So... who's supporting the Junior Doctor strike?

[canarydan23 4,060]

So you worked until 7pm one day and were up again at work at 7am the next day? So what?

Were you saving a life at 6.30pm under an intense pressure that cannot be replicated anywhere else and expected to potentially have to do the same thing the next morning?

Once again, the argument seems to neglect the fact that being responsible for people''s lives takes a very different toll on someone. It''s nothing like extracting coal from the earth, selling insurance policies or building a ship.

If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the shipbuilding industry we''ll build fewer ships. If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the insurance sector you might have to sit on hold a bit longer for your renewal.

If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the NHS there will be more unnecessary deaths in hospital. But go on comparing being a doctor to being a miner if it helps.

Conditions for junior doctors were already driving people away from the profession. This contract will only make the situation a whole lot worse. If you''re happy with under-skilled, less-competent and less-able individuals becoming Junior Doctors then that''s great, I can understand you supporting an actual idiot in this dispute over capable, intelligent professionals. I mean, on the plus side the standard of solicitors and the like will probably improve as more talented academics choose careers with less stress, more money and favourable working conditions. You might even find that a few weeks are shaved off how long it takes to move house. That would be fantastic. For sure, you''re 450% more likely to die in hospital, but it''s just swings and roundabouts, apples and pears, isn''t it?

And for those people rabbiting on about this being politically-charged you are ignoring the inconvenient truth as to how Doctors traditionally vote. In 2010 almost half of them plumbed for Tory. It fell in 2015, but according to most polling among doctors the Tories is still the most supported political party.

I doubt that is the case anymore.

[Hairy Canary 668]

The JD''s are getting a 13.5% rise to compensate for losing their weekend/evening enhancements. The two figures balance each other out, therefore making the package cost neutral. That means the JD''s are going to have work Saturdays and Sundays for the same pay as they were receiving before.

I''m not sure I''d be too pleased about having a reduction in my terms and conditions imposed on me, particularity when taking into account that a JD''s pay of £30,000 is hardly off the scale considering the training and skill required to perform such a valuable service.

We are in danger of alienating a group of people whose services some of us have been very happy to receive, particularly when more highly remunerated jobs are available for such a skill group.

As per normal politicians have promised something during the General Election which they knew would win them votes but without having the money to pay for it. The JD''s are expected to put up with a reduction in their terms in order to square the circle.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

There''s method in my madness Indy. If my car is involved in an accident it''s always someone else''s fault....

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="TCCANARY"]

 

Lovely old sexist generalising there, them wimmin, there all the same, aren''t they? If it wasn''t for there curves and coquettish giggles they would be worth bothering with. [:)]

 

 

[/quote]It has nothing to do with sexism its just the new reality. Many of the female doctors at my practice are married women with families and who can blame them that a lot of them only want to work part time. I certainly don''t but to pretend it is not going to be a problem for the patient is simply deluding yourself. How we overcome the problem is a question that needs debate but lets not pretend that we don''t have a problem.[/quote]

Exactly. My mate''s wife chooses to work only two 12 hour shifts a week.

[Indy 3,289]

😊. Trouble is with red cars, if the police get bored and start playing car snooker!

That aside junior doctors do a great job, but I would like for them to be tied to the UK for at least 5 years once they complete all training and specialise. Too many go off and work abroad after rather a lot of time and money invested in them.

But they do deserve a lot slack, hopefully both parties can reach an agreement.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Hairy Canary"]The JD''s are getting a 13.5% rise to compensate for losing their weekend/evening enhancements. The two figures balance each other out, therefore making the package cost neutral. That means the JD''s are going to have work Saturdays and Sundays for the same pay as they were receiving before.

I''m not sure I''d be too pleased about having a reduction in my terms and conditions imposed on me, particularity when taking into account that a JD''s pay of £30,000 is hardly off the scale considering the training and skill required to perform such a valuable service.

We are in danger of alienating a group of people whose services some of us have been very happy to receive, particularly when more highly remunerated jobs are available for such a skill group.

As per normal politicians have promised something during the General Election which they knew would win them votes but without having the money to pay for it. The JD''s are expected to put up with a reduction in their terms in order to square the circle.[/quote]

Workers in the private sector get new terms imposed all the time. Computer contractors in my industry are often told to take a 10% cut in remuneration or leave, for instance.

