Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
HSE proposed pay cuts for junior doctors from February 18th...
Options
Comments
-
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 It is a prerequisite for employment and in most hospitals they will not hire you if your ACLS is out of date if you are going for an interview.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.
I can assure you that I am a doctor most certainly
In no contract of employment for NCHDs have I seen it as a pre requisite to possess ACLS certification
For Medical SPRS schemes it says must be sat during the program does not mention about recertifying
I would be grateful if you could point out ANY hospital where it is a prerequisite for employment because if you can you are making the argument for the training grant in that hospitals require these course for employment,0 -
sorry Jane but other union members actually understand what unions are for and have tried to resolve their issues themselves before they approach the union with an issue. In my experience that does not happen with junior docs and criticise me for saying it but you/we are too middle class and dont understand what unions are for. Both my parents were involved with trade unions so I understood what they were about, I joined students union in college and got involved. I joined IMO when I graduated and got to understand what the issues were over a period of time. I still meet docs today who dont know how they are paid, at what rates and are able to check their paycheques to see if they were paid the correct rate. They still come to me to ask even though I am not an IMO rep any more, I found the work too detailed, I found that everyone else was willing for you to do all the work for them and not willing to try and do anything to solve their own problem. That does not exist in the main with other unions. I have had this conversation with my parents and they just dont understand how a worker can not understand their own paycheck, it makes no sense to themGosh, 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.
You have to do something to get the ball rolling, i used to get calls from people asking me to fill in their overtime and hand it in because they were afraid of the manpower/personnel person!!!!I didn't realise that I have to pay them so that I can do the work.
sorry to break your bubble but it is the doctor who allows that, any pregnant NCHD I have worked with I have advised them to go to occupational health when they are pregnant and ask for an occupational assessment of the work they are expected to do while pregnant, the hours they are expected to do, to ask occupational health what the expected hazards are for them and their baby and to get that in writing and also to put on paper a deadline after which they will no longer be expected to work beyond a 9 hour dayThis union lets pregnant doctors work 40 consecutive hours on their feet with no sleep or meal breaks.
It is not the IMO that makes doctors work, ask those pregnant doctors how many are in the UNION, many will not be
Ask them how many have asked the Union for advice, many will not have asked
Ask them how many have asked Occ helath for the above assessment and you will get the same advice
Ask any nurse/lab assistant/ admin person in the hospital the same questions and they will tell you chapter and verse about what they are and are not expected to do as a pregnant worker. They know because they go and find out. doctors dont, you cant blame the IMO for that.This union allows 56 hour shifts to happen at weekends.
Sorry to burst your bubble again but you are not employed by the IMO, it is the hospital your employer which allows you to work like this, schedules you to work like this and breaks the law by doing so.
How many NCHDS have complained about this to any of the legal bodies involved in regulating hours over the last 4 years
NONE
Why???
why has no NCHD told their employer that I will not work hours like that, I will work a 56 hour week in whatever shift pattern you want me to work in that is legal but I wont work 56 hour shifts like this, and by the way the law protects me from being victimised for refusing to accommodate you (the employer) by breaking the law working these long hours
Why havent you done this yourself if you are so concerned
Why because most NCHDs fear for their own careers, are afraid to rock the boat, worry about their reference. I have heard them all
So as IMO the body corporate they can advise individuals who have problems but if someone is not willing to go to this length to solve the problem to see this out to the bitter end what can they do????This union allows 32 hour shifts multiple times in the same week, and doctors crash their cars with fatigue.
see the point above in addition i dont think all your NCDH colleagues feel the same way about the hours, surgeons still want to work a lot of hours for their training, so do some other groups
IMO represents all of you, how does it get a comon position
Have you sent in any position statements to the IMO about these working hours on your own behalf or on your colleagues behalf, has your res committee in your hospital met, you do have an IMO res committee in the hospital you work in, I presume you are in a medical specialty from your previous comments about ACLS, have you and your medical colleagues had a meeting elected an Internal IMO spokesperson for your group with a secretary and chairperson of your res commitee or do you think someone from IMO Hosue should come dow to do this for you
I worked in many hospitals where there was no committee in the hospital and when I tried to start one I was told there was no need because I was the only person who would be interested.
Do you know who your local IMO rep is, I guarantee you all the other workers in the hospital know who their rep is!!!
If this is the case and you have brought this to IMO attntion i would stand beside you on this, if you have evidence I willw rite a letter in your support to George McNeice CEO of IMO to ensure that you or colleagues get all support you need in such an environment, you will need to pm me with details so that I can follow that one up, if you do actually want the help.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.
I agree you are paying for something but YOU need to understand what you are paying for and what your responsibility is as a union member
You are not expected to solve all your own problems but you are at least meant to- prepare your own complaint ie tell IMO what problem is
- keep documentation of the related background material such as Overtime forms submitted, paychecks rotas, rosers etc
- have a diary detailing when problem arose, who you tried to solve problem with, their repsonse, your replies with copies of documentation
You would be amazed how many people dont do that
I shudder to think where you get the figure 4,000 from as NCHD IMO membership is nowhere near that high, were you not at the recent meetings where they discussed what the membership levels were
when this arose for us in 1999/2000 there were 3,600 NCHDS in IMO out of total 3,962 NCHDS in country at the time. There has been apathy since in part because of the eranings, people saw no threat to their psoitions and hence never joined or possibly resigned from IMO
No doubt with threats of industrial action and ballots people will come flooding back in to membership but that is sad that it needs that to get people interested and engaged
You have responded to me hence this missive to you
I must say that i am disappointed with the NCHDs as a whole in that a small number of people put their heads on the block to get a deal done years ago and nowadays no one wants to give up heir time to be an IMO rep
Who do you think is going to solve all the problems for you!! Mary Harney or Professor Drumm.0 -
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.
