€116,000 Consultant positions being snubbed

steddyeddy

wolfpawnat wrote: »

I myself left UCC science after two months, only because I realised I had the points for nursing in UCD. But it was one hell of a shock, huge drop out and fail rates in general.

Glad you got what you wanted. Yes its the same in ucd. Only about 20% of science students should be there really. For example one biochemistry undergraduate has chats with other students about epigenetics and DNA methylation and the nature of catholic water and some if the people hadn't a clue what he was talking about one D4 head called him a nerd. People like him have an interest in the course but people like her shouldn't be there. I can always tell apart who will make it and who won't. That's why I get annoyed at people who are doing science or medicine but havent got that passion for the subject.

April O Neill

MMAGirl wrote: »

Experience is all.
It runs at a particularly high rate in your posts too.

So, you don't know. As I thought.

wolfpawnat

steddyeddy wrote: »

Glad you got what you wanted. Yes its the same in ucd. Only about 20% of science students should be there really. For example one biochemistry undergraduate has chats with other students about epigenetics and DAN methylation and thenature of catholic water and some if the people hadn't a clue what he was talking about one D4 head called him a nerd. People like him have a n interest in the course but people like her shouldn't be there. I can always tell apart who will make it and who won't. That's why I get annoyed at people who are doing science or medicine but havent got that passion for the subject.

I went into the nursing, third week in we were learning how to wash people (something nurses are required to do) a girl stormed out saying it was not her life ambition to wash dirty old men. Nurse, doctors, vets, and scientists need to have a grá for their work, so many are there for the wrong reasons.

steddyeddy

wolfpawnat wrote: »

I went into the nursing, third week in we were learning how to wash people (something nurses are required to do) a girl stormed out saying it was not her life ambition to wash dirty old men. Nurse, doctors, vets, and scientists need to have a grá for their work, so many are there for the wrong reasons.

Well its a tough job and I wouldn't be able for it that's for sure. I wish there was a way to weed the ill suited out. The current undergraduates where complain about biochemistry being hard. No sh1t its hard but what can we do? Dumb it down maybe?

gubbie

Montroseee wrote: »

First of all I bear no resent towards people in the medical profession, I know several and they have put everything into their academic performance from a very young age. Despite this, I found the the contents of this article shocking.

I know they have received significant cuts in pay but so has literally everyone else - I know pharmacists on (no exaggeration) half the pay they were 6 or 7 years ago. Putting newly recruited members on lower contracts than existing has been common in the private sector for years. Seemingly consultants view themselves untouchable.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/116000-hospital-jobs-go-unfilled-29163747.html

They're not snubbing for the money. From the doctors that I personally know, they don't work in the hse because life is better abroad then it is here and not because of the pay.

Grayson

gubbie wrote: »

They're not snubbing for the money. From the doctors that I personally know, they don't work in the hse because life is better abroad then it is here and not because of the pay.

To be fair, after I get my masters next year I'm fecking off. This is a depressing country.

Cian92

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well its a tough job and I wouldn't be able for it that's for sure. I wish there was a way to weed the ill suited out. The current undergraduates where complain about biochemistry being hard. No sh1t its hard but what can we do? Dumb it down maybe?

The one thing about science and biochem in particular, the points are so low lots of those who get into biochem in UCC are never gonna stick it out. Maybe if there were less places the points would go up and there wouldn't be a large drop out rate.

Or if the colleges could attract a better calibre of student for the sciences. I'm not sure that would work all that well, when they can get better paying jobs from other degree courses that require less work and are even seen as more prestigious. That prestige isn't attached to science courses, except of course medicine.

dlouth15

wolfpawnat wrote: »

European Working Hours Directive states in Black and White legally what junior doctors SHOULD be working, reality is a far cry from it sadly. 30 something hour shifts, no sleep, 2 food breaks, that would be deemed harsh working conditions in sweatshops I would imagine.

What I'm trying to find out is whether the long hours are an imposition by the HSE management or whether they are part of a sort of medical culture - a rite of passage so to speak.

It seems to me that a large part of the problem is that senior medical professionals ensure that life is hard for junior ones and newer entrants to the profession and that the HSE being weak has been unable to stand up to senior doctors in this regard.

