Skip to main content

Junior Doctors deserve better from the government



So here we are. Junior doctors across England are to be balloted by the BMA (the doctors union if you like) over potential industrial action in response to the Government’s plans to impose a new contract on junior doctors from August 2016.  So how did we get here? Let us be clear. This isn't simply about pay.  It is also about patient safety.

Last month the BMA’s UK junior doctors committee rejected the Government’s attempts to force through a new contract over fears for patient and doctor safety, and opted not to re-enter contract negotiations. The decision was made after it became clear that junior doctors would not be able to negotiate over proposals the BMA believes are unsafe for patients, unfair to doctors and undermine the future of the NHS.

The BMA say it has always wanted to reach agreement on a new contract that protects patient safety and doctors’ wellbeing, but rather than work with junior doctors to address their concerns the government has confirmed that it will impose a new contract on doctors in training from August 2016. The Department of Health has it will look to introduce a new contract by August 2016 for new junior doctors and new appointees when they move to new positions but remain as junior doctors. NHS Employers will continue work to prepare a new contract for August 2016.  They say they will impose this new contract whilst calling on the BMA to negotiate.  

In order to re-enter negotiations, the junior doctor committee is demanding that the Government and NHS Employers withdraw their threat to impose a new contract, and that they provide the following concrete assurances: 

  • proper recognition of antisocial hours as premium time
  • no disadvantage for those working antisocial hours compared to the current system
  • no disadvantage for those working less than full time and taking parental leave compared to the current system3
  • pay for all work done
  • proper hours safeguards protecting patients and their doctors4

Commenting on the decision, the newly elected chair of the BMA’s UK junior doctors committee, Dr Johann Malawana, said:

“Today’s decision is a reflection of the anger felt by the thousands of junior doctors who have told us that the Government’s position is not acceptable.

“The BMA has been clear that it wants to deliver a contract that protects patient safety and is fair to both junior doctors and the health service as a whole. We can only do this if the government is prepared to work collaboratively in a genuine negotiation. Unfortunately, they have chosen to ride roughshod over the concerns of doctors with their threat of imposition.

“Instead of proper negotiations, the Government has insisted that junior doctors accept recommendations made by the DDRB without question. This would not allow the BMA to negotiate over proposals we believe are unsafe for patients, unfair for doctors and undermine the future of the NHS.

“The contract they want to impose will remove vital protections on safe working patterns, devalues evening and weekend work, and make specialties such as emergency medicine and general practice less attractive even though the NHS is already struggling to recruit and retain doctors to these areas of medicine.

“We remain committed to agreeing a contract that protects against junior doctors routinely working long hours, delivers a fair system of pay and does not disadvantage those in flexible working and we will not stand idly by as the Government imposes a contract which undermines that.

“We’ve already seen reports of high numbers of doctors considering leaving the NHS to work abroad6. These figures should serve as a serious wake-up call to the Government that there is a real risk that junior doctors will speak with their feet. To lose a large swathe of doctors in the early stages of their careers would be a disaster for the NHS.

“We have been clear. Junior doctors are not prepared to agree contract changes that would risk patient safety and doctors’ wellbeing. This has been our position all along and in the absence of any attempts by the Government to address our concerns remains our position today.”

The government has picked an unnecessary fight with junior doctors.  The call on the BMA to negotiate and yet hold a gun to their heads.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services.

It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared.

Utilitarian ethics considers the balan…

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well.

No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing.

The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party.

That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team.

Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more widel…

No evidence for vaccine link with autism

Public health bodies are worried that an alarming drop in childhood vaccinations is leading to a resurgence of diseases in childhood that we had all but eradicated.  Misinformation and scare stories about the harmful effects of vaccines abound on the internet and in social media.  Where they are based on 'science', it is highly selective, and often reliance is placed on falsehoods. 
Conspiracy theories also abound - cover-ups, deception, lies. As a result, too many parents are shunning vaccinations for their children.  So, what does the published, peer-reviewed literature tell us about vaccincations? Are they safe and effective, or are there long term harmful effects? 
A new report now provides some of the answers.

New evidence published in the Cochrane Library today finds MMR, MMRV, and MMR+V vaccines are effective and that they are not associated with increased risk of autism.

Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (also known as chickenpox) are infectious diseases caused by …