Sorry Jane and this is showing the naievete quite a bit, they can only represent those who have paid a membership fee ie to join a Union. So your figure of 4,000 is irrelevant unless you get 4,000 people to join and sign up
You cannot be a member of two unions by the way
That is one of the requirements, it dates back to an age where 10,000 was a lot of money, it would be worth checking and maybe the figure is higher but whatever it is is thrown away as the money sits with Labour court, you dissolve your union (if it gets recognition) and the money stays with them2)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.
Can you say exactly what qualifies you to make this statement and how many years you have been working, you asked me if I was even a doctor, are you, how many years qualified, what have they not been representing you upon exactly3)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.
The only threat I have seen to your livelihood is what is happening right now and they seem to be reacting, responding appropriately in my view if not a little quick to ballot the group for industrial action
The IMO has 4 groups, Consultanst, GPS, Publci health doctors and NCHDS. For a long time NCHDs were the dominant group size wise in IMO at that time you would hear GPS and consultanst saying IMO didnt represent their interests only NCHDS.
Any group which is under threat feels others are better served than they are. In recent years there have been 2 NCHD IMO presidents with another due into office this year.
I am gload you dont think so, as others have commented in 200 there were a group who tried to set up another UNION and went down that road only to find it was not possibel, by all means replciate th mistakes, waste your time and effort going nowehere or you could give up your own time, get yourself voted on to the committee, put your money in your pcoket and then argue for all the things you say they are not doing.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.
I will second your nomination, i believe there are 4 open spots on the NCHD committee, show us what you can do.
Show me the evidence, if you are correct I will back up your complaint to the IMOFYI-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.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree there, I do some locum work through an agency, they have had no bookings for some time, i know the people there well, HSE has pulled the plug o hospitals being allowed to book locums because it is another expense they say they dont need.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.
No one is menat to have a glittering career as an NCHD just survive it and move on to the career posting, GP, hospital consultant or public health doctor for most of us. The odd few will go into pharmaceutical companies and many wont work as doctors at all.
You think a union could survive with the 5 employees you mention above and 2 NCHDs, god bless but I think you really do need to go to more meetings to get a handle on whats happening out there5) 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.
Solicitors are no answer its industrial relations specialists (different skill sets entirely) Not sure why you want the financial people, what about recetionsist to answer phones, secretary etc
If you have the energy get involved with the IMO and change them from the inside trying to start something like that would not get you very far, if you are keen to get out of medicine and into business there may be a business in locums just not this year while they are puling the purse strings, n doubt as the year moves on they will realise they actually need locums to keep some services alive and start rehiring the locums but when that will happen is anyones guess
just because some of us are old does not mean our opinions are not valid which equally holds for the young medics among us but you must understand that a lot has happened in our lives as NCHDS and your 3 or 4 years experience as an NCHD is relatively short to understand some of what has gone before0 -
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.
DRM do something about it
get yourself elected
be the passionate one, its more than passion though
No dedication, I disagree that NCHD committee dont get paid, they give up their time to do this, they go to meetings around the country to talk to NCHDs to hear the complaints and yet not all those complaining are members.
No enthuasiasm, then get involved yourself, shake it up
A union is as strong as members nota committee, how many of those people were elected onto the committee answer me that
NONE, they said so at the meeting
why because none of the rest of you could be arsed, sit and complaining about what they dont do is easy, put yourself up there to be shot down. Give up all your free time to do this. I know some of them have political agendas but so what. If there is such disaffection where is the election campaign to get on this committee and change them all or get rid of them all. There isnt any
Why??
WHY??
WHYYYYY??
Regarding rotas and rosters they wrote to all NCHDS and asked for them to fax in rosters, how many did they get
10 ( I was one)
What does that say for you? I asked this last week after RDS meeting had they got this documentation to challenge HSE on layers of call and who is doing what call in what hospitals, what call rotas exist, they cant even get taht information from their won members
Its a bit of an ever decreasing circle if you say the IMO committee are doing this and yet when they try they dont get the support
were you even at the RDS
I hate to use bad words but really you speak through forked tongues, what have you done in your hospital, have you set up a res commitee and when
(I have and have in every hospital I worked in)
Have you collated roatsa/rosters in your hospital
Have you given these to IMO
I spoke to the IMO reps last day, they used to get the bleep lists from hospitals dirctly, they wont give that anymore so it is no use you saying the should goround the copunrty collecting these things who will they get them from
What is the need to go around when we have email and faxes.
get real and get productive otheriwse you bitching about the people who are trying to help will demoralise them.
If you knwo any union people talk to them, after abattle/period like this committees often step down because they have suffered too much in such a prolonged exercise, if they do who is going ot represent NCHDS in future will you or will you be another of thse who say
" I am far too busy with my personal life and working as a busy NCHD to do it, but I will support (shout against) some one else who is willing to do it"
I wonder where your cohonas really lie0 -
The IMO has 4 groups, Consultanst, GPS, Publci health doctors and NCHDS. For a long time NCHDs were the dominant group size wise in IMO at that time you would hear GPS and consultanst saying IMO didnt represent their interests only NCHDS.
As an outsider, I have to wonder why, if the IMO are effective......then why are NCHDs working slave labour in 2009? Why are the public health docs earning about half what their clinical colleagues earn? And why are public health consultants not even allowed call themselves consultants in Ireland.
To my mind, that's 2 of the 4 groups of docs the union represents being absolutely shafted.
