On-going Junior Doctors' strike programme

[Hope]

Was wondering where folk stand on this issue?  Is the planned programme of 5 days a month between September and December 'disproportionate' - as the Academy of Royal Medical Colleges has suggested?  Is it 'irresponsible' as Jeremy Hunt has described it?  Is combatting/amending the new contract vital for the future health of the NHS, as some Junior Doctors' leaders seem to have been suggesting throughout their campaign?

Should the proposed imposition of the new contract - due in October - be postponed/cancelled and new talks started, or what?

Any thoughts?

[Udayana]

Does anyone actually understand what is wrong with the amended contract? If so, please can they explain?

[L.A.]

The rhetoric from the government and right-wing press seems to be basically saying:

'all the actual  issues have been resolved and current industrial action is politically motivated be the far left'

I dunno . . . maybe it will prove to be an opportunity to downgrade the NHS and blame it on the doctors?

[Udayana]

Certainly, if the NHS is wracked by disputes and fails to help people when they need it, then anyone with any sense and money will move to private healthcare and the NHS will be degraded. People won't want their taxes spent on a non-working system when they can spend that money more wisely.

However, what does that have to do with whether an employment contract is fair and reasonable or not? Is it fair and reasonable? If not, which bits are unfair or unreasonable?

[L.A.]

However, what does that have to do with whether an employment contract is fair and reasonable or not? Is it fair and reasonable? If not, which bits are unfair or unreasonable?

The issues appeared to have been resolved after the last industrial action, but against most peoples expectation, the deal was narrowly rejected by the doctors. Difficult to see where they can go from here, but I'm sure that there are some who will see it as an 'opportunity' to make more drastic changes  to the NHS.

[Nearly Sane]

The issues appeared to have been resolved after the last industrial action, but against most peoples expectation, the deal was narrowly rejected by the doctors. Difficult to see where they can go from here, but I'm sure that there are some who will see it as an 'opportunity' to make more drastic changes  to the NHS.

The deal was not narrowly rejected

[L.A.]

The deal was not narrowly rejected

Sorry, that was my understanding from BBC news. The general expectation at the time was that it was a fair deal that would be accepted.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry, that was my understanding from BBC news. The general expectation at the time was that it was a fair deal that would be accepted.

58% rejected it. The members, not those who voted

[Nearly Sane]

58% rejected it. The members, not those who voted

As opposed to 25% of voters voting for the govt

[L.A.]

58% rejected it. The members, not those who voted

Apparently 58% is right, but:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/05/junior-doctors-reject-contract-offer

"About 37,000 BMA members, or 68% of the 54,000 trainee doctors and final and penultimate-year medical students who were eligible to vote, took part in the ballot, which closed on Friday. "

so that would be 39% of the total number . . . all of which is totally irrelevant to the point I was making.

If they strike over an offer that is generally seen as reasonable, they will be making a good case for more radical reform.

[Nearly Sane]

Apparently 58% is right, but:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/05/junior-doctors-reject-contract-offer

"About 37,000 BMA members, or 68% of the 54,000 trainee doctors and final and penultimate-year medical students who were eligible to vote, took part in the ballot, which closed on Friday. "

so that would be 39% of the total number . . . all of which is totally irrelevant to the point I was making.

If they strike over an offer that is generally seen as reasonable, they will be making a good case for more radical reform.

how does 37,000, of 54,000 make 39%?

[L.A.]

58% = 0.58
68% = 0.68

0.68*0.58 = 0.3944

0.3944 = 39% (aprox)

[Nearly Sane]

 

58% = 0.58
68% = 0.68

0.68*0.58 = 0.3944

0.3944 = 39% (aprox)

Which wasn't clear from your post but that is 14% more than the govt vote. In addition that's not covering the vote on striking

And why is the the numbers between entitled to vote from your post changed? Can you post something that breaks it down clearly?

[L.A.]

Which wasn't clear from your post but that is 14% more than the govt vote. In addition that's not covering the vote on striking

And why is the the numbers between entitled to vote from your post changed? Can you post something that breaks it down clearly?

NS - I am not attempting to say that the vote is invalid in any way. I have always taken the view that those who choose not to vote in a ballot can't be too bothered about the outcome. However in this case,  as we all know, the NHS is under great stress, so the rejection of an offer, that had been recommended by their own chairman and subsequent strike threats, will probably be seen as unreasonable by a large number of people, and some in the government might want to use it as justification for more drastic changes to the NHS.  For example "in order to pay for the doctors pay demands we must introduce patient fees" - It could happen!

I don't really understand your problem with the figures, it's just GCSE level maths.

