Labour caves in to Union demands

twinnytwin

This thread isn't another one about causing of inflation - it's about Labour caving into their union paymasters within such a short time in power with nothing in return.

Inaccurate on two counts.

Inflation was mentioned previously in relation to pay.

And the Labour Party's income from trades unions is about half that from companies and individuals, hardly 'paymasters'.

The bigger issue is what’s been proposed that was carefully omitted from the manifesto.
NB The problem with ongoing training for young doctors is a valid one, but they can’t possibly learn everything in all areas in their initial training. Moving around just adds to the problem.

It happens in other fields as well. DD has been working with SEND children, dealing with the paperwork and outside agencies for years, alongside teaching, but to apply for a promoted post, she had to do a 3 year MA course, whilst still working.

I think that "Being heard" goes a long way to accepting compromise. I imagine aspects of the NHS were discussed in this meetings as well as in future conditions.

Whitewavemark2

I think that has been recognised as a real issue and being looked at.

Yes, the doctors were saying after the initial meeting with Wes Streeting that it was the first time that anyone in government had listened to their concerns.

Yes, manifestos can only give a broad outline of intention. Have to wait for actual policy proposals to comment. Tough times with so much needing addressing!

I think that has been recognised as a real issue and being looked at.

I think retention is one of the major issues with young doctors. The pay, but also the cost of moving and constantly finding new accommodation under the post-graduate training rotation system.

Wyllow3 manifestos are worth very little as we all know. I thought Wes Streeting and Amanda Pritchard, head of NHS have a few new ideas so it’s a bit of a guessing game at the moment.
A bit like wondering what is planned on inheritance tax and pension benefits etc. Designed to worry rather than reassure?

eazybee
That’s your right. No party should be able to commandeer part of your union contributions, without giving you the opt out.
Imagine the uproar even on GN if part of everyone’s union contribution had to go to the Conservative Party, or Reform!

In 2013, a full-time Unite member paying at the 'core' rate paid 66p per month into the Political Fund. I don’t know what the rate is now, but the choice should be yours.

Back then, Ed Milliband said he didn’t want union members to pay money to Labour through those fees unless they've deliberately chosen to do so.
So if a Labour party person thought that, then was he wrong?

eazybee

When I was a member of the NAS I most certainly opted out of ^the bit of the union payments that go to the Labour Party. ^

In that case I sincerely hope you declined to accept any pay rises or better/safer working conditions brought about through a Labour government. I'm sure you realise that every single scrap of hard won legislation regarding workers' rights, equality and safety in the workplace has been a result of the Labour party, which is why they were formed in the first place.

The government had to settle the disputes there is no chance of any kind of recovery hampered by strikes. I do hope that they will not be “soft” on the unions because the economy will suffer.

Junior doctors in particular did deserve a decent pay rise, as for training new doctors, many, probably “most” doctors have trained overseas. I had a hip replaced last year only the consultant was British all other staff were migrant, Kenya, Poland, Malaysia, plus 2 lovely student nurses from Nepal, were ones I remember

It has been looked at ronib in the manifesto as in an overhaul of working practices (just checked) but it's far, far too early for detailed policy. There are no "quick fixes" on this one as it means looking at the NHS as a whole.

When I was a member of the NAS I most certainly opted out of the bit of the union payments that go to the Labour Party.

Wwm2 as a social scientist in a previous life, I am surprised that the government has not looked very closely at the whole problem of doctor recruitment and retention. Perhaps Wes Streeting has some great ideas yet to be revealed?

Thankfully we don’t run policy on anecdotal evidence.

Interesting points. My local hospital is whizzing up the league tables with faster times for treatment in A&E. The excellent staff hail from the four corners of the earth. Recruiting hospital staff from abroad is becoming increasingly common. Consultants from Romania are content with their pay here…. Well two were, I couldn’t find any more to ask!
Some consultants are more approachable than others…..

The leaders have accepted it, which is as good a sign as we'll get.

I don't know what the government should do ronib in those circumstances. The junior doctors had quite a lot of public sympathy before. I think they will settle as "Best option".

ronib

Wwm2 and how to handle 35 percent demands?

The last Conservative government sought to make fiscal savings by suppressing public sector pay.

But all they succeeded in doing was to create a massive bottleneck as a result of their bad management of public worker pay, particularly after the level of inflation we have all been subjected to over the past couple of years.

What you are seeing now is the result of the suppression of public workers pay, and the inevitable pushback.

If these demands are not met, recruitment which is existential at the moment will become totally untenable.

Wwm2 and how to handle 35 percent demands?

Balancing the disingenuous OP headline.

“Public sector pay has fallen by 2.5% in real terms since 2010, while private sector pay rose by just under 4% in the same period. Nurses’ pay fell by 6.5%; teachers’ by even more at 9%. These are the facts that underpin the chancellor Rachel Reeves’s decision that public sector workers will get an above-inflation pay rise this year, in line with the 5.5% recommended by the independent pay review bodies.
These increases are needed not just as a matter of fairness for teachers, nurses and doctors but because falling real rates of public sector pay are compounding the recruitment and retention issues facing hospitals, schools and other public services”

Maybe wait and see how the junior doctors vote?
If the 22 percent offer is declined and the original request for 35 percent is reinstated that will be interesting.

And, hopefully, the safety issues will have been resolved too.

As this debate shows, there are two ways of looking at this - either the government has "caved in to the unions" or it has" settled the dispute ".
The desirable outcome will have been achieved - people back at work, and really, our perspective on how this has been achieved is just that - our perspective. Neither view is " right".

Just to be clear the government has not settled the pay increase with junior doctors yet. The vote to accept the offer opens on the 19th August and runs for some time.
The junior doctors may well decide not to accept…….. who knows?