HSE proposed pay cuts for junior doctors from February 18th...

Prime Mover

Svalbard, your reaction to my post is exactly what should not happen at the IMO meetings.

First of all, do you think a complete back-down is realistic? I don't. The HSE are looking to make cuts in many places and now it's looking at NCHDs. Even if they did back down, what would have been achieved? NCHDs would still be working crazy hours and absolutely nothing will have changed, apart from the fact you will have lost even more public goodwill. Why would you fight "by any means necessary" to maintain a status quo that is defective.

Looking at the posts on this forum over the last while, and particularly the Two Weeks blog, it is clear that NCHDs have more than enough ideas to improve working conditions and save money for the HSE. Now is absolutely the time to start talking about how things could be changed. The fact that the HSE have kicked things off in a draconian manner doesn't change that.

If you present a logical money-saving plan to the HSE that improves patient and doctor conditions and it is completely ignored in favour of their current highly unimaginative proposed cuts then you will have much more public support if you need to go to industrial action.

tallaght01

Would it be a stupid idea for a few of us to get together and write a letter to the press?

RobFowl

tallaght01 wrote: »

Would it be a stupid idea for a few of us to get together and write a letter to the press?

I'd co-sign it

dr69ddk9

Can every doctor please just shush.....

There is a reason this aint in the papers just yet.

Its not a Che Guevara revolution but we have to keep our cards pressed firmly to our chests.

This is not the appropriate forum to be discussing these issues so Joe Public can have a birds eye view of our impending wage cut. Joe Public may not have a job so don't expect sympathy for our fiscal demise.

All in good time.

For the moment this blog is doing far more harm than good....

drkpower

A no no no attitude will get you absolutely nowhere in this climate where hundreds of thousands of people are having their contracts unilaterally altered (or withdrawn altogether).

The HSE have been very clever here - they have set the agenda and tone in terms of them making these changes ostensibly in order to reduce NCHD hours and obviously because of the current economic woes. The NCHDs need to reclaim the moral high ground.

Instead of spouting the usual "no unilateral cuts to our contract" union talk (which will go down like a lead baloon), you need to scare the bejaysus out of people by pointing to the obvious flaw in the HSE plan: namely, that the NCHD manpower simply does not exist to safely allow the day off before & after call plan to work. Forget the living out allowance, training grant, lunch break etc...... concentrate on this point only - IT WILL BE DANGEROUS FOR PEOPLE TO BE IN HOSPITAL AS THERE WILL NOT BE SUFFICIENT STAFF TO LOOK AFTER THEM. Play on the fact that frontline medical staff are already stretched - the public have already accepted this.

Do not mention money even once - bang one drum and bang it repeatedly. As a veteran of the 2000 (almost) strike, the reason why we could not lose was that we focussed on one issue - we were working too many hours and this was dangerous for us and more importantly for the public. The climate now is tougher than in 2000 and and if you strike without winning overwhelming public support first, you will be destroyed and then the HSE can do whatever they want with you.

Tread carefully.

panda100

dr69ddk9 wrote: »

Can every doctor please just shush.....

There is a reason this aint in the papers just yet.

Its not a Che Guevara revolution but we have to keep our cards pressed firmly to our chests.

This is not the appropriate forum to be discussing these issues so Joe Public can have a birds eye view of our impending wage cut. Joe Public may not have a job so don't expect sympathy for our fiscal demise.

All in good time.

For the moment this blog is doing far more harm than good....

Completely disagree with this post!

The cuts on NCHD's will directly affect the population at large. It is in the publics intrests to resist these damging attacks on the docs working conditions and training.

These cutbacks have little to do with tightening the strings of the public purse, there not going to create millions in revenue for the goverment.
These attacks are about ensuring doctors move from the unworkable public sector into the private sector.

The HSE's and the goverments agenda when it comes to health is clear. They want a privatised health system based on the US model.In the last few weeks we have seen numerous private for profit health facilites opened around the country. Alongside this we have seen the downgrading of many public hospital facilites,such as the closure of Nenagh A+E.

