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

[JF 694]

Some are lucky enough to have the chance to strike, the majority of us aren''t and just get on with it.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

I work in healthcare. So does my wife. I fully support the strike.

I have many friends who are junior doctors. I''d like to make the following comments;

The notion in this thread that doctors currently don''t work weekends, and work 40 hours is wrong. Every doctor I know makes huge sacrifices for their careers. Show me a doctor that doesn''t currently work at least 70 hours a week, and I''ll show you a pound of rocking -horse manure. They do not get paid massive amounts ts for this. In fact, I''d get paid more than most of my Dr mates, dispite having less education, working less hours, and not being accountable for human life.

The only time they will be well paid is if they ever make it to a consultant post. Many never do.

Most my mates - even during previous strikes have worked on average 8 hour days. They want to strike, but you know, stomach cancer doesn''t operate on itself, and they are caring professionals.

The issue isn''t about getting paid more. It''s about Geri g paid less for the same work.

In my opinion, due to the aging population, the NHS is completly I sustainable in its current form. But screwing the people at its heart is not the solution, especially when they''re being painted as the bad guys - which according to this thread, seems to be working.

[morty 0]

No one is being painted as bad guys, but it seems some want special treatment that virtually nobody else, whether in the public or private sector, is getting right now.Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about.Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.

[Herman 9,717]

Alternatively.[quote user="JF"]Some are lucky enough to have the chance to strike,because others before them have used their rights as workers. The majority of us aren''t because those workers before us just got on with it,and sold their rights for some magic beans.[/quote]

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="Herman "][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="BroadstairsR"]Strong stuff OR and I agree with you.

But, a big "but," are these reforms likely, or intended, to redress these glaring problems or is this all just another Conservative Government''s example of "cutting?"[/quote]Don''t ask me RB, I''m just putting some facts out there that are being ''conveniently'' overlooked or ignored.[;)][/quote]Here are some facts.[url]http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthcaresystem/bulletins/nationalsurveyofbereavedpeoplevoices/england2015[/url]Although a massive organisation like the NHS will never be perfect, if you focus on the negative stats it will seem worse than it actually is.[/quote]Haven''t read all of it yet Herman, but makes interesting reading, and I do take your point.  My point was to put out there that I do not support the junior doctors, and I do get fed up with them being portrayed as ''Dr Perfect Pants'' all the time when they clearly aren''t.[;)]

[Mello Yello 2,281]

The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]You''re right. My son a few months back was delivered in an emergency by a team of 2 Hungarian & Greek midwives, and a Croatian paediatrician. I''m so happy that they were able to come work for the NHS.The NHS is overrun because the human race is living longer. Average life expectancy these days is just over 81, up 6 years since the 90, and up about14 in a generation.What a fantastic problem to have!

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.

[Herman 9,717]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]You''re right. My son a few months back was delivered in an emergency by a team of 2 Hungarian & Greek midwives, and a Croatian paediatrician. I''m so happy that they were able to come work for the NHS.The NHS is overrun because the human race is living longer. Average life expectancy these days is just over 81, up 6 years since the 90, and up about14 in a generation.What a fantastic problem to have![/quote]It''s the elephant in the room, Michael T.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.[/quote]That''s one hell of an assumption Michael.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.[/quote]That''s one hell of an assumption Michael.[/quote]It''s not an assumption. It''s a professional opinion.

[morty 0]

Lol, Daily Mail moment...."IT''S IMMIGRANTS, IT''S ALL THEIR FAULT"[:D]

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="morty"]Lol, Daily Mail moment...."IT''S IMMIGRANTS, IT''S ALL THEIR FAULT"[:D]

[/quote][:D]I''m surprised it took until the 3rd page to be honest - this being a political thread and all.....

[morty 0]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.[/quote]So steel and offshore workers should have less rights, because they didn''t do as well at school?You have to choose here, are these people doctors because it is some kind of calling, and a burning need to help society, or are they doing it for the money? You can''t have it both ways. Yes, of course they should be rewarded for the fine, important work they do, but as you point out, they had choices on which career path to follow.The figures I have read mean that 75% of doctors will actually end up with a payrise. And this stuff about anti social hours etc, well it must hardly come as a surprise to them, did they expect to be working 9-5?I think they are exploiting the fact that they are in a profession that basically can''t be sacked, other than for incompetence.

[BroadstairsR 2,138]

"And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak."

Probably correct.

