Should healthcare professionals be allowed to strike?

Tree

So, on a more generalised basis than the pharmacy one (DO NOT RAISE THAT ON THIS THREAD), should healthcare professionals be allowed to strike, even if it may or will adversely affect patient care?

This debate is on General Principles. Whether or not you agree with the motive to strike, should they be allowed to take industrial action in a manner permissible to all other sectors (bar the armed forces) in order to maintain/improve their working conditions?





Personally, I think all sectors should have the right to issue strike notice and carry out that action. If no interim measures are put in place by the HSE, I don't believe they should have to cancel their stoppage to provide routine coverage. The healthcare unions will generally negotiate or attempt to negotiate emergency cover with the governing bodies. I dont think healthcare workers should be vilified if their has been sufficient notice and an attempt at emergency cover. I don't think that most out of work/lunchtime protests have as much effect as we would like. Nurses lunchtime stoppages only annoyed motorists out on the adjoining roads, the HSE is a big bully who takes no notice of this kind of carry on.

frodi

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

As a pharmacist I think we should have the right to strike. The only way that it could be tempered would be if there was some form of independent binding arbitration in place to sort out disputes. Otherwise all healthcare professionals would just be a doormat to the HSE.

tallaght01

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

it's very interesting that people don't vote in the negative when the question is phrased differently to the pharmacists one. Not saying that's right or wrong, I just think it's interesting.

bleg

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I voted yes but in an ideal world there should be no need for health professionals (or other essential workers) to strike. There should be correct channels set up for such disputes and the sooner one is set up for pharmacists, and the minister stops hiding behind the Competition Authority, the better.

angeldelight

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I think yes - and I am soon to be a pharmacist. If healthcare professionals aren't allowed strike they would be treated exceedingly badly by the HSE - I think this has been seen across all areas of healthcare in the past. I also think it would lead to the poor inadequacies of the HSE being foisted on even more HCPs than it is at the moment and therefore less and less people wanting to work in healthcare

Stepherunie

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I definitely believe we should also have the right to strike, our profession shouldn't preclude us from using a valid method of dealing with issues when other channels haven't worked.

Like any profession we use all avenues before going out on strike, and there will always be emergency cover for these events. I know in general having spoken to people about it, we're far more likely to do a work to rule than strike because it basically has just as good an effect in the main.

nesf

You should add an option for "Yes they should be able to strike but only in a way that minimises the impact on patients". Most of us patients would support the right to strike once that proviso is attached, i.e. the way nurses and doctors strike follows this idea.

Tree

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

Isnt that everyone's attitude to strikes these days though? As long as it doesnt affect me, strike away.

JuliusCaesar

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I had thought that the right to withdraw one's labour is a human right; turns out it isn't; but you do have a right to join a union(Article 23) - but then Ireland gets around that by saying you don't have a right of representation. Back on topic, I don't think that Health Professionals tend to strike willy-nilly as it goes against our ethos and our whole motivation and fulfillment in doing the work we do. Even when we 'work to rule' you can see just how much extra many people do put into their jobs.

Stepherunie

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

nesf wrote: »

You should add an option for "Yes they should be able to strike but only in a way that minimises the impact on patients". Most of us patients would support the right to strike once that proviso is attached, i.e. the way nurses and doctors strike follows this idea.

Pretty much any healthcare professional, particularly in a hospital setting will ensure that emergency cover is available, it's just what's done.


When a work to rule occurs, it becomes plainly obvious just how much extra work people put in on a day to day basis, to keep things running at the levels we do with the staffing we have. And I think at lot of the time people don't realise that, people are double jobbing, working without breaks and under extreme pressure at tiems just to keep the workload going through in the interests of patient care.

nesf

Tree wrote: »

Isnt that everyone's attitude to strikes these days though? As long as it doesnt affect me, strike away.

Yes of course, but that isn't what motivates my point.

imported_guy

No, they should not be allowed to strike (I am a healthcare professional/student)

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

I had thought that the right to withdraw one's labour is a human right; turns out it isn't; but you do have a right to join a union(Article 23) - but then Ireland gets around that by saying you don't have a right of representation. Back on topic, I don't think that Health Professionals tend to strike willy-nilly as it goes against our ethos and our whole motivation and fulfillment in doing the work we do. Even when we 'work to rule' you can see just how much extra many people do put into their jobs.

with this, it just came to my mind that america is the only country where "persuit of happiness" is guranteed, but thats a double edged sword, its only the persuit thats guarnteed.

nesf

Tree wrote: »

Isnt that everyone's attitude to strikes these days though? As long as it doesnt affect me, strike away.

Actually, I'd like to make a more detailed point on this, this isn't simply people not wanting to be affected, it's based on an ethical duty towards patients. Dismissing it as merely people not wanting to be inconvenienced misses the point. Patients who require daily medication should not be put in a position by a strike where they cannot receive medication. In any other health sector there would never be a strike that put patient's health at risk, emergency cover would almost always be in place.

nesf

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

I had thought that the right to withdraw one's labour is a human right; turns out it isn't; but you do have a right to join a union(Article 23) - but then Ireland gets around that by saying you don't have a right of representation. Back on topic, I don't think that Health Professionals tend to strike willy-nilly as it goes against our ethos and our whole motivation and fulfillment in doing the work we do. Even when we 'work to rule' you can see just how much extra many people do put into their jobs.

Doctors don't tend to strike much, the nursing unions are far more militant and far more likely to strike. I'd agree on the work to rule point, many healthcare professionals go above and beyond the call of duty versus people in other professions.

maxheadroom

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

nesf wrote: »

In any other health sector there would never be a strike that put patient's health at risk, emergency cover would almost always be in place.

Just a note about this. The last time NCHDs went out on strike, the emergency cover was provided by consultants. It is likely that a similar situation would arise if another NCHD strike happened.

My point being, that just because there needs to be some emergency cover, doesn't mean that the group who are striking are responsible for providing it.

Gazza22

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I believe they should be allowed to strike, if it was any other way healthcare professionals would be open to a broad sprectrum of abuse.

nesf

maxheadroom wrote: »

Just a note about this. The last time NCHDs went out on strike, the emergency cover was provided by consultants. It is likely that a similar situation would arise if another NCHD strike happened.

My point being, that just because there needs to be some emergency cover, doesn't mean that the group who are striking are responsible for providing it.

Yeah but it's very different to expect consultants to do emergency cover and expecting the HSE to magic up a replacement pharmacy service.

DrIndy

Yes, they should be allowed to strike (I am not a healthcare professional)

I think the correct question is:

Should healthcare professionals ever NEED to strike?

norrie rugger

No, they should not be allowed to strike (I am a healthcare professional/student)

@ Indy: Should anyone ever NEED to strike

I voted yes but it is a partial yes. I think that a work to rule hits the HSE just as hard, if not worse, than an all out strike. I think that the nurses had the right idea last time. Pity that the INO is completely outmatched by the HSE, in terms of press management and the "Talk to Joe" public

Pharmacists are private business people and can do what they will. I might not agree with them but they have the right to fight for their businesses

People should not be mixing public and private workers though

nesf

DrIndy wrote: »

I think the correct question is:

Should healthcare professionals ever NEED to strike?

Yes they should need to strike since there will be times when the answer to an issue that best suits the profession is different to the answer that best suits the country or taxpayer and politicians and civil servants at least pretend to represent the latter.