I would say this is just the beginning of the absolute suffocation of the public health service and those who work within it.

sportswear

Can every doctor please just shush.....


completely agree. everyone who attended the IMO meeting last night is aware of what we have to do and the dangers of operating on a website like this one and the dangers of communicating with the press.

I think it is a terrible idea to communicate with the press as individuals.

The IMO gave professional advice from industrial relations experts on Wednesday as to how to deal with this and we should follow their lead.

United we stand divided we fall.

This thread id doing more harm than good and anyone who was there on Wednesday this was discussed by the 800+ NCHDs present.

This is not what we want.


This thread really needs to be closed for our own good.

drkpower

Good God, whatever you do, dont trust the IMO.

Can you imagine any other public sector union who would have allowed their members to have been walked over for decades like NCHDs have been? If they were doing their job, no NCHD would be still doing 40+ hour shifts and 80+ hour weeks.

In 1999/2000 they wouldnt move a muscle until they were threatened with a mass resignation from the IMO by NCHDs - within 4 months they were on the verge of strike action.

MatthewVII

drkpower wrote: »

Good God, whatever you do, dont trust the IMO.

Can you imagine any other public sector union who would have allowed their members to have been walked over for decades like NCHDs have been? If they were doing their job, no NCHD would be still doing 40+ hour shifts and 80+ hour weeks.

In 1999/2000 they wouldnt move a muscle until they were threatened with a mass resignation from the IMO by NCHDs - within 4 months they were on the verge of strike action.

Not exactly the kind of attitude that's in any way helpful. If NCHDs want to fight the new wave of cuts then the IMO is the only way to do it.

The reason that the IMO hasn't been effective in the past is because doctors have always been apathetic to politics, more interested in advancement of their own careers and willing to be walked over as long as they got good prospects at the end of it. Lack of unity and willingness to stand up for ourselves is exactly why the HSE think they can bring in these cuts over any other healthcare provider group they employ, and only by uniting can we fight back against it in a meaningful way.

Whatever about the past, what's happening now is in the present. Your attitude is incredibly maladaptive and potentially damaging to the prospects of NCHDs now and in the future.

drkpower

MatthewVII wrote: »

Not exactly the kind of attitude that's in any way helpful. If NCHDs want to fight the new wave of cuts then the IMO is the only way to do it.

The reason that the IMO hasn't been effective in the past is because doctors have always been apathetic to politics, more interested in advancement of their own careers and willing to be walked over as long as they got good prospects at the end of it. Lack of unity and willingness to stand up for ourselves is exactly why the HSE think they can bring in these cuts over any other healthcare provider group they employ, and only by uniting can we fight back against it in a meaningful way.

Whatever about the past, what's happening now is in the present. Your attitude is incredibly maladaptive and potentially damaging to the prospects of NCHDs now and in the future.

I am no longer a NCHD (or in medicine for that matter) so I am naturally less concerned about what happens to you guys anymore! But dont get me wrong, having been in the thick of it in the past, I do have sympathy for and support the general aims of the NCHD's.

The problem is that the horse has now bolted - the IMO did almost nothing prior to 1999/2000 to improve the lot of NCHD's and since then have done very little to improve the one thing that NCHD's wanted solved, namely the excessive hours. NCHD's themselves have to take some of the blame for this (for the reasons you have outlined) but there are few unions out there that would have sat by while so little was done to improve their members lot.

I do wish you luck but realistically now is the last time to succesfully mount industrial action - it will be very unpopular and you wil be joining a long queue of other disaffected workers. And lets be honest, the lot of (supposedly) "rich" doctors will not be first on the priority list of a public who are losing jobs in the 000's and a government who have bigger issues to deal with.

The IMO had years of peace and quiet to quietly work on NCHD's terms and conditions and, looking at it from the outside for the last few years, it seems that little has been done.

MatthewVII

drkpower wrote: »

I do wish you luck but realistically now is the last time to succesfully mount industrial action - it will be very unpopular and you wil be joining a long queue of other disaffected workers. And lets be honest, the lot of (supposedly) "rich" doctors will not be first on the priority list of a public who are losing jobs in the 000's and a government who have bigger issues to deal with.

