-emergency care you have to do one of three things:

1. Pay for more doctors, nurses and other staff to increase care by two days per week - which would cost a lot more money (and the trained staff don't exist because there are already shortages in key areas).
2. Get existing staff to work for longer hours to cover the extra two days - which is unsafe and unfair on those existing staff.
3. Spread the working hours of existing staff more thinly over the week, to cover the extra two days - which will reduce the quality of care.

Now, the government is claiming that it can deliver a 7-day NHS with no significant increase in total budget, with no doctor being paid less, with no-one having to work longer hours and no reduction in quality of care. That so clearly doesn't add up, and doctors have been rightly suspicious of these proposals as a result.

Lo and behold, when NHS Employers released some sample rotas for junior doctors under the new contract, they were found to be full of things like claiming a day immediately after a night shift was a 'day off', despite the doctor having worked for probably about ten hours on that day, from midnight to 10am, and having to return to work that evening. Also, breaking promises on not working consecutive weekends. They are also very worried that, although current junior doctors are being offered this contract, there is no protection for doctors in a few years' time from an updated contract that would be even more unacceptable. In short, what the junior doctors are being asked to do is not fair or safe - and when the government says they won't be paid less or work more hours they simply don't believe it.

Fundamentally, this is about a government trying to push through an uncosted and ill-thought-out manifesto pledge, not listening when the experts expected to deliver it tell them it won't work, carrying on regardless, then spinning against doctors by claiming it's all about pay - which is absolute rubbish. It is also absolute nonsense that changing the junior doctor contract will deliver 7-day NHS, of course, because they will also have to change the contracts of everyone else working in the NHS, too.

The end result is likely to be fewer doctors recruited, more doctors leaving the NHS to work abroad or in private practice, worsening shortages in key specialist areas like paediatrics, an overall worse service - and ultimately a recourse to more private medicine to fill the inevitable gaps, which will be more expensive for all concerned, especially the taxpayer.

So, support our junior doctors! They genuinely don't want to strike. They have been backed into a corner, and have judged that this is worth doing in the short term in an attempt to stave off something that would be much worse for patients in the long term.

Probably the most well-informed and considered post ever on NSC.

 

[glasfryn]

My wife is a junior doctor, so let me take a stab at explaining, as I understand it...

The objections to the current proposals are in large part because of a total (justified) lack of trust in the government on behalf of doctors.

As you know, this is all part of the government's plan to have a '7-day NHS' for non-emergency care. (We already have a 7-day NHS for emergency care). This idea is based on a misuse of statistics to assert wrongly that there are more deaths at weekends because of staffing.

To achieve a 7-day NHS for non-emergency care you have to do one of three things:

1. Pay for more doctors, nurses and other staff to increase care by two days per week - which would cost a lot more money (and the trained staff don't exist because there are already shortages in key areas).
2. Get existing staff to work for longer hours to cover the extra two days - which is unsafe and unfair on those existing staff.
3. Spread the working hours of existing staff more thinly over the week, to cover the extra two days - which will reduce the quality of care.

Now, the government is claiming that it can deliver a 7-day NHS with no significant increase in total budget, with no doctor being paid less, with no-one having to work longer hours and no reduction in quality of care. That so clearly doesn't add up, and doctors have been rightly suspicious of these proposals as a result.

Lo and behold, when NHS Employers released some sample rotas for junior doctors under the new contract, they were found to be full of things like claiming a day immediately after a night shift was a 'day off', despite the doctor having worked for probably about ten hours on that day, from midnight to 10am, and having to return to work that evening. Also, breaking promises on not working consecutive weekends. They are also very worried that, although current junior doctors are being offered this contract, there is no protection for doctors in a few years' time from an updated contract that would be even more unacceptable. In short, what the junior doctors are being asked to do is not fair or safe - and when the government says they won't be paid less or work more hours they simply don't believe it.

Fundamentally, this is about a government trying to push through an uncosted and ill-thought-out manifesto pledge, not listening when the experts expected to deliver it tell them it won't work, carrying on regardless, then spinning against doctors by claiming it's all about pay - which is absolute rubbish. It is also absolute nonsense that changing the junior doctor contract will deliver 7-day NHS, of course, because they will also have to change the contracts of everyone else working in the NHS, too.