Most of my union experience is with the uber-crappy BMA. But to someone who's not in the system, the IMO makes them BMA look professional if you're an NCHD or a public health doc.0 -
Advertisement
-
Interesting comment, what is slave labour, slaves werent paid, not sure the relevancetallaght01 wrote: »As an outsider, I have to wonder why, if the IMO are effective......then why are NCHDs working slave labour in 2009?
aother interesting point, salaries determined by negotiation over a long periodtallaght01 wrote: »Why are the public health docs earning about half what their clinical colleagues earn? And why are public health consultants not even allowed call themselves consultants in Ireland.
Te point you make re status has been made in the last two sets of negotiations and to my understanding with the bench marking body and either the labour court or another arbitration body
The decision came down to training and patient contact and responsibility for direct patient care
Comparison was made to UK but was rejected so Cab be specialists in public health, and did get a pay rise for that but not yet consultants so there is a difference between those
However as an NCHD for along time I always felt that the salary levels fro the bottom up in what is now Community medicine AMO and SAMO were much higher than registrar and SPR for arguably less responsibility for direct patient care to take the point above, not that they should be paid less but we should be paid more (dont we all feel we should be paid more for our own jobs)tallaght01 wrote: »To my mind, that's 2 of the 4 groups of docs the union represents being absolutely shafted.
I would say that is harsh, the consultant status thing has been on th agenda, was part of the public health doctors strike a few years ago but I understand it is due back up again in next few yearstallaght01 wrote: »Most of my union experience is with the uber-crappy BMA. But to someone who's not in the system, the IMO makes them BMA look professional if you're an NCHD or a public health doc.
I think to make a valid comparison you have to look at what a union does for its members and read the stuff they send you out, most dont. I am not a public health doc but know more about their stuff because I read the IMO bumph.
Public health docs here in the IMO are the ones that drove the most successful public health initiative worldwide, the smoking ban. A union is more than just terms and conditions for medics its also about being professional in your own role and using the UNION to advocate publicly for services or changes in service that you think are in the publics best interest
Ask the public health docs how they feel the IMO has done in that regard for a comparison between BMA and IMO
AS an NCHD the policy stuff never seems important at the time its only as you get older exactly how important it is, all those motions an debates at AGMs seem a waste of time but I see the value now as I approach consultancy from a locums background0 -
I am gload you dont think so, as others have commented in 200 there were a group who tried to set up another UNION and went down that road only to find it was not possibel, by all means replciate th mistakes, waste your time and effort going nowehere or you could give up your own time, get yourself voted on to the committee, put your money in your pcoket and then argue for all the things you say they are not doing.
For the record, in 2000 there were informal talks between a number of NCHD's and SIPTU (and possibly one other union). There was no attempt by NCHDs to set up another union.
DrZ, i hear your points about union involvement etc and you are dead right, NCHDs are useless at speaking up for themselves. They tend to take it up the ass for a few years until they get out of hospital medicine/become a consultant.
But that doesnt absolve the IMO from representing them. Fair enough, it does tie one hand behind the IMO's back, but they still have one hand!!! And since 2000, what have the IMO achieved since 2000? Anything? Ive been out of the business since 03ish but i dont think anything has changed since 2000...
Has there been any material change in hours for NCHD's?
No.
Has there been any material change in working conditions for pregnant NCHDs?
No.
[and a pregnant NCHD should not have to go to Occupational Health for an assessment, this is something that should be written into the contract of employment at the outset; and who is responsible for negotiating the contract........the IMO (predominantly)]
And now the HSE slash and burn at the NCHDs T&C's....
Why?
Because they know NCHDs will be afraid to stand up to them but more importantly because they know the IMO is impotent.
Would they have attempted something similar against the nurses; no, because the INO would ballot the membership the following day; yet the IMO thus far have not appeared in public and seem to have issued a directive of some kind advising against any individual NCHD from speaking........in fact, the IMO thus far have done nothing and the longer they wait, the less chance they will have of achieving anything; if i was still in the business, I would be going demented!!0 -
But that doesnt absolve the IMO from representing them. Fair enough, it does tie one hand behind the IMO's back, but they still have one hand!!! And since 2000, what have the IMO achieved since 2000? Anything? Ive been out of the business since 03ish but i dont think anything has changed since 2000...
What has any union done for its workers, what do people care about
Salries have increased, submissions to benchmarking body successful, solve individual cases as theya rise
Negotiate working hours with employers and a staged method of their redcution
Hasthere been any material change in hours for NCHD's?
No.
what is material
Average working hours 1999 77
average working hours last year 62Has there been any material change in working conditions for pregnant NCHDs?
No.
Disgaree again, maternity benefit has increased in duration
In addition am surprised at you for taking that stance as a legal person if I understand it correctly[and a pregnant NCHD should not have to go to Occupational Health for an assessment, this is something that should be written into the contract of employment at the outset;
and shocked at a legal representative for writing that
Employers do not reference every piece of legislation that is applicable in contracts you would know that if you did employment law. There is no obligation on employers to do so, they do however have to reference the National terms and conditions applicable if there is one (which there is in this case as negotiated by IMO)and who is responsible for negotiating the contract........the IMO (predominantly)]
Yes and every NCHD non member benefits unfairly in comparison to the UNION members for these negotiations done on their behalf.
You are making my own poaint here, and you reveal a disconnect that most NCHDs have, the IMO is not a corporate body in islation the IMO is the UNION, UNIONS are made up of members who have staff working for themBecause they know NCHDs will be afraid to stand up to them but more importantly because they know the IMO is impotent.
NCHDS seem to believe that the satff are the UNION which is not the case.