This isn't really about jobs, money etc. It's about the compromise of patient care and an unsustainable framework for provision of that care. What the HSE is proposing is extremely dangerous and not in the best interests of patients, and at the end of the day that's the real issue.

drkpower

MatthewVII wrote: »

This isn't really about jobs, money etc. It's about the compromise of patient care and an unsustainable framework for provision of that care. What the HSE is proposing is extremely dangerous and not in the best interests of patients, and at the end of the day that's the real issue.

I agree with you 100% - but the problem is that this issue should have been sorted (or at least the process should be well underway) already. Attempts made now to fight it will be overshadowed by the much bigger prolems the country faces and in the context of everyone else lining up threatening a strike, the public will probably superficially see the NCHDs as just looking for a piece of the pie. This is sadly the reality.

And finally, the HSE have been incredibly clever in framing the cuts as being required both by the current economic woes and as being required to comply with the EWTD.

As i said, i wish you luck but i dont think you will get anywhere until the current economic crisis has settled down.

MatthewVII

drkpower wrote: »

And finally, the HSE have been incredibly clever in framing the cuts as being required both by the current economic woes and as being required to comply with the EWTD.

It's not really that hard when you have a massive PR machine and in the context of the current economic climate. I guess properly staffed hospitals with properly trained doctors are only really missed when they're gone.

Jane5

To all the doctors saying "oh everyone shush".
Why exactly?
So the HSE and media can say what they like, but we can't say a word?
People need to know the reality. That reality is going to be poorly trained doctors (no training grant-can you really see everyone renewing their ACLS like clockwork every two years if they have to try and scrape together 550 euro our of their own money?) and less doctors (anyone with a brain will leave this godforsaken country) and less doctors anyway as there will be fewer rostered on at any one time to care for patients with all the cuts.
The IMO may well want us to hush-people speaking out about the conditions THEY allowed to persist while happy to take our money to finance all the smoked salmon at their AGMs is probably quite embarrassing-but they have a once off chance to redeem themselves forever if they handle this correctly.
That will, however, have to included PR and media use of their own.
Otherwise, people are already starting to talk about starting up an NCHD only union.

drzhivago

drkpower wrote: »

Good God, whatever you do, dont trust the IMO.

Can you imagine any other public sector union who would have allowed their members to have been walked over for decades like NCHDs have been? If they were doing their job, no NCHD would be still doing 40+ hour shifts and 80+ hour weeks.

In 1999/2000 they wouldnt move a muscle until they were threatened with a mass resignation from the IMO by NCHDs - within 4 months they were on the verge of strike action.

Have to disagree with you drkpower

Have you said previously you were no longer in medicine, I think your memories re 99/2000 are a little clouded

There was no threat of mass resignation then, as usual when things get fraught in industrial relations (particularly in unions that represent a number of subgroups) there are tensions, people feel that other groups are getting better treatment

I was around at that time and well before it, there was a sustained effort from the people on the NCHD committee of the IMO to change conditions, they had a contract to be negotiated and they focussed on one thing hours reductions, simple message everywhere about hours reductions. They forced the issue negotiating by getting the DOH to agree to OT for 1st time ever thinking this would force them to relook at the number of hours being worked but it hasnt

The IMO represent all junior doctors, not all are in favour of EWTD regulation, surgeons feel they will not get adequate training to be a specialists with such a reduction in their training time and consequently operating time ( it is not a matter of money for them) witness what has happened in UK in recent years with surgeons being suspended relatively recently after becoming consultants because they did not have enough experience

Like a lot of medics you seem to feel that everyone is against you and that includes IMO. The IMO is your union, he members need to drive the agenda and not wait for others, sadly NCHDs have been very lacking in this

How many times have you seen an election for spots on the National NCHD committee, I cant remember when that happened. 20 people out of 5,000 youd think there would be bunches of people jumping up and down to do it from what is written in all these fora but they are not

I am sick and tired of hearing the I'm too busy line. we are all busy. The ones who put themselves forward every year are also busy but they do it because they want to change things. The difficulty is they are not consistently getting the support they need form the NCHD body, yes in last few weks there have been meetings but where have all these NCHDS been when the local rep tries to organise a meeting in their own hospital.

