The Labour Government

PPT said:
They will pay them.
Just like the Tories should have done.
They deserve it.
Click to expand...
I agree. Although that is going to have a huge effect on the workers position during the already delayed pay talks for this financial year. That’s why I think it’ll be a good pointer as to how Labour will manage public service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
BobKowalski said:
Otherwise known as sick people. Bloody cancer patients lying in bed all day. Make ‘em work, I say.
Click to expand...

What a lazy and ignorant answer - Absolutely not - but as he correctly states there are far too many people playing the system.
 
Worsleyweb said:
What a lazy and ignorant answer - Absolutely not - but as he correctly states there are far too many people playing the system.
Click to expand...
Whilst a minority are there’s a majority who aren’t because they can’t get an operation, an ex colleague of mine had just had to fork out £15k to get two discs replaced in her neck, she was in so much pain and could get no operation on the NHS, she could’ve remained on the sick at work for 6 months full pay, then gone on half pay for another 6 or struggled on modified duties for years in pain awaiting an operation, she’s lucky she was able to borrow the cash, there are thousands who can’t. It’s costing the economy a fortune, if they can get people seen to and back to work it benefits us all, there maybe a minority swinging the lead but hasn’t there always?
 
Blue Maverick said:
Whilst a minority are there’s a majority who aren’t because they can’t get an operation, an ex colleague of mine had just had to fork out £15k to get two discs replaced in her neck, she was in so much pain and could get no operation on the NHS, she could’ve remained on the sick at work for 6 months full pay, then gone on half pay for another 6 or struggled on modified duties for years in pain awaiting an operation, she’s lucky she was able to borrow the cash, there are thousands who can’t. It’s costing the economy a fortune, if they can get people seen to and back to work it benefits us all, there maybe a minority swinging the lead but hasn’t there always?
Click to expand...
Heard of a few people that have paid for knees, hips, cataracts before you even get into dental treatments with their savings recently. While my mum who needs a new knee waits months. It’s broken and those that were in charge for 14 years broke it.
 
BrianW said:
Maybe because it's the market rate.

Having said that, if you consistently underpay someone, the chances are that sooner or later they will leave, and doctors and nurses have opportunities in Australia, to name but one place.

My view is it is very bad policy to treat your staff like shit, as it costs fortunes to replace them. It's not like you can just walk down to the corner and find a brain surgeon under a lamppost, desperate for work at any salary.
Click to expand...
Oh undoubtedly. It costs much more to replace people than keep them, the question is how do you value one person above another, is a doctor worth more than a teacher? They deserve a fair wage and one thats commensurate with their ability, measuring that against international salaries though is difficult as not all tax and healthcare systems are equal.

Im sure if we all paid more tax, more money could be spent on health, but its not a conversation the UK public likes. Australia has the fourth highest average rate of tax in the developed world so no wonder they can pay higher salaries. Additionally some elements of the healthcare system which are free in the UK aren't in Australia.
 
BrianW said:
Maybe because it's the market rate.

Having said that, if you consistently underpay someone, the chances are that sooner or later they will leave, and doctors and nurses have opportunities in Australia, to name but one place.

My view is it is very bad policy to treat your staff like shit, as it costs fortunes to replace them. It's not like you can just walk down to the corner and find a brain surgeon under a lamppost, desperate for work at any salary.
Click to expand...

For managerial and administrative roles the NHS is forced to compete with the private sector and so the elasticity in the market rate for these roles is far greater. If you try and offer £50k for a Director with 10 years experience when the private sector is paying £150k for the same level of responsibility you’re just quite simply never going to find anybody who is up to the job.

For Junior Doctors the NHS rate is the market rate. The only competitive pressure comes from overseas and there are substantial barriers preventing that being a viable option for many. This makes the rate very inelastic. If they change it the number of junior doctors overall stays roughly the same.

The problem is that in the long-term, if not addressed and remuneration looks incredibly poor next to other professions, that inelasticity becomes such a problem that rather than think “why not be a doctor somewhere else?” People start to think “why be a doctor at all?”

This is roughly where we are and if we’re not careful we’ll be a country where working as a payroll admin provides greater reward than training to be a doctor.
 
Whenever i watch the many medical shows that i do and see the surgeons and nurses doing heart transplants or a surgeon operating on an unborn baby i think fuck they dont get paid anywhere near enough
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
For managerial and administrative roles the NHS is forced to compete with the private sector and so the elasticity in the market rate for these roles is far greater. If you try and offer £50k for a Director with 10 years experience when the private sector is paying £150k for the same level of responsibility you’re just quite simply never going to find anybody who is up to the job.

For Junior Doctors the NHS rate is the market rate. The only competitive pressure comes from overseas and there are substantial barriers preventing that being a viable option for many. This makes the rate very inelastic. If they change it the number of junior doctors overall stays roughly the same.

The problem is that in the long-term, if not addressed and remuneration looks incredibly poor next to other professions, that inelasticity becomes such a problem that rather than think “why not be a doctor somewhere else?” People start to think “why be a doctor at all?”

This is roughly where we are and if we’re not careful we’ll be a country where working as a payroll admin provides greater reward than training to be a doctor.
Click to expand...
Do we really need that administrative roles though, that’s were a lot could be culled, we had this in the fire service where the HR department became so bloated they reckon they had 1 HR person for every 3 operational staff, in the private sector it’s about 1 to 10. When a diversity officer is on significantly more than a frontline firefighter I question the whole ethos of it all, they had to be reminded that HR was there to support the operational personal and not the other way round, get rid of HR the fire service would still function not the other way round, same could be said of the NHS and its plethora of managers.
 
