FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should nurses beable to strike?
Should nurses beable to strike?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Continue here any comers, of course they should. I heard that they started the strike yesterday and it ends tonight at 12. NHS organisations across the country will face significant disruption as the rcn holds industrial action Do you know why they are on strike, is it because of pay or the working hours?" Pay and working conditions. Nurses are sick of unsafe staffing on wards, it puts patients at risk. Nurses are looking after too many patients each per shift, how is one nurse supposed to give safe effective care to 20 patients all at the same time? An overworked and over stressed nurse is no good to anyone. Yes part of it is about pay but Nurses have been underpaid for many years so that's nothing new. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. " I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. " Thousands are every year, and the trend is only going upward | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. " So if nurse / Doctors leave to a point hospital's close that's OK Then. Have you tried to see a GP another Job falling in number. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike." Police & army too? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too?" We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike." So you’d be happy with no army, or police? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police?" If we remove the power of striking, and say take it or leave it - people will leave. It's clear the powers that be aren't negotiating. So you'll end up with no police or army anyway. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? If we remove the power of striking, and say take it or leave it - people will leave. It's clear the powers that be aren't negotiating. So you'll end up with no police or army anyway." So do you think they should be allowed to strike? If so any caveats on who/when/why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? If we remove the power of striking, and say take it or leave it - people will leave. It's clear the powers that be aren't negotiating. So you'll end up with no police or army anyway. So do you think they should be allowed to strike? If so any caveats on who/when/why?" Yes. No. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes I think so over the conditions they are expected to work, over pay however they knew the average wage of a nurse going into it, it's always been pants for what they do so what did they expect. It's just a shame the only people suffering are the patients at the end of the day. Mrs " In an ideal world the public would grab the Tories by the scrotum and twist, because they've got us here, but *shrug* | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? If we remove the power of striking, and say take it or leave it - people will leave. It's clear the powers that be aren't negotiating. So you'll end up with no police or army anyway. So do you think they should be allowed to strike? If so any caveats on who/when/why? Yes. No." Ok so happy for the army/police to all go on strike whenever and screw the consequences? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? If we remove the power of striking, and say take it or leave it - people will leave. It's clear the powers that be aren't negotiating. So you'll end up with no police or army anyway. So do you think they should be allowed to strike? If so any caveats on who/when/why? Yes. No. Ok so happy for the army/police to all go on strike whenever and screw the consequences?" Now who's engaging in a strawman? 
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services."I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman. A few weeks/months of no army or police though? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though? "Yes If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"P.s Unions are already restricted. " Correct. And the bootlickers (not saying you, just in case you read it that way) love it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Yes
If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline."Appreciate the honesty, but that would most definitely end in loss of life which I don’t thinks acceptable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"P.s Unions are already restricted. Correct. And the bootlickers (not saying you, just in case you read it that way) love it." I lick boots on the odd occasion….probs not in the same way you mean though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Yes
If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline.
Appreciate the honesty, but that would most definitely end in loss of life which I don’t thinks acceptable."How much of the loss of life from long term decline in services do you think is acceptable? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Yes
If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline.
Appreciate the honesty, but that would most definitely end in loss of life which I don’t thinks acceptable.
How much of the loss of life from long term decline in services do you think is acceptable? "None. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes absolutely should. Nurses have put up with so much for so long and thousands are leaving the profession, which then causes understaffing and more pressure. Agencies charge a fortune for staff which then has a knock on effect on the NHS. The other end of the scale needs looking at too as cleaning staff and porters get paid the same as HCAs with qualifications such as venipuncture and NVQs. " This, I know of a couple of nurses who are now agency bc the pay is better but they do exactly the same shifts in the same hospital that previously employed them directly. The NHS is pissing away thousands on this daily, but they have no choice. Pay them appropriately surely is the answer and focus on retention through improved conditions | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes absolutely should. Nurses have put up with so much for so long and thousands are leaving the profession, which then causes understaffing and more pressure. Agencies charge a fortune for staff which then has a knock on effect on the NHS. The other end of the scale needs looking at too as cleaning staff and porters get paid the same as HCAs with qualifications such as venipuncture and NVQs. This, I know of a couple of nurses who are now agency bc the pay is better but they do exactly the same shifts in the same hospital that previously employed them directly. The NHS is pissing away thousands on this daily, but they have no choice. Pay them appropriately surely is the answer and focus on retention through improved conditions " This..!! Offer good wages and conditions and there won’t be any need for agencies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty " Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Yes
If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline.
Appreciate the honesty, but that would most definitely end in loss of life which I don’t thinks acceptable.
How much of the loss of life from long term decline in services do you think is acceptable?
None."That loss of life is happening now. How do we change things? How does removing striking help, other than remove a method people can use to try to solve the problem? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. " And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Yes
If the choice is between a government who won't negotiate and increasingly degrading conditions, leaving people to change professions, months of none of that profession is preferable to long term decline.
Appreciate the honesty, but that would most definitely end in loss of life which I don’t thinks acceptable.
How much of the loss of life from long term decline in services do you think is acceptable?
None.
That loss of life is happening now.
How do we change things? How does removing striking help, other than remove a method people can use to try to solve the problem?"I’m not sure what the answer is, but any loss of life due to strike action is unacceptable imo. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost?" Not unless they do it en mass. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police?" No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools." You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement! 
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass." So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive " Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike?"I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions." So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies."What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc wouldn’t be too happy.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike?"Make sure you understnad I support their RIGHT to strike, which is not supporting the actual strike. I would not be so bold to demand different workes rights for different occupaions. All animals are equal, but some more equal then others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes. They should. They shouldn't have to withdraw their labour, they should have pay and conditions that would make striking not an option. They , (NHS workers) have been repeatedly let down by successive governments and have now reached breaking point. The money spunked on Track and Trace would have more than paid for any sallery increase, not to mention the £350M a week Mr Mendacious promised on the side of his bullshit bus. So yeah, they have the right to strike. Any deaths as a result, belong to the government. " I'd also rather people not *have to* strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything?" I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes. They should. They shouldn't have to withdraw their labour, they should have pay and conditions that would make striking not an option. They , (NHS workers) have been repeatedly let down by successive governments and have now reached breaking point. The money spunked on Track and Trace would have more than paid for any sallery increase, not to mention the £350M a week Mr Mendacious promised on the side of his bullshit bus. So yeah, they have the right to strike. Any deaths as a result, belong to the government. I'd also rather people not *have to* strike." 100% agree. Yay common ground | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc
wouldn’t be too happy. "I'm not going to argy my spiritual beliefs with you as this is not the topic of the thread but, their are other solutions to these problems. Please don't simplify what I believe without knowing my whole belief system and how I think these issues should be solved. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc
wouldn’t be too happy. I'm not going to argy my spiritual beliefs with you as this is not the topic of the thread but, their are other solutions to these problems. Please don't simplify what I believe without knowing my whole belief system and how I think these issues should be solved."I’m not, you stated no to armies so I’ve just pointed out what they provide. In an ideal world we wouldn’t need them, but we don’t and we do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc wouldn’t be too happy. "I'm of the opinion that bold white saviours who have contributed to these messes, historically, should fuck off and then further. I also think fluffy imperialism is no better than spiky imperialism, and to compare these things to Ebola is insulting to Ebola  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc
wouldn’t be too happy. I'm not going to argy my spiritual beliefs with you as this is not the topic of the thread but, their are other solutions to these problems. Please don't simplify what I believe without knowing my whole belief system and how I think these issues should be solved.