You say if the IMO were doing their job people wouldnt be working 80 hours, the members have to force this issue and they are divided almost 50/50 on it

any doctor can however say in their won hospital, YEs ia am taking this job, NO I will not work > 56 hours per week and NO iI will not work > 13 hours per day. that is the law they are entitled, they do not need the IMo to do that for them but how many have done that individually. there are 3,000 members of the IMO what about the other 2,000 are they refusing to work the long hours---NO

Good god yourself, if you cant trust the IMO you are in deep doo doo because its clear we cant trust each other to do anything about it

drzhivago

Jane5 wrote: »

To all the doctors saying "oh everyone shush".
Why exactly?
So the HSE and media can say what they like, but we can't say a word?
People need to know the reality. That reality is going to be poorly trained doctors (no training grant-can you really see everyone renewing their ACLS like clockwork every two years if they have to try and scrape together 550 euro our of their own money?) and less doctors (anyone with a brain will leave this godforsaken country) and less doctors anyway as there will be fewer rostered on at any one time to care for patients with all the cuts.
The IMO may well want us to hush-people speaking out about the conditions THEY allowed to persist while happy to take our money to finance all the smoked salmon at their AGMs is probably quite embarrassing-but they have a once off chance to redeem themselves forever if they handle this correctly.
That will, however, have to included PR and media use of their own.
Otherwise, people are already starting to talk about starting up an NCHD only union.

I love the naivete, the people dont care as long as there is a doctor in front of them when they arrive in hospital, they dont really care what merit badge courses he has done or whether he has royal college exams or not,

Will he/she listen, do they understand and are they doing something about my problem, that is what the public are concerned about and they are right

To expect them to worry about the nuances of an NCHD life is looking for a lot


What are you worried about renewing ACLS anyway, what does that exactly mean, you have sat the course and passed, you are an intelligent adult why do you need to sit the course again in tw years, why the 2 year timeframe anyway, research shows whatever additions you gain from recertifying are gone 3-4 months later so what about the next 21months up to your next recertify

The material isall available o line why not use it in the interim, do you personally actually audit your own cardiac arrest performance, if you did you would gain more from it than going to the course every two years

Yes there will be less doctors but that has been government policy for a long time, remember Hanly report

The IMO are not trying to hush you up for the IMO benefit for say but for your own benefit

Do you remember the consultant contract discussions, do you remember the quote about Mickey Mouse money it was a throwaway remark by someone relatively senior in the medical field, well experienced but the media spin that quote received afterwards was devastating for consultants

NCDHS are not trained to speak in the media in general, there have been a small number over the years who have held their own but no real media performers and it is a risky business to get into with so much at stake

I think its obvious you havent been to an IMO AGM with the salmon remarks, at least Roy Keane had been to corporate boxes when he made his prawn sandwich remark

I particularly like the last remark people are considering setting up an NCHD only union, would laugh but for the fact that you probably speak the truth just that these people dont know anything about unions obviously

Laws have changed over the years about setting up unions, to get a negotiating licence nowadays you have to represent at least 1,000 people, you also have to deposit I think €10,000 with the Labour Court and you have to be in a sector where there is no union representing workers at the moment (that is the very tricky bit)

On top of that if you are suggesting that the doctors who currently wont even represent themselves at local levels are now going to give up their careers in medicine (because this would be a full time job) o go and start a union with no training, with no funds with no guarantee of success, with no negotiating licence to begin with, I think you may be misguided

If they truly are that disaffected get them to put themselves forward for IMO election and change that body from within, use its money, negotiating licence and staff to d what they want to achieve

I am amazed at some of the comments by what appear to be people who have never had an engagement with the IMO here. if the IMo has not achieved it is because you me and the other NCHDS have not pushed hard enough , simple as that

drkpower

drzhivago wrote: »

Have to disagree with you drkpower

Have you said previously you were no longer in medicine, I think your memories re 99/2000 are a little clouded

