Consultants on full pay

femur61

"The HSE estimates that 450 consultants retain this entitlement on an average salary of €230,000.
It calculates that Historic Rest Days will cost over €103m by the time the last eligible consultant retires in 2027."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0907/consultants.html

Honestly, what sort of ejitts of a society are we. We just lay and still lie down while we struggle and some get exorbitant amounts of pay. I cannot find any justifications for this sort of agreement can anybody else?

beeno67

This is a bull**** story. Consultants like many people are allowed a day off if they work bank holidays or if they do not take their full holidays or if they work way in excess of their contracted time. Some consultants were extremely busy working a 1 in 2 rota which means being on call 186 X 24 hours a year. If the other person on the rota with them was on holidays for 2 weeks, the consultant would be on call for 24 hours a day X 14 days.

The governments in the past agreed to this in principal but because they were so busy they couldn't actually take the time off so a decision was made to count all this due time off and give it at the end of the persons working life.

It is a bit like someone in an ordinary job being asked to come in at the weekend to do some extra work and instead of being paid their boss said he would give them 2 days off in the future to make up for it. You would be pretty pissed off if your boss then said things were too busy to give you those days off and you should just forget about it.

Edit: I am not sure where the average salary of 230K comes from. My understanding is the average salary is €170K (before 10% pension levy)

It like a lot of those wind people up stories there is more to it that it first seems.
as far as I can make out the Hse added all the day off they were owed and paid it back in the form of a years salary.

RichardAnd

No facet of the Irish media can be trusted. Look at the mortage forgiveness agenda, are such people worthy of trust? What is interesting though is that whilst most people here do see through the veil of the debt forgiveness stories, a sizable chunk believe stories such at the one the OP has linked without a second thought.

meditraitor

That's dreadful, I'm sure Dr Reilly will have a look at this, maybe even give them a raise......poor consultants

MagicSean

meditraitor wrote: »

That's dreadful, I'm sure Dr Reilly will have a look at this, maybe even give them a raise......poor consultants

Excellent contribution. You've just proven the point of the poster before you.

Nobody said the consultants are poor in fact they are extremely well paid, but that has no bearing on the facts of what is begin discuses, nor dose it mean that some of the revelations re the public services are a not a complete disgrace.

I think it very important for every body to be a bit wary of the media and how its trying to shape a cretin agenda, always analyse what you are being told don't swallow it whole.

femur61

I know, not a fan of reporting by the media but everybody knows doctors and nurses are so well apid here. We don't have the tax intake to support such high wages. People can't seem to do simple math every €3 intake their is a €2 shortfall in orther words we have to borrow €20bn to fund all aspects of PS pay. http://www.iiea.com/blogosphere/public-sector-pay-at-a-glance

meditraitor

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

Excellent contribution. You've just proven the point of the poster before you.

glad to see you got it, a bull reply for a bull**** story........

Consultants have no oversight in this country, they have a free reign with public monies.


http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/55_MedicalConsultantsContract.pdf

The examination found that, while most hospitals had received work schedules from consultants after
their initial appointment to the post, these were not generally subject to systematic review, and in many
cases, remained unaltered for many years even where consultants’ delivery of sessions had changed.
Most hospitals did not request updated schedules from consultants.
There was a general lack of information available in hospitals to enable managers to satisfy themselves
that consultants’ contractual commitments were being discharged. There was a particular difficulty in
establishing exactly how flexible sessions are delivered and what gets done during those sessions.
Although there was a belief among hospital managers that many consultants exceed their contractual
commitment, this cannot be substantiated in the absence of reliable records.
The contract allows consultants to treat private patients while discharging their obligation to the public
hospital. Accordingly, in addition to their salary, consultants receive fees for the treatment of private
patients. While there is universal entitlement to treatment in the public hospital system, there is also a
policy to limit private treatment in these hospitals to a designated level set by the Minister by reference to
bed numbers.
The contract provides that a consultant’s overall proportion of private to public patients should reflect the
ratio of public to private beds as designated by the Minister at individual hospital level. Overall, 20% of
all beds in public hospitals are designated as private beds. In practice, private patient treatment in public Summary of Findings „ 9
hospitals exceeds 20% in all three categories of clinical activity – elective, emergency inpatient and day
case. To the extent that private patients are accommodated and treated in excess of the designated level,
there are implications for equity of access. It also means that less resources than intended are being
applied for the treatment of public patients.
There is considerable tension between the sessional nature of consultants’ work and the freedom to
engage in private practice which could give rise to conflicting professional responsibilities. There has
been no meaningful attempt to monitor the level of consultants’ private practice for its impact on the
fulfilment of the contractual commitment within public hospitals.