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="canarydan23"]So you worked until 7pm one day and were up again at work at 7am the next day? So what?

Were you saving a life at 6.30pm under an intense pressure that cannot be replicated anywhere else and expected to potentially have to do the same thing the next morning?

Once again, the argument seems to neglect the fact that being responsible for people''s lives takes a very different toll on someone. It''s nothing like extracting coal from the earth, selling insurance policies or building a ship.

If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the shipbuilding industry we''ll build fewer ships. If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the insurance sector you might have to sit on hold a bit longer for your renewal.

If there is a mass exodus of talented people from the NHS there will be more unnecessary deaths in hospital. But go on comparing being a doctor to being a miner if it helps.

Conditions for junior doctors were already driving people away from the profession. This contract will only make the situation a whole lot worse. If you''re happy with under-skilled, less-competent and less-able individuals becoming Junior Doctors then that''s great, I can understand you supporting an actual idiot in this dispute over capable, intelligent professionals. I mean, on the plus side the standard of solicitors and the like will probably improve as more talented academics choose careers with less stress, more money and favourable working conditions. You might even find that a few weeks are shaved off how long it takes to move house. That would be fantastic. For sure, you''re 450% more likely to die in hospital, but it''s just swings and roundabouts, apples and pears, isn''t it?

And for those people rabbiting on about this being politically-charged you are ignoring the inconvenient truth as to how Doctors traditionally vote. In 2010 almost half of them plumbed for Tory. It fell in 2015, but according to most polling among doctors the Tories is still the most supported political party.

I doubt that is the case anymore.[/quote]Lots of people are responsible for other peoples lives in their daily work although not necessarily on the operating table but again you omit the fact that the doctors representatives tell us that this isn''t about money but about patient safety and working hours. I also don''t doubt that many professions think that they are worth more money than they currently get (police, fire, ambulance, armed services.) all have equally valid competing claims.You bring politics into the argument yet seem to forget that The last Labour government gave general practitioners a huge increase in exchange for the promise of reforms that never actually came to fruition. The present government has ringfenced expenditure on the NHS but since it is always a handy political football no amount of expenditure will ever be enough.The big question is how you pay for what you want and where you draw the line for the competing claims. I suggest that when it comes to public services we are all guilty of wanting more than we are prepared to pay for.

[king canary 7,580]

@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.

[Hairy Canary 668]

That''s true Paul but because some Computer Contractors they are treated with disdain it doesn''t mean that JD''s should be too. Or are you suggesting we tell our Junior Doctors to take a pay cut or clear off?

Also Computer Contractors aren''t being used as a political football and with respect neither do they provide such a valuable service.

[morty 0]

[quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Rickyyyy

I''m not sure any of us has any choice on what we pay for any public service. What we may or may not be prepared to pay is an unknown.

However I would speculate that if we had that choice the NHS would be better funded.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="TCCANARY"]

 

Lovely old sexist generalising there, them wimmin, there all the same, aren''t they? If it wasn''t for there curves and coquettish giggles they would be worth bothering with. [:)]

 

 

[/quote]

It has nothing to do with sexism its just the new reality. Many of the female doctors at my practice are married women with families and who can blame them that a lot of them only want to work part time. I certainly don''t but to pretend it is not going to be a problem for the patient is simply deluding yourself. How we overcome the problem is a question that needs debate but lets not pretend that we don''t have a problem.
[/quote] Exactly. My mate''s wife chooses to work only two 12 hour shifts a week.[/quote]

 

Brilliant, you use one person to represent a demographic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Van wink 2,994]

rIcky

You bring politics into the argument yet seem to forget that The last Labour government gave general practitioners a huge increase in exchange for the promise of reforms that never actually came to fruition.

The GP contract was a disaster for the nhs, cost a fortune and now they have to commission separate contracts for out of hours services, shocking waste of resources.

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Rickyyyy

I''m not sure any of us has any choice on what we pay for any public service. What we may or may not be prepared to pay is an unknown.