The members are the UNION, iif the members are weak as you say the union is weak because you cannot rely on the membership to carry out a threat of indstrial action if there were oneWould they have attempted something similar against the nurses; no, because the INO would ballot the membership the following day;
A ballot has happened, result in on 27th, we will see what happens with that, it is only one tool in an arsenal and if people afraid to use the toll the IMO staff have little to do next, during industrial action it is the members that have to do the hardest work and in this case that means not working. It is easier for teh IMO staff relatively speaking.
The hard part for staff of a UNION is to be in negotiations because they then must produce something, the members wont all be there it is the professional negotiators who achieve in thsoe circumstances
what would appearing in publci do, do you think the average public will suddenly melt their hearts for the junior doctors and their demands to maintain their level of earnings when every worker is facing some sort of threatyet the IMO thus far have not appeared in public and seem to have issued a directive of some kind advising against any individual NCHD from speaking..
Are you really that naieve
..
That is your considered opinion....in fact, the IMO thus far have done nothing
From your detailed knowledge of teh area and your legal background can you outline for us what they should do, you are quite good at telling us what you think they are not doing but what shoudl they then be doing
From where I see it- They have to engage with memebsr and have been having hospital meetings/regional meetings since this first came out in October
- They have to object to teh HSE letter in the strongest terms ( this was done and copy sent to all IMO NCHD members and interestingly non members, had I had a choice on that I would have sent the non members nothing)
- They have attended LRC discussions and succeeding in getting cutbacks postponed
- they have gotten the HSE to agree to period of negotiations around NCHD contract
- they have issued ballot with recommendation to vote yes for industrial action
I am not sure in this circumstance what more any UNION would do but maybe from your now enlightened position you might tell us. Often when people are inside a problem looking at it the solution is not obvious but from an outsiders perspective you may see a solution which is not obvious to those inside the talsk, I really would welcome your thoughts as to what more a UNION could do
I have been an IMO member a long time, i am glad it is not a union that is constantly courting public opinion such as some of the others.
If you want to solve a problem you dont try and prolong it by constantly releasing press stateemnts criticising the other side
From what I have read the LRC seems to consider that good practice too but then maybe you have an opinion on them tooand the longer they wait, the less chance they will have of achieving anything; if i was still in the business, I would be going demented!!
watch and wait is what you will have to do0 -
I am merely an interested observer, DrZ, I dont have the answers to all or even some of the issues! And if I am somewhat biased against the IMO (which I am!!) it is because of the personal experience I have had of their inaction in the past - I really hope things have changed but from where I am standing, it doesn't seem as if much has changed. But if i am wrong, i am very happy to say so and in fact, i am very glad to see that the average hours has decreased - if a little surprised!
And Im glad to see that certain opening steps have been taken by the IMO re: this particular dispute - so maybe things are happening.
On the employment law/maternity issue - its actuallly has nothing to do with employment law - my point is simply that the IMO should have negotiated a maximum hours per shift/week stipulation for pregnant NCHD's at this stage - it should be clear for every pregnant NCHD what hours they have to work at every stage of pregnancy - this should have been done regardless of what employment legislation requires.
By contrast, for instance, Aer LIngus female pilots, on announcing they are pregnant are not allowed to fly (as per a specific term in their contract negotiated through their union) - they generally simply pack up and go home for the folowing 14-18 months!
On the "appearing in public/am i that naive" point......As i have said a few times, the precise reason why the 2000 action worked so succesfully (and should have been capitalised on even more) was because public support had been mobilised massively - although the climate is much trickier now, framing the debate as the HSE creating further danger in hospitals by reducing the number of NCHDs working, by downgrading training etc is an argument that can be won on the ariwaves - im surprised that it hasnt been raised at all - if that is naive, fair enough, but the only precedent here is 2000 and that time, the use of the media by individual NCHDs (and occasionally by the IMO) was extremely powerful.0 -
I am merely an interested observer, DrZ, I dont have the answers to all or even some of the issues! And if I am somewhat biased against the IMO (which I am!!) it is because of the personal experience I have had of their inaction in the past - I really hope things have changed but from where I am standing, it doesn't seem as if much has changed. But if i am wrong, i am very happy to say so and in fact, i am very glad to see that the average hours has decreased - if a little surprised!
And Im glad to see that certain opening steps have been taken by the IMO re: this particular dispute - so maybe things are happening.
No maybe, things are happening
If you were not happy in past did you complain or bring this to attention of thsoe on NCHD Committee standard steps for most unions workers
Not sure why yu are surpirsed about averages coming down, there were 3962 NCHDS in 2000 there were 4,682 in 2008, more doctors will bring down hours but is not the complete solution or you worsen the promotional pyramid.On the employment law/maternity issue - its actuallly has nothing to do with employment law - my point is simply that the IMO should have negotiated a maximum hours per shift/week stipulation for pregnant NCHD's at this stage - it should be clear for every pregnant NCHD what hours they have to work at every stage of pregnancy - this should have been done regardless of what employment legislation requires.
By contrast, for instance, Aer LIngus female pilots, on announcing they are pregnant are not allowed to fly (as per a specific term in their contract negotiated through their union) - they generally simply pack up and go home for the folowing 14-18 months!
Female pilots I beleive had a study done by occ health check with any female piltots you might know, alligned to work done in US and JApanese airline industry all went down this line
In our setting CNDHS dont bring pregnancy to attention in the beginning hence some of the problems, I have helped colleagues to solve this by having them placed in day work and not night shifts, often over the objections of the person who raised it in first place
I again disagree that it has nothing to do with employment law as it does, the legislation states that they are entitled to health check, they have to ask for it, female NCHDS dontOn the "appearing in public/am i that naive" point......As i have said a few times, the precise reason why the 2000 action worked so succesfully (and should have been capitalised on even more) was because public support had been mobilised massively - although the climate is much trickier now, framing the debate as the HSE creating further danger in hospitals by reducing the number of NCHDs working, by downgrading training etc is an argument that can be won on the ariwaves - im surprised that it hasnt been raised at all - if that is naive, fair enough, but the only precedent here is 2000 and that time, the use of the media by individual NCHDs (and occasionally by the IMO) was extremely powerful.