the real problem is trying to get these consultants to provide the amount of care they are contractually obliged to do!

meditraitor

Considering the pay scale involved its disgraceful that these consultants are not bothering to at the very minimum provide details of workload and output,

Discharge of Scheduled Commitment
2.23 Of the 51 hospitals who submitted valid responses
ƒ 13 hospitals said that consultants provided information to management on the discharge of their
scheduled fixed and flexible sessions sufficient to establish that they were fulfilling their
contractual commitments.
ƒ Four hospitals maintained that the matter was monitored on the basis of absence notifications by
consultants.
ƒ In three hospitals monthly statistics were used to monitor the delivery of commitments.
ƒ 12 hospitals responded that consultants did not provide this information.
2.24 Of the remaining 19 around half had no formal monitoring mechanism although the majority had
received schedules from consultants. The balance relied on working contacts or monitored the
commitment of some consultants only.
2.25 The IHCA has stated that it is imperative that any claim by hospital management that they do not
monitor consultants’ contractual input should not be interpreted as implying that the appropriate input is
not given or that it is not possible to monitor consultants’ work volumes and time commitment.

Gumbo

femur61 wrote: »

I know, not a fan of reporting by the media but everybody knows doctors and nurses are so well apid here. We don't have the tax intake to support such high wages. People can't seem to do simple math every €3 intake their is a €2 shortfall in orther words we have to borrow €20bn to fund all aspects of PS pay. http://www.iiea.com/blogosphere/public-sector-pay-at-a-glance

i dont think PS is 20Bn, do you :rolleyes:
According to the NRP Report, it was 16BN in 2010.

OMD

meditraitor wrote: »

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

Excellent contribution. You've just proven the point of the poster before you.

glad to see you got it, a bull reply for a bull**** story........

Consultants have no oversight in this country, they have a free reign with public monies.


http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/55_MedicalConsultantsContract.pdf

The examination found that, while most hospitals had received work schedules from consultants after
their initial appointment to the post, these were not generally subject to systematic review, and in many
cases, remained unaltered for many years even where consultants’ delivery of sessions had changed.
Most hospitals did not request updated schedules from consultants.
There was a general lack of information available in hospitals to enable managers to satisfy themselves
that consultants’ contractual commitments were being discharged. There was a particular difficulty in
establishing exactly how flexible sessions are delivered and what gets done during those sessions.
Although there was a belief among hospital managers that many consultants exceed their contractual
commitment, this cannot be substantiated in the absence of reliable records.
The contract allows consultants to treat private patients while discharging their obligation to the public
hospital. Accordingly, in addition to their salary, consultants receive fees for the treatment of private
patients. While there is universal entitlement to treatment in the public hospital system, there is also a
policy to limit private treatment in these hospitals to a designated level set by the Minister by reference to
bed numbers.
The contract provides that a consultant’s overall proportion of private to public patients should reflect the
ratio of public to private beds as designated by the Minister at individual hospital level. Overall, 20% of
all beds in public hospitals are designated as private beds. In practice, private patient treatment in public Summary of Findings „ 9
hospitals exceeds 20% in all three categories of clinical activity – elective, emergency inpatient and day
case. To the extent that private patients are accommodated and treated in excess of the designated level,
there are implications for equity of access. It also means that less resources than intended are being
applied for the treatment of public patients.
There is considerable tension between the sessional nature of consultants’ work and the freedom to
engage in private practice which could give rise to conflicting professional responsibilities. There has
been no meaningful attempt to monitor the level of consultants’ private practice for its impact on the
fulfilment of the contractual commitment within public hospitals.

the real problem is trying to get these consultants to provide the amount of care they are contractually obliged to do!