Even if it is not the Hippocratic oath has it right by all standards of human decency.

We cannot, as caring human beings, endorse medical genocide, whatever the circumstances.

That those circumstances have been brought about by the mis-management of our World at large just emphasises the glaring injustices perpetrated by mankind.

Nothing we can do about this. We all instinctively need to feather our own nest first whatever we donate.

[firststeps 0]

I agree Morty to some extent, every personal circumstance is different.

However, the bankers that got us into a mess in 2007 are now earning big wages and continue getting their BIG bonuses.

As far as the NHS is concerned, it''s a wonder unique service, but I do get annoyed when so much of my contributions are been given to non UK residents.

[morty 0]

[quote user="firststeps"]I agree Morty to some extent, every personal circumstance is different.

However, the bankers that got us into a mess in 2007 are now earning big wages and continue getting their BIG bonuses.

As far as the NHS is concerned, it''s a wonder unique service, but I do get annoyed when so much of my contributions are been given to non UK residents.[/quote]I don''t believe that a lot of the scaremongering about non UK residents is correct. But is the alternative to just let people die on the streets?If you were on holiday in Spain, and you needed treatment, you''d get it. Well, while we are still part of the EEC anyway...I don''t believe that health tourism actually exists, other than in the Daily Mail.

[JF 694]

take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.

I stopped caring at this point. It reads as profession snobbery

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.[/quote]That''s one hell of an assumption Michael.[/quote]It''s not an assumption. It''s a professional opinion.[/quote]How do you work that one out.  You know all the people sitting in the waiting room.  Rubbish.  For someone residing in Australia who are incredibly strict on who comes into that country that''s kind of hypocritical to be passing opinions on what''s happening in our NHS.  It is estimated that the NHS loses approximately £1.8 billion per annum to ''NHS tourists'' so surely we''re entitled to ask what''s going on?  No I''m not blaming immigrants, don''t be so bloody patronising.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.[/quote]So steel and offshore workers should have less rights, because they didn''t do as well at school?You have to choose here, are these people doctors because it is some kind of calling, and a burning need to help society, or are they doing it for the money? You can''t have it both ways. Yes, of course they should be rewarded for the fine, important work they do, but as you point out, they had choices on which career path to follow.The figures I have read mean that 75% of doctors will actually end up with a payrise. And this stuff about anti social hours etc, well it must hardly come as a surprise to them, did they expect to be working 9-5?I think they are exploiting the fact that they are in a profession that basically can''t be sacked, other than for incompetence.[/quote]Yeah, I can see how my last statement sounded elitist. That was not intended. Let me clarify.I''m don''t think that steel workers have less rights because they have less education. I''m saying they have been screwed by private enterprise, and that is perhaps not the top of priorities for the government to prop up another stagnating industry. I also think those workers will have the necessary skills to find work in other industries. I''m sure steel isn''t their ''calling'' as you put it. Health on the other hand should be a bigger priority, and looking after career doctors is, in my opinion, more important than propping up failing industries.

I find your your argument for doctors doing the job a funny one. So, they don''t do a job for the money - therefore they shouldn''t get paid well? So what happens when Canada, Australia, and other European countries pay better? (which they do) What do you think will happen to the quality of care here in the UK? You want to pay them peanuts, but do you want a monkey operating on your dad''s heart bypass?Given that this is the first strike from anyone medical in the last 10 or so years that I can remember - a sector that has been screwed most by the Tories austerity measures - you honestly think the dr''s are ''trying one on'' just because their doctors?If that is the case, these guys need to start winning the PR battle, because when where I sit that is certainly not true.

[MooreMarriot 310]

"... It is estimated that the NHS loses approximately £1.8 billion per annum to ''NHS tourists...".

The Department of Health states  that “health tourists” ,defined as people who have travelled here to get free healthcare they’re not entitled to  , cost £70m to £300m a year. As for the other claim people seem to have accepted at face value.....that a poster " In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff..." , having worked there and attended a number of out patient clinics i have never in a number of years witnessed such a thing. It is a lie designed to provoke.

[morty 0]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.[/quote]That''s one hell of an assumption Michael.[/quote]It''s not an assumption. It''s a professional opinion.[/quote]How do you work that one out.  You know all the people sitting in the waiting room.  Rubbish.  For someone residing in Australia who are incredibly strict on who comes into that country that''s kind of hypocritical to be passing opinions on what''s happening in our NHS.  It is estimated that the NHS loses approximately £1.8 billion per annum to ''NHS tourists'' so surely we''re entitled to ask what''s going on?  No I''m not blaming immigrants, don''t be so bloody patronising.[/quote]To balance this out, do you have a similar figure for British people, who live in other countries around the EU, who have had medical care in those respective countries?

