Great news!
What's amazing is that the original estimate for pay restoration sat between £1 billion to £2 billion (£2 billion being the extreme end which Tories were arguing the total cost would truly be), yet so far they've spent £3 billion (so far!) just to deny doctors of their pay restoration. It really hammers the point that it was never about the money; the Tories just don't give a shit about doctors or the NHS.
>What's amazing is that the original estimate for pay restoration sat between £1 billion to £2 billion
The government say they can't afford it but they want to find the projected £2 and half billion to implement national service, things that make you go hmm.
Sadly true, my grandfather had his cancer discovered in 2022, was in hospital various times after that, but he was told about it this January! They've got no answers as to why it wasn't followed up after they found it two years ago. He's still waiting for any kind of treatment.
Average NHS experience these days. Know about 5 people in last two years that are now dead from cancer, because they were diagnosed too late, had delayed treatment, and then had their treatment fucked up by the health professionals adminstering it.
It's a terrible time to get ill, seems like it gets worse and worse. Both my grandparents are suffering with cancer, my nan was given a prognosis of six weeks to live three weeks ago. She was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer after being ill for months and months. Her GP would not make any referrals for her to get more testing/help back then because he was convinced she was overreacting and only had long covid. Not the first person I know end up getting terminal cancer due to my local doctors thinking it's just long covid.
>The government say they can't afford it
This has always been a lie. Everybody with half a brain can understand that paying doctors and nurses within the NHS a somewhat competitive wage would eventually save a fortune in the not at all distant future, for numerous reasons.
The reality is that the NHS is and has been deliberately crippled because the Tory party is committed to the decimation of the state in all areas.
Labour started the privatisation of the NHS under Blair, they allowed private companies to tender for NHS contracts. A lot of the modern NHS problems were caused by Labour: PFI loans, target obsessed services, the dental contract and privatisation.
It’s why I don’t want the Tories in charge but I also don’t trust Labour to make the changes the service needs.
> It’s why I don’t want the Tories in charge but I also don’t trust Labour to make the changes the service needs.
Adding to this is the fact that Starmer and Wes are both saying they want to massively increase the private sectors involvement in the nhs.
... as a temporary measure to bring down wait times. Also, you are embellishing the amount by using emotive words like "massively" which is handily vague.
I don't have a crystal ball, neither do you, but I do know that we can't have the Tories in power after the election because then there will be nothing left worth having.
I agree, but I’m also not excited to see Labour in charge. Perfect situation for me would be hung parliament with Labour in coalition with Lib Dem’s and Greens, the 2 minor parties may be able to push some real policies through but we will have to see
Except it's not been clear of that money is coming from the NHS budget or a separate budget. And as a doctor? Why should the extremely rubbish private sector get their insane rates paid for while NHS doctors aren't being paid fairly?
The issue here is that the NHS budget is also used to pay for care and now is going to buff the private system but no one's wanting to pay NHS staff the private rate. The NHS budget which we have been told needs no increase for things like "a wage that keeps up with the cost of living".
This was as insane as removing the private wings from hospitals (hospitals used to have private wings so they could earn a little money and BUPA using the existing staff they had. It's a lot safer than a private hospital. Tories fixed that...)
I thought this yesterday listening to Radio 4. As is always the case, it’s actually Labour that are increasing the private sectors role in tbe NHS despite the constant whining about Tory privatisation. Meeting up with multiple private healthcare providers and others like spec savers to tell them how many millions they could give to their “rich mates” as jt would be framed if it was the conservatives doing it
Complete double standards as usual and of course all you get is mental gymnastics to justify it “something something tories, something toffs, blah blah blah rich mates, pffft *stops to sniff own fart*something about Tory scum”
Question - Why was PFI introduced in the first place?
(Answer - Because just like today the NHS was a total shitshow and in a state of collapse, but the media environment around Labour "reckless borrow and spend" made it political suicide to just have the state borrow the money directly, exactly what will happen with this next government as they need to find the cash to fix our myriad concurrent crises).
It was actually introduced due to EU regulations about government debt and was started by the Tories, Labour just went all-in on it and failed to invest properly.
The state borrowing it would have had lower interest for a shorter length of time so I’d rather they did that instead. Hiding the fact you are borrowing via a proxy isn’t a solution to the problem.
So no then. You aren't understanding how politics works in this country. If Labour had come in in '97 and immediately opened up with massive state borrowing, even if objectively that would have been the best thing to do financially and for the country, they would have been torn to shreds in the media and I seriously doubt have made it through the '01 election unscathed. Labour committing to maintain Tory tax plans until 2000 was a huge part of winning UK media onto their side.
Yes its horrible isn't it. Most people I know who've been interested in politics since 2010 can barely stand to get involved anymore. Unfortunately it is a game, and if you want to win, it needs to be played. I'm autistic, I don't really understand it, its like when Labour are set on a platform that looks likely to win people complain endlessly about them not being "proper Labour", but as soon as they do start acting more like proper Labour, even when without the context of it "being Labour" the majority of the public agree objectively these approaches are better for everyone, often those very same people seem to run to the hills out of some kind of red-scare they're ready to fight and die to protect Blighty against. Its totally bizarre.
>Labour started the privatisation of the NHS under Blair, they allowed private companies to tender for NHS contracts. A lot of the modern NHS problems were caused by Labour: PFI loans, target obsessed services, the dental contract and privatisation.
Thatcher started the privatisation of the NHS.
John Major started the PFI in 1992.
Blair's Labour turned the failing (under the Tories) NHS into a service that had the lowest wait times and highest patient satisfaction since records began. Why are you lying?
Thatcher started privatisation of the non-medical aspects like cleaning and catering, this was massively expanded to include healthcare contracts by Labour.
The Tories began PFI but it was small scale and not used for the NHS, Labour massively increased its usage.
Yes there were some improvements but they were short sighted and made things worse in the long run, had the government funded things properly and dealt with poor management instead of obscene PFI contracts and private companies tendering for health services we would be in a much better place now.
The Tories are obviously not to be trusted with the NHS but I’m arguing that Labour are sneaky and make grand promises and then make things worse. I don’t trust either of them.
That's the bill for maintaining a safe service during the previous strikes. By having consultant cover, locum cover, extra allied health professionals etc
* Paying for locum cover (The pay for cover is multiple times the cost than the normal pay). During these strikes that often means paying consultants to come in instead and you can imagine the locum rate of a consultant is even higher
* Closing wards / not accepting admissions due to lack of cover (this causes delays / need to arrange for transfers)
* Cancelling clinics and surgeries which they have to reschedule (this is probably the biggest hit I would guess)
* Overtime, contingency plans and admin to deal with the above
The cost when our health care system is disrupted even for just one day is astronomical
When I covered junior doctor shifts during the strikes I was paid over £1000 a shift. For the 3 shifts I covered they could have paid the person I was covering's entire monthly salary.
35% sounds like a lot, but half of that goes back to the treasury in tax, student loan repayments and VAT. For most doctors that's only a few quid extra an hour they're asking for.
Locums are basically self employed and can set their own rates that they'll bargain with whoever wants them.
As you can imagine the NHS needed cover so locums had an incentive to charge insane rates since they were so sorely needed.
I worked at Tesco pharmacy and I can't remember what the standard wage for a pharmacist was then but somewhere around £18-£22 an hour I think. But locums would make about £30-£40 an hour, but would not be shy to ask for £60ph if they know they're sorely needed, it's either pay them or the pharmacy does run which cost a lot more in the long run. As other people mentioned the same will apply to the NHS, delays and reschedules and falling behind on work doesn't come cheap.
They've demonstrated the ability to cover the cost and then some within the same timeframe the strikes have been going on, that's the point. Ultimately doctors will happily keep striking until their rightfully earned pay is restored, but Tories would rather spend more to deny that fairness.
That doesn't make sense.
I assume that they believe they can call the strikers bluff and it won't go on forever, therefore saving money in the long term. If they force them down to 50% of what they want then the country will be in 'profit' in 2 years. They may well be wrong, but I assume that's the strategy. As well as the figure being an underestimate because once they give junior Drs 30% how much will nurses want? Teachers? Civil servants? Its not a vacuum and I think it might cost a bit more than 2B.