I’m not, you stated no to armies so I’ve just pointed out what they provide.
In an ideal world we wouldn’t need them, but we don’t and we do. "Like I said, there are other solutions to these problems. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc wouldn’t be too happy.
I'm of the opinion that bold white saviours who have contributed to these messes, historically, should fuck off and then further.
I also think fluffy imperialism is no better than spiky imperialism, and to compare these things to Ebola is insulting to Ebola "Hell of a racist thing to say! A lot in the armed forces aren’t white. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike." Ok. So in a world where we have loss of life either way because the government won't budge, your solution is to take an option from people who are trying to solve the problems the government has caused. Logical | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike. Ok. So in a world where we have loss of life either way because the government won't budge, your solution is to take an option from people who are trying to solve the problems the government has caused. Logical " Back to strawmanning I see… I haven’t given a solution. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. Police & army too? We haven't got much of an Army as most are part time anyway and the way the police do their job, they might as well be on strike. So you’d be happy with no army, or police? No army, yes. If the police went on trike I would suppot their right to as I would be organised the same as the other strike. They all wouldn't drop tools. You’re seriously suggesting no army? That’s a bold statement!
Given how undermanned the police are currently do you not think there would be pretty dire consequences if they did strike? I was brought up in a hippy commune so I support all countries have no armies.
What about all peace keeping and humanitarian missions? Pretty certain the people of Somalia, Sudan etc wouldn’t be too happy.
I'm of the opinion that bold white saviours who have contributed to these messes, historically, should fuck off and then further.
I also think fluffy imperialism is no better than spiky imperialism, and to compare these things to Ebola is insulting to Ebola
Hell of a racist thing to say! A lot in the armed forces aren’t white."I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals "You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike. Ok. So in a world where we have loss of life either way because the government won't budge, your solution is to take an option from people who are trying to solve the problems the government has caused. Logical Back to strawmanning I see… I haven’t given a solution. " I'm interested to know how I'm strawmanning. One of the solutions to labour negotiations is striking. The government won't budge, which leads to loss of services and loss of life. You believe that striking should be taken off the table. Therefore you have removed a tool that people can use to try to restore these services. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike. Ok. So in a world where we have loss of life either way because the government won't budge, your solution is to take an option from people who are trying to solve the problems the government has caused. Logical Back to strawmanning I see… I haven’t given a solution. I'm interested to know how I'm strawmanning. One of the solutions to labour negotiations is striking. The government won't budge, which leads to loss of services and loss of life. You believe that striking should be taken off the table. Therefore you have removed a tool that people can use to try to restore these services." By stating I suggested a solution, I haven’t. That’s strawmanning. I believe ANYTHING that risks lives should be off the table, yes! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me."It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army."And yet it’s the army in places like Sudan and Somalia currently doing humanitarian work, but you’d rather that just fucked off. Not very compassionate of you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army."Also are you now suggesting the armed forces don’t do anything worthwhile? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are for sale that is our skill & work is for sale, who has the right to tell us we can't stop selling our skill or work. If we don't pay our energy providers what they think they are worth we get cut off (withdrawn energy) Don't pay your car loan etc it's taken away So why should workers / nurses accept poor payment Fuck this corrupt system that bleeds workers dry whilst the rich are sitting pritty Because if some professions strike then lives are at risk. And if those professionals leave to sell plastic shit and makeup, lives are also not lost? Not unless they do it en mass. So the results of current shortages are that everything is fine? That's naive Most definitely not fine and never said it was. They most certainly deserve better pay & conditions. So given other attempts to work towards better conditions have failed, how does removing a way for them to respond help anything? I’ve already stated I don’t know the answer, but striking isn’t the way for me. I think nurses, fire service etc should be in the same category as the police & army and therefore not allowed to strike. Ok. So in a world where we have loss of life either way because the government won't budge, your solution is to take an option from people who are trying to solve the problems the government has caused. Logical Back to strawmanning I see… I haven’t given a solution. I'm interested to know how I'm strawmanning. One of the solutions to labour negotiations is striking. The government won't budge, which leads to loss of services and loss of life. You believe that striking should be taken off the table. Therefore you have removed a tool that people can use to try to restore these services. By stating I suggested a solution, I haven’t. That’s strawmanning. I believe ANYTHING that risks lives should be off the table, yes! " You've suggested banning striking because you think it'll make things worse in the short term. I'm sorry if you dislike the word "solution". You're suggesting a way forward that will remove an option for the longer term resolution. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've suggested banning striking because you think it'll make things worse in the short term. I'm sorry if you dislike the word "solution". You're suggesting a way forward that will remove an option for the longer term resolution." Nope, I’m not sure where you’re going wrong. I haven’t suggested any solution. Do I think nurses should be paid more? Yes. Do I think they should be allowed to strike? No. Do I think the government have screwed them (again)? Yes. Do I have a solution? No. There we go, all clear. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army.
Also are you now suggesting the armed forces don’t do anything worthwhile?"No. I'm suggesting that those things can be done by bodies other than the army. It'd lead to a) the removal of any exemption to the right to strike, which is a profound loss of rights for people who society claims to revere b.) removal of charitable work from an imperialist body and c) less of a sacred cow for people to throw money into when they decide they want to bomb the shit out of a country for oil oops I mean freedom | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army.
Also are you now suggesting the armed forces don’t do anything worthwhile?
No. I'm suggesting that those things can be done by bodies other than the army.
It'd lead to a) the removal of any exemption to the right to strike, which is a profound loss of rights for people who society claims to revere
b.) removal of charitable work from an imperialist body and
c) less of a sacred cow for people to throw money into when they decide they want to bomb the shit out of a country for oil oops I mean freedom"And yet they are done by the army. There would be no need for an army in an ideal world, but we don’t live in an ideal world. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've suggested banning striking because you think it'll make things worse in the short term. I'm sorry if you dislike the word "solution". You're suggesting a way forward that will remove an option for the longer term resolution. Nope, I’m not sure where you’re going wrong. I haven’t suggested any solution. Do I think nurses should be paid more? Yes. Do I think they should be allowed to strike? No. Do I think the government have screwed them (again)? Yes. Do I have a solution? No. There we go, all clear. "Ok, cool The government are not prepared to pay public sectors fairly. This is resulting in a degradation of services including loss of life long term. What tools do people have to get the government to budge? Several which haven't worked. And strikes To solve the problem of degradation of services, you propose that people have one tool removed from them. How does this help in the slightest? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army.
Also are you now suggesting the armed forces don’t do anything worthwhile?
No. I'm suggesting that those things can be done by bodies other than the army.