[morty 0]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.[/quote]So steel and offshore workers should have less rights, because they didn''t do as well at school?You have to choose here, are these people doctors because it is some kind of calling, and a burning need to help society, or are they doing it for the money? You can''t have it both ways. Yes, of course they should be rewarded for the fine, important work they do, but as you point out, they had choices on which career path to follow.The figures I have read mean that 75% of doctors will actually end up with a payrise. And this stuff about anti social hours etc, well it must hardly come as a surprise to them, did they expect to be working 9-5?I think they are exploiting the fact that they are in a profession that basically can''t be sacked, other than for incompetence.[/quote]Yeah, I can see how my last statement sounded elitist. That was not intended. Let me clarify.I''m don''t think that steel workers have less rights because they have less education. I''m saying they have been screwed by private enterprise, and that is perhaps not the top of priorities for the government to prop up another stagnating industry. I also think those workers will have the necessary skills to find work in other industries. I''m sure steel isn''t their ''calling'' as you put it. Health on the other hand should be a bigger priority, and looking after career doctors is, in my opinion, more important than propping up failing industries.

I find your your argument for doctors doing the job a funny one. So, they don''t do a job for the money - therefore they shouldn''t get paid well? So what happens when Canada, Australia, and other European countries pay better? (which they do) What do you think will happen to the quality of care here in the UK? You want to pay them peanuts, but do you want a monkey operating on your dad''s heart bypass?Given that this is the first strike from anyone medical in the last 10 or so years that I can remember - a sector that has been screwed most by the Tories austerity measures - you honestly think the dr''s are ''trying one on'' just because their doctors?If that is the case, these guys need to start winning the PR battle, because when where I sit that is certainly not true.[/quote]They are hardly being paid peanuts. And, as I said, having read the proposal on offer, 75% of doctors will end up on more money.I find the "anti social hours" thing an utter non issue.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="Mello Yello"]The ''National Health Service'' has become the ''International Health Service''........[/quote]In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff.[/quote]And I''m sure many of them come from families who have an income and pay tax, which means they''re as entitled to it as you are - regardless what language they speak.[/quote]That''s one hell of an assumption Michael.[/quote]It''s not an assumption. It''s a professional opinion.[/quote]How do you work that one out.  You know all the people sitting in the waiting room.  Rubbish.  For someone residing in Australia who are incredibly strict on who comes into that country that''s kind of hypocritical to be passing opinions on what''s happening in our NHS.  It is estimated that the NHS loses approximately £1.8 billion per annum to ''NHS tourists'' so surely we''re entitled to ask what''s going on?  No I''m not blaming immigrants, don''t be so bloody patronising.[/quote]1) I live in Norwich. I''ve lived in the UK for over 10 years.2) I work as a consultant specialising in healthcare billing.3) I used to work for the NHS, but no longer do.4) One of my jobs for the NHS was to help trusts to recoup lost revenue. It actually used to be my job to know - statistically speaking - who was paying tax in your waiting room.5) Assuming the £1.8 billion UKIP figure is correct (which it''s not, but lets look past that), the current yearly NHS budget is £102 billion. Apparently UKIP''s biggest problem in the NHS would save them a whole £1.5% of their total budget.Any other assumptions on me you want fact checked, or we good? Happy to meet you for a beer if you ever want to further fact check anything else and discuss this further. PM me. I''m a good guy! Honest!But like I said - professional opinion. I think it''s justified.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.[/quote]So steel and offshore workers should have less rights, because they didn''t do as well at school?You have to choose here, are these people doctors because it is some kind of calling, and a burning need to help society, or are they doing it for the money? You can''t have it both ways. Yes, of course they should be rewarded for the fine, important work they do, but as you point out, they had choices on which career path to follow.The figures I have read mean that 75% of doctors will actually end up with a payrise. And this stuff about anti social hours etc, well it must hardly come as a surprise to them, did they expect to be working 9-5?I think they are exploiting the fact that they are in a profession that basically can''t be sacked, other than for incompetence.[/quote]Yeah, I can see how my last statement sounded elitist. That was not intended. Let me clarify.I''m don''t think that steel workers have less rights because they have less education. I''m saying they have been screwed by private enterprise, and that is perhaps not the top of priorities for the government to prop up another stagnating industry. I also think those workers will have the necessary skills to find work in other industries. I''m sure steel isn''t their ''calling'' as you put it. Health on the other hand should be a bigger priority, and looking after career doctors is, in my opinion, more important than propping up failing industries.