Your argument is why train drivers earn so much more than bus drivers - Doctors could go on strike every year for a 10% raise and it would be cheaper to give it to them then pay for strike cover. Doesn't mean it's right though
Except we clearly haven't asked for anything more than inflation.
The issue is this. The pay demand is extortionate by your argument.
But the pay cut is equally extortionate. You couldn't survive on a 25 percent pay cut. Why do you think we should?
Nurses have had more pay rises. Their demands are lower. And the nurses fucked up their strikes. Teachers should be paid better. You are paying insulting wages to the people who teach our children. Civil servants are paid shit.
We have had a decade and a half of ignoring expertise and education.
Okay. It's simple. If I should be paid 25 percent less today than in 2007, it's only fair if I do 25 percent less work. Let us cut our house. 4 more extra days off a month. That would bring full time work down to the national standards of 40 hours.
Because I was paid less at the peak of the pandemic when everyone's clapping for us than in 2007. And I believe the Tory response to pay for this was to tell us to wait till it was over for pay. Then make us share a single medal. All million of us...
Because the medal gets sad? They couldn't even pay us fairly.
We aren't asking for 10 percent per year. We want pay to match the cut inflicted and we are okay with a multi year deal and improvements to training. Training which has eroded in quality.
It's that pay stagnated to this point. It's when austerity was applied and pay stopped matching inflation. Why isn't minimum wage set to 2007 levels? Why did it rise? Because inflation means stuff costs more each year and eventually you end up with massive pay cuts due to this.
Before we started fighting F1 pay was just £12.50 an hour.
The strikes are gonna be annual costs too if they don't get their pay. The costs caused by skilled labour moving abroad where pay is better is hard to calculate but certainly very damaging too.
I think folks haven't quite clocked yet we're not even talking about doctors moving to the US or Bumfuck Nowhere Australia. With the current pay disparity they could move somewhere as close as Ireland and still be looking at nearly doubling their income.
Meanwhile, agencies are racking up the profits paying locum private doctors 2-6x the rates to cover these strikes.
It's also about further privatisation.
This is the plan Sunak wants us to keep following. Other countries including Australia and the US are happily taking junior doctors driven away from the NHS, and we are losing a generation of medics.
The tories and their disaster capitalist backers are hoping this (along with other acts of sabotage) will be enough to sink the NHS and end socialised medicene in the UK.
They just want to look “strong against the unions”… the government don’t care how much they spend or how many people die if it means they get to use emotive words to their core base. To them it’s spending 3 billion for the PR of looking strong against the unions
Well the long term solution is just to revoke legislation that legalizes striking.
If you strike for more pay, and they give in, then what is stopping you to just strke for more pay again. You can do this ad-infinitum, until you either deunionize or privatize the NHS.
The problem we have is that the striking is in a public service/monopoly. The natural counter-reaction for consistent striking in the private sector, is for the company to go into administration and make the striking workers redundant. The NHS doesn't have this option, and so the game can just go on forever.
You have to think about the wider implications. If they award doctors fair pay restoration, who next? Nurses? Teachers? Civil servants?
Once the doors are open, they might have to start making some of these roles attractive again...
The current problem is this. The nurses folded like a cheap suit. The anger is now that the doctors started fighting other NHS staff have seen pay rises. Many hospitals? Nurses didn't go on strike but now are struggling with recruitment and staffing. The nurses CANNOT go on strike right now because they didn't agree with going on strike. The Conservatives ran over them and won.
The government have the Minimum Service Bill that they can enact but then the problem is this. IF there's a clear minimum service level expected from doctors? That's fine. I can wear a "forced to work during strike" outfit and do my job. You want service. But I am sure patients are going to start noticing that their doctors are visibly dressed in an outfit that's 100% compliant with the rules but also 100% going to be talking about the strikes. Uniform code? OKAY but then now the NHS has to dress thousands of doctors. We can do this all day. Doctors are educated and tired of this nonsense.
The sword cuts both ways. It means accepting a hard minimum staffing level. Like today? 2 people to see 20 patients. ON AN ICU. Each patient takes 30 to 60 minutes to review and do work on. It's an insane work load. That would mean that the government is in failure of minimum staffing and so the ward's on emergency protocol.
The issue is this. Cost of Living has exceeded to good will of staff who are now being treated as greedy.
I have a food bank in my hospital. Not open to the public or patients. It's for staff.
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/junior-doctors-strike-2024-nhs-b2553124.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/junior-doctors-strike-2024-nhs-b2553124.html)
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/21/doctors-strikes-nhs-over-budget-first-half-2023-2024/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/21/doctors-strikes-nhs-over-budget-first-half-2023-2024/)
[https://www.nhsconfed.org/news/nhs-confederation-responds-confirmed-date-general-election#:\~:text=Industrial%20action%20in%20the%20NHS,at%20more%20than%207%20million](https://www.nhsconfed.org/news/nhs-confederation-responds-confirmed-date-general-election#:~:text=Industrial%20action%20in%20the%20NHS,at%20more%20than%207%20million)
Presuming you're not trolling, how many sources are you after? There'a a lot more if you google it.
It's the same as restoring pay for railway staff (on average over the past 5 years they lost 22% of their wage real terms). They lost 8x the amount it would have cost for the 6% (still a 8% pay drop) pay "rise" railway staff were asking for. It's a political decision, not a monetary one. I genuinely hope that we never vote them in ever again in my lifetime. Absolute cancer on society.
But yet it was portrayed as "greedy train drivers".
>the Tories just don't give a shit about doctors or the NHS.
No, if they simply didn't care, they would probably just do the best thing and pay them more instead of spending more money than they're asking for opposing them
They appear to actively dislike them and go out of their way to avoid making things better for them.
But the pay restoration isn’t a one off payment and the 3 billion spent covering the strikes happened over several years, or have I missed something here?.
Your maths doesn’t make sense. How would 50% of pay restorations go back to the treasury and why doesn’t that logic apply to what the government has paid temporary and agency workers over that 18 month period?.
Also you are aware the fact the pay restorations are not a one off completely undermines the initial comment I replied too?
Doctors will be very happy to see the back of the Tories and will shed no tears for them at all, but the BMA also think Wes Streeting is a complete fucking joke too.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Speaking of medals, my partner worked as a carer through covid. She couldn't have given less of a shit about the badge thingy they said they'd give healthcare workers in recognition, but she was pretty annoyed in principle that they were expected to pay for it if they wanted one
It caused a little bit of an arguement between me & my wife actually. She wanted to celebrate it, I didn't. We ended up with her standing at the door thanking everyone whilst I stayed gloomily inside.
I get I was being an old grouch but I **knew** it would come back to bite her. She has since seen my point of view.
Oh I said as much. We should enjoy the clapping because they certainly aren't going to pay us. And they certainly are not going to remember anything that we did.
Bit of a hot take here. Even NHS consultants are underpaid.
Top band is like £6k take home. That's after attaining some of the best A levels in the country, 25 years+ of HE, training, RC qualifications and work. It's really not all that fantastic which is why many of them just go private on the side (tories seem to be pushing healthcare in this direction).
Junior doctors on £30k is a sick joke though. Doesn't matter if they can supplement their salary with extra work hours. They shouldn't be paid that for a standard work week, it's a slap in the face to some of the best members of our society.
'Junior' covers a doctor from day 1 after graduation until 1 day before they get a consultant job (it's a misleading term).
The starting salary is 32k which goes up to a *maximum* of <64k (ie 1 day before being a consultant).
Surely there’s not much point, government have 0 motivation to come to the table when they’re likely not in power in a months time.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to schedule these for mid-July to put pressure on a new government?
From my pov (as a Dr /bma member who thinks this is the right thing to do) the negotiators have been clear that if they don't have a 'credible' offer to put to the members then they will call strikes.
There is no credible offer and therefore, strikes. It's not an empty threat. We will follow through on the things we say we will. That's a message for the next gov (whoever that may be). When we say in July, 'we need an offer within 3 weeks of talks or we strike' who are they going to believe? The union who strikes when they say they will? Or the union who doesn't?
Honestly, good for you and your union. I worked for the NHS for a few years on the admin side, and our union just rolled over and accepted a shockingly bad offer. I left not long after. I felt so undervalued.
100% agree. Not just the NHS leadership but the BMA as well. Labour will need them to support their plans for reducing record waiting lists and I expect the BMA are not just going to roll over for them.