It'd lead to a) the removal of any exemption to the right to strike, which is a profound loss of rights for people who society claims to revere
b.) removal of charitable work from an imperialist body and
c) less of a sacred cow for people to throw money into when they decide they want to bomb the shit out of a country for oil oops I mean freedom
And yet they are done by the army. There would be no need for an army in an ideal world, but we don’t live in an ideal world."All I'm saying is, if I have a wand and I can eliminate a) armies, or b) Ebola, cancer, and HIV/AIDS, I'm eliminating armies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've suggested banning striking because you think it'll make things worse in the short term. I'm sorry if you dislike the word "solution". You're suggesting a way forward that will remove an option for the longer term resolution. Nope, I’m not sure where you’re going wrong. I haven’t suggested any solution. Do I think nurses should be paid more? Yes. Do I think they should be allowed to strike? No. Do I think the government have screwed them (again)? Yes. Do I have a solution? No. There we go, all clear.
Ok, cool
The government are not prepared to pay public sectors fairly. This is resulting in a degradation of services including loss of life long term.
What tools do people have to get the government to budge?
Several which haven't worked. And strikes
To solve the problem of degradation of services, you propose that people have one tool removed from them.
How does this help in the slightest?"Again I’ve never said it did help, I would just prefer a different solution where there’s no potential loss of life…call me crazy! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm sorry if you mistake my comments about the UK and other countries, or the cultural phenomenon of white saviour complex, as being about individuals
You’re the one that brought colour into the debate, not me.
It's an expression based on historical realities, but I suppose those things hurt feelings
But if you must play that game, every coloured saviour complex from any place can fuck off. Any worthwhile job can be delegated to outside the army.
Also are you now suggesting the armed forces don’t do anything worthwhile?
No. I'm suggesting that those things can be done by bodies other than the army.
It'd lead to a) the removal of any exemption to the right to strike, which is a profound loss of rights for people who society claims to revere
b.) removal of charitable work from an imperialist body and
c) less of a sacred cow for people to throw money into when they decide they want to bomb the shit out of a country for oil oops I mean freedom
And yet they are done by the army. There would be no need for an army in an ideal world, but we don’t live in an ideal world.
All I'm saying is, if I have a wand and I can eliminate a) armies, or b) Ebola, cancer, and HIV/AIDS, I'm eliminating armies."I think everyone would say the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Over worked and underpaid as its always been in the NHS but Never the less, they kept quiet over the past few years knowing full well what was going on so I honestly do not feel sorry for them! "Oh noes, the lizardy plot of Martians to depopulate the world immediately no in a few months no in a few years has been discovered! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You've suggested banning striking because you think it'll make things worse in the short term. I'm sorry if you dislike the word "solution". You're suggesting a way forward that will remove an option for the longer term resolution. Nope, I’m not sure where you’re going wrong. I haven’t suggested any solution. Do I think nurses should be paid more? Yes. Do I think they should be allowed to strike? No. Do I think the government have screwed them (again)? Yes. Do I have a solution? No. There we go, all clear.
Ok, cool
The government are not prepared to pay public sectors fairly. This is resulting in a degradation of services including loss of life long term.
What tools do people have to get the government to budge?
Several which haven't worked. And strikes
To solve the problem of degradation of services, you propose that people have one tool removed from them.
How does this help in the slightest?
Again I’ve never said it did help, I would just prefer a different solution where there’s no potential loss of life…call me crazy!"I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. " I actually think we agree on the fundamentals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. I actually think we agree on the fundamentals." Possibly yes I'd rather any of these services didn't strike, but I don't think that's a viable option, now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. I actually think we agree on the fundamentals. Possibly yes I'd rather any of these services didn't strike, but I don't think that's a viable option, now." Holy shit we found common ground again!?! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. I actually think we agree on the fundamentals. Possibly yes I'd rather any of these services didn't strike, but I don't think that's a viable option, now. Holy shit we found common ground again!?! "And purple in the bedroom 
(I argue ideas, not people) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. I actually think we agree on the fundamentals. Possibly yes I'd rather any of these services didn't strike, but I don't think that's a viable option, now. Holy shit we found common ground again!?!
And purple in the bedroom
(I argue ideas, not people)"Same. I love opinionated people that don’t back down, or succumb to the crowd so high five matey.
We may not agree and would likely throttle each other, but I respect that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd rather that too - but, as you say, we don't live in an ideal world. I actually think we agree on the fundamentals. Possibly yes I'd rather any of these services didn't strike, but I don't think that's a viable option, now. Holy shit we found common ground again!?!
And purple in the bedroom
(I argue ideas, not people)
Same. I love opinionated people that don’t back down, or succumb to the crowd so high five matey.
We may not agree and would likely throttle each other, but I respect that. "For sure. Here's to a good argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They've been treated abysmally but the government and not taken seriously. The government happily recieve and accept their regular pay rises while other very necessary and important skilled workers in our society are pushed aside. I'm not anything to do with the NHS but I would happily stand with them to support their fight for a fair and just pay rise. You can imagine the response that you'd get if MPs were expected to be content with a clip and bandaging on pans once a week instead of a pay rise. Most NHS workers are paid nothing near the 80k+ and expenses that MPs are paid. Shameful. " Exactly this.
People saying they shouldn't strike but don't know of another solution are proving the point of the strikers. It's LAST resort. They lose a day's pay for every day they're out there striking FOR better terms and conditions. There IS no other solution other than to demonstrate WHY their labour is needed in the first place. Full solidarity here with those on strike. And anyone at risk isn't at risk because of striking nurses but because the government we have is shit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No they should not be allowed to strike, and yes we live in a free country, one that should not be dictated too by unions. If the job does not pay vote with your feet. I spent 31 years in job with no right to strike, I voted with my feet and gave the job up. Strangely some employment pay scales are driven by lack of applicants and those leaving maybe nursing needs a structure like that. I see nursing giving up the degree qualifications just like the Police are doing now, the degree qualification is large part of why they are in this mess. " Exactly, the fact nurses & police have to have degrees has weakened the world & particularly the police. Universities are now completely woke & we can see this in how inept & woke our Police are. Guessing your 31yrs in a no strike profession left you with a good pension. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Continue here any comers, of course they should. I heard that they started the strike yesterday and it ends tonight at 12. NHS organisations across the country will face significant disruption as the rcn holds industrial action Do you know why they are on strike, is it because of pay or the working hours?" Of course - I nursed for 40 years and the government took the proverbial all of that time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No they should not be allowed to strike, and yes we live in a free country, one that should not be dictated too by unions. If the job does not pay vote with your feet. I spent 31 years in job with no right to strike, I voted with my feet and gave the job up. Strangely some employment pay scales are driven by lack of applicants and those leaving maybe nursing needs a structure like that. I see nursing giving up the degree qualifications just like the Police are doing now, the degree qualification is large part of why they are in this mess. " Yes they should. The membership IS the union. They vote to strike and the organisation listens because that's what member's subs pay them to do. So it's nonsense to say the unions are 'dictating' anything. The strikers are part of the wider electorate, some of them may have been stupid enough to vote the scumbags in that we have now that are shitting all over them. It's everyone's right to voice dissatisfaction at the terms and conditions being taken away from them. There's nothing more dictatorial than a government deliberately demonising unions while they take away the right to withhold labour on the premise that it makes everyone else unsafe, especially when they're using news outlets like ITV and the BBC to do it. It just makes people look stupid when they fall for it. The nursing profession doesn't have problems attracting new applicants, it has problems retaining current staff who are seeing what has been taken from them. Just because you were miserable in a job for years it doesn't mean that everyone else should sit down and shut up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Continue here any comers, of course they should. I heard that they