Worsleyweb said:
What a lazy and ignorant answer - Absolutely not - but as he correctly states there are far too many people playing the system.
Click to expand...

what system do you think they are playing? The long term sick one where they get £99.35 pw or the JSA one where they get £90.50 pw - in both cases that works out about the equivalent of £2.80 ph over a 35 hour week.

Or they could go to work on the National Living Wage which for 35hrs gets the £400 pw. In reality THEY are the lead swingers you vilify - the poor bastards exploited by employers on low wages so they have to claim benefits to pay their way and still use a food bank - in absolute reality its the EMPLOYERS who swing the lead because they pay low wages and expect you, me and every other tax payer to pick up the shortfall.

Ken Murphy CEO of TESCO gets almost £10m a year but its ok his wages are paid in Eire so none of the tax he pays supports his employees. Are you seeing how this works yet?
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
The problem is that in the long-term, if not addressed and remuneration looks incredibly poor next to other professions, that inelasticity becomes such a problem that rather than think “why not be a doctor somewhere else?” People start to think “why be a doctor at all?”
Click to expand...
Its where we are at with teachers which can be seen by the large fall in the number of graduates doing PGCEs. When it comes to applicants for medical degrees its still significantly over subscribed. To quote a Guardian article...

"University and College Admissions Service (Ucas) figures show that 28,690 students applied to medicine in 2021, a rise of 21% on last year. Universities made 21,577 offers, a reduction of 14.4% compared with 2019, representing a 41.2% rise in rejections."

From a hard nosed economics point of view supply far exceeds demand which would suggest that the supply at least in the medium term supply of new junior doctors is probably more elastic than most people believe.

However as you rightly point out it doesn't take much to tip the balance and due to the training requirements for the medical professions supply can rapidly become inelastic.
 
Blue Maverick said:
Do we really need that administrative roles though, that’s were a lot could be culled, we had this in the fire service where the HR department became so bloated they reckon they had 1 HR person for every 3 operational staff, in the private sector it’s about 1 to 10. When a diversity officer is on significantly more than a frontline firefighter I question the whole ethos of it all, they had to be reminded that HR was there to support the operational personal and not the other way round, get rid of HR the fire service would still function not the other way round, same could be said of the NHS and its plethora of managers.
Click to expand...
1720629261165.png
Reminds me of this
 
Blue Maverick said:
Do we really need that administrative roles though, that’s were a lot could be culled, we had this in the fire service where the HR department became so bloated they reckon they had 1 HR person for every 3 operational staff, in the private sector it’s about 1 to 10. When a diversity officer is on significantly more than a frontline firefighter I question the whole ethos of it all, they had to be reminded that HR was there to support the operational personal and not the other way round, get rid of HR the fire service would still function not the other way round, same could be said of the NHS and its plethora of managers.
Click to expand...

I read recently that one of the big problems in the NHS is that it's under-managed.

They had less managers than would be expected for an organisation that size. More managers were needed so that the medical staff could be organised more effectively, and they weren't having to do management/admin roles, which they didn't have the skills for, and which took them away from clinical work.
 
bluenova said:
I read recently that one of the big problems in the NHS is that it's under-managed.

They had less managers than would be expected for an organisation that size. More managers were needed so that the medical staff could be organised more effectively, and they weren't having to do management/admin roles, which they didn't have the skills for, and which took them away from clinical work.
Click to expand...
Anything to do with the Tory reforms to reduce the number of NHS managers which ended with doctors spending more time on managing and less time with patients?
 
bluenova said:
I read recently that one of the big problems in the NHS is that it's under-managed.

They had less managers than would be expected for an organisation that size. More managers were needed so that the medical staff could be organised more effectively, and they weren't having to do management/admin roles, which they didn't have the skills for, and which took them away from clinical work.
Click to expand...
Then do it at lower wages then, the draw in the public sector is usually what you get as well as the pay, sick pay, holidays, pension etc. it’s the pay off for lesser wages, it worked for me, some maybe it doesn’t, but that’s the choice you make.
 
Blue Maverick said:
Then do it at lower wages then, the draw in the public sector is usually what you get as well as the pay, sick pay, holidays, pension etc. it’s the pay off for lesser wages, it worked for me, some maybe it doesn’t, but that’s the choice you make.
Click to expand...

Do you believe that most NHS managers are overpaid?

The argument I saw was that there were around 2-3% of staff in management roles, compared with an average of nearly 10% in similar organisations. And even that figure included some clinical staff doing management roles. Given that we're talking about managing some of the most highly skilled people in the country, that we've invested huge sums in training, it makes little sense to skimp so heavily.

That kind of disparity doesn't suggest that that you're overpaying a few, when you could be paying three, four, or five times the amount a fair wage. It suggests a political choice of taking the 'easy' cuts, so you can claim your keeping clinical staff numbers up, even while the service fails.
 
Blue Maverick said:
Then do it at lower wages then, the draw in the public sector is usually what you get as well as the pay, sick pay, holidays, pension etc. it’s the pay off for lesser wages, it worked for me, some maybe it doesn’t, but that’s the choice you make.
Click to expand...

Not sure of the point you make. You start by saying it should be done for lower wages then later said you worked in the public sector for lower wages. How low should the wages go?
Dealing with life and death of the public I want the best management not just the one that will do it for low pay because they may well get a benefit in the long run
 
bluethrunthru said:
Not sure of the point you make. You start by saying it should be done for lower wages then later said you worked in the public sector for lower wages. How low should the wages go?
Dealing with life and death of the public I want the best management not just the one that will do it for low pay because they may well get a benefit in the long run
Click to expand...
I mean don’t expect the same as the the private sector as you get the other benefits, it’s the trade off. Oh and fuck diversity people off in every sector.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top