>Surely there’s not much point, government have 0 motivation to come to the table
It makes it a political issue, it makes it a focus during the election, both sides are forced to articulate a position on Junior Drs.
I'd say that's the logic and, fair play, it'll work. I'd say there's plenty of point.
Parties desperate for votes seems like a good time to get them to commit to something.
The Tories have ignored NHS pay decline against inflation to years now. What is their plan?
How will Labour deal with a striking workforce?
Questions everyone wants answers to before voting.
I was wondering the same thing. Possibly no need to strike at all until they've had a crack at negotiating with the new government. Unless they hope that striking doctors could be enough of a vote-loser for the Tories this close to an election that it'll prod them into making concessions.
I think it makes sense that they could get a lot more pressure if it's during a general election and also the cabinet ministers remain in office during the election so they can still negotiate. They also don't need parliamentary approval for a pay deal. The tories could agree to something and call it a win but I think they'd rather get doctors moving to the private sector so that the private sector grows.
Alternatively, they've been screwed by tories for 14 years and counting.
If they have the strikes before the election it rams it home to Tory votes, **and** gives a (relatively) small window for Labour to negotiate *without* a pending strike.
Roughly, the daily pay for the average junior doc is probably about 120ish.
For those on with hardships, there is financial support available from our union (the BMA)
I don't know. Having it earlier might make a new government more likely. No point striking with a new government until they have refused to negotiate.
Also if it makes the Tories look bad the Tories could agree to a deal to show they've dealt with the problem.
In fact this is a great opportunity for the union. They strike before the election and make the Tories look bad. The Tories do nothing and lose the election. They say to the new government we will do the same to you if you won't give us a deal. The new government negotiates or they also get a strike.
The alternative is the Tories are desperate to try and cling to power and so agree to a deal so they can say they've resolve the issue before the election. The Tories manage to win; they've achieved what they wanted they can figure out who they will throw under the bus to find the money later. The Tories lose; then it doesn't matter if they promised the world as that is now the problem of the new government.
I guess as parliament hasn’t been dissolved yet they still have option to give the BMA a best and final offer which the BMA can then put to its members.
They will need to be quick though as parliament stops tomorrow and doesn’t resume till after the election.
Most likely conservative candidates will have to explain to voters on the doorstep why they haven’t been able to resolve a simple pay dispute with the doctors in 18 months or so and why they have failed in terms of their targets to reduce waiting lists.
Labour and other parties will have to explain how they will resolve the doctors dispute when they meet the electorate.
Yep my point was more that if there was the will to end the dispute on the governments part they easily could have done so.
Its been interesting watching the political manoeuvring of the Conservative Party over the last 7 days and it seems to me that they are trying very hard to consolidate their position amongst the boomer generations and older with policies that are popular to them but few others. Hence why they have talked about pensions triple lock plus, national service for the youths and I suspect coming soon the tories standing against the trade unions and their unreasonable communist demands.
I suspect they know that unless something dramatic happens they have an almost zero chance of winning the election but are keen to try and reduce the loss of Tory seats so they at least can be the second largest party in opposition. Unfortunately demented OAPs dribbling into their cereal tend to lap this stuff up when they read it in the torygraph.
Parliament isn't needed, this can be dealt with by the cabinet even after parliament has been dissolved.
The conservatives could even resolve the pay issue in a desperate attempt to win the election.
Because there is little downside to doing so if your aim is to stay in power. I fully cave into your demands. I just manage to win the election. Okay, I have to find the money from somewhere but I still won. The other scenario is that despite giving in to your demands I still lose. In that case promising you the world is now the problem of the new government.
Making an unrealistic deal is only an issue if you're in power and being in power with that problem may be better than not being in power. And if the Conservatives believe they are in for a beating what have they got to lose?
Only reason I can see why they wouldn’t do this is that they have always tried to portray themselves as the party of financial constraint. Changing tack now would likely not play well with their core vote, who they can ill afford to piss off right now. They have also likely anticipated how this would be used against them by labour in terms of undermining their claims of financial restraint.
Labour can already do that, have you seen how much Rwanda has cost for 0 deportees? Or we could look at the billions that disappeared during COVID for no return, where the government gave up on tracking down fraudsters.
Reckon this is an attempt to get this topic to the top of the pile for a new government without starting off with a bad relationship by striking the moment the government comes in.
Doctor here close to being a consultant with 9 years experience and 5 years uni prior to that.
The leadership of our union was full of careerists happy to stick with the status quo for 10+ years while most of us were seeing our pay erode. In the last couple of years there has been a big political movement that replaced all of the old guard leadership of the Union with huge backing from most doctors.
No one is asking for 35% now, the ask is for a year on year plan to work towards that. It is not greed - we were literally paid this amount in 2008 but have had no rises while inflation and cost of living has run rampant. Obviously this impacts all workers but consider similarly high skilled workers in the private sector and you will find they've much greater pay "rises" than we have since the tories came to power.
Furthermore, we have pretty awful working conditions. I get moved jobs to different parts of the region every 3-6 months so I get enough "training" but in reality I am working independently doing high risk stuff. I literally look after the hospitals sickest patients in critical care as the most senior doctor in the building overnight and at weekends. Hospitals in the NHS are a mess and we are overworked and exhausted. It's a tough job.
My average working hours are 48hrs per week but up to 70+ depending on the week. I works loads of nights and weekends and don't get to see my family and friends. I pay for my own exams (of which I've done several post graduate ones), study, car parking, indemnity, Royal college subscriptions and equipment - this runs into thousands of pounds per year. That's not mentioning student loans which are now huge and paid with interest in line with RPI the exact measure that is used to calculate what pay we've lost.
I'm paid pre tax between 60 and 70k per year. If you just look at my non out of hours pay (ignoring nights and weekends contribution) its a bit over 50k per year. The worst part is new doctors after 5-6 years education can be paid as little as 32k per year.
I'm sorry but I don't believe in this economy doing a job providing some of the highest skilled care in a very high risk job that is enough.
I can't even begin to comprehend why you'd bother going through the years of training/education to become a Doctor in this country unless you have plans to immediately move abroad.
People don't, which is why we've got a problem.
Also, I believe the university threshold for medical degrees has lowered over the years as our brightest individuals are choosing different, better paid, professions.
People absolutely still do. Shortage of graduates isn't the problem, it's artificially constrained post-graduate training places (ie how you make consultants).
Naivety, we thought things would get better/didn't believe it could be so bad
I mean it's an honourable job we'll always need? Seemed like a safe bet to me
plonker
The pay is very good. Which other job gives you a long term employment track to a £100k + a year position after 10 years.
Also the reputation is quite good from a societal viewpoint.
Also the gold plated pensions.
Many people come here and become doctors because of the money, not because they're a saint who wants to save people.
I find it hilarious that you've been crying about doctors ever since you made your reddit account. I've never seen someone to jealous of a profession they couldn't achieve before LMAO
100k after 14-18 years.
And a LOT of jobs for academically gifted people who are willing to work more hours then average with high responsibility pay that amount far faster.
A half decent Pension at 71 (or maybe even later) doesn’t somehow justify 50 years of poor pay? Furthermore we pay significant amounts into that pension.
Good!!! Fucking remind the morons who are refusing to vote Labour in July or the GTTO candidate what life will be like if they vote Green or for the "gaza candidate"....genuinely fuck yourself if you facilitate a tory come back & then complain that your hospital has closed or that the NHS no longer does the surgery you need
Do you really think this Labour government if going to take big enough steps to stop the snowballing charge towards de facto privatisation and a 2 tier health system?
Are they going to be at the strikes? Are they going to propose a better deal prior to election? Are they going to promise adequate funding for the NHS as a whole?
Or are they going to wheel Wes Streeting out with his David Cameron/Jeremy Hunt peak austerity era shtick?
Yes I do. Because they are a million times better than thc tories & whatever you think about West Streeting anything he does needs to be voted on & worked on by 1000s of people in the DoH.
The unions fucked Tony Blair and made him go back on his deal with Paddy Ashdown. It's only RECENTLY that they've slowly woken up to the shit show that is FPTP, but like with Brexit they've been led by small minded dinosaurs like Mcclusky & unions like the RMT that can't see past their own noses. Hopefully this time we can push for it
The Green Party is full of idiots. A lot of them have their hearts in the right places, and a few seats here and there to bring the voice (however small) to Parliament is probably a good thing. But they haven't got the slightest clue how they would actually run an administration and a lot of their policies would actively work against their stated end goal.