started the strike yesterday and it ends tonight at 12. NHS organisations across the country will face significant disruption as the rcn holds industrial action Do you know why they are on strike, is it because of pay or the working hours? Of course - I nursed for 40 years and the government took the proverbial all of that time " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike." When Boris was pm, would it have been ok for him to strike for more. I mean technically he was in strike just not officially. But you did say everyone What about policeman when there’s a riot happening in your street , ok for them to strike and let you die ? If you allow a countries critical services to suffer because the workers disagree on pay , you end up with a shit hole like the uk where nothing works | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't think public servants should have the right to strike. It’s only hurts the people they serve. These government workers should do their job or leave if they don’t like it. Private sector is different. If sports direct goes on strike , no one cares, we go to JD instead. Only the sports direct shareholders are hurt , so striking works. I couldn't disagree more. Everyone should have the right to strike. When Boris was pm, would it have been ok for him to strike for more. I mean technically he was in strike just not officially. But you did say everyone What about policeman when there’s a riot happening in your street , ok for them to strike and let you die ? If you allow a countries critical services to suffer because the workers disagree on pay , you end up with a shit hole like the uk where nothing works " Your logic isn't sound. You are saying its bad now, yet the critical services aren't allowed to strike? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As nurse for 26 years I have plenty to say on the matter. In 1997 the starting wage was £11,500, we knew the wage was not great but we went in with free education and a guaranteed job at the end of three years or 5000 hours of practice / in University, not including private study time to complete essays course work etc. That's what you needed to register with the NMC (the regulatory body). FYI the average course is about 600 taught hours over 3 years, although I suspect this is less now. For which a bursary was given £360 a month under 25 and £500 a month over 25. Fast forward to 2022, a newly qualified nurse starts on about £26,000 but there are enhancements for weekend work and night duty which bumps it to about £28,000 more or less. The catch is , no bursary , same hours needed to complete the course and now a fee of £27,000 for tuition which must be paid back as soon as you earn enough , which is less that the starting wage so it's immediate. You can progress , of course but the big differences in pay are much higher up and take time. There is no incentive to stay working in the lower parts of the wage bracket as it takes 5 years to get the next level increment, so people move out into other positions, often filling Jnr Dr roles. Again the banding is such that movement up is only realised in real terms when you have been in the job 5 years. I digress. The last nurse I spoke to had actually accrued £60,0000 worth of debt to pursuing a career as a nurse. Cost of living rent etc adds up and course work hours prohibited getting a part time job whilst at University unlike those doing history classes or economics. So do they get get a fair wage? No I don't think so , not considering what they need to know and are responsible for. Do they or should they have the right to strike? Yes they bloody should , who took the bursary away , who took the free education away , who in their right mind would do that ? Because you can't attract people to it , only young people you'll never get anyone coming into it later on in life as it's probably too expensive and they would never get rid of the debt. So the right to strike is all we got left in this fight for a better life for our children, our parents , ourselves. Because I don't wanna go down the alternative route of private health care. Great if you can afford it , good for you. We also were pushed into the agenda for change which saw all staff apart from the savy Dr's go into one pay scale for all. So the electrician who is there and the maintenance people the managers and office workers (all essential employees) are on the same scale so when we talk about increasing the wage for nurses it's EVERYONE in the NHS on the agenda for change and believe me when I say there are a lot more people on the higher level of wages above that of a nurse who are not as skilled or have spent a fortune on university fees and if they did they could hold down a part time job whilst there. So that's why the government has been so careful with the offer. It's not just nurses that will break the bank it will be ALL the others too. My view is take out the fronline patient facing roles from the agenda for change and give them a healthily payrise. The NHS will not collapse if those in patient facing roles are paid according to their job and qualifications. Anyway 1997 a modest house was £40,000 , what can you expect to buy now on a wage of 4 times your salary? Well have a look for yourself , it don't buy you much at all these days. The future of the NHS and its workforce requires investment in people and wages , it's simply not good enough for some on here to say , "well you knew what you were getting into" (might as well spit on them as you say it). The mess needs turning round and it can't do that if we head towards privatisation , which will cost YOU a lot more in the long run. I've said enough , if you got to the end ..... thank you for your time. " You are right, removing the bursary and treating it like a degree was a terrible idea , I am surprised any one wants to come into nursing anymore. Privatisation is the only way to increase the service levels, it does cost more and it should cost more, health is important, it should be the governments top priority along with education and infrastructure, get these tight and everything else fixes itself by magic. Here in Dubai every single employer has to provide private medical insurance to all staff and their immediate family it’s the law. The quality of service is amazing, no waiting for anything , doesn’t matter what job you have , or what you earn, you have access to world class services for every and and condition , illness etc. you need an MRI , blood tests or X-ray , just walk into a clinic in the mall and have it done in your lunch hour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Over worked and underpaid as its always been in the NHS but Never the less, they kept quiet over the past few years knowing full well what was going on so I honestly do not feel sorry for them!
Oh noes, the lizardy plot of Martians to depopulate the world immediately no in a few months no in a few years has been discovered!"Cute  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What about paramedics???? Should they strike too ?????" They can and have. Guess who stood in….the army? But nah we don’t need an army and they should be allowed to strike too… | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Any person should have the right to withhold their labour. What should be removed from any and all contracts is clauses which prevent them from doing so. " Critical services should not be allowed to strike. That’s not to say they don’t deserve better pay & conditions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr" Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately, you got that wrong. The army didn't step in when we went on strike as they didn't have the correct qualifications to do the work we do.!!! " The army covered during the paramedic/ambulance strikes. That’s not wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately, you got that wrong. The army didn't step in when we went on strike as they didn't have the correct qualifications to do the work we do.!!! The army covered during the paramedic/ambulance strikes. That’s not wrong." They covered Ambulance Drivers, they didn't provide "paramedic" cover. They were also not permitted to speed or drive through red lights. Cal | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately, you got that wrong. The army didn't step in when we went on strike as they didn't have the correct qualifications to do the work we do.!!! The army covered during the paramedic/ambulance strikes. That’s not wrong. They covered Ambulance Drivers, they didn't provide "paramedic" cover. They were also not permitted to speed or drive through red lights. Cal" I did clear that up in the following post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike." Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The shouldn't need to strike, they should have been given a decent wage years ago " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though? "Some sections of society do not get the best service from the police. Personally I don't know enough about the army except they get subsidised accomodation, drinks and supplies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers. "I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. " Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Some sections of society do not get the best service from the police. Personally I don't know enough about the army except they get subsidised accomodation, drinks and supplies"You didn’t answer though. Happy to respond when you do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers.
I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal?"Yes. I support anyone who strikes, as I said there is always minimum staffing levels, regardless of the profession. And every profession should have the right to strike if done legally and properly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers.
I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal?
Yes. I support anyone who strikes, as I said there is always minimum staffing levels, regardless of the profession. And every profession should have the right to strike if done legally and properly. "So if the police strike and they’re unable to respond to calls do you not think that would have an adverse effect? How about if the army downed tools? Do you not think that would have severe implications? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike." When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers.
I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal?
