Speaking as a new consultant with ( hopefully) many years to go, I read
through the contract with interest, principally for what it may offer to
A&E, as in my department there is already a consultant on the floor 9 until
9, and on the weekends in the morning. What will happen to us in A&E when
the GPs give up care post 5 pm ? It is becoming a 24 hour society, and
we are the specialty with the least choice in when to close shop.
One of the main concerns of other specialties is over the unsocial hours.
In the larger DGHs, with enough radiologists, medics etc, a one in 5 or so
until 10 pm is not going to be too catastrophic on their lifestyle. Might
even make ours a little easier. Consultant discharge ward rounds in the
evening ? Evening clinics to send patients to, a CT scan or ultrasound that
didn't have to wait from 4.30 pm until next day , or from Friday until
Monday morning ?.
Hammer out the details, sure. However if / when the deal is rejected, I
can already hear all the other specialties heaving a sigh of relief that
their 9 - 5 lifestyle has been proved sacrosanct, leaving us to deal with
an increased workload with present inadequate level of out -of- hours
support.
Paul Ransom
Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton
----- Original Message -----
From: Rocky <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: Consultant Contract
> Steve,
>
> Exactly what am I doing or saying that is unprincipled? I don't remember
> having any say in any new contracts for junior doctors, for example - and
> they certainly had an impact on consultants workload. Can you tell me why
I
> shouldn't be interested in something that may well have a big impact on my
> pension? And, of course, it should have an impact on everyone else's
> pension, assuming the government doesn't try to change things. That would
> be an indication for industrial action, which I would be perfectly
prepared
> to support. There's no evidence that what you say about phasing things in
> is true - and if someone else gets it before me, I'm quite prepared to
take
> action about that, too. As for your last question, all it takes is for
> Emergency Physicians collectively, in areas, to say that they will work
> exactly to the terms of the new contract. After all, at least part of the
> reason for why we're treated so badly by our employers presently is
because
> some consultants agreed to take on ridiculous amounts of work for no
> remuneration - and many paid for it with their health - but it still put
all
> of us under pressure to work in the same manner. Of course the new
contract
> won't work any better that the old one if we all continue to be martyrs
and
> let management trample all over us.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rocky.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Meek" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Consultant Contract
>
>
> > Brave man Rocky for sticking your head above the
> > parapet. I don't agree with you though. Apart from the
> > argument that your younger colleagues won't wistfully
> > remember you as a man of principle, I am worried that
> > you are misguided, too, I reckon, as you may not get
> > the salary increase you're expecting for five years
> > anyway - I understand there is an annual quota for
> > putting consultants on the new contract, if it were
> > agreed.
> > The contract appears to be undergoing a renegotiation
> > right now anyway and I have no doubt that
> > comprehensive rejection by ballot, if one ever takes
> > place, will lead to swiftly improved terms by HMG.
> >
> > At least the new contract will allow us to
> > > time-limit our workload. Far too many of us are
> > > currently working far, far too many hours because we
> > > feel it is something we must do for the good of our
> > > departments, hospitals, nurses and patients. Its
> > > time we had the guts to stand up and say to
> > > management, "No, I'm not going to do that any more".
> > > I think this new contract would give us the
> > > opportunity and the right to do just that.
> > So how exactly does the proposed contract help you to
> > do this?
> > Steve Meek
> >
> > --- Rocky <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > Well, Mike, I'm planning to vote yes. The basic
> > > reason is that I'm 55 and I plan to retire at 60.
> > > So I have to put up with whatever the new contract
> > > brings for five years but I should then have a
> > > significantly better pension fund than under the old
> > > contract. I'm sure the new contract virtually
> > > guarantees that most of us will be doing evening
> > > sessions (but I suspect that will happen anyway). I
> > > 'm not happy about getting 8 per cent for emergency
> > > call but I'm getting nothing now. I have no fear of
> > > reappraisal and I don't believe any administrator
> > > can find a reason to hold back my salary increments.
> > > I currently work more hours than I should under
> > > the European Working Time Directive and I would have
> > > every intention, if the new contract comes in, of
> > > making sure that I get some sort of remuneration for
> > > all the work that I do. I don't do private
> > > practice and I believe that a lot of the sometimes
> > > hysterical opposition to the new contract is from
> > > in-house specialists who do a lot of it. I don't
> > > think much of this new contract but I'm sure, ir it
> > > is rejected (as I suppose it will be), that there
> > > will not be a renegotiation until well after the
> > > next general election. That will be too late for
> > > me. It seems to me that a lot of the vocal
> > > opposition to the new contract is based on fear of
> > > the government, fear of management and a stunning
> > > lack of confidence in our own ability to stand up to
> > > them. At least the new contract will allow us to
> > > time-limit our workload. Far too many of us are
> > > currently working far, far too many hours because we
> > > feel it is something we must do for the good of our
> > > departments, hospitals, nurses and patients. Its
> > > time we had the guts to stand up and say to
> > > management, "No, I'm not going to do that any more".
> > > I think this new contract would give us the
> > > opportunity and the right to do just that.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Rocky
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Adrian Fogarty
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2002 1:16 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Consultant Contract
> > >
> > >
> > > I note the stony silence Mike. It's remarkable,
> > > but on the few occasions that I've seen a letter
> > > supportive of the contract, I was then bemused and a
> > > little disappointed to discover that the author was
> > > either a member of, or linked closely to, the
> > > negotiating committee, perhaps vainly hoping he
> > > might be mistaken for an ordinary voting "punter".
> > > It's all very suggestive of mass hysteria.
> > >
> > > Adrian Fogarty
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Michael Dudley
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 6:01 PM
> > > Subject: Consultant Contract
> > >
> > >
> > > Out of interest, is there anyone lurking out
> > > there (and is brave enough to
> > > put their head above the parapet!) who is
> > > planning to vote yes, and thinks
> > > the proposed new consultant contract is actually
> > > a good thing?
> > >
> > > Mike Dudley
> > > Airedale
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
> > http://finance.yahoo.com
> >
|