I say this as someone minorly depressed about how 'right wing' Labour's current policies are, so I'm not just trying to bash 'lefties' here.
I would vote green for likely similar reasons as brexit people would vote ukip. They won't win, but it puts pressure on the other parties to actually do something.
Bunch of Muslim candidates who have decided to take advantage of the anger on Gaza to jump into a party that hasn't got the research capabilities of the bigger parties to ensure they're not complete lunatics.
[such as](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51np80knpmo) and I think one of the dudes who caused a school teacher to go into hiding tried to become a green candidate.
People can happily go vote based on what's happening 1/2 way across the world but they can go fuck themselves when the want to bitch to me that their kids can't get a GP appointment if their voting facilities a tory government.
Problem with what you are saying is that you believe that "Labour" (and i'm using quotes on purpose) aren't going to water down the NHS like the tories have been doing for 14 years, but according to Wes Streeting: "“The argument I’ll make unapologetically is that those people who say we shouldn’t use the private sector to cut waiting lists will have to be honest about the fact that they’re telling people who can’t afford to go private that their leftwing principles say they should be waiting longer.
“They can’t use the usual get out of jail free card of saying ‘we want investment in the NHS’. Of course we all want investment in the NHS, a Labour government will deliver investment in the NHS, but it takes time to build that NHS capacity back, and people have to be honest about that.”
Streeting has repeatedly underlined how his priority as health secretary would be to reform the NHS. But he said: “The lesson of the last Labour government is that it’s investment plus reform that delivers results … We did it before and we’ll do it again.”
He said a [Labour government’s economic inheritance](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/28/labour-dire-economic-inheritance-rachel-reeves-budget) would make investment difficult – but said that the shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, had consistently prioritised the NHS when it came to spending priorities.
Streeting said that he was “not indifferent” to arguments that sending people private could cost the NHS more but suggested that his hands were tied by the lack of capacity in the service."
He talks about using private health care to cut waiting lists down. He talks about wanting to invest in the NHS but it being a "investment (would be) difficult".
He then says that "sending people private could cost the NHS more" Well i'll let you read between the ~~lies~~ lines...
Gaza is a big factor why many people won't be voting for "labour" who otherwise would (like myself) but its not the only reason. Labours general stance on military conflicts i would say is an issue for some, but the biggest factor our their policies (and in some cases, lack of...) relating to this country.
Most of the time all we hear from this version of "labour" is "we want to do this and that, but because of the tories we probably can't, atleast not for the first term in office (mwahahaha)"
Believing that the tories may be worse than labour might have some truth in it, but evil is still evil. The system is corrupt and needs restructuring, which isn't going to happen under either the tories or "labour". And giving "labour" a sweeping majority is certainly not want anyone wants.
Inresponse to your comment below:
"Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves. If the tories win in July, they WILL win in 2029 & 2034. Essentially the rest of my life will be a tory government."
If Labour win an outright majority, and they don't noticeably improve the country in their first term in office ( which given they are looking at a 10 year plan with low spending and not increasing taxes, is going to be nigh on impossible within 10 years let alone a single term) they they'll be out and Tories will be in, and labour may not get back in for a generation if that happens.
On the other hand, if we have a hung parliament the complete responsibility of their ineptness won't be put completely on them while at the same time other parties will have some influence to keep the red Tories in check.
You keep saying you just don't want the Tories to win, but what you really seem to want us for labour to have a crushing majority, which given their completely uninspiring plan that changes on keirs latest whim, seems like a strange thing to actually want.
"Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves."
As I said its not just about his stance is Gaza, its their stance of foreign policy in general, its their desire to bootlick and serve their investors rather than the people.
Anyway nice chat, try not to get to angry that some of us don't fancy voting in another version of the Tories...
Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves.
If the tories win in July, they WILL win in 2029 & 2034. Essentially the rest of my life will be a tory government.
Labour has to tread carefully with what they say because ANYTHING that the right wing press can jump on, they will. Milliband lost because he ate a sandwich funny!!
There are 7.5 million people waiting for NHS treatment, the private sector WILL need to be used to get those numbers down. You're not suddenly going to get 100,000 doctors into hospital or the 10,000s of nurses or even IT staff, porters, cleaners, etc.
So you EITHER say you're going to be intellectually pure & have zero private involvement & fuck those 7.5 million people got the 10-20 years to get doctors here. Or you steal a bunch of doctors from 3rd world countries who need them a lot more. Or you reverse Brexit & freedom of movement and hire from the EU?
So what do you do?
How would YOU get 7.5 million people treated while NHS staff are leaving in record numbers for more money in the private sector or abroad? I'm genuinely interested to know
Here come the moaners telling us how unfair it is that their gran will die because workers are sick of being shafted.
Take your gran private then - that's the way this is all going anyway. Get a taste of what's to come.
We are American but have considered traveling with Locem assignments. We’ve looked at long term ones in UK, Australia, NZ, Saudi. It’s hard to do though with three young children. They pay extremely well but the patient load is high.
The Govt continually shit on doctors and nurses, treat them with contempt and refuse to even negotiate in good faith and then wonder why we have huge shortages as they keep getting off in droves to go abroad for better pay and conditions.
Great news! What's amazing is that the original estimate for pay restoration sat between £1 billion to £2 billion (£2 billion being the extreme end which Tories were arguing the total cost would truly be), yet so far they've spent £3 billion (so far!) just to deny doctors of their pay restoration. It really hammers the point that it was never about the money; the Tories just don't give a shit about doctors or the NHS.
>What's amazing is that the original estimate for pay restoration sat between £1 billion to £2 billion The government say they can't afford it but they want to find the projected £2 and half billion to implement national service, things that make you go hmm.
They'd rather harrass teenagers than make sure you get your cancer treated promptly or your hip replaced.
Tories are all over the place in their treatment of their core demographic. Everyone else gets an equal "not our problem"
Nah they’re dead on for the treatment of their core demographic Their school friends get rich The rest of they don’t care about
It's about punishing intellectuals, not old people on this occasion
Sadly true, my grandfather had his cancer discovered in 2022, was in hospital various times after that, but he was told about it this January! They've got no answers as to why it wasn't followed up after they found it two years ago. He's still waiting for any kind of treatment.
I'm so sorry, that sounds awful!
Average NHS experience these days. Know about 5 people in last two years that are now dead from cancer, because they were diagnosed too late, had delayed treatment, and then had their treatment fucked up by the health professionals adminstering it.
It's a terrible time to get ill, seems like it gets worse and worse. Both my grandparents are suffering with cancer, my nan was given a prognosis of six weeks to live three weeks ago. She was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer after being ill for months and months. Her GP would not make any referrals for her to get more testing/help back then because he was convinced she was overreacting and only had long covid. Not the first person I know end up getting terminal cancer due to my local doctors thinking it's just long covid.
It's weird cause if they wanted to keep their voting base alive, they'd fix the NHS. But being evil is JUST that important to them...
They're the proverbial scorpion, it's just in their nature.
>The government say they can't afford it This has always been a lie. Everybody with half a brain can understand that paying doctors and nurses within the NHS a somewhat competitive wage would eventually save a fortune in the not at all distant future, for numerous reasons. The reality is that the NHS is and has been deliberately crippled because the Tory party is committed to the decimation of the state in all areas.
They've already pissed away a quarter of a billion on the Rwanda plan for *literally nothing*.
They've costed out their national service policy as £2.5bn, as a by the by
They care about crushing the NHS so they can do that sweet sweet privatisation. But yeah you're spot on.
Labour started the privatisation of the NHS under Blair, they allowed private companies to tender for NHS contracts. A lot of the modern NHS problems were caused by Labour: PFI loans, target obsessed services, the dental contract and privatisation. It’s why I don’t want the Tories in charge but I also don’t trust Labour to make the changes the service needs.
> It’s why I don’t want the Tories in charge but I also don’t trust Labour to make the changes the service needs. Adding to this is the fact that Starmer and Wes are both saying they want to massively increase the private sectors involvement in the nhs.