Yes. I support anyone who strikes, as I said there is always minimum staffing levels, regardless of the profession. And every profession should have the right to strike if done legally and properly.
So if the police strike and they’re unable to respond to calls do you not think that would have an adverse effect?
How about if the army downed tools? Do you not think that would have severe implications?"If the police did strike (they can't I'm sure) but if they did they wouldn't have no one manning the streets ffs lol. They'd have staffing levels low but not empty.. like everywhere else. Same with the army. (I'm sure though army and police can't get involved in stuff like that. I think) x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers.
I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal?
Yes. I support anyone who strikes, as I said there is always minimum staffing levels, regardless of the profession. And every profession should have the right to strike if done legally and properly.
So if the police strike and they’re unable to respond to calls do you not think that would have an adverse effect?
How about if the army downed tools? Do you not think that would have severe implications?
If the police did strike (they can't I'm sure) but if they did they wouldn't have no one manning the streets ffs lol. They'd have staffing levels low but not empty.. like everywhere else. Same with the army.
(I'm sure though army and police can't get involved in stuff like that. I think) x"You’re correct!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them. "Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them. The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position. Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right. I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should be able to. Whether you agree with it or nor every profession should have the right to strike (if done legally). I fully support all the striking workers.
I’ll ask you the same as I’ve asked others with the same opinion. Would you apply that to the police & army too? If so would you make any stipulations, or are you ok with them striking when they like so long as legal?
Yes. I support anyone who strikes, as I said there is always minimum staffing levels, regardless of the profession. And every profession should have the right to strike if done legally and properly.
So if the police strike and they’re unable to respond to calls do you not think that would have an adverse effect?
How about if the army downed tools? Do you not think that would have severe implications?
If the police did strike (they can't I'm sure) but if they did they wouldn't have no one manning the streets ffs lol. They'd have staffing levels low but not empty.. like everywhere else. Same with the army.
(I'm sure though army and police can't get involved in stuff like that. I think) x"You’re right, the police and army aren’t permitted to strike for the very reason(s) I believe nurses & fire fighters also shouldn’t be permitted to strike. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy."I think it's evident there is no other option for them; that's why they're doing it. They haven't taken it lightly. I have a few friends who are striking nurses and they said it broke their hearts to do it but they have to stand up for what's right for the staff - and that's correct. The NHS is already a mess and at dangerous staffing levels, what the nurses are doing isn't making it drown even more. X | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy."So the decision to strike has been because pay and conditions have been unacceptable for years. Which means that there's has been increased risk to patients for years a consequence due to underperforming services. And now it has reached such a horrendous point that the staff are saying, we have to do this because that can't go on. We have no option left. The solution is not to elect a government that under-funds and mis-manages, public services and uses them as a cash cow transfering taxpayers money to their party donors through a system of private tendor. And actually fund the NHS on the basis of need, acknowledging that a healthy society is a productive one and this will have a multiplier effect on the economy. It's investment not expenditure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy.
I think it's evident there is no other option for them; that's why they're doing it. They haven't taken it lightly. I have a few friends who are striking nurses and they said it broke their hearts to do it but they have to stand up for what's right for the staff - and that's correct.
The NHS is already a mess and at dangerous staffing levels, what the nurses are doing isn't making it drown even more. X"I have family as well as friends that have decided to strike. Of course I massively sympathise and indeed support them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy.
So the decision to strike has been because pay and conditions have been unacceptable for years. Which means that there's has been increased risk to patients for years a consequence due to underperforming services.
And now it has reached such a horrendous point that the staff are saying, we have to do this because that can't go on. We have no option left.
The solution is not to elect a government that under-funds and mis-manages, public services and uses them as a cash cow transfering taxpayers money to their party donors through a system of private tendor.
And actually fund the NHS on the basis of need, acknowledging that a healthy society is a productive one and this will have a multiplier effect on the economy. It's investment not expenditure.
"Agree with most of what you’ve said. The only things I can think of are independent arbitration, or a referendum. Referendum possibly the best option, but it would need to be open, clear and the almost impossible…honest! Will people be ok (I would) getting taxed more to fund the increase? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy.
So the decision to strike has been because pay and conditions have been unacceptable for years. Which means that there's has been increased risk to patients for years a consequence due to underperforming services.
And now it has reached such a horrendous point that the staff are saying, we have to do this because that can't go on. We have no option left.
The solution is not to elect a government that under-funds and mis-manages, public services and uses them as a cash cow transfering taxpayers money to their party donors through a system of private tendor.
And actually fund the NHS on the basis of need, acknowledging that a healthy society is a productive one and this will have a multiplier effect on the economy. It's investment not expenditure.
" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy.
So the decision to strike has been because pay and conditions have been unacceptable for years. Which means that there's has been increased risk to patients for years a consequence due to underperforming services.
And now it has reached such a horrendous point that the staff are saying, we have to do this because that can't go on. We have no option left.
The solution is not to elect a government that under-funds and mis-manages, public services and uses them as a cash cow transfering taxpayers money to their party donors through a system of private tendor.
And actually fund the NHS on the basis of need, acknowledging that a healthy society is a productive one and this will have a multiplier effect on the economy. It's investment not expenditure.
Agree with most of what you’ve said.
The only things I can think of are independent arbitration, or a referendum. Referendum possibly the best option, but it would need to be open, clear and the almost impossible…honest! Will people be ok (I would) getting taxed more to fund the increase?
"That won't ever happen. And people (whatever profession) shouldn't have to stay in low paid, over worked, under staffed jobs to make ends meet. The government won't listen. So what else is there to do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That won't ever happen. And people (whatever profession) shouldn't have to stay in low paid, over worked, under staffed jobs to make ends meet. The government won't listen. So what else is there to do? "I’ve given a couple of possible alternatives, but have already said a number of times I don’t know the solution as it’s complicated. I just don’t think critical services should be allowed to strike due to the increased risk to lives. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes they should. However, if they just stopped doing all the free hours ( cutting short tea breaks, missing lunch, staying to help a friend because its busy etc.) that would be crippling enough. I work in a job where we are not allowed to strike, the press are barred from reporting on our work conditions, and my pay has dropped massively since I began. It's everyone's right to withdraw Labour and its the employers decision for how long. I'd like to see all of the NHS hand in their notice. That would stir things up a bit. " Yup that is an option for everyone (not saying it’s correct). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For all those opposing the NHS and teachers strikes then maybe you should offer to do thier jobs to get a better understanding of why they are using this last resort to address the complete bollocksy shit show that is happening. Yes I work in the NHS and yes Im also a carer and dont get me started on the social care system grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Not opposing the strikes, but don’t think nurses should be permitted to strike. Why not? Serious question. They're the NHS workers that keep the place going and yet they're treated amongst the worst. It isn't just about pay, it's about unsafe conditions (I know of nurses working 14 hour days and getting a 20 min break in, stood up, on a ward). Under staffed, under paid, over worked, in debt, they have every right to strike. If you're going to moan about it's making the NHS dangerous without them - it's already at dangerously low levels and they have to have a minimum staffing level even during strikes. - those minimum staffing levels are close to what they're already working at. Appreciate the question. I don’t think any critical services should be allowed to strike. When teachers, nhs, rail staff strike there is always min staffing levels. They don't just walk out and no ones there lol. There is always a (what is legally counted as) safe amount of staff there. Teachers are staying for vulnerable and year 11s atm. Nurses and docs are on a rota system (even during strike action) railway staff again - reduced services for many - only some lines walked out completely. The NHS, schools and other striking professions don't grind to a hault.. they somewhat carry on with low staff and if you think the NHS strikes are making things worse- open your eyes. These minimum staffing levels they put on during strikes are near enough what they're working atm anyway.. and that's not down to them.