There was no threat of mass resignation then

They are pretty clear actually! December 1999, CUH, circa 50-100 forms filled out by CUH NCHDs resigning from IMO; contact made with like-minded NCHDs in SJH, Mater, Limerick RH, UCHG who "intended" to do the same, IMO informed of this; press release sent to IMO (although i dont think we actually issued the press release!); informal discussons with SIPTU; all of this sent to and made known to the IMO - it all happened. It was a bit of a cheap stunt but it worked!!

drzhivago wrote: »

I was around at that time and well before it, there was a sustained effort from the people on the NCHD committee of the IMO to change conditions, they had a contract to be negotiated and they focussed on one thing hours reductions, simple message everywhere about hours reductions. They forced the issue negotiating by getting the DOH to agree to OT for 1st time ever thinking this would force them to relook at the number of hours being worked but it hasnt

There is no doubt that there had been good work done by the NCHD committee. Problem was that they caved when it came to negotiation; in 1999/2000 the level of support for docs was unprecedented - even the taxi drivers seemed to support the plight of the junior docs!!. It was pretty remarable when you think about it!! I and others were pushing for punitive OT rates (ie. Tx2 over 65 hours, Tx3 after 80 hours, something along those lines) in order to make the reduction in hours something that the DoH would have to do financially (which is what they are concerned about). Sadly we settled at T+1/2 for all overtime (excl. Sun/BHs) - that was never sufficient to lead to the reduction of hours that was needed. Fair enough, a lot of NCHDs want the long hours, but the campaign was predicated on reducing them and that was the basis on which an agreement should have been reached.

drzhivago wrote: »

Like a lot of medics you seem to feel that everyone is against you and that includes IMO. The IMO is your union, he members need to drive the agenda and not wait for others, sadly NCHDs have been very lacking in this

Im no longer a doc; when i was one, i didnt feel that they were out to get us, just that they were ineffectual and seemed to be more concerned with their other members (GPs, consultants etc..). I agree with you 100% that NCHDs are terrible for pursuing their agenda - there was (and probably still is) a widespread view out there that sticking your head above the parapet will result in your career being shot down in flames - (the horror stories about NCHDs who took action in the 1970s being forced to leave the profession were doing the rounds big time in 1999/2000 as i recall)- a view which i felt then and still feel is just inaccurate and short-sighted.

But heres the thing...... even if the NCHDs are all shrinking violets, that doesnt absolve the IMO from representing them to the best of their ability. That is why you employ a union - to do your dirty work for you. And the IMO's failure to do anything substantive either pre or post-2000 is embarrassing.

drkpower

drzhivago wrote: »

The IMO are not trying to hush you up for the IMO benefit for say but for your own benefit

Do you remember the consultant contract discussions, do you remember the quote about Mickey Mouse money it was a throwaway remark by someone relatively senior in the medical field, well experienced but the media spin that quote received afterwards was devastating for consultants

NCDHS are not trained to speak in the media in general, there have been a small number over the years who have held their own but no real media performers and it is a risky business to get into with so much at stake

That may be a reasonable tactic if the IMO were saying something.....but so far, they are not......i'm not sure what they are waiting for - the economic crisis is not going to settle anytime soon - i can only assume they will speak up on 18 Feb (the day the cuts come into effect??).

In any case, even if the IMO were speaking up im not sure if the benefits of shusshhing the members outweight the negatives. Sure the Mickey Mouse comment (and the NCHD with the toilet brush saying "we are not cleaners" as the 1st item in the news in early 2000) are damaging - but with so many queuing up to take industrial action at the moment, the NCHDs, as they do not attract automatic sympathy (given that they all are paid a fortune and have rich daddies....), need to outline ther cause with real meaning and passion rather than just union talk. Again, going back to 2000, the most compelling arguments were all made by NCHDs genuinely and emotionally appearing on TV and radio telling their story of how the hours were affecting them and therefore patients. The same should be done now. It will be tough but it will have a better chance of hitting home than press releases from the IMO. And without significant public support, a striike will fail and fail spectacularly.

drzhivago

drkpower wrote: »

That may be a reasonable tactic if the IMO were saying something.....but so far, they are not......i'm not sure what they are waiting for - the economic crisis is not going to settle anytime soon - i can only assume they will speak up on 18 Feb (the day the cuts come into effect??).