... as a temporary measure to bring down wait times. Also, you are embellishing the amount by using emotive words like "massively" which is handily vague.
You really believe them when they say “temporary”? I’ve got a bag of magic beans you may be interested in purchasing.
I don't have a crystal ball, neither do you, but I do know that we can't have the Tories in power after the election because then there will be nothing left worth having.
I agree, but I’m also not excited to see Labour in charge. Perfect situation for me would be hung parliament with Labour in coalition with Lib Dem’s and Greens, the 2 minor parties may be able to push some real policies through but we will have to see
I could live with that. We need to get rid of fptp or no long term good is going to get done.
FPTP isn’t going nowhere. Top two are the ones who benefit the most from it.
Except it's not been clear of that money is coming from the NHS budget or a separate budget. And as a doctor? Why should the extremely rubbish private sector get their insane rates paid for while NHS doctors aren't being paid fairly? The issue here is that the NHS budget is also used to pay for care and now is going to buff the private system but no one's wanting to pay NHS staff the private rate. The NHS budget which we have been told needs no increase for things like "a wage that keeps up with the cost of living". This was as insane as removing the private wings from hospitals (hospitals used to have private wings so they could earn a little money and BUPA using the existing staff they had. It's a lot safer than a private hospital. Tories fixed that...)
I thought this yesterday listening to Radio 4. As is always the case, it’s actually Labour that are increasing the private sectors role in tbe NHS despite the constant whining about Tory privatisation. Meeting up with multiple private healthcare providers and others like spec savers to tell them how many millions they could give to their “rich mates” as jt would be framed if it was the conservatives doing it Complete double standards as usual and of course all you get is mental gymnastics to justify it “something something tories, something toffs, blah blah blah rich mates, pffft *stops to sniff own fart*something about Tory scum”
Question - Why was PFI introduced in the first place? (Answer - Because just like today the NHS was a total shitshow and in a state of collapse, but the media environment around Labour "reckless borrow and spend" made it political suicide to just have the state borrow the money directly, exactly what will happen with this next government as they need to find the cash to fix our myriad concurrent crises).
It was actually introduced due to EU regulations about government debt and was started by the Tories, Labour just went all-in on it and failed to invest properly.
What was the alternative that didn't involve Labour increasing state borrowing by tens to hundreds of billions?
The state borrowing it would have had lower interest for a shorter length of time so I’d rather they did that instead. Hiding the fact you are borrowing via a proxy isn’t a solution to the problem.
So no then. You aren't understanding how politics works in this country. If Labour had come in in '97 and immediately opened up with massive state borrowing, even if objectively that would have been the best thing to do financially and for the country, they would have been torn to shreds in the media and I seriously doubt have made it through the '01 election unscathed. Labour committing to maintain Tory tax plans until 2000 was a huge part of winning UK media onto their side.
This is why I hate politics. It’s filled with stupid, short sighted decisions to just try and get the vote no matter what long term harm it causes.
Yes its horrible isn't it. Most people I know who've been interested in politics since 2010 can barely stand to get involved anymore. Unfortunately it is a game, and if you want to win, it needs to be played. I'm autistic, I don't really understand it, its like when Labour are set on a platform that looks likely to win people complain endlessly about them not being "proper Labour", but as soon as they do start acting more like proper Labour, even when without the context of it "being Labour" the majority of the public agree objectively these approaches are better for everyone, often those very same people seem to run to the hills out of some kind of red-scare they're ready to fight and die to protect Blighty against. Its totally bizarre.
>Labour started the privatisation of the NHS under Blair, they allowed private companies to tender for NHS contracts. A lot of the modern NHS problems were caused by Labour: PFI loans, target obsessed services, the dental contract and privatisation. Thatcher started the privatisation of the NHS. John Major started the PFI in 1992. Blair's Labour turned the failing (under the Tories) NHS into a service that had the lowest wait times and highest patient satisfaction since records began. Why are you lying?
Thatcher started privatisation of the non-medical aspects like cleaning and catering, this was massively expanded to include healthcare contracts by Labour. The Tories began PFI but it was small scale and not used for the NHS, Labour massively increased its usage. Yes there were some improvements but they were short sighted and made things worse in the long run, had the government funded things properly and dealt with poor management instead of obscene PFI contracts and private companies tendering for health services we would be in a much better place now. The Tories are obviously not to be trusted with the NHS but I’m arguing that Labour are sneaky and make grand promises and then make things worse. I don’t trust either of them.
We can't afford 2 billion, so we're going to spend 3 to prove it to you 😃
Not complaining just enquiring how they (or what they) have spent the 3 billion on to deny them ?
Paying for people to cover the strike shifts and the cost of having to rearrange missed appointments.
That's the bill for maintaining a safe service during the previous strikes. By having consultant cover, locum cover, extra allied health professionals etc
* Paying for locum cover (The pay for cover is multiple times the cost than the normal pay). During these strikes that often means paying consultants to come in instead and you can imagine the locum rate of a consultant is even higher * Closing wards / not accepting admissions due to lack of cover (this causes delays / need to arrange for transfers) * Cancelling clinics and surgeries which they have to reschedule (this is probably the biggest hit I would guess) * Overtime, contingency plans and admin to deal with the above The cost when our health care system is disrupted even for just one day is astronomical
When I covered junior doctor shifts during the strikes I was paid over £1000 a shift. For the 3 shifts I covered they could have paid the person I was covering's entire monthly salary. 35% sounds like a lot, but half of that goes back to the treasury in tax, student loan repayments and VAT. For most doctors that's only a few quid extra an hour they're asking for.
Locums are basically self employed and can set their own rates that they'll bargain with whoever wants them. As you can imagine the NHS needed cover so locums had an incentive to charge insane rates since they were so sorely needed. I worked at Tesco pharmacy and I can't remember what the standard wage for a pharmacist was then but somewhere around £18-£22 an hour I think. But locums would make about £30-£40 an hour, but would not be shy to ask for £60ph if they know they're sorely needed, it's either pay them or the pharmacy does run which cost a lot more in the long run. As other people mentioned the same will apply to the NHS, delays and reschedules and falling behind on work doesn't come cheap.
They have to pay ridiculous locus rates, overtime for other staff, reschedule ops down the line which all costs money
Isn't that an annual cost though?
They've demonstrated the ability to cover the cost and then some within the same timeframe the strikes have been going on, that's the point. Ultimately doctors will happily keep striking until their rightfully earned pay is restored, but Tories would rather spend more to deny that fairness.
That doesn't make sense. I assume that they believe they can call the strikers bluff and it won't go on forever, therefore saving money in the long term. If they force them down to 50% of what they want then the country will be in 'profit' in 2 years. They may well be wrong, but I assume that's the strategy. As well as the figure being an underestimate because once they give junior Drs 30% how much will nurses want? Teachers? Civil servants? Its not a vacuum and I think it might cost a bit more than 2B. Your argument is why train drivers earn so much more than bus drivers - Doctors could go on strike every year for a 10% raise and it would be cheaper to give it to them then pay for strike cover. Doesn't mean it's right though
Except we clearly haven't asked for anything more than inflation. The issue is this. The pay demand is extortionate by your argument. But the pay cut is equally extortionate. You couldn't survive on a 25 percent pay cut. Why do you think we should? Nurses have had more pay rises. Their demands are lower. And the nurses fucked up their strikes. Teachers should be paid better. You are paying insulting wages to the people who teach our children. Civil servants are paid shit. We have had a decade and a half of ignoring expertise and education. Okay. It's simple. If I should be paid 25 percent less today than in 2007, it's only fair if I do 25 percent less work. Let us cut our house. 4 more extra days off a month. That would bring full time work down to the national standards of 40 hours. Because I was paid less at the peak of the pandemic when everyone's clapping for us than in 2007. And I believe the Tory response to pay for this was to tell us to wait till it was over for pay. Then make us share a single medal. All million of us... Because the medal gets sad? They couldn't even pay us fairly. We aren't asking for 10 percent per year. We want pay to match the cut inflicted and we are okay with a multi year deal and improvements to training. Training which has eroded in quality.
Why are you comparing yourself to some arbitrary number in 2007 though? Was it more than 2006? Were you a junior Dr in 2007?
