Looked for a thread on this but can't see any headings with NHS or doctors in it so .....
Like most people I have instinctively supported the docs. Regardless of who us in power docs vs govt is not much of a contest really. It's been difficult to find out the real issues because neither side's communications are clear or related.
Through friends we know a junior doc who tried to explain their position but TBH it was an emotional position based on Hunt, imposition threat and it not being 'fair'. Alongside this was a genuine concern for how stretched the NHS was and that this would be worse but without any explanation of why it how that is related to the offer. I.e it is stretched but the threats are not obviously linked to the offer. The lack of insight into the details of the deal this doc had was surprising to say the least and I can be certain the doc's beliefs are based on the Union/colleagues. It was heart felt but confusing. Obviously this is 1 person and I am not saying at all thus reflects the docs. Just explaining the inputs.
The Government side of things hasn't been clear either TBH. it's clear they are trying to change contracts to support a 7 day elective service and bring contracts into line with modern day practices (well overdue).
On the BBC site this is an extract from the final offer
- The government is offering extra pay after 17:00
- But they have offered to top up the pay by 30% for those who work regular Saturdays - defined as at least one in four
- The BMA wants all day Saturday for everyone to be paid at 50% above the basic rate
- Agreement has not been reached on on-call allowances, how limits on working hours are to be policed and days off between night shifts
- The government has offered a basic pay rise of 13.5%
- The BMA has said it is willing to accept between a 4% and 7% hike in basic pay to cover the weekend pay issue
I am sure that there is a wealth of detail not included in these few bullet points but it's difficult to feel sympathetic to these bullet points.
The OT point isn't made clear and I assume because it's complex? This isn't easy because roles salaried at that level typically aren't getting OT. The nature of the role and hours demand some mechanism and I doubt this is easy.
The demand for 50% for Saturday sounds right in the 1970's but is long gone surely? In the 90's these arrangements were disappearing. TBH I am surprised they are being offered 30% and turning it down. The 13.5% huge increase is obviously to balance the loss of those older style terms but again I am surprised this us being discounted.
I'll stop there but I don't understand why this deal has them on strike.
There is a lot if emotional rhetoric re Hunt, feasibility of 7 day elective and max working hours, patient safety (also conflicting in that Govt says it is reducing max workable hours but docs saying they risk working longer ???) but most are not terms of the deal.
Other than more emotive slagging off of Hunt (or the Docs) is there a simple way to explain logically the Docs position because I am pretty sure it's not in the bullet points.
Like most people I have instinctively supported the docs. Regardless of who us in power docs vs govt is not much of a contest really. It's been difficult to find out the real issues because neither side's communications are clear or related.
Through friends we know a junior doc who tried to explain their position but TBH it was an emotional position based on Hunt, imposition threat and it not being 'fair'. Alongside this was a genuine concern for how stretched the NHS was and that this would be worse but without any explanation of why it how that is related to the offer. I.e it is stretched but the threats are not obviously linked to the offer. The lack of insight into the details of the deal this doc had was surprising to say the least and I can be certain the doc's beliefs are based on the Union/colleagues. It was heart felt but confusing. Obviously this is 1 person and I am not saying at all thus reflects the docs. Just explaining the inputs.
The Government side of things hasn't been clear either TBH. it's clear they are trying to change contracts to support a 7 day elective service and bring contracts into line with modern day practices (well overdue).
On the BBC site this is an extract from the final offer
- The government is offering extra pay after 17:00
- But they have offered to top up the pay by 30% for those who work regular Saturdays - defined as at least one in four
- The BMA wants all day Saturday for everyone to be paid at 50% above the basic rate
- Agreement has not been reached on on-call allowances, how limits on working hours are to be policed and days off between night shifts
- The government has offered a basic pay rise of 13.5%
- The BMA has said it is willing to accept between a 4% and 7% hike in basic pay to cover the weekend pay issue
I am sure that there is a wealth of detail not included in these few bullet points but it's difficult to feel sympathetic to these bullet points.
The OT point isn't made clear and I assume because it's complex? This isn't easy because roles salaried at that level typically aren't getting OT. The nature of the role and hours demand some mechanism and I doubt this is easy.
The demand for 50% for Saturday sounds right in the 1970's but is long gone surely? In the 90's these arrangements were disappearing. TBH I am surprised they are being offered 30% and turning it down. The 13.5% huge increase is obviously to balance the loss of those older style terms but again I am surprised this us being discounted.
I'll stop there but I don't understand why this deal has them on strike.
There is a lot if emotional rhetoric re Hunt, feasibility of 7 day elective and max working hours, patient safety (also conflicting in that Govt says it is reducing max workable hours but docs saying they risk working longer ???) but most are not terms of the deal.
Other than more emotive slagging off of Hunt (or the Docs) is there a simple way to explain logically the Docs position because I am pretty sure it's not in the bullet points.
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire