Doctors could be forced to work at least five years in NHS
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/doctors-could-forced-work-nhs-least-five-years-plans-home-grown/
So Jezza is at it again, developing plans which require British trained doctors to be forced to work for the NHS for 5 years after graduation or be forced to pay back training costs.
This during a time of the lowest recorded morale of junior doctors, following imposition of terms of employment widely considered unacceptable by the work force, when applications for medicine are at an all-time low and acceptance of specialty training are also at a low. Costs of student life are rising, and costs of practicing medicine are increasing (registration fees, insurance fees, exam fees, portfolio fees, course fees).
To me, this seems like a case of kicking a dog when its down. Why not make the job more attractive to encourage staff to stay, rather than committing them to servitude. See the approach of other countries, such as the Czech Republic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/05/czech-republic-doctors/481080/
Thoughts?
So Jezza is at it again, developing plans which require British trained doctors to be forced to work for the NHS for 5 years after graduation or be forced to pay back training costs.
This during a time of the lowest recorded morale of junior doctors, following imposition of terms of employment widely considered unacceptable by the work force, when applications for medicine are at an all-time low and acceptance of specialty training are also at a low. Costs of student life are rising, and costs of practicing medicine are increasing (registration fees, insurance fees, exam fees, portfolio fees, course fees).
To me, this seems like a case of kicking a dog when its down. Why not make the job more attractive to encourage staff to stay, rather than committing them to servitude. See the approach of other countries, such as the Czech Republic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/05/czech-republic-doctors/481080/
Thoughts?
Scroll to see replies
So basically Mr Hunt is admitting that the NHS is now a terrible place to work, and that rather than try and improve working conditions or staff treatment, actually the best solution to this is to hold all our medical training to ransom for 5 years.
Talk about short-termism, I imagine most of those doctors will scarper the moment their indentured labour contract runs out, and then what will happen? Who's going to want to work for the health service if half the employees aren't even there by choice?
Talk about short-termism, I imagine most of those doctors will scarper the moment their indentured labour contract runs out, and then what will happen? Who's going to want to work for the health service if half the employees aren't even there by choice?
As I said in the medicine forum the other day, Hunt is loathsome but it is not unreasonable to get doctors (who benefited from a very expensive and publicly subsidised education) to work in this country for a little while.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
Original post by Snufkin
As I said in the medicine forum the other day, Hunt is loathsome but it is not unreasonable to get doctors (who benefited from a very expensive and publicly subsidised education) to work in this country for a little while.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
And as I mentioned to you in the other thread, it is very easy for you to make these kind of calls when you'd never have to be on the receiving end of them. Rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide are far above the average amongst doctors compared to the rest of the population - how exactly do you think dragging down morale even further is going to help with that?
A hospital full of demoralised doctors is an unsafe hospital. The job of the government should be to improve safety, not manage decline.
I don't think it's unreasonable at all. Why should British tax payers fund a degree for someone who isn't going to work in a system they can access? Obviously the ideal solution would be doctors choosing to stay but it's certainly not unfair to ask them to pay back several years work if they get a decent job with good pay and no student debt.
Original post by doodle_333
I don't think it's unreasonable at all. Why should British tax payers fund a degree for someone who isn't going to work in a system they can access? Obviously the ideal solution would be doctors choosing to stay but it's certainly not unfair to ask them to pay back several years work if they get a decent job with good pay and no student debt.
Except we graduate with the highest debt levels of any degree, so where did that even come from?
The pay is eventually good, but if you look at the hourly pay of an FY1 or FY2 (considering all the nights, weekends, extra unpaid hours, etc), we're not exactly raking it in here.
Original post by Democracy
And as I mentioned to you in the other thread, it is very easy for you to make these kind of calls when you'd never have to be on the receiving end of them. Rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide are far above the average amongst doctors compared to the rest of the population - how exactly do you think dragging down morale even further is going to help with that?
A hospital full of demoralised doctors is an unsafe hospital. The job of the government should be to improve safety, not manage decline.
A hospital full of demoralised doctors is an unsafe hospital. The job of the government should be to improve safety, not manage decline.
Easy, yes. It doesn't mean I'm wrong. I do not doubt that junior doctors have it hard, but really, what is the alternative given the government's determination to make cuts? Unsafe hospitals are better than no hospitals.
Original post by Snufkin
Easy, yes. It doesn't mean I'm wrong. I do not doubt that junior doctors have it hard, but really, what is the alternative given the government's determination to make cuts? Unsafe hospitals are better than no hospitals.
I certainly hope you'll be displaying the same level of nonchalance when it's you or your relatives who are being treated in unsafe hospitals. Or will you have your solicitor on speed dial?
Original post by Democracy
I certainly hope you'll be displaying the same level of nonchalance when it's you or your relatives who are being treated in unsafe hospitals. Or will you have your solicitor on speed dial?
I'm being realistic, not nonchalant. I don't have a solicitor. Doctors might want to vote with their feet and force change, and I daresay that would work eventually, but in the meantime patients would suffer. I don't think that's fair. Doctors can take one for the team and hope for better days.
1) A demoralised work staff is unsafe. Lesser than two evils? Someone that is despondent is better off not showing up that day.