In any case, even if the IMO were speaking up im not sure if the benefits of shusshhing the members outweight the negatives. Sure the Mickey Mouse comment (and the NCHD with the toilet brush saying "we are not cleaners" as the 1st item in the news in early 2000) are damaging - but with so many queuing up to take industrial action at the moment, the NCHDs, as they do not attract automatic sympathy (given that they all are paid a fortune and have rich daddies....), need to outline ther cause with real meaning and passion rather than just union talk. Again, going back to 2000, the most compelling arguments were all made by NCHDs genuinely and emotionally appearing on TV and radio telling their story of how the hours were affecting them and therefore patients. The same should be done now. It will be tough but it will have a better chance of hitting home than press releases from the IMO. And without significant public support, a striike will fail and fail spectacularly.

You havent heard me calling for strike in this forum I think its wrong

I dont think they are prepared
I dont think this cohort of NCHDS are willing to put up with the hardships of a strike

drkpower

drzhivago wrote: »

You havent heard me calling for strike in this forum I think its wrong

I dont think they are prepared
I dont think this cohort of NCHDS are willing to put up with the hardships of a strike

If a strike can be relatively quick, it is actually the best for all concerned - but obviously that is not guaranteed, certainly not in this climate.

Is a Work to Rule being considered? Id be very concerned about that policy. Do individual NCHDs have the balls to refuse to do non-routine work when this may result in their consultant being called to do it....?!! I doubt it! And it would allow for a constant HSE drip feed of negative publicity.

Is there a 3rd way?

Traumadoc

drzhivago wrote: »

Have to disagree with you drkpower

Have you said previously you were no longer in medicine, I think your memories re 99/2000 are a little clouded

There was no threat of mass resignation then, as usual when things get fraught in industrial relations (particularly in unions that represent a number of subgroups) there are tensions, people feel that other groups are getting better treatment
t

I too recall the threat of mass resignations and trying to join SIPTU.

Jane5

"What are you worried about renewing ACLS anyway, what does that exactly mean, you have sat the course and passed, you are an intelligent adult why do you need to sit the course again in tw years, why the 2 year timeframe anyway, research shows whatever additions you gain from recertifying are gone 3-4 months later so what about the next 21months up to your next recertify

The material isall available o line why not use it in the interim, do you personally actually audit your own cardiac arrest performance, if you did you would gain more from it than going to the course every two years"

Dr. Zhivago,
Are you really a doctor?
If you were then you would know that we are REQUIRED to resit the ACLS every two years. It is a prerequisite for employment and in most hospitals they will not hire you if your ACLS is out of date if you are going for an interview.
Personally I benefitted enormously from the last ACLS I did-the guidelines changed since 2005 and hence it was good to do it again and be up to date. I have seen some messy arrests run by some doctors who could really benefit from a repeat of formal ACLS training.
Nevertheless the situation remains that it is a prerequisite for employment as an NCHD in Irish hospitals for most jobs excluding laboratory work.

Jane5

I am amazed at some of the comments by what appear to be people who have never had an engagement with the IMO here. if the IMo has not achieved it is because you me and the other NCHDS have not pushed hard enough , simple as that

Gosh, Dr. Zhivago, I'm sorry. I guess I just assumed that when I pay them 588euro per year! that they would act like, y'know, other unions and DO stuff for me. I didn't realise that I have to pay them so that I can do the work.

This union lets pregnant doctors work 40 consecutive hours on their feet with no sleep or meal breaks. This union allows 56 hour shifts to happen at weekends. This union allows 32 hour shifts multiple times in the same week, and doctors crash their cars with fatigue. This union does not intervene when asked for help with aggressive management.

I'm paying SOMEBODY for SOMETHING. If I am the one supposed to be doing the work, then I'm cancelling my cheque. Bottom line.

They have a chance to redeem themselves here. 600 euro times 4000 (the approx number of NCHDs) is a lot of money to lose were we to all resign.