[Hope]

The rhetoric from the government and right-wing press seems to be basically saying:

'all the actual  issues have been resolved and current industrial action is politically motivated be the far left'

I dunno . . . maybe it will prove to be an opportunity to downgrade the NHS and blame it on the doctors?

JH seems to be saying - if you're still not happy with something that your 'union' bosses agreed with, come and talk to the government rather than bypassing such discussions and simply striking.  Not sure quite what the right-wing press is saying - I tend to tune out as soon as I hear 'Daily Mail' or 'the Mirror'.

[Jack Knave]

Certainly, if the NHS is wracked by disputes and fails to help people when they need it, then anyone with any sense and money will move to private healthcare and the NHS will be degraded. People won't want their taxes spent on a non-working system when they can spend that money more wisely.

However, what does that have to do with whether an employment contract is fair and reasonable or not? Is it fair and reasonable? If not, which bits are unfair or unreasonable?

Private healthcare have no interest in expensive tricky medical issues all they want is the easy stuff so they can milk it.

Everything the government is doing is forcing the NHS to go fully private like the states - hence many Tories support TTIP. This needs to be resisted with all the force possible. The NHS is being run down so that the people scream for it to be fixed and it will be fixed by the private sector. This is what happened with our other services; they got starved, but the private sector hasn't solved anything, if anything they have made things worse.

[Nearly Sane]

Private healthcare have no interest in expensive tricky medical issues all they want is the easy stuff so they can milk it.

Everything the government is doing is forcing the NHS to go fully private like the states - hence many Tories support TTIP. This needs to be resisted with all the force possible. The NHS is being run down so that the people scream for it to be fixed and it will be fixed by the private sector. This is what happened with our other services; they got starved, but the private sector hasn't solved anything, if anything they have made things worse.

And Nigel supported an American style health service, until he thought it wasn't gating votes and UKIP, well keep guessing

[L.A.]

Private healthcare have no interest in expensive tricky medical issues all they want is the easy stuff so they can milk it.

Everything the government is doing is forcing the NHS to go fully private like the states - hence many Tories support TTIP. This needs to be resisted with all the force possible. The NHS is being run down so that the people scream for it to be fixed and it will be fixed by the private sector. This is what happened with our other services; they got starved, but the private sector hasn't solved anything, if anything they have made things worse.

If the government are indeed trying to privatise the NHS, the junior doctors are aiding and abetting them by making it clear to everyone that the current system doesn't work.

[Udayana]

Private healthcare have no interest in expensive tricky medical issues all they want is the easy stuff so they can milk it.

Everything the government is doing is forcing the NHS to go fully private like the states - hence many Tories support TTIP. This needs to be resisted with all the force possible. The NHS is being run down so that the people scream for it to be fixed and it will be fixed by the private sector. This is what happened with our other services; they got starved, but the private sector hasn't solved anything, if anything they have made things worse.

Maybe or (imo) maybe not. However either way this doesn't tell us what is wrong with the proposed contract or provide any reason for a strike.

ETA: Just been listening to Any Questions .. and seems fairly clear that none of the panel have a clue either.

[Nearly Sane]

If the government are indeed trying to privatise the NHS, the junior doctors are aiding and abetting them by making it clear to everyone that the current system doesn't work.

because obviously there us only not work/ work on something like the NHS and there is no idea that something that complex might work better.

[L.A.]

One of the things that I would bet is going on now, is that private health companies are talking to the government trying to convince them how much more reliable their own services are and no doubt they will be offering additional services during the strikes.

[L.A.]

because obviously there us only not work/ work on something like the NHS and there is no idea that something that complex might work better.

No one believes that the NHS as it stands today is satisfactory,  a prolonged doctors strike will certainly influence future decisions. I am sure that there are those in the government who would favour much more involvement of private companies and patient charges - so maybe that is the way things will go.

Personally I very much hope not.

[Nearly Sane]

One of the things that I would bet is going on now, is that private health companies are talking to the government trying to convince them how much more reliable their own services are and no doubt they will be offering additional services during the strikes.

Quite possibly, sort ofnlijr Southern Rail would be!

[Nearly Sane]

No one believes that the NHS as it stands today is satisfactory,  a prolonged doctors strike will certainly influence future decisions. I am sure that there are those in the government who would favour much more involvement of private companies and patient charges - so maybe that is the way things will go.

Personally I very much hope not.

why is is then that yoy trued to claim one side did think that, and that their opposition to the govts policy was based on that view?

[L.A.]

Quite possibly, sort ofnlijr Southern Rail would be!

Complicated situation and Jeremy's chums are making a bad situation worse - but that's getting way off topic.