However I would speculate that if we had that choice the NHS would be better funded.[/quote]Well Nigel, it makes you wonder why governments don''t double public service wages and stick 10p on income tax and we would all find out.But I guess we all know the answer to that one.[;)]

[Indy 3,289]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]

You don''t work for Weatherfords by any chance do you Morty?

I''ve taken a hit on hours as a contractors. O&G hitting hard as Shell has anounced further closures?

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="TCCANARY"]

 

Lovely old sexist generalising there, them wimmin, there all the same, aren''t they? If it wasn''t for there curves and coquettish giggles they would be worth bothering with. [:)]

 

 

[/quote]It has nothing to do with sexism its just the new reality. Many of the female doctors at my practice are married women with families and who can blame them that a lot of them only want to work part time. I certainly don''t but to pretend it is not going to be a problem for the patient is simply deluding yourself. How we overcome the problem is a question that needs debate but lets not pretend that we don''t have a problem.[/quote] Exactly. My mate''s wife chooses to work only two 12 hour shifts a week.[/quote]

 

Brilliant, you use one person to represent a demographic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]Whilst you make an accusation of sexism instead of addressing the point I made that the feminisation of the medical profession has thrown up a previously unforeseen problem.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy"][quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]

You don''t work for Weatherfords by any chance do you Morty?

I''ve taken a hit on hours as a contractors. O&G hitting hard as Shell has anounced further closures?[/quote]No, Subsea 7. Yeah pretty much everyone is taking cuts, but at least we still have jobs! Odd thing is we are actually still pretty busy, so a lot of it has to do with maintaining the shareholders dividends I suspect.

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="Vanwink"]rIcky

You bring politics into the argument yet seem to forget that The last Labour government gave general practitioners a huge increase in exchange for the promise of reforms that never actually came to fruition.

The GP contract was a disaster for the nhs, cost a fortune and now they have to commission separate contracts for out of hours services, shocking waste of resources.[/quote]Expecting goverment to be economic with our cash was always going to be a triumph of hope over experience.

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]Morty, you need to tell your employer that you don''t care if oil goes to ten dollars a barrel, you are not going to take a cut in pay and conditions.[;)]

Some people just don''t live in the real world do they

[Indy 3,289]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Indy"][quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]

You don''t work for Weatherfords by any chance do you Morty?

I''ve taken a hit on hours as a contractors. O&G hitting hard as Shell has anounced further closures?[/quote]No, Subsea 7. Yeah pretty much everyone is taking cuts, but at least we still have jobs! Odd thing is we are actually still pretty busy, so a lot of it has to do with maintaining the shareholders dividends I suspect.[/quote]

I know what you mean, I''m contracted to a Norwegian firm, this is the first time it''s hit Norway this hard.

It''s funny how O&G is always overlooked when debating long hours and pressure at the workplace.

Glad to hear things are still fairly busy for you matey, hope it continues and we see some of these projects started, so many on hold at the moment.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]Morty, you need to tell your employer that you don''t care if oil goes to ten dollars a barrel, you are not going to take a cut in pay and conditions.[;)]

Some people just don''t live in the real world do they[/quote][:D][Y]

[The gut 0]

canarydan23 wrote:

"So you worked until 7pm one day and were up again at work at 7am the next day? So what? Were you saving a life at 6.30pm under an intense pressure that cannot be replicated anywhere else and expected to potentially have to do the same thing the next morning? Once again, the argument seems to neglect the fact that being responsible for people''s lives takes a very different toll on someone."

I thought you support the new contract then Dan, they seem to make it clear there is less hours.

I''m starting to get the impression the jd''s are striking because not only is their overtime less in financial terms but that the govt are restricting how many overtime hours they can work.

The docs'' argument is not adding up!

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Indy"][quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]

You don''t work for Weatherfords by any chance do you Morty?

I''ve taken a hit on hours as a contractors. O&G hitting hard as Shell has anounced further closures?[/quote]No, Subsea 7. Yeah pretty much everyone is taking cuts, but at least we still have jobs! Odd thing is we are actually still pretty busy, so a lot of it has to do with maintaining the shareholders dividends I suspect.[/quote]

I know what you mean, I''m contracted to a Norwegian firm, this is the first time it''s hit Norway this hard.