Again this is not true. Most hospital consultants are contracted to work 35 hours a week. I personally know 4or 5 consultants all of whom work way in excess of these hours. This is backed up by the article above where Hospital Managers had confirmed that although they didn't have figures they believed that many consultants worked far in excess of their contracted hours

You say consultants do not provide details of the work done. This is not exactly true. Consultants are not asked for this information which is a very different story.

ardmacha

People can't seem to do simple math every €3 intake their is a €2 shortfall

Well it is true that people cannot do simple math and thank you for posting a "calculation" that show this.

However, the debate would be better assisted by correct math.

the real problem is trying to get these consultants to provide the amount of care they are contractually obliged to do!

While this may arise with some people, the greater problem is ensuring that consultants are able to do the amount of work they are contractually obliged to do rather than being held up for lack of beds, nurses, x-rays or whatever.

irishh_bob

femur61 wrote: »

"The HSE estimates that 450 consultants retain this entitlement on an average salary of €230,000.
It calculates that Historic Rest Days will cost over €103m by the time the last eligible consultant retires in 2027."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0907/consultants.html

Honestly, what sort of ejitts of a society are we. We just lay and still lie down while we struggle and some get exorbitant amounts of pay. I cannot find any justifications for this sort of agreement can anybody else?

time was only priests , doctors , the school principal and perhaps the local guard , had any real standing in the local community , only the docs have held onto thier elite status , a sheltered clique who have gotten far too much respect down the years from goverment and citizens alike

bamboozle

between this deal and the extra 14 weeks holidays staff at FAS were allowed take on full pay in their last year before retirement (to help them get used to retirement) Bertie & his ilk really signed away the future of this country.
Hard job now is for present govt to stand up to these groups and their unions.

if its contractual, why not just offer them 75k tax free today to renage this clause in their contracts. that would cost about 33m rather than 103m.

irishh_bob

OMD wrote: »

Again this is not true. Most hospital consultants are contracted to work 35 hours a week. I personally know 4or 5 consultants all of whom work way in excess of these hours. This is backed up by the article above where Hospital Managers had confirmed that although they didn't have figures they believed that many consultants worked far in excess of their contracted hours

You say consultants do not provide details of the work done. This is not exactly true. Consultants are not asked for this information which is a very different story.

il start feeling sorry for overworked consultants ( and GP,S ) when they stop objecting to numbers being increased , the restrictions on numbers practicising both increases salarys for consultants ( and GP,s ) and results in poorer performance and ultimatley the patient suffers

Crazy Horse 6

Shocking but hardly a surprise

OMD

irishh_bob wrote: »

OMD wrote: »

Again this is not true. Most hospital consultants are contracted to work 35 hours a week. I personally know 4or 5 consultants all of whom work way in excess of these hours. This is backed up by the article above where Hospital Managers had confirmed that although they didn't have figures they believed that many consultants worked far in excess of their contracted hours

You say consultants do not provide details of the work done. This is not exactly true. Consultants are not asked for this information which is a very different story.

il start feeling sorry for overworked consultants ( and GP,S ) when they stop objecting to numbers being increased , the restrictions on numbers practicising both increases salarys for consultants ( and GP,s ) and results in poorer performance and ultimatley the patient suffers

Consultants constantly complain that their is not enough consultants employed in Iteland. The consultant bodies are totally against restricting numbers and regards salaries consultants have had a pay rise abandoned and have cuts of 25% with hardly a squeak from them. I know they are well paid but your post is totally misinformed

Caoimhín

beeno67 wrote: »

This is a bull**** story. Consultants like many people are allowed a day off if they work bank holidays or if they do not take their full holidays or if they work way in excess of their contracted time. Some consultants were extremely busy working a 1 in 2 rota which means being on call 186 X 24 hours a year. If the other person on the rota with them was on holidays for 2 weeks, the consultant would be on call for 24 hours a day X 14 days.

Rubbish. Of course they are legally entitle to it but that pay is about the same as a private sector executive. I know many self employed an senior executives who work in excess of 80 hours a week an never take a bank holiday.

meditraitor

OMD wrote: »

Again this is not true. Most hospital consultants are contracted to work 35 hours a week. I personally know 4or 5 consultants all of whom work way in excess of these hours. This is backed up by the article above where Hospital Managers had confirmed that although they didn't have figures they believed that many consultants worked far in excess of their contracted hours

You say consultants do not provide details of the work done. This is not exactly true. Consultants are not asked for this information which is a very different story.

this is your opinion and not backed up by anything other than hearsay.