Public support mobiliised massively on the issue of long working hours hat was the focus and think back the people who appeared in the media at the time were ALL IMO committee members.
Public not so interested in doctors maintaining their wage levels so not the same point now
Soundbites is what will be the order of the day here and it will start with a HSE soundbite about huge earnings (not mentioning the long hours worked to have such earnings)
Would you put yourself in the media t answer such criticisms, i woudnlt right now, I can defend the hours I work, not excessive. i can defend the hours I work, occasionally excessive but i cannot defend the 100 hour week interpolated to earnings as we know a lot still work those hours
2000 was a different age, different solution required, the public dont really know about training, I fear if you stress that issue too much you rick making junior doctors look unqualified to do the jobs they are doing and frighten the public too.
Where too next I ask you again0 -
Advertisement
-
Where too next I ask you again
I think you have confused me with either an NCHD or an IMO negotiator!!If you were not happy in past did you complain or bring this to attention of thsoe on NCHD Committee standard steps for most unions workers
Brought it to the attention of IMO NCHD Committee and then to the top brass when they visited the Hospital - and they did nothing. But hey, that was a long time ago and i'm over it.......I again disagree that it has nothing to do with employment law as it does, the legislation states that they are entitled to health check, they have to ask for it, female NCHDS dont
Employment law are just minimum requirements; my point (again) is that there should be a specific term in every NCHD contract outlining the maximum shift a pregnant NCHD can do (once she has notified employer obviously) a la the term in a pilots contract saying she simply cannot fly.2000 was a different age, different solution required, the public dont really know about training, I fear if you stress that issue too much you rick making junior doctors look unqualified to do the jobs they are doing and frighten the public too.
absolutely, frighten the living sh!t out of them!!! then you might get somewhere!0 -
On the employment law/maternity issue - its actuallly has nothing to do with employment law - my point is simply that the IMO should have negotiated a maximum hours per shift/week stipulation for pregnant NCHD's at this stage - it should be clear for every pregnant NCHD what hours they have to work at every stage of pregnancy - this should have been done regardless of what employment legislation requires.
.
Are pregnant women also doing the 72 hour shifts in Ireland??? :eek::eek:
If they are, the IMO are worse than I'd ever imagined!!!!Interesting comment, what is slave labour, slaves werent paid, not sure the relevance
aother interesting point, salaries determined by negotiation over a long period
Te point you make re status has been made in the last two sets of negotiations and to my understanding with the bench marking body and either the labour court or another arbitration body
The decision came down to training and patient contact and responsibility for direct patient care
Comparison was made to UK but was rejected so Cab be specialists in public health, and did get a pay rise for that but not yet consultants so there is a difference between those
However as an NCHD for along time I always felt that the salary levels fro the bottom up in what is now Community medicine AMO and SAMO were much higher than registrar and SPR for arguably less responsibility for direct patient care to take the point above, not that they should be paid less but we should be paid more (dont we all feel we should be paid more for our own jobs)
I would say that is harsh, the consultant status thing has been on th agenda, was part of the public health doctors strike a few years ago but I understand it is due back up again in next few years
I think to make a valid comparison you have to look at what a union does for its members and read the stuff they send you out, most dont. I am not a public health doc but know more about their stuff because I read the IMO bumph.
Public health docs here in the IMO are the ones that drove the most successful public health initiative worldwide, the smoking ban. A union is more than just terms and conditions for medics its also about being professional in your own role and using the UNION to advocate publicly for services or changes in service that you think are in the publics best interest
Ask the public health docs how they feel the IMO has done in that regard for a comparison between BMA and IMO
AS an NCHD the policy stuff never seems important at the time its only as you get older exactly how important it is, all those motions an debates at AGMs seem a waste of time but I see the value now as I approach consultancy from a locums background
To summarise you seem to be saying
a) They tried to sort out the public health consultants ststus and pay, but they couldn't.
b) But that's OK because we have a smoking ban instead.
c) slave labour is OK if you get paid for it.
I hope IMO membership isn't compulsory if I ever return to Ireland.0 -
Going a bit off topic, and back to something which I think was mentioned earlier in this thread.....
I loved the way the Independent spun the NCHD who made 120k in overtime down in Limerick I think it was.
Check out this story in today's Sunday Times.
I wonder if we'll get a similar slant about a Garda's pay. I suspect not.0 -
bigjimthefirst wrote: »Going a bit off topic, and back to something which I think was mentioned earlier in this thread.....
I loved the way the Independent spun the NCHD who made 120k in overtime down in Limerick I think it was.
Check out this story in today's Sunday Times.
I wonder if we'll get a similar slant about a Garda's pay. I suspect not.
Plus the papers have been putting the following two points out there, too...
1) That NCHDs are ready to strike because of the reduction in overtime, as opposed to the removal of overtime pay.
2) That the "reduction in overtime" is actually to keep us legal with the EWTD. They actually quoted an HSE source for that one!0 -
tallaght01 wrote: »Are pregnant women also doing the 72 hour shifts in Ireland??? :eek::eek:
If they are, the IMO are worse than I'd ever imagined!!!!
No they arent
I think drk and some others should read up a little on contracts of employment
I have not seen female pilots contracts but have seen a lot from people I work with in the health sector. All any contracts do is mention maternity benfits, they do not specify what you can and cannot do at various stages of pregnancy.