I find your your argument for doctors doing the job a funny one. So, they don''t do a job for the money - therefore they shouldn''t get paid well? So what happens when Canada, Australia, and other European countries pay better? (which they do) What do you think will happen to the quality of care here in the UK? You want to pay them peanuts, but do you want a monkey operating on your dad''s heart bypass?Given that this is the first strike from anyone medical in the last 10 or so years that I can remember - a sector that has been screwed most by the Tories austerity measures - you honestly think the dr''s are ''trying one on'' just because their doctors?If that is the case, these guys need to start winning the PR battle, because when where I sit that is certainly not true.[/quote]They are hardly being paid peanuts. And, as I said, having read the proposal on offer, 75% of doctors will end up on more money.I find the "anti social hours" thing an utter non issue.[/quote]No, they''re not on peanuts. But when other places are paying double-peanuts, the NHS is left with the ones prepared to settle for one. See my point?Agree to disagree ''n all that. I''d just ask yourself two questions;1) That 75% figure. Who came up with that number, and what''s their motivation?2) If 75% of doctors were going to end up with more money, and we already know they work many anti-social hours, then why are they striking?

[morty 0]

[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="morty"]Ask steel workers, ask the nearly 50,000 offshore workers who have lost their jobs, that nobody cares about. [/quote]I take your point - but comparing Steel workers to people who have at least 8 years university education, as well as being accountable for human lives - is apples and oranges in my opinion.[quote user="morty"]Out of interest, what does a junior doctor earn? And don''t worry, this isn''t a stick to beat with, as I recognise the years of training they have to carry out to get where they are.[/quote]Depends on where they have progressed. Interns don''t get paid much at all, but Fellow''s and Registrar''s do better.I''m guessing, but I''d say between 40k and 70k, depending on role. For the amount of unpaid overtime and unsocial hours they do, I''d say per hour they''re getting screwed. They should have done law, economics or computer science at university instead.But they''re a different bred in my opinion. They do it because of the chance to do something extraordinary, along with a thirst for learning. I look at my mates (When I see them. Can be difficult with the hours they pull) and say they''re mad. They wouldn''t have it any other way.[/quote]So steel and offshore workers should have less rights, because they didn''t do as well at school?You have to choose here, are these people doctors because it is some kind of calling, and a burning need to help society, or are they doing it for the money? You can''t have it both ways. Yes, of course they should be rewarded for the fine, important work they do, but as you point out, they had choices on which career path to follow.The figures I have read mean that 75% of doctors will actually end up with a payrise. And this stuff about anti social hours etc, well it must hardly come as a surprise to them, did they expect to be working 9-5?I think they are exploiting the fact that they are in a profession that basically can''t be sacked, other than for incompetence.[/quote]Yeah, I can see how my last statement sounded elitist. That was not intended. Let me clarify.I''m don''t think that steel workers have less rights because they have less education. I''m saying they have been screwed by private enterprise, and that is perhaps not the top of priorities for the government to prop up another stagnating industry. I also think those workers will have the necessary skills to find work in other industries. I''m sure steel isn''t their ''calling'' as you put it. Health on the other hand should be a bigger priority, and looking after career doctors is, in my opinion, more important than propping up failing industries.

I find your your argument for doctors doing the job a funny one. So, they don''t do a job for the money - therefore they shouldn''t get paid well? So what happens when Canada, Australia, and other European countries pay better? (which they do) What do you think will happen to the quality of care here in the UK? You want to pay them peanuts, but do you want a monkey operating on your dad''s heart bypass?Given that this is the first strike from anyone medical in the last 10 or so years that I can remember - a sector that has been screwed most by the Tories austerity measures - you honestly think the dr''s are ''trying one on'' just because their doctors?If that is the case, these guys need to start winning the PR battle, because when where I sit that is certainly not true.[/quote]They are hardly being paid peanuts. And, as I said, having read the proposal on offer, 75% of doctors will end up on more money.I find the "anti social hours" thing an utter non issue.[/quote]No, they''re not on peanuts. But when other places are paying double-peanuts, the NHS is left with the ones prepared to settle for one. See my point?Agree to disagree ''n all that. I''d just ask yourself two questions;1) That 75% figure. Who came up with that number, and what''s their motivation?2) If 75% of doctors were going to end up with more money, and we already know they work many anti-social hours, then why are they striking?[/quote]Well its up to their employers to balance things out, if doctors want to go abroad and chase the money, they are entitled to do so, but I don''t need to tell you, theres only so much money in the pot.I read the 75% figure in The Telegraph, which I consider to be a fairly reliable source.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