Not getting into teachers, rail staff etc as I have different views on them.
The nurses strikes included all shift patterns and it was on the employer to ensure adequate life preserving cover. Now I personally think that puts lives at risk hence my position.
Again I’ll say I think they deserve better pay & conditions and have done for years, but I don’t agree they should be allowed to strike to achieve it. I think when you effectively hold critical, life saving, services hostage then it’s not right.
I can’t tell you what the solution is as it’s not easy.
So the decision to strike has been because pay and conditions have been unacceptable for years. Which means that there's has been increased risk to patients for years a consequence due to underperforming services.
And now it has reached such a horrendous point that the staff are saying, we have to do this because that can't go on. We have no option left.
The solution is not to elect a government that under-funds and mis-manages, public services and uses them as a cash cow transfering taxpayers money to their party donors through a system of private tendor.
And actually fund the NHS on the basis of need, acknowledging that a healthy society is a productive one and this will have a multiplier effect on the economy. It's investment not expenditure.
Agree with most of what you’ve said.
The only things I can think of are independent arbitration, or a referendum. Referendum possibly the best option, but it would need to be open, clear and the almost impossible…honest! Will people be ok (I would) getting taxed more to fund the increase?
"I am always for public referendum. I think we should replace the house of lords with it. We need to remodel taxation itself. Stiglitz resource based taxation models would be the way to go. To prevent hoarding of land and resources, it stifles the economy. Close the loopholes for tax avoidance and offshore syphoning. But primarily yes, I think whatever healthcare costs is what we need to pay. Get the private sector out of it as much as possible. It's just leeching and it offers not added value. It's the same doctors and treatment patients are receiving the majority of the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That won't ever happen. And people (whatever profession) shouldn't have to stay in low paid, over worked, under staffed jobs to make ends meet. The government won't listen. So what else is there to do?
I’ve given a couple of possible alternatives, but have already said a number of times I don’t know the solution as it’s complicated. I just don’t think critical services should be allowed to strike due to the increased risk to lives.
"Risk to lives? As stated - they work at minimum staffing levels on a rota system (if you're down to work once its been announced, you can't strike, despite if you voted to or wanted to be on the picket line). Those min staffing levels for strikes are what they're basically working at every day normally without the strikes. The impact has been minimal. Yes people have had to wait longer for treatment, moved appointments or ops around - but that happens every normal day now with the way the NHS is. This 'they're putting lives at risk' narrative has been fed by the media to get the public onside and away from supporting the strikes.x look into staffing levels | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am always for public referendum. I think we should replace the house of lords with it. We need to remodel taxation itself. Stiglitz resource based taxation models would be the way to go. To prevent hoarding of land and resources, it stifles the economy. Close the loopholes for tax avoidance and offshore syphoning. But primarily yes, I think whatever healthcare costs is what we need to pay. Get the private sector out of it as much as possible. It's just leeching and it offers not added value. It's the same doctors and treatment patients are receiving the majority of the time." Huzzah common ground and progress!!! Can’t say I’ve dug too much into taxation so can’t engage with you there buddy. Completely agree on paying whatever it costs and would happily pay more personal tax if needed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Risk to lives? As stated - they work at minimum staffing levels on a rota system (if you're down to work once its been announced, you can't strike, despite if you voted to or wanted to be on the picket line). Those min staffing levels for strikes are what they're basically working at every day normally without the strikes. The impact has been minimal. Yes people have had to wait longer for treatment, moved appointments or ops around - but that happens every normal day now with the way the NHS is. This 'they're putting lives at risk' narrative has been fed by the media to get the public onside and away from supporting the strikes.x look into staffing levels "Yes a risk to lives. I don’t disagree they’re operating minimum levels, but logically that’s an added increase to risk. Again it would be the same if the police and/or army went on strike. Regardless of what minimum cover was in place there is still an increased risk and that’s what I’m opposed to. You don’t think there’s an increased risk to life and I do. We can agree to disagree as neither is going to persuade the other differently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Risk to lives? As stated - they work at minimum staffing levels on a rota system (if you're down to work once its been announced, you can't strike, despite if you voted to or wanted to be on the picket line). Those min staffing levels for strikes are what they're basically working at every day normally without the strikes. The impact has been minimal. Yes people have had to wait longer for treatment, moved appointments or ops around - but that happens every normal day now with the way the NHS is. This 'they're putting lives at risk' narrative has been fed by the media to get the public onside and away from supporting the strikes.x look into staffing levels
Yes a risk to lives. I don’t disagree they’re operating minimum levels, but logically that’s an added increase to risk.
Again it would be the same if the police and/or army went on strike. Regardless of what minimum cover was in place there is still an increased risk and that’s what I’m opposed to.
You don’t think there’s an increased risk to life and I do. We can agree to disagree as neither is going to persuade the other differently. "When they're already at pretty much minimum staffing levels without the strike - no there isn't a large risk. Or much of a risk at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Risk to lives? As stated - they work at minimum staffing levels on a rota system (if you're down to work once its been announced, you can't strike, despite if you voted to or wanted to be on the picket line). Those min staffing levels for strikes are what they're basically working at every day normally without the strikes. The impact has been minimal. Yes people have had to wait longer for treatment, moved appointments or ops around - but that happens every normal day now with the way the NHS is. This 'they're putting lives at risk' narrative has been fed by the media to get the public onside and away from supporting the strikes.x look into staffing levels
Yes a risk to lives. I don’t disagree they’re operating minimum levels, but logically that’s an added increase to risk.
Again it would be the same if the police and/or army went on strike. Regardless of what minimum cover was in place there is still an increased risk and that’s what I’m opposed to.
You don’t think there’s an increased risk to life and I do. We can agree to disagree as neither is going to persuade the other differently.
When they're already at pretty much minimum staffing levels without the strike - no there isn't a large risk. Or much of a risk at all. "Completely disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now who's engaging in a strawman?
Restricting unionising is dangerous and anti democratic.
There are costs to those choosing to strike and that's part of the negotiation.
I'd rather a few weeks or months of what you call "screw the consequences" than a longer term of short staffed and non functional public services.
I haven’t said, or insinuated anything, I’ve asked a genuine question so it’s most definitely not a strawman.
A few weeks/months of no army or police though?