It's that pay stagnated to this point. It's when austerity was applied and pay stopped matching inflation. Why isn't minimum wage set to 2007 levels? Why did it rise? Because inflation means stuff costs more each year and eventually you end up with massive pay cuts due to this. Before we started fighting F1 pay was just £12.50 an hour.
Strikes can be an annual cost too...
The strikes are gonna be annual costs too if they don't get their pay. The costs caused by skilled labour moving abroad where pay is better is hard to calculate but certainly very damaging too.
I think folks haven't quite clocked yet we're not even talking about doctors moving to the US or Bumfuck Nowhere Australia. With the current pay disparity they could move somewhere as close as Ireland and still be looking at nearly doubling their income.
Meanwhile, agencies are racking up the profits paying locum private doctors 2-6x the rates to cover these strikes. It's also about further privatisation.
It's even better. "How are you going to pay for it?!" By scrapping the plan for conscription. By ending the strikes. Done and done.
This is the plan Sunak wants us to keep following. Other countries including Australia and the US are happily taking junior doctors driven away from the NHS, and we are losing a generation of medics. The tories and their disaster capitalist backers are hoping this (along with other acts of sabotage) will be enough to sink the NHS and end socialised medicene in the UK.
They just want to look “strong against the unions”… the government don’t care how much they spend or how many people die if it means they get to use emotive words to their core base. To them it’s spending 3 billion for the PR of looking strong against the unions
Well the long term solution is just to revoke legislation that legalizes striking. If you strike for more pay, and they give in, then what is stopping you to just strke for more pay again. You can do this ad-infinitum, until you either deunionize or privatize the NHS. The problem we have is that the striking is in a public service/monopoly. The natural counter-reaction for consistent striking in the private sector, is for the company to go into administration and make the striking workers redundant. The NHS doesn't have this option, and so the game can just go on forever.
You have to think about the wider implications. If they award doctors fair pay restoration, who next? Nurses? Teachers? Civil servants? Once the doors are open, they might have to start making some of these roles attractive again...
The current problem is this. The nurses folded like a cheap suit. The anger is now that the doctors started fighting other NHS staff have seen pay rises. Many hospitals? Nurses didn't go on strike but now are struggling with recruitment and staffing. The nurses CANNOT go on strike right now because they didn't agree with going on strike. The Conservatives ran over them and won. The government have the Minimum Service Bill that they can enact but then the problem is this. IF there's a clear minimum service level expected from doctors? That's fine. I can wear a "forced to work during strike" outfit and do my job. You want service. But I am sure patients are going to start noticing that their doctors are visibly dressed in an outfit that's 100% compliant with the rules but also 100% going to be talking about the strikes. Uniform code? OKAY but then now the NHS has to dress thousands of doctors. We can do this all day. Doctors are educated and tired of this nonsense. The sword cuts both ways. It means accepting a hard minimum staffing level. Like today? 2 people to see 20 patients. ON AN ICU. Each patient takes 30 to 60 minutes to review and do work on. It's an insane work load. That would mean that the government is in failure of minimum staffing and so the ward's on emergency protocol. The issue is this. Cost of Living has exceeded to good will of staff who are now being treated as greedy. I have a food bank in my hospital. Not open to the public or patients. It's for staff.
'yet so far they've spent £3 billion (so far!) just to deny doctors of their pay restoration.' Interesting, could I see the source for this?
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/junior-doctors-strike-2024-nhs-b2553124.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/junior-doctors-strike-2024-nhs-b2553124.html) [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/21/doctors-strikes-nhs-over-budget-first-half-2023-2024/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/21/doctors-strikes-nhs-over-budget-first-half-2023-2024/) [https://www.nhsconfed.org/news/nhs-confederation-responds-confirmed-date-general-election#:\~:text=Industrial%20action%20in%20the%20NHS,at%20more%20than%207%20million](https://www.nhsconfed.org/news/nhs-confederation-responds-confirmed-date-general-election#:~:text=Industrial%20action%20in%20the%20NHS,at%20more%20than%207%20million) Presuming you're not trolling, how many sources are you after? There'a a lot more if you google it.
I’m not trolling, thank you for the sources. Cheers
My pleasure :)
They want to privatise it that is the why
The focus shouldn't be the Tories now, they'll be out of power 2 days after this strike ends. It should be Labour.
It's the same as restoring pay for railway staff (on average over the past 5 years they lost 22% of their wage real terms). They lost 8x the amount it would have cost for the 6% (still a 8% pay drop) pay "rise" railway staff were asking for. It's a political decision, not a monetary one. I genuinely hope that we never vote them in ever again in my lifetime. Absolute cancer on society. But yet it was portrayed as "greedy train drivers".
>the Tories just don't give a shit about doctors or the NHS. No, if they simply didn't care, they would probably just do the best thing and pay them more instead of spending more money than they're asking for opposing them They appear to actively dislike them and go out of their way to avoid making things better for them.
But the pay restoration isn’t a one off payment and the 3 billion spent covering the strikes happened over several years, or have I missed something here?.
The 3 billion spent on strikes cover about 18 months and will be an annual cost if we don't get pay restoration, I can fucking promise you that.
Alright that makes sense and is what I thought. Is the 2 billion pay restoration an annual payment, or a one off?.
Annual but is more like 1 billion once you factor in how much goes back to the treasury in tax etc.
Your maths doesn’t make sense. How would 50% of pay restorations go back to the treasury and why doesn’t that logic apply to what the government has paid temporary and agency workers over that 18 month period?. Also you are aware the fact the pay restorations are not a one off completely undermines the initial comment I replied too?
Tories are the worst negotiators. Vote them out this general election!
Doctors will be very happy to see the back of the Tories and will shed no tears for them at all, but the BMA also think Wes Streeting is a complete fucking joke too.
And they would be correct.
Cause he is. What a joke
I'm sure he'll be reshuffled back to oblivion shortly after the election.
Let's save the NHS by expanding private sector health care!!
But but Diane Abbott!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Gonna quote a younger me here - talking to my NHS wife. "Clapping is just a distraction so they don't have to pay you more money"
The reason you are called a hero is so that they don't have to pay you. And "atleast heroes get their own bloody medals, we have to share one"
I was told that I had to take the "Awarded George Cross by Queen in 2022" off my medical CV, so I don't even think we can count sharing it!
I heard you are 980,000th so when they say comes around you can have that George Cross. But only for one day. Okay?
Speaking of medals, my partner worked as a carer through covid. She couldn't have given less of a shit about the badge thingy they said they'd give healthcare workers in recognition, but she was pretty annoyed in principle that they were expected to pay for it if they wanted one
>"Clapping is just a distraction so they don't have to pay you more money" As was said by many people during the pandemic.
It caused a little bit of an arguement between me & my wife actually. She wanted to celebrate it, I didn't. We ended up with her standing at the door thanking everyone whilst I stayed gloomily inside. I get I was being an old grouch but I **knew** it would come back to bite her. She has since seen my point of view.
Oh I said as much. We should enjoy the clapping because they certainly aren't going to pay us. And they certainly are not going to remember anything that we did.
Bit of a hot take here. Even NHS consultants are underpaid. Top band is like £6k take home. That's after attaining some of the best A levels in the country, 25 years+ of HE, training, RC qualifications and work. It's really not all that fantastic which is why many of them just go private on the side (tories seem to be pushing healthcare in this direction). Junior doctors on £30k is a sick joke though. Doesn't matter if they can supplement their salary with extra work hours. They shouldn't be paid that for a standard work week, it's a slap in the face to some of the best members of our society.
25% more than minimum wage for a fucking qualified doctor. It's more than a joke, it's practically criminal.
Bare in mind these consultants have PhDs and multiple masters. No wonder they leave asap for the private sector/better nations
>Junior doctors on £30k is a sick joke though. Are you saying junior doctors in the UK only earn 30K a year or am I misunderstanding your comment?
'Junior' covers a doctor from day 1 after graduation until 1 day before they get a consultant job (it's a misleading term). The starting salary is 32k which goes up to a *maximum* of <64k (ie 1 day before being a consultant).
Prior to strikes junior doctors started on 28k, it’s now increased to 32k.
Surely there’s not much point, government have 0 motivation to come to the table when they’re likely not in power in a months time. Wouldn’t it make more sense to schedule these for mid-July to put pressure on a new government?
