Nurses and Midwives on Strike

For the 1% that was recommended by the independent review board.

Urgent and emergency care unaffected, so no need to keep that baby in.

 

I have instructed the Mrs to keep it in for the day, just to be safe as I'm sure the midwives still working will be at full stretch anyway

(which probably means my phones about to go off....) :doh:

 

Not often I agree with strikes, but they do seem to have a case, not sure of all the facts to be honest, but I think its been confirmed they will not get a pay rise next year either, everything seems to point to a pay rise, they can afford it and deserve it.

 

I could never agree with strikes in the public sector - good case or not.

 

Seems somewhat tatically inept of the Government. 1% is not huge set against NHS budgets. You'd have thought they would have told the Health Trusts to award the 1% but find the money from current budgets. There's little I admire about this Govt, but I do have to acknowledge their talent for peeing people off.

 

I keep reading that the NHS has run out of money, so I'm not sure where people are getting this idea from that there is spare cash to pay everyone a 1% rise. I'm sure the 1% rise is justified, but what are we going to cut to pay for it?

 

Less 10% of Unison members voted in favour, and not more than 50% in any union.

 

Hang on, so if they can't make 1% of efficiency savings all your talk of public sector flabbiness is just nonsense isn't it? If they haven't got 1% to take out the NHS is literally the most streamlined organisation in the country.

 

Approximate figures

NHS spending in 2003 £64bn, in 2013 £109bn

% of GDP in 2003 5%, in 2103 9.27%

Spend per member of population gone up from £1,287 per head, to around £2,000 per head.

38,000 more doctors over that time (34% increase), 24,000 more nurses (6.8% increase)
16% more clinically trained staff, 17.4% more qualified ambulance staff.

Yes, it will be easy to find many smaller issues amongst the bigger picture. But the fact remains that the NHS needs to spend their extra funds responsibly. Waiting times for GP and hospital appointments and treatment are far too long.

If the doctors and nurses miss out on £5 per week extra, so what. Far more damage will be done by strikes that will only go to increase waiting times even further.

 

The NHS Trusts are already running deficits. If they save 1% in efficiency it should probably go against that shortfall before pay rises unfortunately.

 

.

World bank says 9.4% for all health spending, private and public, against France 11.7 Germany 11.3 and USA 17.9. The NHS is hardly an albatross is it?

 

Has anyone got any figures for management pay rises within the NHS?

 

So are you saying that we should judge our spending alongside health care systems where private funding plays a significantly greater proportion? Interesting!

In my view, in this particular situation, the funding models are so different across different countries that your figures are irrelevant, unless you are pushing to scrap the NHS and bring in more private health care?

 

You are not reading it correctly. This is total health spending in all sectors. I'm saying the NHS is good value. We spend less to get similar outcomes. Maybe we should spend a bit more where the outcomes don't match.

 

Maybe we could privatise all health care. It might, for example, give the sort of value for money and efficiency the privatised rail companies have delivered.

 

My point is that spending has gone up considerably over the past decade. The NHS cannot continue in the same way. The improvements at the sharp end for patients have not kept pace with the massive amount of extra money the NHS has received.

 

For f's sake! And what might the ultimate weapon for a public labour force with a genuine grievance be then?

 

Well your wife'll certainly be at full stretch imminently anyway ...

 

Just a quick graph that illustrates the increase in NHS spending;



And a little table that illustrates how so few NHS staff believe they should be striking for more pay



But the Unions take them out anyway. It is a disgrace how a tiny minority can override the majority in industrial relations. Democracy? Don't make me laugh!

 

And what percentage of the electorate voted for the government? Redundant argument ...

 

See above. Plus, if the majority can't be arsed to vote that's their business ...

 

It may seem a massive amount but the spending still lags well behind nations which should be comparators.

Those final improvements are hard to make. In any business the final 10% of quality is the most expensive.

 

£5 per week increase when almost all NHS Trusts are in deficit isn't a genuine grievance. For a start 60% get incremental pay increases anyway, which is far more than the majority of workers are getting during this downturn.

See the table below in #19. It seems that the vast majority of staff do not believe that the current issue is worth striking over. The Police never strike, but their pay has kept up with the general situation.

 

Maybe it's time to rationalise what ths NHS treats in the face of unremitting and expensive medical advance. IVF on the NHS? Maybe not ...

 

You said a strike was "never justified", now you're criticising the quality of this particular grievance. I believe that's called 'moving the goalposts'.

I've seen your table. It doesn't indicate a majority against this strike - it indicates a majority who couldn't be arsed to vote. It indicates majorities in favour of strike action amongst those that did vote. If you want to use statistics then use them properly. The police are the one public sector that the government is always particularly reluctant to upset.

 

Of course it isn't a redundant argument. The NHS was a simple vote strike or not. Whereas the election vote provides many different options.

Kelso, that was a weak point and you know it!

 

As if! The point is that you're being selective when you claim a majority are against something rather than simply being disengaged.

 

Resign and go and get a job where you feel your skills are attracting a more justified salary? That's how it works in the private sector, and I don't see a problem with it.

 

Wonderful logic. Because one system is garbage we should excuse another system.

Change the strike rules. Also change the electoral system and make voting compulsory in my opinion.

 

I can always get a GP appointment at the drop of a hat. But then I live in Scotland ...

 

Agreed.

 

When people apply for jobs with a public service, that is funded from a limited public purse they must understand that they are providing vital services that are far more important than a pay increase. As I said, the Police never strike, no matter how upset they are. If there is a genuine grievance then they would have the ultimate sanction of leaving for something better. That continual threat is what keeps the NHS staff relatively well paid. Time after time people like the nurses tell us that it is the patients that matter, yet here those words are somewhat hollow.

Public service workers get the best pensions, the best holidays, the best sickness allowances. Why should they have the right to just stop working when a few of them think they aren't getting their own way?

I have used the statistics totally properly - and you provided the reason yourself in your last paragraph. The vast majority of staff "couldn't be arsed to vote". Remember, that is just putting a tick on a piece of paper. That indicates that the the vast majority just did not think the cause was worth striking over.

 

Think of the agency staff.

If I had more time on my hands I'd love to contribute more to this thread, and I actually wrote out a reply that covered more than the above earlier on but i tapped 'previous post' on my phone like an absolute idiot and lost it all.

It's interesting how heavily discussed all these issues are on this forum. I know these threads often descend into name calling and people shouting their own opinions without proper debate, but it's sort of great this type of thing is being talked about.

My experience of striking was as an agency worker threatened with the sack and told by my employers 'choose your fights wisely'. Absolute rubbish.

 

Yeah, well my daughter (in Cheltenham) has just spent about 30 minutes on her phone (mobile) trying to get an appointment and she could only get one three weeks away. She has to ring at 8.30 in the morning, whether driving, on a train, or up a mountain. It si an answer machine up to 8.29.59 and then engaged solidly. She couldn't even get an answer last week. If she rings during the day, she is told she must ring in the morning.

 

That'll do wonders for the NHS! Many who work in it have a strong vocational committment and believe passionately in a public health service ...