Some sections of society do not get the best service from the police. Personally I don't know enough about the army except they get subsidised accomodation, drinks and supplies
You didn’t answer though. Happy to respond when you do. "It's totally your call if you respond. I don't think any of it is a simple yes or no answer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am always for public referendum. I think we should replace the house of lords with it. We need to remodel taxation itself. Stiglitz resource based taxation models would be the way to go. To prevent hoarding of land and resources, it stifles the economy. Close the loopholes for tax avoidance and offshore syphoning. But primarily yes, I think whatever healthcare costs is what we need to pay. Get the private sector out of it as much as possible. It's just leeching and it offers not added value. It's the same doctors and treatment patients are receiving the majority of the time. Huzzah common ground and progress!!! Can’t say I’ve dug too much into taxation so can’t engage with you there buddy. Completely agree on paying whatever it costs and would happily pay more personal tax if needed." I get that you are someone who debates to find common ground and explore rather than try and 'win' Happy to get into even heated debate with good people such as yourself. Thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yeah they should be able to strike. 20:00 claps don’t pay the bills n put food on the table. " they should be able to strike but should not need to if the government offers them good pay & conditions, absolute minimum keeping pace with inflation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am always for public referendum. I think we should replace the house of lords with it. We need to remodel taxation itself. Stiglitz resource based taxation models would be the way to go. To prevent hoarding of land and resources, it stifles the economy. Close the loopholes for tax avoidance and offshore syphoning. But primarily yes, I think whatever healthcare costs is what we need to pay. Get the private sector out of it as much as possible. It's just leeching and it offers not added value. It's the same doctors and treatment patients are receiving the majority of the time. Huzzah common ground and progress!!! Can’t say I’ve dug too much into taxation so can’t engage with you there buddy. Completely agree on paying whatever it costs and would happily pay more personal tax if needed. I get that you are someone who debates to find common ground and explore rather than try and 'win' Happy to get into even heated debate with good people such as yourself. Thanks" Well said bud and same to you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As nurse for 26 years I have plenty to say on the matter. In 1997 the starting wage was £11,500, we knew the wage was not great but we went in with free education and a guaranteed job at the end of three years or 5000 hours of practice / in University, not including private study time to complete essays course work etc. That's what you needed to register with the NMC (the regulatory body). FYI the average course is about 600 taught hours over 3 years, although I suspect this is less now. For which a bursary was given £360 a month under 25 and £500 a month over 25. Fast forward to 2022, a newly qualified nurse starts on about £26,000 but there are enhancements for weekend work and night duty which bumps it to about £28,000 more or less. The catch is , no bursary , same hours needed to complete the course and now a fee of £27,000 for tuition which must be paid back as soon as you earn enough , which is less that the starting wage so it's immediate. You can progress , of course but the big differences in pay are much higher up and take time. There is no incentive to stay working in the lower parts of the wage bracket as it takes 5 years to get the next level increment, so people move out into other positions, often filling Jnr Dr roles. Again the banding is such that movement up is only realised in real terms when you have been in the job 5 years. I digress. The last nurse I spoke to had actually accrued £60,0000 worth of debt to pursuing a career as a nurse. Cost of living rent etc adds up and course work hours prohibited getting a part time job whilst at University unlike those doing history classes or economics. So do they get get a fair wage? No I don't think so , not considering what they need to know and are responsible for. Do they or should they have the right to strike? Yes they bloody should , who took the bursary away , who took the free education away , who in their right mind would do that ? Because you can't attract people to it , only young people you'll never get anyone coming into it later on in life as it's probably too expensive and they would never get rid of the debt. So the right to strike is all we got left in this fight for a better life for our children, our parents , ourselves. Because I don't wanna go down the alternative route of private health care. Great if you can afford it , good for you. We also were pushed into the agenda for change which saw all staff apart from the savy Dr's go into one pay scale for all. So the electrician who is there and the maintenance people the managers and office workers (all essential employees) are on the same scale so when we talk about increasing the wage for nurses it's EVERYONE in the NHS on the agenda for change and believe me when I say there are a lot more people on the higher level of wages above that of a nurse who are not as skilled or have spent a fortune on university fees and if they did they could hold down a part time job whilst there. So that's why the government has been so careful with the offer. It's not just nurses that will break the bank it will be ALL the others too. My view is take out the fronline patient facing roles from the agenda for change and give them a healthily payrise. The NHS will not collapse if those in patient facing roles are paid according to their job and qualifications. Anyway 1997 a modest house was £40,000 , what can you expect to buy now on a wage of 4 times your salary? Well have a look for yourself , it don't buy you much at all these days. The future of the NHS and its workforce requires investment in people and wages , it's simply not good enough for some on here to say , "well you knew what you were getting into" (might as well spit on them as you say it). The mess needs turning round and it can't do that if we head towards privatisation , which will cost YOU a lot more in the long run. I've said enough , if you got to the end ..... thank you for your time. You are right, removing the bursary and treating it like a degree was a terrible idea , I am surprised any one wants to come into nursing anymore. Privatisation is the only way to increase the service levels, it does cost more and it should cost more, health is important, it should be the governments top priority along with education and infrastructure, get these tight and everything else fixes itself by magic. Here in Dubai every single employer has to provide private medical insurance to all staff and their immediate family it’s the law. The quality of service is amazing, no waiting for anything , doesn’t matter what job you have , or what you earn, you have access to world class services for every and and condition , illness etc. you need an MRI , blood tests or X-ray , just walk into a clinic in the mall and have it done in your lunch hour " We in effect pay insurance here too. Taxes must go up(ie for those corporationsand individs who hardly pay any. Reversing cuts to HMRC might help there.plus banning advisers from industry working there..) Taxes must be paid.. Reform needs to happen. A present government needs to do one. Taking health amd education away from direct control of government,permanently,might help also. But yeah, Middle East.US.private health insurance REALLY works well for everyone there doesn't it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As nurse for 26 years I have plenty to say on the matter. In 1997 the starting wage was £11,500, we knew the wage was not great but we went in with free education and a guaranteed job at the end of three years or 5000 hours of practice / in University, not including private study time to complete essays course work etc. That's what you needed to register with the NMC (the regulatory body). FYI the average course is about 600 taught hours over 3 years, although I suspect this is less now. For which a bursary was given £360 a month under 25 and £500 a month over 25. Fast forward to 2022, a newly qualified nurse starts on about £26,000 but there are enhancements for weekend work and night duty which bumps it to about £28,000 more or less. The catch is , no bursary , same hours needed to complete the course and now a fee of £27,000 for tuition which must be paid back as soon as you earn enough , which is less that the starting wage so it's immediate. You can progress , of course but the big differences in pay are much higher up and take time. There is no incentive to stay working in the lower parts of the wage bracket as it takes 5 years to get the next level increment, so people move out into other positions, often filling Jnr Dr roles. Again the banding is such that movement up is only realised in real terms when you have been in the job 5 years. I digress. The last nurse I spoke to had actually accrued £60,0000 worth of debt to pursuing a career as a nurse. Cost of living rent etc adds up and course work hours prohibited getting a part time job whilst at University unlike those doing history classes or economics. So do they get get a fair wage? No I don't think so , not considering what they need to know and are responsible for. Do they or should they have the right to strike? Yes they bloody should , who took the bursary away , who took the free education away , who in their right mind would do that ? Because you can't attract people to it , only young people you'll never get anyone coming into it later on in life as it's probably too expensive and they would never get rid of the debt. So the right to strike is all we got left in this fight for a better