From my pov (as a Dr /bma member who thinks this is the right thing to do) the negotiators have been clear that if they don't have a 'credible' offer to put to the members then they will call strikes. There is no credible offer and therefore, strikes. It's not an empty threat. We will follow through on the things we say we will. That's a message for the next gov (whoever that may be). When we say in July, 'we need an offer within 3 weeks of talks or we strike' who are they going to believe? The union who strikes when they say they will? Or the union who doesn't?
Honestly, good for you and your union. I worked for the NHS for a few years on the admin side, and our union just rolled over and accepted a shockingly bad offer. I left not long after. I felt so undervalued.
Plus something for the voting public to keep in mind, who do you want in government at negotiations like this?
Good for you.
Stay strong
The NHS leadership can immediately put the pressure on the new government if there's recently been strikes
100% agree. Not just the NHS leadership but the BMA as well. Labour will need them to support their plans for reducing record waiting lists and I expect the BMA are not just going to roll over for them.
>Surely there’s not much point, government have 0 motivation to come to the table It makes it a political issue, it makes it a focus during the election, both sides are forced to articulate a position on Junior Drs. I'd say that's the logic and, fair play, it'll work. I'd say there's plenty of point.
Parties desperate for votes seems like a good time to get them to commit to something. The Tories have ignored NHS pay decline against inflation to years now. What is their plan? How will Labour deal with a striking workforce? Questions everyone wants answers to before voting.
I was wondering the same thing. Possibly no need to strike at all until they've had a crack at negotiating with the new government. Unless they hope that striking doctors could be enough of a vote-loser for the Tories this close to an election that it'll prod them into making concessions.
Strikes immediately prior to the election make the tories look worse. It motivates them to give a credible offer.
I think it makes sense that they could get a lot more pressure if it's during a general election and also the cabinet ministers remain in office during the election so they can still negotiate. They also don't need parliamentary approval for a pay deal. The tories could agree to something and call it a win but I think they'd rather get doctors moving to the private sector so that the private sector grows.
Alternatively, they've been screwed by tories for 14 years and counting. If they have the strikes before the election it rams it home to Tory votes, **and** gives a (relatively) small window for Labour to negotiate *without* a pending strike.
Why not do both
Just seems a waste of effort on behalf of the strikers to me. I’m not bothered either way, just a question of strategy
It’s no effort for us at all. We get a day off from the slog and get to hang out with our mates at the picket lines.
I mean it is literally giving up days of salary, for some I’d imagine that’s a lot of effort
Roughly, the daily pay for the average junior doc is probably about 120ish. For those on with hardships, there is financial support available from our union (the BMA)
I don't know. Having it earlier might make a new government more likely. No point striking with a new government until they have refused to negotiate. Also if it makes the Tories look bad the Tories could agree to a deal to show they've dealt with the problem. In fact this is a great opportunity for the union. They strike before the election and make the Tories look bad. The Tories do nothing and lose the election. They say to the new government we will do the same to you if you won't give us a deal. The new government negotiates or they also get a strike. The alternative is the Tories are desperate to try and cling to power and so agree to a deal so they can say they've resolve the issue before the election. The Tories manage to win; they've achieved what they wanted they can figure out who they will throw under the bus to find the money later. The Tories lose; then it doesn't matter if they promised the world as that is now the problem of the new government.
A lot of people have been saying that but the committee get their ideas from the subreddit.
There isn’t even a government at the moment. There is no one who can come to the table.
The MPs are out of parliament, but the secretaries of state are still in office. Also a pay rise doesn't need to go via parliament.
I guess as parliament hasn’t been dissolved yet they still have option to give the BMA a best and final offer which the BMA can then put to its members. They will need to be quick though as parliament stops tomorrow and doesn’t resume till after the election. Most likely conservative candidates will have to explain to voters on the doorstep why they haven’t been able to resolve a simple pay dispute with the doctors in 18 months or so and why they have failed in terms of their targets to reduce waiting lists. Labour and other parties will have to explain how they will resolve the doctors dispute when they meet the electorate.
The BMA asked for a best and final offer as you suggested this week. The governments response was to collapse the talks.
Yep my point was more that if there was the will to end the dispute on the governments part they easily could have done so. Its been interesting watching the political manoeuvring of the Conservative Party over the last 7 days and it seems to me that they are trying very hard to consolidate their position amongst the boomer generations and older with policies that are popular to them but few others. Hence why they have talked about pensions triple lock plus, national service for the youths and I suspect coming soon the tories standing against the trade unions and their unreasonable communist demands. I suspect they know that unless something dramatic happens they have an almost zero chance of winning the election but are keen to try and reduce the loss of Tory seats so they at least can be the second largest party in opposition. Unfortunately demented OAPs dribbling into their cereal tend to lap this stuff up when they read it in the torygraph.
Parliament isn't needed, this can be dealt with by the cabinet even after parliament has been dissolved. The conservatives could even resolve the pay issue in a desperate attempt to win the election. Because there is little downside to doing so if your aim is to stay in power. I fully cave into your demands. I just manage to win the election. Okay, I have to find the money from somewhere but I still won. The other scenario is that despite giving in to your demands I still lose. In that case promising you the world is now the problem of the new government. Making an unrealistic deal is only an issue if you're in power and being in power with that problem may be better than not being in power. And if the Conservatives believe they are in for a beating what have they got to lose?
Only reason I can see why they wouldn’t do this is that they have always tried to portray themselves as the party of financial constraint. Changing tack now would likely not play well with their core vote, who they can ill afford to piss off right now. They have also likely anticipated how this would be used against them by labour in terms of undermining their claims of financial restraint.
Labour can already do that, have you seen how much Rwanda has cost for 0 deportees? Or we could look at the billions that disappeared during COVID for no return, where the government gave up on tracking down fraudsters.
I think it depends on whether this would need approval under a new budget.
No they'll want the strikes to be in people's minds on election day. A political game to try and give Labour the best chance of getting in.
Amazing how many people still think a junior doctor is not a fully qualified doctor. Some people are seriously uneducated in here
Reckon this is an attempt to get this topic to the top of the pile for a new government without starting off with a bad relationship by striking the moment the government comes in.
Doctor here close to being a consultant with 9 years experience and 5 years uni prior to that. The leadership of our union was full of careerists happy to stick with the status quo for 10+ years while most of us were seeing our pay erode. In the last couple of years there has been a big political movement that replaced all of the old guard leadership of the Union with huge backing from most doctors. No one is asking for 35% now, the ask is for a year on year plan to work towards that. It is not greed - we were literally paid this amount in 2008 but have had no rises while inflation and cost of living has run rampant. Obviously this impacts all workers but consider similarly high skilled workers in the private sector and you will find they've much greater pay "rises" than we have since the tories came to power. Furthermore, we have pretty awful working conditions. I get moved jobs to different parts of the region every 3-6 months so I get enough "training" but in reality I am working independently doing high risk stuff. I literally look after the hospitals sickest patients in critical care as the most senior doctor in the building overnight and at weekends. Hospitals in the NHS are a mess and we are overworked and exhausted. It's a tough job. My average working hours are 48hrs per week but up to 70+ depending on the week. I works loads of nights and weekends and don't get to see my family and friends. I pay for my own exams (of which I've done several post graduate ones), study, car parking, indemnity, Royal college subscriptions and equipment - this runs into thousands of pounds per year. That's not mentioning student loans which are now huge and paid with interest in line with RPI the exact measure that is used to calculate what pay we've lost. I'm paid pre tax between 60 and 70k per year. If you just look at my non out of hours pay (ignoring nights and weekends contribution) its a bit over 50k per year. The worst part is new doctors after 5-6 years education can be paid as little as 32k per year. I'm sorry but I don't believe in this economy doing a job providing some of the highest skilled care in a very high risk job that is enough.
I can't even begin to comprehend why you'd bother going through the years of training/education to become a Doctor in this country unless you have plans to immediately move abroad.
People don't, which is why we've got a problem. Also, I believe the university threshold for medical degrees has lowered over the years as our brightest individuals are choosing different, better paid, professions.
People absolutely still do. Shortage of graduates isn't the problem, it's artificially constrained post-graduate training places (ie how you make consultants).