That is the same for all workers here. they are entitled to occ health assessment and must ask for it themslves, which most do but as drk said himself trying to get NCHDS to stand up at times is difficult as they like to remain anonymous in worktallaght01 wrote: »To summarise you seem to be saying
a) They tried to sort out the public health consultants ststus and pay, but they couldn't.
b) But that's OK because we have a smoking ban instead.
c) slave labour is OK if you get paid for it.
I hope IMO membership isn't compulsory if I ever return to Ireland.
Thats a pretty liberal summary, I am not saying much about the public doctors except that I read the bumph emanating from the IMO and have seen what has happened with their claim to be consultants. It has been examined by a body as mentioned previously and is up for discussion again, timetable I am not sure, I am not a public health doctor so didnt go in to that detail
The point about the smoking ban is that the IMO public health doctors know how to get the UNION to act on issues that are important to them and it was they that wanted the smoking ban and they achieved it
It is an example of what a UNION can do if the members are united
As for your last point by definition it cant be slave labour can it if its being paid for, to compare the two is ridiculous and is the opposite end of how the HSE are trying to portray NCHDs right now as people who earned loads of money by doing overtime.0 -
I dunno. It seems to me that the IMO should be doing that job for the public health docs. I mean the docs themselves withdrew their out of hours services over these issues a few years back, as far as I remember. Their union should be at least able to get them simple parity with their colleagues. That shouldn't be an insurmountable objective.
I still think NCHD are working as modern day slaves. Not in the strictest sense. but no-one should be forced to work those kinds of hours in this day and age. No-one. Thos hours are illegal for a god reason. But the union seems unable to even get NCHDs their statutory rights.
I don't know what the situation is with pregnant women. Are they realistically working 24, 36, 72 hour shifts?0 -
I can assure right now that pregnant NCHDs in Ireland are most assuredly working those hours right now. I have heard of some very sad stories of miscarriages, some at quite late stages, DIRECTLY AFTER OR DURING these extended shifts. One very recently. The hospital refused to get a locum and threatened the doctor in question with her registration if she refused to work the hours at the late stage in pregnancy she was in. I was told she contacted the IMO and got little advice and no proactive help at all. (I am not stating this, simply what I was told).
I am furious with the IMO for not insisting that protection for pregnant NCHDs is written into the NCHD contract and vigorously insisted upon at every instance. They know well our unique vulnerability to this particular type of exploitation, and they know well that pregnant NCHDs are doing these hours right now. It is a matter that needs to be acted on with immediate urgency. Why is this situation allowed to continue?0 -
Dr. Zhivago, for the record, I would LOVE to join the IMO and be on the NCHD committee, however, I imagine I would be thrown off of it after about a week because I would actually insist on action and reform instead of just allowing the status quo to continue and doing nothing. We can't have people like that on our little committees
I would insist on immediate alteration of our contract to definitively protect pregnant NCHDs from extended shift lengths and sleep deprivation, and if these contractual rights were violated, then I would insist on swift legal action against the hospital involved immediately on hearing of the breach.
No arsing around with Occ Health, no nothing. Pregnant women should not do a physically demanding job for 30-40 hours straight without any sleep or designated meal breaks. End of story. That this is allowed to happen reflects very badly on the IMO and indeed on the medical profession as a whole.0 -
Dr. Zhivago,
In a post above you DENIED that pregnant women were doing these shifts!
Why are you denying that right now, in Ireland, pregnant NCHDs are working continuous shifts of 30-50 hours straight with no sleep or meal breaks?
You either know it is happening and don't want to admit it, or you are out of touch with what is happening.
Interns, SHOs and registrars who are pregnant are doing these hours from early pregnancy to often quite late in the pregnancy, and many are, how can I put this, energetically discouraged from taking their full complement of mat leave. One surgical reg that I know of gave birth on Friday and was back at work on Tuesday!0 -
No they arent
I think drk and some others should read up a little on contracts of employment
I have not seen female pilots contracts but have seen a lot from people I work with in the health sector.
I'll be brief DrZ because I think Jane5 has expressed some of these issues better than I could....
There is no need to read up on contracts of employment.... any contract can include any term the parties agree on (as long as it doesnt violate the law). My point (for the 3rd time) is that the IMO (on behalf of NCHDs) should have already negotiated into the standard NCHD contract of employment a term stating that pregnant NCHDs CAN NOT work more than X or Y hours......but they didn't.
And for the record, as I understand it, the provision I mentioned for female pilots is specifically written into Aer Lingus pilots contracts.All any contracts do is mention maternity benfits, they do not specify what you can and cannot do at various stages of pregnancy.
No; the NCHD contract may merely "mention" maternity benefits but that merely emphasises its inadequacy; a contract of employment can be 1 page long or 1000 pages long depending on what the parties agree.0 -
Advertisement
-
I never got a one hour lunch break, so as a matter of interest - whats to stop you guys taking your lunch break at the end of the day ? Say you finish at 7pm ( standard 12 hour day in my time) take your lunch break then - mark your time sheet as finishing at 8pm?
I do not know if it is illegal or honest and I am not advocating anything - just wondering.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 11109
NCHD's have been let down repeatedly in the past An ex IMO president got the training grant and his career suffered as a result.
I know of a pregnant NCHD who went into labour on a 36 hour shifts.
I did 120 hour weeks and was paid for the first 72 hours only. I am ashamed my colleagues are expected to still do the same.
I got 20 mins max as a luch break and regularly left meals to answer bleeps and calls never to return.
I also know of GP trainee's who were castigated for taking maternity leave durine a training scheme and "punished" by getting rotations as far away from home as was possible.