2) It does not cost £230K to train a doctor
3) Doctors pay taxes....
4) Will education be free with living costs included? This is essentially conscription but yet there are no benefits for the doctor
5) violation of freedoms and right to move.
6) just ugh
Posted from TSR Mobile
2) It does not cost £230K to train a doctor
3) Doctors pay taxes....
4) Will education be free with living costs included? This is essentially conscription but yet there are no benefits for the doctor
5) violation of freedoms and right to move.
6) just ugh
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Democracy
Except we graduate with the highest debt levels of any degree, so where did that even come from?
The pay is eventually good, but if you look at the hourly pay of an FY1 or FY2 (considering all the nights, weekends, extra unpaid hours, etc), we're not exactly raking it in here.
The pay is eventually good, but if you look at the hourly pay of an FY1 or FY2 (considering all the nights, weekends, extra unpaid hours, etc), we're not exactly raking it in here.
Sorry I thought doctors had their costs paid by the NHS rather than taking out student loans and just googled it and realised you don't! OK well assuming what I read was correct (you pay 4 years and get 2 funded) then I think it's pretty cheeky to ask for 5 years payback. Maybe one or two I would support but 5 is a lot to ask for 2 years funding.
Because it's cheaper and will lead to a quality in NHS care, hence incomes the white knight of Virgin Premium NHS treatment, for private paying insurers. We all know this.
I plan on working in the NHS anyway, so I doubt it'll affect that many, but it will be interesting to see the effect of this on International student intakes.
That said, it's another sign really of how society views doctors, DOCTORS OWE TAXPAYERS, forget the increased fees, registration costs, insurance costs, accommodation etc. THAT'S OUR PROBLEM. Doctors are all overpaid, they went on strike looking for more money and the government beat them, this is their punishment.
That's our existence now.
I plan on working in the NHS anyway, so I doubt it'll affect that many, but it will be interesting to see the effect of this on International student intakes.
That said, it's another sign really of how society views doctors, DOCTORS OWE TAXPAYERS, forget the increased fees, registration costs, insurance costs, accommodation etc. THAT'S OUR PROBLEM. Doctors are all overpaid, they went on strike looking for more money and the government beat them, this is their punishment.
That's our existence now.
It would be a really good idea to campaign against this and collectively bargain for a negotiated settlement.
Damn, if only there was a British Medical Union of some kind.
Damn, if only there was a British Medical Union of some kind.
Original post by Etomidate
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/doctors-could-forced-work-nhs-least-five-years-plans-home-grown/
So Jezza is at it again, developing plans which require British trained doctors to be forced to work for the NHS for 5 years after graduation or be forced to pay back training costs.
This during a time of the lowest recorded morale of junior doctors, following imposition of terms of employment widely considered unacceptable by the work force, when applications for medicine are at an all-time low and acceptance of specialty training are also at a low. Costs of student life are rising, and costs of practicing medicine are increasing (registration fees, insurance fees, exam fees, portfolio fees, course fees).
To me, this seems like a case of kicking a dog when its down. Why not make the job more attractive to encourage staff to stay, rather than committing them to servitude. See the approach of other countries, such as the Czech Republic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/05/czech-republic-doctors/481080/
Thoughts?
So Jezza is at it again, developing plans which require British trained doctors to be forced to work for the NHS for 5 years after graduation or be forced to pay back training costs.
This during a time of the lowest recorded morale of junior doctors, following imposition of terms of employment widely considered unacceptable by the work force, when applications for medicine are at an all-time low and acceptance of specialty training are also at a low. Costs of student life are rising, and costs of practicing medicine are increasing (registration fees, insurance fees, exam fees, portfolio fees, course fees).
To me, this seems like a case of kicking a dog when its down. Why not make the job more attractive to encourage staff to stay, rather than committing them to servitude. See the approach of other countries, such as the Czech Republic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/05/czech-republic-doctors/481080/
Thoughts?
Seems like a decent idea to me… can't believe he came up with this himself. But the timing isnt right which makes him look dumb since he's ignoring current data.
I think medical applicants are falling because people know it's so competitive and believe they can't do it. My brother had an outstanding academic profile, straight A's & mostly A*'s at GCSEs and A*A*AA at A-level, still couldn't get in and ended up getting a counter offer for bio-med which he took instead. This year in school I know a few people who didn't get offers for medicine and decided at the last minute it was too hard for them (not just the grades but the entire process). So I think the morale of uni applicants for medicine is also decreasing and we should be trying to get as many of them in the NHS as possible and not lose them to the private sector.
Although this does seem like a Tory policy to charge for training/education?.… strange.
Original post by Snufkin
As I said in the medicine forum the other day, Hunt is loathsome but it is not unreasonable to get doctors (who benefited from a very expensive and publicly subsidised education) to work in this country for a little while.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
Of course it would make more sense to deal with the route problems causing doctors to leave, but the Government is not going to do that (and it's naive to expect them to given they caused so many of the problems in the first place), so this scheme to keep doctors working here is the lesser of two evils. A hospital full of demoralised doctors is better than a chronically understaffed hospital.