I don't say anything, the comptroller and auditor general is saying this in the report I linked to.....

The report says,

There is a fundamental difference of interpretation between the HSE and the consultants about the
number of hours to be worked under the contract. The HSE claims that 39 hours per week, inclusive of
six hours of unschedulable activities, is provided for, while the consultants contend that a 33 hour week is
what was contracted for. It is disappointing that this matter has not been resolved in the ten years since
the contract was signed in 1997.


The 33 scheduled weekly hours are divided into 11 three hour sessions, comprising 7-8 clinical sessions


and 3-4 flexible sessions covering training, research and management activities.

There are also
provisions for on-call availability. The contract envisaged the production of schedules which would be
agreed with hospital managements in order to show how the service commitment would be delivered by
each consultant.

Basically they have 21-24 working hours(face top face) and the rest is for other activities like I would hazard a guess, admin...

at their pay grade the minimum requirement would be a log of work and the fact you/they dont think they should provide this is part of the problem.

OMD

meditraitor wrote: »

this is your opinion and not backed up by anything other than hearsay.

I don't say anything, the comptroller and auditor general is saying this in the report I linked to.....

The report says,

There is a fundamental difference of interpretation between the HSE and the consultants about the
number of hours to be worked under the contract. The HSE claims that 39 hours per week, inclusive of
six hours of unschedulable activities, is provided for, while the consultants contend that a 33 hour week is
what was contracted for. It is disappointing that this matter has not been resolved in the ten years since
the contract was signed in 1997.


The 33 scheduled weekly hours are divided into 11 three hour sessions, comprising 7-8 clinical sessions


and 3-4 flexible sessions covering training, research and management activities.

There are also
provisions for on-call availability. The contract envisaged the production of schedules which would be
agreed with hospital managements in order to show how the service commitment would be delivered by
each consultant.

Basically they have 21-24 working hours(face top face) and the rest is for other activities like I would hazard a guess, admin...

at their pay grade the minimum requirement would be a log of work and the fact you/they dont think they should provide this is part of the problem.

You are getting yourself all mixed up here and are comparing 2 different contracts, the 1997 one and one signed in about 2006. As part of the 2006 contract consultants provide their hours worked. This was not asked for as part of the 1997 contract (as confirmed by your first post). It should be noted that the new contract offered large pay rises for conforming to the new contract. The pay rises were not given and pay cuts were imposed instead. Despite this, consultants have kept to the terms of this contract which includes recording their activity.

mossyc123

bamboozle wrote: »

between this deal and the extra 14 weeks holidays staff at FAS were allowed take on full pay in their last year before retirement (to help them get used to retirement)

You can't really compare the cosseted 9-5ers in FAS or any other State Agency to Consultants for a number of reasons.

Consultants spend about 5-6 years in Medical School, followed by 20+ years working like absolute dogs in Hospitals up and down the country.

They work nights, weekends and unlike Nurses they have to be back in on Monday morning for another full week with maybe a few nights staying in the hospital thrown in for good measure.

During this period as NCHD's (Junior Doctors), they don't get paid all they are entitled to, don't get full amounts of overtime they are due, have to deal with woeful admin staff who don't give a damn whether or not they are paid what they are due, are represented by a piss-poor union who haven't the power to stand up for them while the Nurses, Porters and Admin staff get everything that's coming to them.

They move around the Country to different hospitals every few years, never having more then a year or two contract, have to reapply for new posts and positions, constantly being examined and improving themselves.

It's about as far from a "handy number" that you can get.

It is arguably the most difficult job in the Country.

The 1-year paid leave is but a fraction of what they are actually owed.

In my opinion, the "double-jobbing" element of it is not acceptable and this should be revised.

If they want to claim the final year unpaid they should be fully retired, and its arguable given the state the Public Finances are in they should forego it altogether.

But they should be the last in the queue of Public Servants giving up entitlements as they have put in a level of time and effort to their jobs comparable to no other workers.

ChRoMe

OMD wrote: »

It should be noted that the new contract offered large pay rises for conforming to the new contract. The pay rises were not given and pay cuts were imposed instead. Despite this, consultants have kept to the terms of this contract which includes recording their activity.

