Aye, thatâs the problem. Why go into the NHS and itâs (perceived) poor rates of pay and working conditions when you can either go private or bank?
But even if you train in house how do you retain them after theyâve qualified? I canât see a âyou have to work here for 5 yearsâ stipulation in their training contract being enforceable!!
Maybe if the NHS got rid of the top level executives and dribbled the money down to the lower levels that might get more people interested.
I did see a strange comment that remarked that one of the problems with staffing the NHS was the feminisation of the workforce!! I guess this means that they all get pregnant and leave but it did seem an odd thing to say!!
Why wouldnât it be enforceable? It is within industries such a Finance - they can stipulate a decreasing fine over the length of those 5 years for the value of the training provided.
And itâs different in the finance sector in that you get a large pay packet at the end of the day. The NHS pay, as we all know, isnât even comparable.
Why would you go in to a job knowing that if you want to leave in 3 years time (for whatever reason) youâre going to have to pay a huge %age of your wage. That would lead to people staying in a role they want to leaveâŚ
And the Human Rights, OMG can you imagine the Human RIghts??
You donât have to leave due to pregnancy though - you take maternity and then make a decision - and if itâs too expensive you go back to work. Whatâs the point in doing years of training if youâre planning to get pregnant and leave the profession that quickly?
I wouldnât set it at 5 years BTW, I would set it at 3.
And comparing it to Finance, I know that at my last company a fully-qualified CIMA Finance Analyst was on ÂŁ28k when qualified, in central London. They had a 4 year diminishing fine starting at ÂŁ12k.
I donât know what nurses earn, but it canât be that far off that.
Because maintenance costs money so is very difficult to make a profit from. Which is why it never got sold off.
My job is maintenance of an oil platform but to do that correctly i need to spend money on spares and equipment to maintain the life of the platform. The accountants inevitably go for three quotes and buy the cheapest part closest to what I had requested it normally does not fit, is not suitable to be installed, or is just plain wrong. Wasted money and eventually they buy the part I originally asked for 6 months late shipping it by airfreight because it has now become urgent to get offshore more wasted money.
Can a mod just cut and paste this in the annoyance thread
Shame they did not do the same with the rest of the railways and continued shoveling money into that rather than into the pockets of lawyers and and the nationalised rail operators of other countries.
Iâll just add a couple of points to this. Not sure if it advances the Discourse.
I source a lot of private medical cover for clients through traditional insurers like your Bupaâs of this world, setting up private healthcare trusts and self-funding.
Key is that it doesnât cover acute cases as the NHS is best for emergencies. Cancer, cardiac and brain stuff is also better or perhaps more reliably treated on NHS (though private cancer treatment is available as it allows access to certain drugs not funded by NHS). Private cover wonât touch chronic conditions either.
A lot of NHS consultants also do private care, even treating a lot of cases in private wing in NHS hospitals (as well as private hospitals)
What you are effectively left with is private healthcare allowing people to jump NHS waiting lists and getting a nicer room away from the rabble and maybe free tea & coffee and maybe some fresh flowers in your roomâŚthose that canât afford it suffer for longer before being most likely treated by the same consultant on the NHS.
I think what Iâm trying to say is that private healthcare only want to offer the treatments that will make the most money with the least likelihood of complications and potential litigation if things go wrong (Iâm not speaking for those that provide the actual care). Unless the Govt make it possible to extract profit providing all healthcare risk free in the UK then private companies will stick to only what they are good atâŚ
Edit: sorry, meant to add, under private medical insurance you often have limits to treatment e.g. a set level of funding, maximum number of days for certain types of treatment or number of sessions (e.g. counselling or physio). After that if treatment is still needed you can maybe self-fund or transition back to the NHS, which is arguably where you could have started if the health system hadnât been fucked upâŚ
The article says the roles are being filled by temporary staff causing them to go overbudget on that area of spending. So the staff are there they just arenât employed full time by the NHS. Surely someone needs to look in to why that isâŚmoney? conditions?
European Labour has allowed wages to be lower than what is probably the market rate (hence the fall in Supply). However, because of the sudden loss of a number of nurses, and less coming in via the overseas channels due to the fall in exchange rate, this is left with a shortfall in both fall time nurses (letâs say 9%) and in wages for people wanting to do the job.
If wages were to increase by say ÂŁ5k per year, you are looking at an additional ÂŁ2.5b to cover the shortfall and current nurses working.
Whatever way you look at this, itâs an issue, as no idea where that money can come from at the moment.
Agency nurses are also easier to employ due to the way contractors are dealt with on balance sheets.
Itâs not just European labour though, itâs any overseas labour - with the exchange rate falling it is a much less enticing proposal for anyone coming in from overseas.
Those figures are odd, as I was working on 287k as the number of nurses working for the NHS, so there is obviously a disparency between the different figures quoted by different organisations.
According to Nursing.com, 357,000 nurses in NHS in UK, 26,000 are Non EU, 20,000 are EU, which is 14% of the staff. Doesnât sound a lot, but in theory if that is surpressing wages by 14%, thatâs ÂŁ3k (obviously thatâs not exactly how it works, but an interesting comparison).
Worth bearing in mind that some full time nhs staff plug those gaps. For example if cardiac are desperate for more staff Mrs G would be offered an agency shift on overtime to cover it.
Brexit will solve this - repeal the working time directive and make the junior doctors work 80 hours a week again. immediate doubling of manpower on the front line, half the waiting list, everybody happy (except the junior doctors, but shit, they can look forward to charging insurance companies a fuck ton to do their day job when they become consultants)