Jane5

"to get a negotiating licence nowadays you have to represent at least 1,000 people, you also have to deposit I think €10,000 with the Labour Court and you have to be in a sector where there is no union representing workers at the moment (that is the very tricky bit)

On top of that if you are suggesting that the doctors who currently wont even represent themselves at local levels are now going to give up their careers in medicine (because this would be a full time job) o go and start a union with no training, with no funds with no guarantee of success, with no negotiating licence to begin with, I think you may be misguided" as per Dr. Zhivago.

Dr.Zhivago,
1)Any union representing NCHDs would be representing a group numbering well over 4000 which is 4 times the figure you quoted me.

2)10,000euro between a couple of people isn't that hard to arrange if you try. Particularly if you are all used to working 100 hour weeks, you would be amazed at the things you can do when you turn that energy and work ethic towards things that aren't akin to swimming against a strong current-ie. the feeling one gets working in most Irish hospitals.

3)The IMO is the consultants union technically. I would imagine it would not be particularly difficult to combine that fact with the fact that they blatantly have NOT represented our interests in years. Not quite so tricky after all.

4) "to go and start a union with no training, with no funds with no guarantee of success, with no negotiating licence to begin with, I think you may be misguided" to quote you.
The negotiating licence I don't thinking is a big an obstacle or problem as you like to make it sound.
FYI-advocating for your rights and being the voice of a generation when one is a junior in a hostile situation and your union won't come to your aid to any meaningful degree is not quite the same as "won't even represent themselves at local levels".
I funnily enough know enough disaffected and disillusioned NCHDs right now to start up my own locum agency, nevermind a union. We're in the right place at the right time if it's those qualities you're looking for. And with the conditions as bad as they are and set to get a WHOLE lot worse, I don't think most people have on their rose tinted glasses vis a vis a glittering career as an NCHD at present. I wouldn't see recruitment as being one of the bigger hurdles to be honest.

5) A couple NCHDs would do it. The key others one would need to hire would be a solicitor or two, ideally with experience or an interest in employment law, a PR person, and a financial services professional or two.

drkpower

Are NCHDs still on an IMO-enforced Omerta or is anyone willing to announce/suggest their future plans in respect of the cuts?

Teachers, bus drivers and others have already balotted - the queue is getting longer!!

DrM

I agree with Jane5. The IMO has not been representing NCHD's interests as a union dedicated to NCHDs.

There is no enthusiasm, no leadership, no dedication, no passion. There is no desire to improve NCHDs working conditions. They should be checking NCHDs working conditions, rota, the res facilities, workload, etc up and down the country, looking for ways to improve things by suggesting solutions to local hospitals.

They wait until problem arises before anything is done. Simply, they are not visible on the ground. When you are not visible, your members think you are weak, and the HSE thinks you are weak... and we sit and wonder why we as a group often end up being bullied by the HSE administration.

Such passive characteristic of the current IMO/NCHD committee is not a sign of a strong union. The nonverbal message that is coming out of IMO is that they couldn't care less about me and about NCHDs. It is pathetic. Representation is weak, a lot of NCHDs have no confidence that IMO can help them. Instead of speaking up on our behalf, all you see is "our" IMO Presidents & cronies shaking hands and wearing chains with Mary Harney in a certain hotel in Killarney. I think a true NCHD union is the way forward, there is too much conflict of interests in the IMO at present.

Vorsprung

DrM wrote: »

When you are not visible, your members think you are weak, and the HSE thinks you are weak... and we sit and wonder why we as a group often end up being bullied by the HSE administration.

In fairness to the IMO, then 50% of NCHDs are not members of the union, the unionis weak. I agree with Matt Sadlier when he says that the union is only as strong as its members. The INO has 95% of nurses in it - that makes it powerful. I listened to what Matt and the IMO Vice-President had to say at the Dublin meeting last week, and I thought they were quite passionate about it.

Dr Galen

whether NCHD's go down the route of the IMO or another NCHD only union do you guys really think that there is the collecive will within your own ranks to do things? To make the tough calls? To stand up to the powers that be, (in that I include your own consultants).

tbh, i doubt it. I've plenty of mates who are doc's, from all levels, consultants down to interns, and one thing that always comes through, is the fear. The fear of sticking your head above the pulpit. Of speaking up, as it could wreck your career aspirations. I've known of a consultant, who stuck up for an SpR once, when the another more "senior" consultant was giving said SpR a total bollocking for pretty much stupid reasons, have his life made hell for quite a long time for doing so. If thats what happens (wrongly) at that level how are you going to convince other NCHD's to stand up and be counted.