In that case, I'd call for all graduates to be chained and required to work in the public sector for 5 years after, otherwise be charged full cost of training. Unis set the fees, if they want to increase the tuition fees, let them, don't blame the students. Since tuition fees that I took out a loan to pay for actually directly prop up healthcare funding, this is a double nope.
Original post by doodle_333
Sorry I thought doctors had their costs paid by the NHS rather than taking out student loans and just googled it and realised you don't! OK well assuming what I read was correct (you pay 4 years and get 2 funded) then I think it's pretty cheeky to ask for 5 years payback. Maybe one or two I would support but 5 is a lot to ask for 2 years funding.
Students pay £9,000 a year but the real cost is more like £25,000 a year (I don't know why doctors are so keen to dispute this
). So no, I don't think it is cheeky to ask doctors who move abroad without putting in at least some work in the UK to pay back the full cost of their degree.Original post by doodle_333
Sorry I thought doctors had their costs paid by the NHS rather than taking out student loans and just googled it and realised you don't! OK well assuming what I read was correct (you pay 4 years and get 2 funded) then I think it's pretty cheeky to ask for 5 years payback. Maybe one or two I would support but 5 is a lot to ask for 2 years funding.
Most medical students only get one year of funding btw.
I'm not sure why we "owe" anyone anything - I paid my tuition fees and now I'm paying my taxes like everyone else. Teachers and nurses are also leaving their careers in droves. What shall we do about that? Are we literally going to put millions of people into indentured servitude as opposed to figuring out why all of these highly trained professionals are leaving their jobs (some would say vocations), and actually fixing the root of the problem?
Original post by doodle_333
I don't think it's unreasonable at all. Why should British tax payers fund a degree for someone who isn't going to work in a system they can access? Obviously the ideal solution would be doctors choosing to stay but it's certainly not unfair to ask them to pay back several years work if they get a decent job with good pay and no student debt.
We graduate with no student debt? News to me mate.
Original post by Snufkin
Students pay £9,000 a year but the real cost is more like £25,000 a year (I don't know why doctors are so keen to dispute this ). So no, I don't think it is cheeky to ask doctors who move abroad without putting in at least some work in the UK to pay back the full cost of their degree.
). So no, I don't think it is cheeky to ask doctors who move abroad without putting in at least some work in the UK to pay back the full cost of their degree.And it was explained to you in the other thread that all degrees in the UK are subsidised by the government.
What are your plans about other people that do degrees in the public sector?
What do you plan in doing about their tuition fee and living expense debt?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by That Bearded Man
In that case, I'd call for all graduates to be chained and required to work in the public sector for 5 years after, otherwise be charged full cost of training. Unis set the fees, if they want to increase the tuition fees, let them, don't blame the students. Since tuition fees that I took out a loan to pay for actually directly prop up healthcare funding, this is a double nope.
That's not much of a threat considering Humanities/Social Science students are already being overcharged for their degree. I'd happily work in the public sector for a few years if it meant I'd only pay the 'full' (real) cost of a degree.
Original post by Newtothis83
And it was explained to you in the other thread that all degrees in the UK are subsidised by the government.
What are your plans about other people that do degrees in the public sector?
What do you plan in doing about their tuition fee and living expense debt?
Posted from TSR Mobile
What are your plans about other people that do degrees in the public sector?
What do you plan in doing about their tuition fee and living expense debt?
Posted from TSR Mobile
No they aren't (not in the same way, anyway). If I took out a loan to do a history degree and never paid it back then yes, my degree would technically be subsidised by the government - but if I paid the loan back, it wouldn't be. Regardless of whether doctors pay back their loan or not, it is still subsidised.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Medicine degree apprenticeship
- UK Medical School Debt is about £184.5k over 30 years
- Which field Adult or mental health??
- Apprenticeships in medicine
- medicene abroad
- Absolutely furious with the NHS
- Statutory, voluntary, private, informal, social provisions
- Thoughts on Medical Degree Apprenticeship
- clinical psychology
- Doctors/medical students, would you start medical school at 40 years old?
- Is medicine genuinely worth it? What other options do I have?
- ADHD and autism
- Why study Biomedical Science at Bradford? Thread
- College Course
- Scared of going Gyno/period pain
- Frenulum breve, is surgery essential or are steroid creams effective?
- NHS are a joke
- Medicine at university
- Dermatology NHS vs private practice
- What's the lifestyle of a surgeon and the journey?
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Part Time or Distance Learning Funding if I didn't complete first degreeLast reply 2 minutes ago
Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entryLast reply 2 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 2 minutes ago
emmanuella's study discussions #2: taking breaksLast reply 4 minutes ago
Michaela School: Muslim student loses prayer ban challengeLast reply 5 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 5 minutes ago
Amazon Project management apprenticeship 2024Last reply 6 minutes ago
Edexcel IGCSE Higher tier Mathematics A Paper 1 1H (4MA1) - 8th November 2023Last reply 7 minutes ago
AQA A Level French Paper 3 (Speaking/IRP) 7652/3 - 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 11 minutes ago
DHSC Health Policy Fast Track Scheme 2023 ThreadTrending
Last reply 7 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 7 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
