BMA (British Medical Association) taking industrial action

misskool

Doctors taking a day of action


And the Guardian

Unhappy with their pension scheme. No idea of their details.

So, will people have issues with those who are on above average salaries taking action because their pensions are being cut? Will doctors be the new bankers/Tube drivers? Or will we all be in sympathy with them?

oh, on BBC news, the GP being interviewed said that they do have it better than others but it's the principle of the matter, pensions are a means of deferred pay.

edit: June 21. GPs on action.

Wookster

Apparently a £53,000 pension is not enough.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

The_White_Horse

just more public sector greedy ignorant filth.

misskool

The_White_Horse wrote: »

just more public sector greedy ignorant filth.

NHS GPs are self-employed on contract to the NHS.

chucky

Wookster wrote: »

Apparently a £53,000 pension is not enough.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

I really don't understand why the pension is a problem to some people, maybe it's jealousy.

The terms and conditions the doctors signed up for are the terms and conditions they signed up for.

Maybe in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe where you have come from it was a bit different but there are laws in this country to protect people to what they put their signature to.

lostinrates

misskool wrote: »

NHS GPs are self-employed on contract to the NHS.

Then surely the answer is for them to negotiate a payment and arrange their own pensions?

It is absolutely right fairness is applied to those with large salaries as well as small, but also right that those of us in a luckier financial situation acknowledge that and contribute.

There is always a private model to explore should the nhs not suit an individual.

vivatifosi

Is there anyone on here who knows what the actual changes are and can list them all? I've been digging around looking but all I can find are references to retirement ages increasing, however there appears to be more to it than that.

It's hard to debate what we think about something without knowing what they are actually striking over. I've tried the BMA website (which looks surprisingly militant at the moment) but you have to register to get to what the changes actually are.

lostinrates

vivatifosi wrote: »

Is there anyone on here who knows what the actual changes are and can list them all? I've been digging around looking but all I can find are references to retirement ages increasing, however there appears to be more to it than that.

It's hard to debate what we think about something without knowing what they are actually striking over. I've tried the BMA website (which looks surprisingly militant at the moment) but you have to register to get to what the changes actually are.

No, i tried this yesterday, as parent was interested, but hit similar barriers.

princeofpounds

The main changes basically are that in order to maintain the same end outcome of their pensions, the doctors are being asked to increase their contributions from the current level. Higher-paid doctors are being asked to contribute proportionately more than lower ones.

The terms and conditions the doctors signed up for are the terms and conditions they signed up for.

Most doctors are self-employed or work as part of a small partnership. They contract their services to the NHS. There is nothing to stop these contracts being readjusted upon renewal like any business deal.

In fact, as a general point, as long as benefits already gained are preserved, there is nothing contractually wrong with employers and employees striking an entirely new wage deal at any point.

The argument that 'this was in my contract' in such cases is not valid. It might have been in people's expectations, but that is not the same thing. And besides, if this were held as an unmovable principle employees would never be able to gain wage rises.

Having said all that, I don't know enough about the details of the changes to decide who I support. But broadly speaking as long as current contracts are not broken I think that any future contract can be as different as you like - the doctors can always go and find someone else to employ them if they don't like the terms.

That basic view is moderated by the fact that on one side you have a near-monopoly employer in the NHS, and on the other you have a cartel-like structure of the BMA. So there is no free market in medical labour employment, and leaving it to individual wage bargaining may well not come out with an optimal eocnomic answer. The question is then how on earth you actually find one!

Loopgames

Don't self employed people sort out their own pensions? What kind of self employment do doctors have if their own pensions are not 'self provided'?

Graham_Devon

misskool wrote: »

So, will people have issues with those who are on above average salaries taking action because their pensions are being cut?

This is the angle which many of the left seem to take, including the left leaning media.

It's an easy way to attack their argument.

However, I have to say....what other profession has been targetted in such a way that the age of retirement is increased to 68?

As the BMA states. They are not asking for preferencial treatment, just fair treatment. To have a sudden change of retirement (2 actually as there was one recently) to 68 AND an increase in contributions, solely to one group of preofessionals does seem a bit weird.

The media are backing the government up on this one though, and attacking the fact that they are on above average wage. It's a dangerous path to walk down when we get to the stage that we can treat those on above average wage differently to everyone else.

I'm not pro the action, but I'm not sure what else can be done to make their point? Unfortunately, I feel their point will be drowned out by the fact they are on above average wage, which is neither here nor there really.