Doctors vote in favour of industrial action

But won't their salaries improve over time if and when the economy improves..so they can keep paying at the higher rate.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Average income is about £26K as you well know.

So? They are above average in terms of education and qualification and they get compensated accordingly. Comparisons to a mean are meaningless.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

So you're quite happy to pay into your own pension and that of your doctor who is unprepaired to pay his fair share?

I am happy that my taxes go to Doctors (amongst others). I would say fair share is debatable, I do know they agreed to pension reform in 2008 and that rugged is being pulled from under them just four years later.

[Ramrod]

I'm linking to an article in the Guardian......I need a lie down......Striking as a doctor can never be justified

Originally Posted by Damien

I am happy that my taxes go to Doctors (amongst others). I would say fair share is debatable, I do know they agreed to pension reform in 2008 and that rugged is being pulled from under them just four years later.

The deal they got in 2008 was unbelievably good. Liebour rolled over and gave them a fistful of good things, including removing the obligation to provide out-of-hours cover. It was a costly deal won at the height of the credit bubble that preceded the massive crash we are now all living through and was never sustainable. Doctors are intelligent people and the majority of them acknowledge this - which is why most doctors did not support this ludicrous 'strike that isn't', either by not voting at all, or by voting against.

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I'm linking to an article in the Guardian......I need a lie down......Striking as a doctor can never be justified

I would advise that you do not lie down if you were surprised\shocked by a purported insiders comments, but rather stand up and scream at the absolute audacity of the blatant propaganda nonsense spouted by the author.

Take another look and look at the author. He is Dr. Dan Poulter who is Conservative MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich and is a member of the health select committee. His bio is linked from his name at the top of the article.

It truly makes me wonder just how low this government can go to score propaganda points and try to hoodwink the public with remarks from stooges who do not declare a vested interest. It also makes one wonder why the press are so compliant with an obvious propaganda ploy.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Traduk

I would advise that you do not lie down if you were surprised\shocked by a purported insiders comments, but rather stand up and scream at the absolute audacity of the blatant propaganda nonsense spouted by the author.

Take another look and look at the author. He is Dr. Dan Poulter who is Conservative MP for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich and is a member of the health select committee. His bio is linked from his name at the top of the article.

It truly makes me wonder just how low this government can go to score propaganda points and try to hoodwink the public with remarks from stooges who do not declare a vested interest. It also makes one wonder why the press are so compliant with an obvious propaganda ploy.

Ok, how about the editor of the Lancet?
link

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

I am happy that my taxes go to Doctors (amongst others). I would say fair share is debatable, I do know they agreed to pension reform in 2008 and that rugged is being pulled from under them just four years later.

To be fair, those 4 years later have been quite remarkable years haven't they - if there'd been more 'boom' and less 'bust' during that time and the years leading up to it, this wouldn't have happened. We're staring at financial meltdown here. I think we all, doctors included, have to accept that the pace of change (economic and social) has never been greater, the 'rule book' is having to be rewritten and will probably need reviewing far more often than ever used to be the case. If it turns out that things improve well then there'll be time and a case for pensions etc. to be reviewed again and ehancements made according to the financial conditions of the time. No it isn't fair and I have every resepct for doctors but I that's where we're at sadly and medics aren't going to be the only ones whose plans for their future are scuppered.

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Ok, how about the editor of the Lancet?
link

I am sure that it is easy to trawl around and find many arguments both for and against but my response was due to reading the article that was in your link.

The article was articulate, very persuasive, logical and ticked all the right emotive boxes. However it struck me as being just too much like a party political broadcast and once I took the trouble to find who and what the author actually was, a party political broadcast it was but without an inquisitive mind one would never have known.

There is a massive information gap between what the public are told and the reality of any given situation. I am reliably informed by an insider that morale within hospital practitioners is falling rapidly especially with younger medics as their older counterparts look to negotiate deals to leave via the exit door into early retirement.

GP's are a separate entity but within hospitals cost and efficiency measures are in many cases driving practitioners to to a level of increasing despair not only for what is expected of them but whether they can safely pursue their duty of care within time constraints.

Many of the professional grade practitioners within the hospital sector of the NHS are subject to the old civil service type incremental ladder form of pay enhancement upon promotion. It is not unusual that many years can pass within a grade to move up the incremental ladder during which time the same responsibilities were accepted on day one as sometimes a decade later when pay has increased by many thousands due to nothing more than the passage of time. That form of averaging plays havoc with any pension deal which is not final pay orientated.