So they would get a pay rise if the didnt break the contract O_o, heh in another business you would be out of a job.

"Despite this", its despite nothing, the consultants know they have a good thing going even with the cuts.

OMD

ChRoMe wrote: »

So they would get a pay rise if the didnt break the contract O_o, heh in another business you would be out of a job.
.

Don't be silly. They didn't break the contract and they didn't get the pay rise. The HSE however did break the terms of the contract.

ChRoMe

OMD wrote: »

The HSE however did break the terms of the contract.

Yet the consultants continue to work on.... wonder why that is.

mossyc123

irishh_bob wrote: »

a sheltered clique who have gotten far too much respect down the years from goverment and citizens alike

Oh, give me a break!

Have you any idea the amount of unpaid work these people have put in over the years.

A proper society rewards talent and hard work.

Consultant Doctors have exhibited these qualities throughout their working lives to rise to the top of a very demanding profession.

They are about as far from sheltered as you can get.

ChRoMe

mossyc123 wrote: »

Oh, give me a break!

Have you any idea the amount of unpaid work these people have put in over the years.

A proper society rewards talent and hard work.

Consultant Doctors have exhibited these qualities throughout their working lives to rise to the top of a very demanding profession.

They are about as far from sheltered as you can get.

Thats why they can earn north of 150k while the Irish health system is in a mess.

Nice work if you can get it!

alchemist33

ChRoMe wrote: »

Yet the consultants continue to work on.... wonder why that is.

So you'd support them if they went on strike? That's good to know.

OMD

ChRoMe wrote: »

Thats why they can earn north of 150k and not have to account for their hours while the Irish health system is in a mess.

Nice work if you can get it!

It has been explained already that this is not the case. Why are you pretending it is?

ChRoMe

I misread, the post has been updated. The point still stands even without that piece

ChRoMe

alchemist33 wrote: »

So you'd support them if they went on strike? That's good to know.

Eh no.

mossyc123

ChRoMe wrote: »

Nice work if you can get it!

They don't just "get it" handed to them... they work like dogs to get to where they are!

I think the problem is that because they were treated so poorly as Junior Doctors when they get to Consultant level with a much stronger Union behind them they have the upper hand on the HSE and try, like all PS workers, to get the best possible Pay & Conditions.

There is too much of a disconnect between NCHD and Consultant level and I think the Pay levels and degree of job stability should be more gradual then it is at the moment.

ChRoMe

mossyc123 wrote: »

They don't just "get it" handed to them... they work like dogs to get to where they are!

Dont we all, why are consultants special in that regard that you have to keep mentioning how hard they work?

OMD

mossyc123 wrote: »

There is too much of a disconnect between NCHD and Consultant level and I think the Pay levels and degree of job stability should be more gradual then it is at the moment.

this used to be the case but not anymore as NCHDS are better paid for overtime and weekends than they used to be. It is possible (though not the norm) for an NCHD to take a pay cut when becoming a consultant when total hours worked are taken into account.

mossyc123

ChRoMe wrote: »

Dont we all, why are consultants special in that regard that you have to keep mentioning how hard they work?

Was responding to the general comparison that the OP and indeed RTE tried to make between FAS workers and Consultants.

The 2 situations are incomparable.

OMD

ChRoMe wrote: »

mossyc123 wrote: »

They don't just "get it" handed to them... they work like dogs to get to where they are!

Dont we all, why are consultants special in that regard that you have to keep mentioning how hard they work?

To become a consultant you must first get a leaving Cert above the 99th centile.
Then you spend 6 years in college and realistically (but not always) get honours in your final exams. Which basically you have to be in the top 20% of graduates.
Then by interview you have to try to get on an SHO training scheme which will hopefully get you a 2 year job working about 70 hours a week. During your spare time you have to study for and get 2 exams called part 1 & 2 membership exams. Again these exams have a failure rate of about 80% but you can trait them a number of times
After this you then apply for reg positions where again you will work 70+ hours a week. Now in most cases you will have to do extra exams again with high fail rates.
When this is done you will usually be expected to work abroad and get experience in a foreign health system.
Then you will be expected to do large amounts of research and these days a PhD is pretty much required.
Then you can start looking fio jobs. you must remember though at this stage despite having gone through all this the odds are you will not get a job in Ireland and have to work elsewhere.