I've had this conversation with them, its despicable how we as a nation, government and health service treat our NCHD's, and tbh I can't believe its only now that a few of you seem to growing some balls.

If you get together and run this right, get the truth out there about what you actually do during the course of your working week, the public will stand behind you. Don't let it become about the money. Learn from what the nurses did last year and the year before....and don't try and fry all your fish at the same time, don't end up looking greedy and most importantly don't pansy out of it. Stand up for yourselves, your training and your patients. You got my vote lads, but I'm pretty much already in your choir

DrM

bigjimthefirst wrote: »

In fairness to the IMO, then 50% of NCHDs are not members of the union, the unionis weak. I agree with Matt Sadlier when he says that the union is only as strong as its members. The INO has 95% of nurses in it - that makes it powerful. I listened to what Matt and the IMO Vice-President had to say at the Dublin meeting last week, and I thought they were quite passionate about it.

BigJim,
Yes the union is only as strong as its members. I did not disagree with that. That is what you need in a union but IMO has not been visible to the NCHDs to make them want to sign up as union members. Have you ever wonder why NCHDs are not signing up? Hundreds of Euros is a huge chunk of your income for signing up to something that you do not see any benefit. Many NCHDs feel the IMO is not representing their interest, to them IMO is irrelevant. To them the IMO is only for a few elite NCHDs wanting to be political/ for thier career progression etc.

You cannot compare IMO to INO. INO is a homogenous crowd... They have common interests and that make them very very strong. When you are a nurse you have completed your career ladder, with a few who wants to do the 'extras' like CNM, Community nursing, Practice nurse, Nurse tutor etc which are "optional" career choices. When they demand something, all members gets the benefit... i.e. relevant.

INO is unlike our doctors union (IMO) made up of different people (Consultants, Public health doctors, GPs, NCHDs, med students) with different interests, some conflicting with each other. That's the curse in the IMO.

The various groups within IMO need to come together in unity. When NCHDs get bullied, the Consultant committee must be the first to speak up and defend their NCHDs. If the Consultant group dare to speak up for the NCHDs, then we as NCHDs (and IMO) will be as strong as INO, SIPTU, IMPACT etc. That's what we need to build a strong IMO.

The HSE tactical strategy is to divide and conquer the IMO... The HSE is trying to cause conflicts and frictions between the Consultants group and NCHDs group so that we have a weak union. When we disagree between ourselves, we become weak. We must not fall for that.

DrM

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

whether NCHD's go down the route of the IMO or another NCHD only union do you guys really think that there is the collecive will within your own ranks to do things? To make the tough calls? To stand up to the powers that be, (in that I include your own consultants).

Mystik Monkey,
This is not the time to start a new union. HSE wants to see a divided group of NCHDs and a divided IMO, so they can achieve their cutbacks. In a critical time like this, we can only hope that all NCHDs will join a single union, the IMO. That way, with 4000+ strong NCHDs in the country we the NCHDs will become the strongest subgroup within IMO.

NCHDs will never be bullied if all NCHDs unite. When we unite, we watch each other's back. That's a strong cohesive group of people.
If the Consultants group would watch our backs, and NCHDs in turn watch their backs, we become even stronger. For this to happen, leadership within IMO is crucial.

In reality, the HSE is not interested in our training, working conditions, family life or even patient care. The HSE is not about patients care anymore, it is about finding ways to limit and cut expenses. We are plagued in this HSE health system with insufficient bed capacity; the HSE likes that and is trying to keep it that way... low bed capacity... low maintenance and overhead costs. Just imagine that we have a huge supply of free beds... all operations will be done, all tests and scans etc will be done... the HSE annual budget will not last 3 months. In a way, trolleys in A&Es are benefiting the HSE budget. And all those patients awaiting long term placement in nursing homes, the longer they are in our acute hospitals, the fewer patients who needs operations/test/scans will be admitted using the excuse of bed shortage, another cost containment measure!