I am a GP (emerging) and the IMO has let me down badly.
It's easy to say get involved but those that do suffer career wise and family wise .
I have no easy answers but we as a group have been shafted over the years and this present proposal to turn a "training " position into a poorly paid "service " one only must be resisted.
I can be PM'ed and will do all I can to help and support.
Rob0 -
Cant see why you would be thrown off, regarding the pregnancy in this message I agree with your sentiment but the individual has to bring it up with management, in my experience they dont. It isnt necessarily an IMO issue, not all doctors are in the IMO. But if worker doesnt raise the issue management say there is no issue because it was never raised with us.Dr. Zhivago, for the record, I would LOVE to join the IMO and be on the NCHD committee, however, I imagine I would be thrown off of it after about a week because I would actually insist on action and reform instead of just allowing the status quo to continue and doing nothing. We can't have people like that on our little committees
I would insist on immediate alteration of our contract to definitively protect pregnant NCHDs from extended shift lengths and sleep deprivation, and if these contractual rights were violated, then I would insist on swift legal action against the hospital involved immediately on hearing of the breach.
No arsing around with Occ Health, no nothing. Pregnant women should not do a physically demanding job for 30-40 hours straight without any sleep or designated meal breaks. End of story. That this is allowed to happen reflects very badly on the IMO and indeed on the medical profession as a whole.
get yourself on that committee and get it raised0 -
Dr. Zhivago,
In a post above you DENIED that pregnant women were doing these shifts!
Why are you denying that right now, in Ireland, pregnant NCHDs are working continuous shifts of 30-50 hours straight with no sleep or meal breaks?
You either know it is happening and don't want to admit it, or you are out of touch with what is happening.
Interns, SHOs and registrars who are pregnant are doing these hours from early pregnancy to often quite late in the pregnancy, and many are, how can I put this, energetically discouraged from taking their full complement of mat leave. One surgical reg that I know of gave birth on Friday and was back at work on Tuesday!
Think its important to actually read each others message and not just repsond out of emotion
The message asked were people doing 72 hour shifts while pregnant
The answer NO
72 hour shifts very rae, 72 hour weeks different
You have changed the thrust of this now to 30-50 hour shifts with no meal break or sleep. I cant categorically say people arent doing 50 hour shifts just to say in the hospital where i last worked as an an NCHD that 32 hour shifts were common, 50 hour shifts were rare in general. Pregnant workers were taken off the on call rota at a defined period of pregnancy, if they had a note from a doctors they were taken off earlier but the pregnant worker had to bring the issue of pregnancy to the attention of management.
The issue of MAt leave is between worker and employer, it is a legal obligation, not an IMO issue. If the worker decides not to take it because of some pressure the IMO gtting involved in that instance wont change that perceived pressure and may actually make the perception worse.
Rock and hard place for both doctor and worker then, easy to blame the IMO because they did not write all this into every contract but as said previously by drk contracts are between 2 parties. If one doesnt want to write stuff in because they dont feel the need then the stuff doesnt appear in the contracts but in all the circulars and other bumph that coems with it
If NCHDS dont read the contract as is what chance they will have read all teh otehr stuff and understand MAt leave and work assesmsmsnets for hazards
a good place for informatio on this is
www.hsa.ie
health and safety authority0 -
I'll be brief DrZ because I think Jane5 has expressed some of these issues better than I could....
There is no need to read up on contracts of employment.... any contract can include any term the parties agree on (as long as it doesnt violate the law). My point (for the 3rd time) is that the IMO (on behalf of NCHDs) should have already negotiated into the standard NCHD contract of employment a term stating that pregnant NCHDs CAN NOT work more than X or Y hours......but they didn't.
My point is I believe they did, as you say contract can include any terms that are not illegal, thus pregnan workers come under working time Act and health and safety acts, both referenced in the supplemental material to NCHD contract (I have spoken to people who drew up these contracts and they say the employers would not write in stuff regarding maternity leave in 2000 because they felt it was already covered in the legislation). Legislation states working hours already, pregnant doctor can ask for assessment as all otehr workers do by utilising the health and safety guidelines, (Few NCHDS do this, I dont know why we are debating that it is a point of fact) The other female workers seem much more inclined to use the protections than pregnant NCHDS, we seem to be venting our feelings about this on to the IMO when the issue is whether a person feels that raising the issue of their pregnancy will affect their career in some way negatively. Having an additional clause (if the employers accede to writing it) into contracts, will that change the doctors perception of effects on their career???And for the record, as I understand it, the provision I mentioned for female pilots is specifically written into Aer Lingus pilots contracts.
No; the NCHD contract may merely "mention" maternity benefits but that merely emphasises its inadequacy; a contract of employment can be 1 page long or 1000 pages long depending on what the parties agree.
You make my point here, both parties have to agree to have it in contracts and the employers in health service dont want to write this stuff in contracts because they feel it is covered in legislation is my understanding from discussions I previously had
How would it look you have an NCHD strike because you have agreed everything (terms/pay/condition./training) but they will not write a clause in contracts about maternity legislation. we would be a laughing stock among all other workers who know what benefits exist and use them. we dont use them, want them written into contracts specifically
I ask you drk how do you force that issue in negotiations when the other side dont want to write it is?? where is your bargaining power (no pun intended)0 -
I never got a one hour lunch break, so as a matter of interest - whats to stop you guys taking your lunch break at the end of the day ? Say you finish at 7pm ( standard 12 hour day in my time) take your lunch break then - mark your time sheet as finishing at 8pm?
I do not know if it is illegal or honest and I am not advocating anything - just wondering.