ChRoMe

OMD wrote: »

To become a consultant you must first get a leaving Cert above the 99th centile.
Then you spend 6 years in college and realistically (but not always) get honours in your final exams. Which basically you have to be in the top 20% of graduates.
Then by interview you have to try to get on an SHO training scheme which will hopefully get you a 2 year job working about 70 hours a week. During your spare time you have to study for and get 2 exams called part 1 & 2 membership exams. Again these exams have a failure rate of about 80% but you can trait them a number of times
After this you then apply for reg positions where again you will work 70+ hours a week. Now in most cases you will have to do extra exams again with high fail rates.
When this is done you will usually be expected to work abroad and get experience in a foreign health system.
Then you will be expected to do large amounts of research and these days a PhD is pretty much required.
Then you can start looking fio jobs. you must remember though at this stage despite having gone through all this the odds are you will not get a job in Ireland and have to work elsewhere.

What about all the people who work more than 70 hours a week for less than 150k a year? Consultants, as much as you would like to think, are not some special breed. In fact there is a huge amount of people who work as long for a lot lot lot less.

mossyc123

OMD wrote: »

this used to be the case but not anymore as NCHDS are better paid for overtime and weekends than they used to be.

I believe it used to be the norm (up until a court case was taken during the '90's (?)) that NCHD's didn't generally get what they were owed.

With the squeeze on Public Finances over the last few years, I have personal experience of NCHD's whose have had to fight tooth and nail to get what they are owed from Admin Depts in SOME hospitals.

Others that are implementing the working-time directive and have better organised payroll and rostering systems are paying out what is owed without any hassle.

is possible (though not the norm) for an NCHD to take a pay cut when becoming a consultant when total hours worked are taken into account.

In terms of job stability though, it still is the promised land for most NCHD's.

scholar007

OMD wrote: »

To become a consultant you must first get a leaving Cert above the 99th centile.
Then you spend 6 years in college and realistically (but not always) get honours in your final exams. Which basically you have to be in the top 20% of graduates.
Then by interview you have to try to get on an SHO training scheme which will hopefully get you a 2 year job working about 70 hours a week. During your spare time you have to study for and get 2 exams called part 1 & 2 membership exams. Again these exams have a failure rate of about 80% but you can trait them a number of times
After this you then apply for reg positions where again you will work 70+ hours a week. Now in most cases you will have to do extra exams again with high fail rates.
When this is done you will usually be expected to work abroad and get experience in a foreign health system.
Then you will be expected to do large amounts of research and these days a PhD is pretty much required.
Then you can start looking fio jobs. you must remember though at this stage despite having gone through all this the odds are you will not get a job in Ireland and have to work elsewhere.

Ah c'mon - Seriously! Consultants earn big bucks and I concede some are worth every penny or cent. They earn the big bucks for being consultants and are adequately rewarded throughout their working life. Just look at the big houses and jags and mercs and masseratis in any hospital consultants reserved carpark.

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for one section of the work force who are already highly paid getting the perk, yes the perk of a years paid leave before they retire. It's no wonder the health service in this country is in the shíte! Just what genius politician or health board flunkey agreed to this daft perk?

swordofislam

OMD wrote: »

To become a consultant you must first get a leaving Cert above the 99th centile.

Retiring consultants did not need this.

OMD wrote: »

Then you spend 6 years in college and realistically (but not always) get honours in your final exams. Which basically you have to be in the top 20% of graduates.

So graduates in medicine below this range will not get jobs? Pull the other one.

OMD wrote: »

Then you will be expected to do large amounts of research and these days a PhD is pretty much required.

Very few retiring consultants have Phds

swordofislam

scholar007 wrote: »

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for one section of the work force who are already highly paid getting the perk, yes the perk of a years paid leave before they retire.

Consultants are aware of these perks and deliberately structure their hours in order to avail of them. When those at the top of the health service game the system in this way everybody else will too.

mossyc123

ChRoMe wrote: »

What about all the people who work more than 70 hours a week for less than 150k a year? Consultants, as much as you would like to think, are not some special breed. In fact there is a huge amount of people who work as long for a lot lot lot less.