life for our children, our parents , ourselves. Because I don't wanna go down the alternative route of private health care. Great if you can afford it , good for you. We also were pushed into the agenda for change which saw all staff apart from the savy Dr's go into one pay scale for all. So the electrician who is there and the maintenance people the managers and office workers (all essential employees) are on the same scale so when we talk about increasing the wage for nurses it's EVERYONE in the NHS on the agenda for change and believe me when I say there are a lot more people on the higher level of wages above that of a nurse who are not as skilled or have spent a fortune on university fees and if they did they could hold down a part time job whilst there. So that's why the government has been so careful with the offer. It's not just nurses that will break the bank it will be ALL the others too. My view is take out the fronline patient facing roles from the agenda for change and give them a healthily payrise. The NHS will not collapse if those in patient facing roles are paid according to their job and qualifications. Anyway 1997 a modest house was £40,000 , what can you expect to buy now on a wage of 4 times your salary? Well have a look for yourself , it don't buy you much at all these days. The future of the NHS and its workforce requires investment in people and wages , it's simply not good enough for some on here to say , "well you knew what you were getting into" (might as well spit on them as you say it). The mess needs turning round and it can't do that if we head towards privatisation , which will cost YOU a lot more in the long run. I've said enough , if you got to the end ..... thank you for your time. You are right, removing the bursary and treating it like a degree was a terrible idea , I am surprised any one wants to come into nursing anymore. Privatisation is the only way to increase the service levels, it does cost more and it should cost more, health is important, it should be the governments top priority along with education and infrastructure, get these tight and everything else fixes itself by magic. Here in Dubai every single employer has to provide private medical insurance to all staff and their immediate family it’s the law. The quality of service is amazing, no waiting for anything , doesn’t matter what job you have , or what you earn, you have access to world class services for every and and condition , illness etc. you need an MRI , blood tests or X-ray , just walk into a clinic in the mall and have it done in your lunch hour We in effect pay insurance here too. Taxes must go up(ie for those corporationsand individs who hardly pay any. Reversing cuts to HMRC might help there.plus banning advisers from industry working there..) Taxes must be paid.. Reform needs to happen. A present government needs to do one. Taking health amd education away from direct control of government,permanently,might help also. But yeah, Middle East.US.private health insurance REALLY works well for everyone there doesn't it." Buy UK is already one of the highest taxed countries in the world, I think only Netherlands pay more. Seriously, 40-50% of everything you earn is given for what ? Awful health services, high uncontrolled crime and illegal immigration , bad housing, awful roads , public transport that’s a joke, crazy high energy prices. At sone point you have to accept the country is it broken and another 5-10% tax won’t fix it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As nurse for 26 years I have plenty to say on the matter. In 1997 the starting wage was £11,500, we knew the wage was not great but we went in with free education and a guaranteed job at the end of three years or 5000 hours of practice / in University, not including private study time to complete essays course work etc. That's what you needed to register with the NMC (the regulatory body). FYI the average course is about 600 taught hours over 3 years, although I suspect this is less now. For which a bursary was given £360 a month under 25 and £500 a month over 25. Fast forward to 2022, a newly qualified nurse starts on about £26,000 but there are enhancements for weekend work and night duty which bumps it to about £28,000 more or less. The catch is , no bursary , same hours needed to complete the course and now a fee of £27,000 for tuition which must be paid back as soon as you earn enough , which is less that the starting wage so it's immediate. You can progress , of course but the big differences in pay are much higher up and take time. There is no incentive to stay working in the lower parts of the wage bracket as it takes 5 years to get the next level increment, so people move out into other positions, often filling Jnr Dr roles. Again the banding is such that movement up is only realised in real terms when you have been in the job 5 years. I digress. The last nurse I spoke to had actually accrued £60,0000 worth of debt to pursuing a career as a nurse. Cost of living rent etc adds up and course work hours prohibited getting a part time job whilst at University unlike those doing history classes or economics. So do they get get a fair wage? No I don't think so , not considering what they need to know and are responsible for. Do they or should they have the right to strike? Yes they bloody should , who took the bursary away , who took the free education away , who in their right mind would do that ? Because you can't attract people to it , only young people you'll never get anyone coming into it later on in life as it's probably too expensive and they would never get rid of the debt. So the right to strike is all we got left in this fight for a better life for our children, our parents , ourselves. Because I don't wanna go down the alternative route of private health care. Great if you can afford it , good for you. We also were pushed into the agenda for change which saw all staff apart from the savy Dr's go into one pay scale for all. So the electrician who is there and the maintenance people the managers and office workers (all essential employees) are on the same scale so when we talk about increasing the wage for nurses it's EVERYONE in the NHS on the agenda for change and believe me when I say there are a lot more people on the higher level of wages above that of a nurse who are not as skilled or have spent a fortune on university fees and if they did they could hold down a part time job whilst there. So that's why the government has been so careful with the offer. It's not just nurses that will break the bank it will be ALL the others too. My view is take out the fronline patient facing roles from the agenda for change and give them a healthily payrise. The NHS will not collapse if those in patient facing roles are paid according to their job and qualifications. Anyway 1997 a modest house was £40,000 , what can you expect to buy now on a wage of 4 times your salary? Well have a look for yourself , it don't buy you much at all these days. The future of the NHS and its workforce requires investment in people and wages , it's simply not good enough for some on here to say , "well you knew what you were getting into" (might as well spit on them as you say it). The mess needs turning round and it can't do that if we head towards privatisation , which will cost YOU a lot more in the long run. I've said enough , if you got to the end ..... thank you for your time. You are right, removing the bursary and treating it like a degree was a terrible idea , I am surprised any one wants to come into nursing anymore. Privatisation is the only way to increase the service levels, it does cost more and it should cost more, health is important, it should be the governments top priority along with education and infrastructure, get these tight and everything else fixes itself by magic. Here in Dubai every single employer has to provide private medical insurance to all staff and their immediate family it’s the law. The quality of service is amazing, no waiting for anything , doesn’t matter what job you have , or what you earn, you have access to world class services for every and and condition , illness etc. you need an MRI , blood tests or X-ray , just walk into a clinic in the mall and have it done in your lunch hour We in effect pay insurance here too. Taxes must go up(ie for those corporationsand individs who hardly pay any. Reversing cuts to HMRC might help there.plus banning advisers from industry working there..) Taxes must be paid.. Reform needs to happen. A present government needs to do one. Taking health amd education away from direct control of government,permanently,might help also. But yeah, Middle East.US.private health insurance REALLY works well for everyone there doesn't it. Buy UK is already one of the highest taxed countries in the world, I think only Netherlands pay more. Seriously, 40-50% of everything you earn is given for what ? Awful health services, high uncontrolled crime and illegal immigration , bad housing, awful roads , public transport that’s a joke, crazy high energy prices. At sone point you have to accept the country is it broken and another 5-10% tax won’t fix it " The UK is not one of the highest taxed countries in the world. That's just untrue. In terms of interest rate for highest earners or tax to GDP ratio. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Critical services should not be allowed to strike. That’s not to say they don’t deserve better pay & conditions." Indeed, but by virtue of not allowing them to strike because their role is so critical, removes agency from the worker, effectively making them indentured without certain rights enjoyed by others. What then is the difference between a pimp and x trafficked people, and x other people who are forbidden to strike ? Both groups are placed at a disadvantage with their labour by conditions imposed upon them. And if those people really are that critical, are they paid enough for it ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Realistically, all public sector wages should be permanently linked to inflation..." Tie them to MP's salaries and expenses  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