Sorry traumadoc cant be done that way specifically precluded in the legislation
Is illegal
Is probably dishonest as well saying you are somewhere when you are not
If we are to prevail in this it should not be because we believe that two wrongs make a right0 -
NCHD's have been let down repeatedly in the past An ex IMO present got the training grant and his career suffered as a result.
Not sure what you mean here, NCHDs let down by whom and how did the career of this guy suffer.I know of a pregnant NCHD who went into labour on a 36 hour shifts.
I did 120 hour weeks and was pain for the first 72 hours only. I am ashamed my colleagues are expected to still do the same.
The hours have been reducing though slowly, partly because of increased numbers of docs which is counterproductive for docs as a whole in the long run, becomes a trainee rather than specialist run service.
I got 20 mins max as a luch break and regularly left meals to answer bleeps and calls never to return.I also know of GP trainee's who were castigated for taking maternity leave durine a training scheme and "punished" by getting rotations as far away from home as was possible.
Thats brutal if true, those involved in decision could be referred to medical council, we take these things too easilyI am a GP (emerging) and the IMO has let me down badly. It's easy to say get involved but those that do suffer career wise and family wise . I have no easy answers but we as a group have been shafted over the years and this present proposal to turn a "training " position into a poorly paid "service " one only must be resisted.
I can be PM'ed and will do all I can to help and support.
Rob
Sorry for your troubles, what is an emerging GP, have not heard that term before?
The group as said previously needs to develop a set of balls, people may disagree with me but its not the IMO here, the group need to stand up and say no, the group then use the IMO to achieve what they want
The disconnect from where I see it is that people believe the IMO should be acting on its own, this is industrial relations, by definition its reactive stuff in general.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 11109
Not sure what you mean here, NCHDs let down by whom and how did the career of this guy suffer.
Let down by consultants who expect and insist on unfair work practices, let down buy the HSE and IMo who have failed to sort out the EWTD among lots of other things. Without naming names NCHC reps have had their career progression stalled at best by fighting for the rights and entitlements presently enjoyed, (Ie should be consultants but still NCHD's or abroad as a result)
Also you acknowlage the GP trainee issue was unacceptable thats another incident
[/quote]Sorry for your troubles, what is an emerging GP, have not heard that term before?
The group as said previously needs to develop a set of balls, people may disagree with me but its not the IMO here, the group need to stand up and say no, the group then use the IMO to achieve what they want
The disconnect from where I see it is that people believe the IMO should be acting on its own, this is industrial relations, by definition its reactive stuff in general.[/quote]
The ICGP Network of Emergings GPs project (NEGs) was a development to support GPs in the early years of their career and to provide greater opportunities for establishing GPs to become involved in College affairs.
NEGs is particularly interested in representing GPs who are registrars, locums, sessional, part-time, assistants (GMS or private), new principals and those who have recently completed their training in other countries. In return it is anticipated that the College will be enriched and strengthened by the considerable talents and energy that establishing GPs have to offer.0 -
Let down by consultants who expect and insist on unfair work practices, let down buy the HSE and IMo who have failed to sort out the EWTD among lots of other things. Without naming names NCHC reps have had their career progression stalled at best by fighting for the rights and entitlements presently enjoyed, (Ie should be consultants but still NCHD's or abroad as a result)
Also you acknowlage the GP trainee issue was unacceptable thats another incident
The ICGP Network of Emergings GPs project (NEGs) was a development to support GPs in the early years of their career and to provide greater opportunities for establishing GPs to become involved in College affairs.
NEGs is particularly interested in representing GPs who are registrars, locums, sessional, part-time, assistants (GMS or private), new principals and those who have recently completed their training in other countries. In return it is anticipated that the College will be enriched and strengthened by the considerable talents and energy that establishing GPs have to offer.
Didnt know the term thanks for the info
I think if you look at some of the guys who have been named individuals in IMO over the years, (and I mean 20) many of them are consultants now and still involved in medical type politics,0 -
Advertisement
-
Having an additional clause (if the employers accede to writing it) into contracts, will that change the doctors perception of effects on their career???
It will allow doctors in a vulnerable position (ie. pregnant ones) to have certainty in respect of their rights and not put them in a position where they need to take certain steps which they (rightly or wrongly) believe may cause them to be looked upon in a bad light by their employers and/or consultants.How would it look you have an NCHD strike because you have agreed everything (terms/pay/condition./training) but they will not write a clause in contracts about maternity legislation. we would be a laughing stock among all other workers who know what benefits exist and use them. we dont use them, want them written into contracts specifically
I ask you drk how do you force that issue in negotiations when the other side dont want to write it is?? where is your bargaining power (no pun intended)
The bargaining power is simple and very strong. Here is a rough sketch of how to achieve this tomorrow.
1. Ask the HSE why they object to including a provision in NCHD contracts precluding a pregnant NCHD from working more than, lets say, 12 hours a day given that there is no specific legislative provision to this effect.
2. Inform the HSE that you intend to seek legal advice as to whether pregnant NCHDs who suffer miscarrriages/any other adverse effects may suceed in an action against the HSE and state that the IMO will encourage and assist such NCHDs in these actions.
3. If they refuse, issue a press release to the media stating that the HSE refuses to include such a term, that the HSE rosters pregnant doctors to work 32 hour + shifts which has resulted in miscarriages and is extremely dangerous for the pregnant NCHD and for the public she treats.
4. Call on the Minister for Health to intervene.
Simple.
If you think that would not work, you dont understand the power of the media.
Even in this climate ,that story would be all over the papers and the HSE would be pilloried for it.
But the HSE tell the IMO that they wont include it in the contract and the IMO says 'grand'.
I think that says it all.0
Advertisement