On the basis of international standards our doctors\consultants are not overly well paid but the package they had with ultra good pensions went a long way towards ameliorating a not so brilliant working lifetime income. Interference with the package will almost certainly see some going abroad and others looking towards the private sector as many GP's do already.

I see that many people state that along the lines of we are all in this together that cuts should be accepted for what we cannot afford. I wonder if what we cannot afford, we cannot afford to be without because I honestly think that before too many years have passed what we knew as the NHS will be a shadow of what it was.

I was not that long ago that people fed up with the agony of waiting two years for a hip replaced paid from their own resources. I wonder how long it will be before that situation returns and if it does will it be the thin end of the wedge. The decline of NHS dentistry did not happen overnight but it's path of decline was hastened with changes of remuneration to practitioners.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

It really makes me laugh when people have a moan at why people go on strike over principles.

Doctors and Nurses have a right to strike, but we all know that MPs will pull at the heart strings and say 'patient care'. Its ok for government ministers to break the law, fiddle expenses and do everything against what is right and get away with it earn thousands of pounds for sitting on the backside for doing nothing, have three months holidays.

And yet when people fight for there rights, the public gang up on them.

When agreements are made, The Tories come along and tear it up, saying ' we must do this'

When Doctors and Nurses train to the full capacity, quite rightly they go into private practice, as this is where the money is - is that right oer wrong, no they are doing what is right for themself and looking after themself, what is wrong in that.

I will always support people that are striking for what is right - this is our right, if this coalition had there way, we would be a third rate country living on hand outs on the corner - anything to save this coalition money.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

- anything to save this coalition money.

what's wrong with saving money ?.It's ridiculous that people say the coalition are only doing something to save money ,of course they are it's their job to manage our money, especially money we have borrowed

[Arthurgray50@blu]

There are ways of saving money, but this coalition are doing everything overnight, they will be in power for five years.

They have been in power now some 18 months, and so far they have crippled the country already, and people are fighting for there rights - which they are entitled to do.

The coalition are bringing out silly taxes to make us pay more money into the treasury, and now they are going red faced due to the backlash.

The coalition will pay the ultimate price if they do anything else to hit the country.

What will happen if the nurses go on strike in support of the Doctors.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by martyh

what's wrong with saving money ?.It's ridiculous that people say the coalition are only doing something to save money ,of course they are it's their job to manage our money, especially money we have borrowed

Marty I prescribe one of these:



twice a day or as and when Arthur pops up spouting his usual tripe...

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by martyh

what's wrong with saving money ?.It's ridiculous that people say the coalition are only doing something to save money ,of course they are it's their job to manage our money, especially money we have borrowed

The coalition's declared intent was to bring the fiscal deficit into balance within it's five year (s)elected duration. They have failed so far to make any headway and have projected the duration of fiscal balance by the two years they have been in office, which IMO is as much pie in the sky as the initial projection. Give them another three years and with further delays\setbacks I suspect the request will be for another chance to correct what was not previously corrected.

Of course it is ridiculous to criticise a coalition formed to save money for actually doing the job but IMO it is equally ridiculous to think that the objective will be achieved by reducing a 30 year old doctor's pension and raising his\her retirement age to 68 when the amount in extra contributions is minimal and the pay back to the taxpayer is 38 years into the future.

Under the guise of the failed premise of fiscal discipline there is a massive social engineering campaign under way.

The has always been a fact of life which was ignored when the good times rolled and was perpetuated by labour's stupidity. This country lived beyond its means for decades and spent every bit of good fortune available to enhance living standards for the masses. We will have to revert back to a realistic base level and with the Conservatives that means a reversion to the if you can afford it, pay and if you cannot, go without.

Social engineering is achieved with lots of small steps, many of which are by stealth and under the media radar. I watch trends and and I do not like the way the trends are going. If I was half my age I would be looking to move abroad because I sincerely believe that in time anybody who is not very rich will become poor and I have been there and done that and have the scars to prove it.

You missed the bit out about the currently 30 year old doctor living (on average) until they are about 90 (having retired at 68), with a one in five chance of living until they are 100 (according to the Guardian) - how should this be funded?