BMA (British Medical Association) taking industrial action

grizzly1911

Graham_Devon wrote: »

This issue isn't about pay.


I do feel they have a point about their pensions specifically being targetted. You suggested looking at firemen and teachers...o.well why not look at nurses and admin staff working in the very same places? They haven't had their pensions changed in such a way, and they all work under the same roof....thats what justifies, in my mind, doctors concern about being treated equally.

.

Nurses and clinical supplemental clinical such as radiographers have had the terms altered in a similar way. In the case of nurses they also had there terms adjusted some 4 year ago.

Appreciate the increase in contributions isn't as great as for doctors but that reflects the the lower pay scales/affordability.

kabayiri

Have none of you watched Lion King, specifically the great circle of life?

a) Doctors get a great pension deal
b) Public coffers have to be used to support this deal
c) Public taxes rise; people who are thus less well off spend less on their welfare
d) because of c) people are more 'sick', especially in their pension poverty days
e) more sick people need to use Doctors more, maintaining the demand for Doctors
f) point e) justifies a) and we start the cycle again.

The_J

lostinrates wrote: »

Age is relevant, many of us in any job are going to struggle in our late sixties. I will no longer be able to do the somewhat pathetic amount of manual work i now do. Ofcourse working using medicine doesn't necessarily rely on practical skills for all, but for some it will be ok. Personal provision and decisions are easier for anyone with a larger than avergae income.

If the employer is accommodating then there is no reason why older people cannot work for longer. Will you be able to instruct people how to do the work you do now? How to do it faster, safer and more accurately? Will you be able to assess new technology and work out whether it will add value to the existing business?

Old people get treated really badly by business. Often it can be justified because some old people have a bad attitude but there is no substitute for experience.

Andy_L

DaddyBear wrote: »

Why should doctors pay double the contributions of a civil servants for the same pension,

because the Dr's pension scheme is different to the CS scheme (and different to all other NHS staff as well) as are the other T&Cs of employment

ruggedtoast

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why does it keep going back to the wage!?

It's not about the wage!

Except the BMA have already announced that they see pensions as deferred wages, which is why they are going on strike.

There are many other much more poorly paid NHS workers who have accepted this deal Graham.

A 26 year old would have to put nearly £2k a month into a private pension to match GPs pensions. They have already been given a sweetheart deal by Labour that the BMA never expected to be approved.

This is austerity Britain, GPs cost too much, work too few hours, and the general level of patient satisfaction is low. None of this points towards high pensions.

lostinrates

The_J wrote: »

If the employer is accommodating then there is no reason why older people cannot work for longer. Will you be able to instruct people how to do the work you do now? How to do it faster, safer and more accurately? Will you be able to assess new technology and work out whether it will add value to the existing business?

Old people get treated really badly by business. Often it can be justified because some old people have a bad attitude but there is no substitute for experience.

This is my point, qualifications and experince can be used in appropriate ways if the main 'job' is no longer suitable for many. This is more easily acheived for those in 'better' jobs with 'better' experience than people who have been at the bottom of a chain their whole lives. My fil is working into his seventies (albeit a job that is also his hobby) many of the people we look to for wisdom are 'old'.

Fwiw, i am my employer, i treat myself excellently, but atm i am also the daily dogs body. The real dogs body is my dh.

michaels

Thank you for this.

One possible counter arguement is that GPs did very well in the later labour years with the contract renegotiation over out of hours and thus during the good times they gained proportionately more than those they are now claiming will be impacted proportionately less and yet when you were doing better I did not hear any complaints saying 'its not fair, why should we be getting much bigger pay rises than other govt employees?'

This is only based on media reports so you may have the facts to prove me wrong.

DaddyBear wrote: »

Ok, quick doctor's perspective.
NHS pension has been in profit since inception.
Last year it provided £2bn to the treasury.
All surplus goes into the Government black hole, none s ring-fenced or invested.
NHS pension was reviewed in 2007 and several recommendations made to make to ensure it is sustainable:
closure of final salary schemes, increased contributions upto max of 11% and increased retirement age from 60 to 65.
All were implemented. Despite being the first public sector scheme to close the final salary system the recommendations were accepted without complaint because we recognised that sustainability of the system was essential.

Fast forward 4 years.
Further changes forced upon us without any possibility of negotiation:
Additional increase in contributions to max of 14.5%
Increase in retirement age to 68
Switching all current members to average salary scheme.

Our gripes:
Blatant unfair treatment compared to other public sector workers.
We are being expected to swallow 2 massive changes in 4 years.
Why should doctors pay double the contributions of a civil servants for the same pension, we're clearly being used to subsidise other public sector pensions.
Expecting doctors to work until 68 is totally unrealistic and smacks of the government simply not understanding or caring about the logistics of being a doctor. At 68 are you in a position to conduct a mentally challenging job without any protected breaks that often involves emergencies in the middle of the night? Other professions such as the police have an earlier retirement age because of the difficult nature of ther work.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why does it keep going back to the wage!?

It's not about the wage!

Exactly Graham, it's absolutely got nothing to do with the wage.

Too many people fixated on the money side skewing their logic.

The_J

lostinrates wrote: »

This is my point, qualifications and experince can be used in appropriate ways if the main 'job' is no longer suitable for many. This is more easily acheived for those in 'better' jobs with 'better' experience than people who have been at the bottom of a chain their whole lives. My fil is working into his seventies (albeit a job that is also his hobby) many of the people we look to for wisdom are 'old'.

Fwiw, i am my employer, i treat myself excellently, but atm i am also the daily dogs body. The real dogs body is my dh.

Oh right, I didn't realise you were s/e. Hopefully when you're 68 you'll be able to employ a lackie to do the work for you while you sit back and count the monies.

I know someone called Graham who would be perfect! He's a bit disobedient but tenacious.

michaels

Is it not a final salary pension scheme? In which case how is it in any way seperate from wages?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why does it keep going back to the wage!?

It's not about the wage!