(psssst.... the 75% figure originality came from Jeremy Hunt) [;)]

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="MooreMarriot"]

"... It is estimated that the NHS loses approximately £1.8 billion per annum to ''NHS tourists...".

The Department of Health states  that “health tourists” ,defined as people who have travelled here to get free healthcare they’re not entitled to  , cost £70m to £300m a year. As for the other claim people seem to have accepted at face value.....that a poster " In a clinic waiting area at the N&N recently, I was the only one speaking English, other than staff..." , having worked there and attended a number of out patient clinics i have never in a number of years witnessed such a thing. It is a lie designed to provoke.

[/quote]

• Deliberate'' use of the NHS—use by those who come here
  specifically to receive free treatment or who come for other reasons but
  take advantage of the system when they''re here—is hard to quantify.
  It''s thought to be very roughly between £110 million and £280 million a
  year.
• ''Normal'' use of the NHS—by foreign visitors who''ve ended up being
  treated while in England—is estimated to cost about £1.8 billion a year.
• The majority of these costs aren''t currently charged for. Only about
  £500 million is thought to be recoverable or chargeable at the moment.

Who do you think of when you hear the term ''health tourist''? A

Spaniard who breaks a leg while on holiday in the UK? An American

travelling here deliberately to use the NHS for free? What about a

British expat who comes home every now and then to see their old,

trusted GP?

All of them can be seen as ''health tourists'' in that they''ve come

from somewhere else and may have received healthcare in the UK for free.

But for some the cost of their treatment is recoverable and for others

it isn''t. Keeping track of these cases is exceptionally difficult and so

is working out the cost to the country.

The costs

We can split the estimated costs into two categories:

Normal use: The estimated cost of normal use of the NHS—by foreign visitors who''ve ended up being treated while in England—is £1.8 billion a year (including

a small number of European visitors treated in the rest of the UK).

This includes the cost of treating them in A&E, though visitors

aren''t currently charged for this, and the cost of treating some

foreigners resident in England who currently don''t incur charges.

Only around £500 million per year is estimated to be recoverable or chargeable according to the Department for Health. In reality only £100 million was recovered in 2013/14.

Deliberate use: This is the estimated cost of treating those travelling to England deliberately

for free treatment, or those who take advantage of the health system

while here (which means using it more intensively than they might have

done otherwise). This group is particularly difficult to quantify as we

don''t really know who most of them are. It''s thought they could cost the

NHS somewhere between £110 million and £280 million a year, on top of

the £1.8 billion a year.

Only hospitals are required to charge overseas visitors

The NHS was founded on the principle

that it''s a service "free at the point of use" for those ordinarily

resident in the UK. But foreign or migrant patients usually need to pay a

fee for their treatment.

Only services provided in or linked to a hospital in England are required to charge for overseas visitors. This excludes services like A&E and walk-in centres.

GPs in England have the discretion

to register overseas patients in theory, and once registered they can

be treated just like any other resident. But in reality they can only

refuse a patient from their list if, say, it was closed to new patients,

rather than because they don''t have leave to remain. The situation is

similar in the rest of the UK.

Who pays?

Currently, foreigners who are ''ordinarily resident'' in the UK—those

who are seen as settled in the UK—are exempt from charges. Full time

students and some others are too. The definition of ''ordinarily resident'' was tightened in last year''s Immigration Act to include only those who have Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), but this hasn''t come into force yet.

Most Europeans don''t have to pay for treatment themselves. Charges

for patients from countries in the European Economic Area are claimed

back by the NHS from their country of residence. The NHS also has

reciprocal agreements with some other countries such

as Australia, where visitors can receive free urgent treatment if they

find they need it when visiting the UK. These agreements are currently being reviewed.

