On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 23:04:26 +0100, PETER FELLOWS wrote:
>The chairman will receive a slightly larger honorarium if the population exceeds 75 thousand. In total, level 1,around œ17.5K <75K population, œ19.2K <75K population ( > >includes œ6000 deemed to cover klocums).
So, this is what you pay someone to run an organisation that turns
over, what? 10 million pounds a year?
No wonder the government is laughing, in fact, they should be ecstatic.
Instead of paying professional managers the going rate (what? 70-80K),
get a shmuck to do it for one tenth! Ha!
>There was a long and heated debate at G P C.
No change then? The usual long hot farts and wind.
> The conclusion was that G PC should not give a directive...
No no no, it is not the job of leaders to lead. No, of course, not!
>, but that John Chisholm will write to all GPs outlining our feelings about the deal...
Oh, how nice! Warm cuddly feelings, how sweet, how generous!
>, what the pension implications might be ( bad news)...
Oh well, GPs have vocation, they don't worry about mortal things like
that!
>and how we feel you might cope with it.
Yeah? How *do* you feel that they might cope with it? Any substance
attached to "feeling"?
>The general feeling ....
Oh, here it is again! All good college boys stuff, eh?
>that we should not withdraw from PCGs...
What, that would be like, er...., not having feelings, oh, the shame of
it!
>but that the time committed to the PCG should only reflect the payment on offer....
Does the leadership propose to distribute stop watches? Whoopee, I
might even come back, I've always wanted a GPC monogrammed stop watch.
So, half way through a crucial meeting about people's lives, the GPs
would stand up, declare "time's up guv" and walk out? What about
feelings? Have you none?
>By my reckoning the payment will only allow for about one session every two weeks for ordinary board members at Level 1.
So that the GPs on the board are absent when the really hard to get
past GPs work will be schedulled?
> What the hell am I going to say to my constituents in Gloucestershire who have been receiving œ60 an hour, which I negotiated, for work to date
>establishing PCG's?
"Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government" (D Steele)
>They will not accept a cut of 50%
Oh yeah? So, what are they going to do about it?
Do we have a done deal if it is a 30% cut?
>No superannuation is simply unacceptable.
Ditto.
>Since when has our pay level been set by the pay level of social workers and nurses?
Oh, I reckon roundabout 1990?
>We need firm national leadership....
Silly me, and I thought you were addressing the GPC!
>I would like you to recommend cessation of all co-operation with PCG's until satisfactory payment, with appropriate superannuation, and full
>reimbursement of expenses, is agreed.
And *no* surrendering of arms caches until we are in the executive
either!
>If PCG's go ahead without us they will not have the necessary expertise.
Whoopee, they will be even cheaper (said the minister)
>Let's recognise our own strength. Put the brakes on."
Let me get this straight: was this a 'Quick Fit Fitters' meeting?
>only one who thought the deal was reasonable, except for superannuation.
Aah, isn't that sweet? At last, a leader showing some feelings. I
*am* glad.
>( it doesnt say where, or what happens if manpower juggling has turned the area into a restricted area while the chairman is in post).
Come on, Peter, really! Aren't you nitpicking here?
>There appears to be no allowance for all the additional reading time, and time to communicate with grass roots GPs
No probs, anyone taking this job obviously can't read or communicate
anyway and the nearest grass roots they will ever get to is a metroland
lawn
>I wonder what the rest of you will now do?
I know what I will *not* do.
Ahmad
________________________________________
Dr Ahmad Risk
http://mednetics.org
Office: +44 (1273) 748198
Home: +44 (1273) 724866
Fax: +44 (1273) 748198
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
