Serious News Thread

Discussion over more serious issues and topics
User avatar
siteguru
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:07 pm
Tag: SIR CUNTALOT
Location: Out of view ... but I AM watching you! MWUHAHAHAHA!!
Contact:

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby siteguru » Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:38 pm

There's not enough parking even for staff at the new Suffering General, nevermind parking for patients.

User avatar
Sam
Posts: 4956
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:41 pm
Tag: Hasn't realised that there are custom ranks yet
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Sam » Mon Feb 29, 2016 5:01 pm

One of the hospitals I work in, it's a fiver a day to park. Staff can park £15/month in the staff car park but the waiting list is about 600 strong and takes about 2 years to get a staff space.

People complain about the price of parking, but to be fair if it was any less, the carpark ends up used as a park+ride by commuters, so screwed either way.
:-)

User avatar
Sam
Posts: 4956
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:41 pm
Tag: Hasn't realised that there are custom ranks yet
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Sam » Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:57 am

:-)

User avatar
keasy
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:52 pm
Tag: Argumentative cunt.
Contact:

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby keasy » Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:14 am

Integration is the way forward for both the NHS and Social services.

Health budgets are devolved within the UK and that has caused for the Scottish Government to look at how they streamline budgets in relation to both health and social care.
And, before you shout 'you lost, get over it' (you know who you are ;) ) it is now being looked at as a standard down south too, because it makes sense.
In essence, social care and health care budgets are being rolled into one and to make it viable there are areas within these budgets that are considered 'integrated'. It's essentially pooling from the one pond to save money.

In my current role I investigate both NHS and Social Work clients if they have had a fall within the past 6 months or so. Why? Because if a social work client has falls they probably have a medical reason for it....and if there is no medical cure then social work will have to put in place measures to minimise that client's daily living via equipment referd via an Occupational therapist. But! BUT! The NHS has OT's too...so why waste money passing from one OT to another, especially if the NHS OT has deemed what is appropriate, but can't action it as it's a social work OT's area? ?
Integrated care means communication between the two and not only creating inter-departmental comms that didn't previously exist it saves money as two previously completely separate areas are now intercommunicating as opposed to waiting on each others' paperwork and official clearance.

It makes far more sense to me than a privatised system where one company that is between patients' need waits for paper work from another and 'CHARGES' each other for that privilege!

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:56 pm

So what happens now during the next doctor's strike when someone comes in bleeding from everywhere? Are they actually going to let them bleed out on the floor to their death? Can't see it, no-one is that uncaring.
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

Dan
Posts: 4105
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:00 pm

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Dan » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:11 pm

It will be non-junior doctor delivered emergency cover. The consultants and some non-training junior doctors will still be there to provide emergency care (which they will be more than capable of handling), but elective work will have to be cancelled to free them up to do so, thus increasing the impact of the strike. All available evidence shows that deaths fall during this kind of industrial action.

There's a very simple way for the government to avoid this happening - don't unilaterally impose a contract on 64,000 people who think it's unfair and unsafe.

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:15 pm

What happens if you get too many people for the amount of senior doctors to handle?
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

Dan
Posts: 4105
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:00 pm

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Dan » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:24 pm

The same as when there are too many people for the junior doctors + normal (lower) numbers of consultants to handle. The total capacity of the emergency service will be the same as usual, just delivered by different people.

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:42 pm

So aside from a few more elective procedures being cancelled, everything will be the same as the previous strikes?
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:46 pm

Sorry, I know my posts are coming across as a bit obtuse/blunt! :oops:
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

Dan
Posts: 4105
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:00 pm

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Dan » Wed Mar 23, 2016 7:08 pm

Essentially. But more elective procedures & clinics being cancelled ultimately cost the government money and start causing organisational problems -- which given their refusal to negotiate is the only way this will be resolved.

And don't worry - not offended (nor do I want you to try to not offend me). All I want is to be able to explain this (very complex) problem as thoroughly and clearly as possible!

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:30 pm

See, as I see it this new strike won't make any practical difference at all over the last ones, which the general public actually weren't too fussed over. For the most part I'd say the public agree with you guys, and as they weren't massively inconvenienced then they were happy to support the strike. Trouble is, with that attitude then the government won't be forced to do anything.

The way forward would be to have a strike lasting two weeks, or a month, or something that puts the entire system under long-term strain. If the consultants and other staff can't do their regular thing, then they're going to start being a bit miffed too. This length of strike would then lead to larger disruption for the public, who will do one of two things:

- Become incredibly angry at the government;
- Or become incredibly angry at the doctors.

I'm not hugely convinced the former will be the one that comes out on top. From my perspective (and I fully admit my hatred for unions and strikes in general, so I am by no means unbiased!) it seems that the public as a whole no longer has the appetite or tolerance for strikes that they once did. Perhaps the younger generation for whom rebelling against the Man is a rite of passage, but those who are older now seem to be against the striking culture. I don't know if that's correct, or if it's just the view from my small part of the world, and I would imagine it's probably a different story in the North for example. Trouble is, if that's the case then ultimately I can see the BMA having to back down on some of their points as I don't think it's a fight that's winnable.


Cards on the table time: Do I think the strikes are justified? I honestly don't know. I think that JDs and the NHS as a whole have to accept some kind of modernisation, and that from my limited view that does not appear to be happening. At the same time I don't think it's fair that anyone should be on a payscale that leaves them worse off in purely financial terms, and that should never be the case in a public sector job.
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:31 pm

It is a bloody nightmare to understand though, and it's arguably harder for me as it's only you and Mrs Jez that I know who work in the NHS, so I have very little comprehension of the daily struggles. I just get to complain like fuck on FB when I can't see a GP ;)
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."

Dan
Posts: 4105
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 11:00 pm

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Dan » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:26 pm

Doctors want the government to listen whilst inconveniencing patients and colleagues as little as possible. The end point here is an indefinite withdrawal of all junior doctor cover. Given that even a single day of emergency-care only striking from doctors was basically unprecedented we had to start slowly and escalate -- for as much our piece of mind as the publics. Nobody wants an indefinite all out strike - but it will happen unless the government rethink.

Public support is nice, but ultimately not necessary. E.g. tube drivers.

What kind of modernisation would you like to see in the NHS, and in what way do you think doctors preventing it from coming about?

User avatar
Ekona
Posts: 16622
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:24 pm
Tag: Official member of the RB Anti Facist Party est. 2009
Location: Braintree, innit

Re: Serious News Thread

Postby Ekona » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:42 pm

I agree, it had to start slowly, but right now I can only see the indefinite option doing anything for the cause. Might be good, might be bad.

I would say that public support is vital though, regardless of NHS or tube striking. Without it, the government won't be under any pressure to accede to demands, and in the meantime people will either die (unlikely, I can't see a single doctor not breaking the strike if someone's life was genuinely in danger) or doctors will go back to work because they won't get paid if they don't, and ultimately everyone has mortgages to pay etc.

In terms of modernisation, I guess I don't really know if I'm honest. 7 day weeks should certainly be the norm, with 0700 to 1900 shift patterns introduced but rigidly stuck to (i.e. no OT). I shouldn't have to wait a month to see a GP, although that's mostly financial I assume. Patients should be financially hit if they don't turn up for appointments without notice. Trusts should be forced to work together for added buying power. I don't know, I have such a limited knowledge on the workings that it's hard to have an accurate and reasoned opinion, and even I can see that it reads a bit like Sun reader writing a wish list :lol:
"Chav kids are like sand people. They're easily startled but they'll be back, and in greater numbers."


Return to “Serious Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron