The Commons Bar Mk XIII - MHoC Chat Thread

Announcements Posted on
Four things that unis think matter more than league tables 08-12-2016
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Can't stand most beer. Normally would drink cider or run but neither where available
    To me cider is too much like fruit juice, I'd much rather have a beer.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RomanBowling33)
    To me cider is too much like fruit juice, I'd much rather have a beer.
    good man
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I disagree with this. UKIP's rise in 2015 was largely among white working class electorates - traditionally Labour voters who would never in a million years vote Tory. UKIP won very few votes off the Tories because of the referendum promise.
    I don't think we should rule out them voting Tory - May is really going to make a big play for them, and Corbyn certainly isn't going to help. The best case scenario I can see is that they keep voting UKIP or stay at home, and the worst case that they vote Tory - I just can't see us winning them without massive, massive changes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    I don't think we should rule out them voting Tory - May is really going to make a big play for them, and Corbyn certainly isn't going to help. The best case scenario I can see is that they keep voting UKIP or stay at home, and the worst case that they vote Tory - I just can't see us winning them without massive, massive changes.
    The Ukip vote as a whole does not need to go Tory, if even a third of their voters go blue in 2020 then the Tories could be close to a 100+ majority. As me and Fez have discussed previously, Labour can pretty much say goodbye to Wrexham, Wakefield, Halifax and a load of other seats unless things change.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Got a selfie with Prescott
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I must say I really have started turning towards beers and ales in the last few months over ciders

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I must say I really have started turning towards beers and ales in the last few months over ciders

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Stopped being a cider ******, eh?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Stopped being a cider ******, eh?
    No, just less of
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Labour's collapse in Scotland continues. They fall to 16% while the Tories rise to 21% (gain Berwickshire).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I must say I really have started turning towards beers and ales in the last few months over ciders

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Promising
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And today the BMA have shown themselves to be totally incompetent and the relevant organisation should strike all those at the top of the organisation off as doctors, if it takes them a month to realise that 5 day strikes are dangerous to patients they clearly can't be trusted when they don't have anywhere near as much time to see much less obvious things.
    Shock horror, chronically understaffed hospitals request junior doctors not strike, junior doctors showing themselves as they always have been as the main defenders of patient safety, have sacrificed their right to strike to protect patients. You ARE narrow minded

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Shock horror, chronically understaffed hospitals request junior doctors not strike, junior doctors showing themselves as they always have been as the main defenders of patient safety, have sacrificed their right to strike to protect patients. You ARE narrow minded

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They're the main defenders of patient safety by threatening to do something they know compromises patient safety? I'm not sure which is worse, the idea it literally took them this long to realise the blindingly obvious, or that they intentionally did it to try to make people think they care. The Beeb were idiots reacting to it, not once did they ask anybody interviewed "why has it taken this long to realise?"

    If it takes these people a month to see the blindingly obvious how can they be trusted to deal correctly with patient safety when they don't have that long? Alternatively, can they be trusted on patient safety when they intentionally threaten to harm it to try to score political points?

    Which is it, ignorance or intentional threat?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Got a selfie with Prescott
    Please do not share this with us.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Labour's collapse in Scotland continues. They fall to 16% while the Tories rise to 21% (gain Berwickshire).
    Doesn't really matter when you have the SNP getting over 50% of the vote.

    Would be very surprised if they dropped a single seat at the next election (apart from boundary changes).*
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    They're the main defenders of patient safety by threatening to do something they know compromises patient safety? I'm not sure which is worse, the idea it literally took them this long to realise the blindingly obvious, or that they intentionally did it to try to make people think they care. The Beeb were idiots reacting to it, not once did they ask anybody interviewed "why has it taken this long to realise?"

    If it takes these people a month to see the blindingly obvious how can they be trusted to deal correctly with patient safety when they don't have that long? Alternatively, can they be trusted on patient safety when they intentionally threaten to harm it to try to score political points?

    Which is it, ignorance or intentional threat?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well they considered in the long run that their action would be less harmful to patients *than the proposed changes to the *health service.

    It's quite simple really. What else could they have done to make their point? Especially when you have a health secretary who uses knowingly false data to try and make his point about patient deaths at the weekend.

    *
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RomanBowling33)
    To me cider is too much like fruit juice, I'd much rather have a beer.
    Meet in the middle ; a snakebite.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Well they considered in the long run that their action would be less harmful to patients *than the proposed changes to the *health service.

    It's quite simple really. What else could they have done to make their point? Especially when you have a health secretary who uses knowingly false data to try and make his point about patient deaths at the weekend.