The end result is likely to be fewer doctors recruited, more doctors leaving the NHS to work abroad or in private practice, worsening shortages in key specialist areas like paediatrics, an overall worse service - and ultimately a recourse to more private medicine to fill the inevitable gaps, which will be more expensive for all concerned, especially the taxpayer.

So, support our junior doctors! They genuinely don't want to strike. They have been backed into a corner, and have judged that this is worth doing in the short term in an attempt to stave off something that would be much worse for patients in the long term.

anyone who thinks this is NOT what this is all about is living in cloud cockoo land

good post by the way Wayneflete

 

[Prince Monolulu]

My wife is a junior doctor, so let me take a stab at explaining, as I understand it...

The objections to the current proposals are in large part because of a total (justified) lack of trust in the government on behalf of doctors.

As you know, this is all part of the government's plan to have a '7-day NHS' for non-emergency care. (We already have a 7-day NHS for emergency care). This idea is based on a misuse of statistics to assert wrongly that there are more deaths at weekends because of staffing.

To achieve a 7-day NHS for non-emergency care you have to do one of three things:

1. Pay for more doctors, nurses and other staff to increase care by two days per week - which would cost a lot more money (and the trained staff don't exist because there are already shortages in key areas).
2. Get existing staff to work for longer hours to cover the extra two days - which is unsafe and unfair on those existing staff.
3. Spread the working hours of existing staff more thinly over the week, to cover the extra two days - which will reduce the quality of care.

Now, the government is claiming that it can deliver a 7-day NHS with no significant increase in total budget, with no doctor being paid less, with no-one having to work longer hours and no reduction in quality of care. That so clearly doesn't add up, and doctors have been rightly suspicious of these proposals as a result.

Lo and behold, when NHS Employers released some sample rotas for junior doctors under the new contract, they were found to be full of things like claiming a day immediately after a night shift was a 'day off', despite the doctor having worked for probably about ten hours on that day, from midnight to 10am, and having to return to work that evening. Also, breaking promises on not working consecutive weekends. They are also very worried that, although current junior doctors are being offered this contract, there is no protection for doctors in a few years' time from an updated contract that would be even more unacceptable. In short, what the junior doctors are being asked to do is not fair or safe - and when the government says they won't be paid less or work more hours they simply don't believe it.

Fundamentally, this is about a government trying to push through an uncosted and ill-thought-out manifesto pledge, not listening when the experts expected to deliver it tell them it won't work, carrying on regardless, then spinning against doctors by claiming it's all about pay - which is absolute rubbish. It is also absolute nonsense that changing the junior doctor contract will deliver 7-day NHS, of course, because they will also have to change the contracts of everyone else working in the NHS, too.

The end result is likely to be fewer doctors recruited, more doctors leaving the NHS to work abroad or in private practice, worsening shortages in key specialist areas like paediatrics, an overall worse service - and ultimately a recourse to more private medicine to fill the inevitable gaps, which will be more expensive for all concerned, especially the taxpayer.

So, support our junior doctors! They genuinely don't want to strike. They have been backed into a corner, and have judged that this is worth doing in the short term in an attempt to stave off something that would be much worse for patients in the long term.

Well said

 

[beorhthelm]

...Lo and behold, when NHS Employers released some sample rotas for junior doctors under the new contract, they were found to be full of things like claiming a day immediately after a night shift was a 'day off', despite the doctor having worked for probably about ten hours on that day, from midnight to 10am, and having to return to work that evening. Also, breaking promises on not working consecutive weekends. ...

Fundamentally, this is about a government trying to push through an uncosted and ill-thought-out manifesto pledge, not listening when the experts expected to deliver it tell them it won't work, carrying on regardless, then spinning against doctors by claiming it's all about pay - which is absolute rubbish.

some usful insights, but couple of things dont ring true. the rotas dont show patterns as you describe, and i've heard and read BMA reps saying it is about pay, with the fundemental sticking point that they want unsocial hours recognised with higher pay. as i last recall, that was the last of a dozen items unresolved, except the principle of the contract being imposed and the mistrust. which as far as i can tell is whats its really about, if they tore up the pay changes i think they still wouldnt accept it.