Hard work AND Talent is what gets you reward.

alchemist33

ChRoMe wrote: »

What about all the people who work more than 70 hours a week for less than 150k a year? Consultants, as much as you would like to think, are not some special breed. In fact there is a huge amount of people who work as long for a lot lot lot less.

I see you quoted thw whole post and then ignored most of it. Do you have any conception of the levels of stress and responsibility a doctor (or other frontline health professional) has? If you think you're not paid enough, fine. Make a case for more money for your job but going on about people who have worked their way to the top getting paid more just smacks of begrudgery.

ChRoMe

mossyc123 wrote: »

Hard work AND Talent is what gets you reward.

Right so poor people are only poor because they are lazy and dumb?

ChRoMe

alchemist33 wrote: »

I see you quoted thw whole post and then ignored most of it. Do you have any conception of the levels of stress and responsibility a doctor (or other frontline health professional) has? If you think you're not paid enough, fine. Make a case for more money for your job but going on about people who have worked their way to the top getting paid more just smacks of begrudgery.

If Ireland had a decent health care system, I'd be staying quiet.

I have no issue with people getting paid a lot if they demonstrate the value they add.

Zubeneschamali

scholar007 wrote: »

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for one section of the work force who are already highly paid getting the perk, yes the perk of a years paid leave before they retire.

Do you know where this perk came from?

When consultants moved contracts, some had up to 4 years of accumulated time in lieu for working every weekend for 10 years (for which they were not offered pay).

This "year off" is only a fraction of what some were owed at the time.

mossyc123

scholar007 wrote: »

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for one section of the work force who are already highly paid getting the perk, yes the perk of a years paid leave before they retire. It's no wonder the health service in this country is in the shíte! Just what genius politician or health board flunkey agreed to this daft perk?

They should forego it IMO, considering the state of the Public Finances and the fact that they would hardly be impoverished without it.

But, we can't ignore the fact that they are owed it.

Not by some easy PS Contractual BS but by the fact that for years as NCHD's they simply weren't paid for the hours they worked.

Things have changed for the better and MOST NCHD's are getting correctly paid these days, but back in the 80's and 90's they simply weren't.

This issue is a Million miles away from FAS and other such cases.

What angered me was the "tut-tutting" on RTE last night as the ultimate cosy Semi-Staters had a go at the country's hardest working Public Servants.

ChRoMe

mossyc123 wrote: »

had a go at the country's hardest working Public Servants.

Yet still cant provide a service of any decent quality. How come if the consultants are being so hard done by they are still working in the HSE?

Christ, I live in London and a consultant with 20 years experience makes 100k and thats operating in one of the greatest public health systems in europe.

mossyc123

ChRoMe wrote: »

If Ireland had a decent health care system, I'd be staying quiet.

I have no issue with people getting paid a lot if they demonstrate the value they add.

Terrible Admin, layers and layers of wasteful management, Unions that are too powerful.

Waste everywhere.

Porters on triple-time for watching Christmas day TV while the Junior Doctor is on Double-Time for saving lives.

I wouldn't blame the Consultants for any of that.

ChRoMe

mossyc123 wrote: »

Terrible Admin, layers and layers of wasteful management, Unions that are too powerful.

Waste everywhere.

Porters on triple-time for watching Christmas day TV while the Junior Doctor is on Double-Time for saving lives.

I wouldn't blame the Consultants for any of that.

You are a great person for skipping the questions that show the true colours.

Yeah a porters triple pay on christmas day is what is bringing the system down :rolleyes:

The reason the consultants dont **** off from the HSE is because they know how good they have it.

mossyc123

ChRoMe wrote: »

Yet still cant provide a service of any decent quality. How come if the consultants are being so hard done by they are still working in the HSE?

Christ, I live in London and a consultant with 20 years experience makes 100k and thats operating in one of the greatest public health systems in europe.

I never said the Consultants were "hard done by".

I said they weren't properly paid during their NCHD years.

How much does the Nurse earn in the NHS?

How much does the Hospital Porter earn in the NHS?

Our Doctors are known as very hard-working, experienced professional worldwide.

The fault of the system can't be put on them.

They are there to save lives, not administrate.