    *
    What else could they have done to make their point? Resigned declaring themselves unfit for service, what they have achieved is absolutely nothing but lost support. They could have been doing a short strike every few weeks if they were insistent on striking, instead they tried playing their beat card and it failed, there is no escalation left short of proving some of their opponents right by saying "**** this I'm going abroad," at which point they lose and harm the profession even more than they already have.

    It's interesting to note that whenever you read commentary from older doctors they always slam the JDs for treating medicine as merely a profession and not a vocation.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Doesn't really matter when you have the SNP getting over 50% of the vote.

    Would be very surprised if they dropped a single seat at the next election (apart from boundary changes).*
    Would have to look at the new boundaries but under the current ones the polling would suggest that Labour lose their seat, the Lib Dems hold their island and the Tories take both border seats. The nearest other Tory target would be somewhere near Aberdeen but even with that set of polls, the SNP hold it by 6-7%.

    Agree though, the non-SNP parties are fighting for scraps at this stage.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    They're the main defenders of patient safety by threatening to do something they know compromises patient safety? I'm not sure which is worse, the idea it literally took them this long to realise the blindingly obvious, or that they intentionally did it to try to make people think they care. The Beeb were idiots reacting to it, not once did they ask anybody interviewed "why has it taken this long to realise?"

    If it takes these people a month to see the blindingly obvious how can they be trusted to deal correctly with patient safety when they don't have that long? Alternatively, can they be trusted on patient safety when they intentionally threaten to harm it to try to score political points?

    Which is it, ignorance or intentional threat?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Its a simple question of short term pain, long term gain. You've ignored the various concerns from the contract, yes there is going to be a pay cut, yes training will now be leveraged on to the doctors without a central fund, yes relocation expenses are cut, those are all horrific but not really a management issue (I still object on all these grounds, but they really aren't a patient safety issue)

    What is and remains concerning is the lack of clarity over working hours (still no explanation as to how cost neutral but doctors earn more and work longer) the EU working directive stance (doctors have been required to opt-out for years, lowering the hours changes nothing, they will STILL have to opt-out) the draft time sheet which showed no separation between day and night working (as of this moment, I think you are entitled to between 48-72 hours to adjust from working day shift to night shift) the weekend working % increase is too minimal IMO to make it attractive to work, so it sounds like docs will have to be relocated on weekends against their wishes. The weekend premium (ie cut) already hits the hardest specialties, if you want to cut pay you have to save A+E docs, but they'll be hardest hit. *Anyway, there's many more, but its clear this isn't about sustainability, they haven't protected certain specialties and the roll out of Associates us bloody terrifying.

    In relation to the strikes, its a game of chicken, doctors strikes have constantly been underwritten by a vow to return to work if it is declared unsafe in their absence. This has been maintained generally through good will, as managers tolerate paying cover for them in exchange for how rare they strike. Problem is managers have now basically said they'll block any strike attempts by declaring them unsafe and forcing them back to work, taking advantage of an unwritten agreement made in good faith. Previous strikes were kept safe by hiring senior help, I suspect these were yanked as seniors raised concerns since we're approaching winter.

    Strike action has to be a tool to protect workers, your question implies that strike action cannot be allowed to be effective (which is a balancing act for the BMA, either shatter good will but stand up, or cave but retain good will)

    Another point is how the BMA separate personal and professional opinions. Personally I despise the obvious privatisation plans of the govt, but as a BMA member my job isn't politics, its to ensure that wherever the burden for Hunts policy falls, it isn't on doctors. You'll note that the BMA stays neutral on politics, but the vast majority of docs are anti-privatisation, it has been raised to use that as a key argument against govt, but that was actually rejected as being too political.

    As you might have guessed, I'm a keen union man, and feel seriously let down by the BMA, but I think something else is going on here, generally our forum is quite open but just recently new, private discussions have begun and something else is happening. IA was cancelled to retain popularity but they're going to try something else. I've decided to give them one more chance before I withdraw membership, but something else is definitely going on here, a new tactic.*
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What else could they have done to make their point? Resigned declaring themselves unfit for service, what they have achieved is absolutely nothing but lost support. They could have been doing a short strike every few weeks if they were insistent on striking, instead they tried playing their beat card and it failed, there is no escalation left short of proving some of their opponents right by saying "**** this I'm going abroad," at which point they lose and harm the profession even more than they already have.

    It's interesting to note that whenever you read commentary from older doctors they always slam the JDs for treating medicine as merely a profession and not a vocation.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I actually agree, a better tactic would have been short, effective strikes that also don't hit doctors pockets too much. If I was head of the BMA, I'd tell any trusts (i think its obs and gynae first) that doctors will not return to work under the new contract and will not return to work until they get a written guarantee that they will continue to work under old contract until new contract agreed. I'd also insist on ending the presumption that returning to work accepts the new contract.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 10, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Do you think you'll achieve your predicted A Level grades?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.