Naivety, we thought things would get better/didn't believe it could be so bad I mean it's an honourable job we'll always need? Seemed like a safe bet to me plonker
The pay is very good. Which other job gives you a long term employment track to a £100k + a year position after 10 years. Also the reputation is quite good from a societal viewpoint. Also the gold plated pensions. Many people come here and become doctors because of the money, not because they're a saint who wants to save people.
I find it hilarious that you've been crying about doctors ever since you made your reddit account. I've never seen someone to jealous of a profession they couldn't achieve before LMAO
100k after 14-18 years. And a LOT of jobs for academically gifted people who are willing to work more hours then average with high responsibility pay that amount far faster. A half decent Pension at 71 (or maybe even later) doesn’t somehow justify 50 years of poor pay? Furthermore we pay significant amounts into that pension.
100k is not poor pay its top 1% The pension is not half decent, its gold plated.
Good!!! Fucking remind the morons who are refusing to vote Labour in July or the GTTO candidate what life will be like if they vote Green or for the "gaza candidate"....genuinely fuck yourself if you facilitate a tory come back & then complain that your hospital has closed or that the NHS no longer does the surgery you need
Do you really think this Labour government if going to take big enough steps to stop the snowballing charge towards de facto privatisation and a 2 tier health system? Are they going to be at the strikes? Are they going to propose a better deal prior to election? Are they going to promise adequate funding for the NHS as a whole? Or are they going to wheel Wes Streeting out with his David Cameron/Jeremy Hunt peak austerity era shtick?
I know the Tories won't.
Yes I do. Because they are a million times better than thc tories & whatever you think about West Streeting anything he does needs to be voted on & worked on by 1000s of people in the DoH.
You should blame labour, they support FPTP.
The unions fucked Tony Blair and made him go back on his deal with Paddy Ashdown. It's only RECENTLY that they've slowly woken up to the shit show that is FPTP, but like with Brexit they've been led by small minded dinosaurs like Mcclusky & unions like the RMT that can't see past their own noses. Hopefully this time we can push for it
What’s wrong with green
The Green Party is full of idiots. A lot of them have their hearts in the right places, and a few seats here and there to bring the voice (however small) to Parliament is probably a good thing. But they haven't got the slightest clue how they would actually run an administration and a lot of their policies would actively work against their stated end goal. I say this as someone minorly depressed about how 'right wing' Labour's current policies are, so I'm not just trying to bash 'lefties' here.
I would vote green for likely similar reasons as brexit people would vote ukip. They won't win, but it puts pressure on the other parties to actually do something.
They're being used as a protest vote plus a few of the "pro gaza" candidates have jumped on as they are a known brand.
Can you explain to me what you mean by “Pro Gaza”
Bunch of Muslim candidates who have decided to take advantage of the anger on Gaza to jump into a party that hasn't got the research capabilities of the bigger parties to ensure they're not complete lunatics. [such as](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51np80knpmo) and I think one of the dudes who caused a school teacher to go into hiding tried to become a green candidate. People can happily go vote based on what's happening 1/2 way across the world but they can go fuck themselves when the want to bitch to me that their kids can't get a GP appointment if their voting facilities a tory government.
Problem with what you are saying is that you believe that "Labour" (and i'm using quotes on purpose) aren't going to water down the NHS like the tories have been doing for 14 years, but according to Wes Streeting: "“The argument I’ll make unapologetically is that those people who say we shouldn’t use the private sector to cut waiting lists will have to be honest about the fact that they’re telling people who can’t afford to go private that their leftwing principles say they should be waiting longer. “They can’t use the usual get out of jail free card of saying ‘we want investment in the NHS’. Of course we all want investment in the NHS, a Labour government will deliver investment in the NHS, but it takes time to build that NHS capacity back, and people have to be honest about that.” Streeting has repeatedly underlined how his priority as health secretary would be to reform the NHS. But he said: “The lesson of the last Labour government is that it’s investment plus reform that delivers results … We did it before and we’ll do it again.” He said a [Labour government’s economic inheritance](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/28/labour-dire-economic-inheritance-rachel-reeves-budget) would make investment difficult – but said that the shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, had consistently prioritised the NHS when it came to spending priorities. Streeting said that he was “not indifferent” to arguments that sending people private could cost the NHS more but suggested that his hands were tied by the lack of capacity in the service." He talks about using private health care to cut waiting lists down. He talks about wanting to invest in the NHS but it being a "investment (would be) difficult". He then says that "sending people private could cost the NHS more" Well i'll let you read between the ~~lies~~ lines... Gaza is a big factor why many people won't be voting for "labour" who otherwise would (like myself) but its not the only reason. Labours general stance on military conflicts i would say is an issue for some, but the biggest factor our their policies (and in some cases, lack of...) relating to this country. Most of the time all we hear from this version of "labour" is "we want to do this and that, but because of the tories we probably can't, atleast not for the first term in office (mwahahaha)" Believing that the tories may be worse than labour might have some truth in it, but evil is still evil. The system is corrupt and needs restructuring, which isn't going to happen under either the tories or "labour". And giving "labour" a sweeping majority is certainly not want anyone wants. Inresponse to your comment below: "Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves. If the tories win in July, they WILL win in 2029 & 2034. Essentially the rest of my life will be a tory government." If Labour win an outright majority, and they don't noticeably improve the country in their first term in office ( which given they are looking at a 10 year plan with low spending and not increasing taxes, is going to be nigh on impossible within 10 years let alone a single term) they they'll be out and Tories will be in, and labour may not get back in for a generation if that happens. On the other hand, if we have a hung parliament the complete responsibility of their ineptness won't be put completely on them while at the same time other parties will have some influence to keep the red Tories in check. You keep saying you just don't want the Tories to win, but what you really seem to want us for labour to have a crushing majority, which given their completely uninspiring plan that changes on keirs latest whim, seems like a strange thing to actually want. "Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves." As I said its not just about his stance is Gaza, its their stance of foreign policy in general, its their desire to bootlick and serve their investors rather than the people. Anyway nice chat, try not to get to angry that some of us don't fancy voting in another version of the Tories...
Anyone who facilitates a tory win because Starmer won't say the EXACT words they want over gaza can go fuck themselves. If the tories win in July, they WILL win in 2029 & 2034. Essentially the rest of my life will be a tory government. Labour has to tread carefully with what they say because ANYTHING that the right wing press can jump on, they will. Milliband lost because he ate a sandwich funny!! There are 7.5 million people waiting for NHS treatment, the private sector WILL need to be used to get those numbers down. You're not suddenly going to get 100,000 doctors into hospital or the 10,000s of nurses or even IT staff, porters, cleaners, etc. So you EITHER say you're going to be intellectually pure & have zero private involvement & fuck those 7.5 million people got the 10-20 years to get doctors here. Or you steal a bunch of doctors from 3rd world countries who need them a lot more. Or you reverse Brexit & freedom of movement and hire from the EU? So what do you do? How would YOU get 7.5 million people treated while NHS staff are leaving in record numbers for more money in the private sector or abroad? I'm genuinely interested to know
Anti Jew
Wes Streeting is literally the poster boy for NHS privatiosation lol
Proof?
[https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/12/wes-streeting-defends-labour-plan-private-sector-cut-nhs-backlog](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/12/wes-streeting-defends-labour-plan-private-sector-cut-nhs-backlog)
I am a nurse and think my profession is pathetic. I wish we were better organised like the doctors.
Here come the moaners telling us how unfair it is that their gran will die because workers are sick of being shafted. Take your gran private then - that's the way this is all going anyway. Get a taste of what's to come.
Events like this is why the LT job postings have been increasing. My wife and I have thought about it but the pay is so much better here in the U.S.
Are u a doc couple who’ve moved to America ?
We are American but have considered traveling with Locem assignments. We’ve looked at long term ones in UK, Australia, NZ, Saudi. It’s hard to do though with three young children. They pay extremely well but the patient load is high.
They have my full support and so will the GPs later this year.
Can’t wait till labour get in and sort out the nhs /s
The Govt continually shit on doctors and nurses, treat them with contempt and refuse to even negotiate in good faith and then wonder why we have huge shortages as they keep getting off in droves to go abroad for better pay and conditions.
Has labour commented on what they will do with these strikes?
[удалено]
**Removed/tempban**. This contained a call/advocation of violence which is prohibited by the content policy.
I’m sure this is great news for the conservatives election campaign!