Deliberate health tourism—a very rough estimate

Research commissioned by the Department for Health has estimated the gross cost of ''deliberate'' health tourism

for urgent treatment in England to anywhere between £110 million and

£280 million. Which barely compares to the £1.8 billion gross cost for

''normal'' use of the NHS. But these figures are rough, as the report makes clear: "[it''s] impossible to estimate with confidence".

The research splits the ''deliberate'' health tourists into two sub-groups:

• Deliberate intent: Those travelling to the UK for urgent, acute expensive surgery where they''ll go straight to A&E: £60-80 million

• Taking advantage: Those accessing more routine treatments, having
  been able to register with a GP and visiting on a regular basis. This
  includes British expats who may be chargeable but who have an active GP
  registration: £50-200 million

To get a number for those coming with ''deliberate intent'' to receive

treatment the researchers calculated the risk of people coming from

different countries. This ''abuse rate'' is based on how close their

country of origin is to the UK and the quality of publicly-funded

healthcare there. It guessed an abuse rate of about 1 in 100 visitors

from high risk countries being health tourists, and about 1 in 1,000

visitors from medium risk countries.

To work out the cost, the research assumes all health tourists will

be receiving more expensive treatment—they''re unlikely to travel to the

UK for a flu jab—settling on about £7,000 per case using

(incomplete) data on previous unpaid bills owed to the NHS.

So combining the abuse rate and the cost data, the report estimates

the cost of providing care for this first group of deliberate health

tourists could be anywhere between £20 million and £100 million.

For the second group of health tourists ''taking advantage'' of the NHS, the researchers say:

"... we feel it would be potentially misleading to come up with an estimate".

Nevertheless it has a rough stab at it, suggesting a range

of between £50 million and £200 million a year for these routine NHS

users.

''Normal'' use of the NHS by visitors

Gross costs to the NHS for the wider group (excluding the ''deliberate'' health tourists) have been estimated by the same report as:

• £260 million per year for visitors and non-permanent residents from the European Economic Area (EEA) to England
• £1,400 million per year for visitors and temporary migrants from outside the EEA to England, and irregular migrants
• £95 million per year for English expats living abroad

A further £100 million a year could be added to this if you include UK-wide figures for use of the NHS by Europeans, according to the Department of Health.

The vast majority of the costs for non-EEA visitors and migrants are

not recoverable, because they''re related to GP, A&E or other

services that don''t charge or are exempt for some other reason. About

£300 million also relates to irregular migrants who the report says are

likely to have no means to pay.

About £500 million ''recoverable'' currently

About £150 million can be invoiced to individuals living outside the EEA. Of this, it''s thought that

health Trusts get back about 15%. That''s based on about 40% of people

being identified, 85% of those being invoiced, and 40% of those invoiced

actually paying.

About £340 million is recoverable from European (EEA) visitors (including those using the NHS in the rest of the UK), mostly under the European Health Insurance Card scheme.

The report is again at pains to point out that these are ''uncertain estimates'' because of the full complexity of the eligibility rules.

Is it even worth the trouble to recover the money?

The Department of Health has previously estimated that

the costs of recovering what''s owed could be more than £18 million.

That was compared to the costs being recovered at the time of about

£15-25 million per year.

The money has to be recovered by the NHS bodies that provided the

treatment and NHS Trusts don''t have any incentive to identify overseas

visitors. That''s because, by flagging concerns about a patient''s

entitlement to free treatment, it''d be rejecting money that it would

otherwise receive from the government. Once an overseas visitor is

identified, the Trust instead has to recover its own debt, which will

also run up administration costs.

To tackle this recovery problem the Government announced in July 2014 that it was introducing measures which would recoup an estimated £500 million a year by 2017/18. This is based on:

• £200 million from better identification of EEA patients and recharging to their home countries
• £200 million via a ''health surcharge'' for non-EEA migrants with a visa to stay for over six months
• £100 million from better identification and recovery directly from non-EEA migrants

NHS Trusts will be paid 75% of the cost of non-EEA patients by health

service commissioners, and will then be able to charge double that to

the patient in fees.

So if treating a patient has cost £100, the provider will get £75

from the commissioning group and then will try to recoup £150 from the

patient or their insurer. If successful, they''ll pay the £75 back to the

commissioning group. We''ve got more information on this here.

Medical tourism 

None of these measures consider the money the NHS actually brings in

from medical tourists, that is overseas visitors coming here to pay for

treatment. According to an independent review on overseas use of the NHS for the Department for Health, it''s a "growing market".

Don''t call me a liar MooreMarriot you weren''t there.  Idiot.