It''s funny how O&G is always overlooked when debating long hours and pressure at the workplace.

Glad to hear things are still fairly busy for you matey, hope it continues and we see some of these projects started, so many on hold at the moment.[/quote]The trouble is people have a very skewed perception of life offshore, and possibly a bit of jealousy because it is fairly well paid. So few have much sympathy for the thousands who have lost their jobs.My vessel is currently working for Shell, in the Gulf of Mexico, which seems to be fairly busy. West Africa has almost completely ground to a halt, my last project was in Pointe Noire, and we have no work there for the foreseeable, and I think Shell and BP have all but pulled out of Angola, but part of that is a concern about another civil war.Aye, fingers crossed that all these predictions of a price rise, come true!

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="TCCANARY"]

 

Lovely old sexist generalising there, them wimmin, there all the same, aren''t they? If it wasn''t for there curves and coquettish giggles they would be worth bothering with. [:)]

 

 

[/quote]

It has nothing to do with sexism its just the new reality. Many of the female doctors at my practice are married women with families and who can blame them that a lot of them only want to work part time. I certainly don''t but to pretend it is not going to be a problem for the patient is simply deluding yourself. How we overcome the problem is a question that needs debate but lets not pretend that we don''t have a problem.
[/quote] Exactly. My mate''s wife chooses to work only two 12 hour shifts a week.[/quote]

 

Brilliant, you use one person to represent a demographic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Whilst you make an accusation of sexism instead of addressing the point I made that the feminisation of the medical profession has thrown up a previously unforeseen problem.
[/quote]

 

Have you considered that your theory (it''s a theory not a point) about feminisation of the medical profession being a problem is not correct?

 

 

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="morty"]Aye, fingers crossed that all these predictions of a price rise, come true![/quote]The problem you have in your industry Morty, is that shale oil opened a fresh dynamic and when the price goes up again they will just restart their operations. When conventional oil production looked like hitting a peak it seemed like the sky was the limit but coupled with the debt overhang and low economic activity I can''t see $150 oil anytime soon. On the other hand oil isn''t going to be replaced by something else anytime soon either.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="morty"]Aye, fingers crossed that all these predictions of a price rise, come true![/quote]The problem you have in your industry Morty, is that shale oil opened a fresh dynamic and when the price goes up again they will just restart their operations. When conventional oil production looked like hitting a peak it seemed like the sky was the limit but coupled with the debt overhang and low economic activity I can''t see $150 oil anytime soon. On the other hand oil isn''t going to be replaced by something else anytime soon either.[/quote]Yes the Saudis tried to basically bust the shale oil companies, and pretty much failed, they actually have ridden it out fairly well.Nah, predictions are for a steady rise, possibly peaking about $80 by the end of the year. We may have seen the end of the boom / bust pattern within the industry I think.Unless Trump gets in and starts a war....

[Van wink 2,994]

morty wrote:

"Aye, fingers crossed that all these predictions of a price rise, come true!"

Not as far as I''m concerned, but I don''t work in the industry.

[ricardo 7,350]

[quote user="TCCANARY"]

 

Have you considered that your theory (it''s a theory not a point) about feminisation of the medical profession being a problem is not correct?

 

 

[/quote]Can you show me that it isn''t?I''ve given you a logical explanation for why its probably true. Family time etc etc, breaks for pregnancies, child care etc, husband in full time employment. I know things are changing but its still the case that women earn less than men and commit more time to family life.Why do you think this isn''t a problem.

[Herman 9,731]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="morty"][quote user="king canary"]@Paul

That is different though- contractors surrender certain rights for certain benefits. An employer couldn''t impose a 10% pay cut on it''s permanent staff without a really good reason and nor should they be able to.[/quote]Oh yes they can, and my company just did.[/quote]Morty, you need to tell your employer that you don''t care if oil goes to ten dollars a barrel, you are not going to take a cut in pay and conditions.[;)]

Some people just don''t live in the real world do they[/quote]So basically because others suffer then everyone should, is that the gist?

[Katie Borkins 1]

There must be an economic case to offer over 85''s voluntary euthanasia in return for a cash sum for their relatives. This would reduce the NHS burden and free up valuable housing stock, and probably put many people out of their misery.