There are documents on the HSE site outlining to management how the working time directive needs to be implemented in practice for example. Other staff in the HSE don't seem to have the same problems or at least not to the same extent.

dlouth15

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I wonder how much experience of the real world (in relation to working) you have if you think contracted hours are something set in stone because they bloody well aren't.

No but they provide protection to the worker and as far as I can see the HSE consultant contract is good in this regard. In the private sector it is quite common to have working hours stated but in addition to that, a clause whereby the employee is expected in the contract to work extra hours on top of that "from time to time". The non-specific nature of "from time to time" means that a lot of pressure can legally be put on the employee who has little redress in the courts.

That is why the starting point has to be the contract.

awec

It's not as if consultant's being highly paid is a secret.

All those moaning about it, why did you not train for a medical profession yourself? Sure it's only a few years of incredibly difficult college (if you perform well enough at school to get into a medicine course) and then years of on-the-job training dealing with keeping people alive.

Much easier to sit on here begrudging and whinging than actually doing something about it for yourself.

If you want the best doctor's in Ireland you have to offer competitive salaries, rather than pulling some arbitrary figure out of thin air and declaring that "that's enough for anyone".

April O Neill

awec wrote: »

Sure it's only a few years of incredibly difficult college

Once you get in, it's not particularly difficult. There's a large volume of work but say the science you need to know isn't massively in-depth. It would be no more intellectually difficult than a great many college courses.

baalthor

dlouth15 wrote: »

What I'm trying to find out is whether the long hours are an imposition by the HSE management or whether they are part of a sort of medical culture - a rite of passage so to speak.
.

Maybe the amount of work to be done is greater than the amount of contracted labour hours available?

dissed doc

dlouth15 wrote: »

This seems fairly reasonable for a salary in line with countries in Northern Europe.

It certainly does, but the HSE has for years broken the contract completely on their part. Whatever is said about hours or working practices is completely ignored. You can easily be on call as a consulotant for 72hrs in a row, and paid nothing for it except being tied by umbilical cord to the hospital. The contract also obliges consultants to do whatever the employer decides is necessary any day of the week.

Likewise Ireland obeys the European Working Time Directive right? Except it doesn't with doctors. And the contract says maximum 24hrs in a row, except people are still working 36hrs+ in a row.

Grayson

dissed doc wrote: »

Likewise Ireland obeys the European Working Time Directive right? Except it doesn't with doctors. And the contract says maximum 24hrs in a row, except people are still working 36hrs+ in a row.

It's the same in the UK too isn't it? the only people exempt are Police, the army and junior doctors.

Too

This is not a "woe is me" post but simply stating some facts.

116,000 with no increments.
- croke park 2 = 108000
-10% pension levy = 98000
- 50% paye, prsi, usi, etc = 49000
Approx 4000 per month.

Quite simply does not compare with comparable grades in other western countries. Many of these have different hierarchical systems and the term consultant or attending or senior is often not interchangeable.

6 years med school
At least 10 years as NCHD working > 70 a week (my longest week was 144 hours and my longest shift 109 hours)
7 third level qualifications.
A broken system constantly starved of resources and full of beurocratic "that's not my job" -ers.
Turning into work no matter what (I once took a sick day as an intern) because I won't be replaced if I don't. Going in on at least every second day off so that the patients are seen by somebody who a) knows what's wrong with them and b) has a clue what he/she is doing.
An employer who will take every opportunity to screw you. In many hospitals in this country you are openly told that you will not be paid for unrostered hours because they know that you will stay.
A job where you are only one human error from ending your career - medical council complaint, hepatitis /HIV infection. Taking responsibility if your decision/action/inaction directly affects your patients health or life.

I love my job. The good days and the bad. The money is important but so is job satisfaction and quality of life. I have made huge sacrifices as have my wife and kids to progress and continue in this career. Is it unreasonable to expect a degree of financial comfort in return?

caroline1111

April O Neill wrote: »

Once you get in, it's not particularly difficult. There's a large volume of work but say the science you need to know isn't massively in-depth. It would be no more intellectually difficult than a great many college courses.

What made you form this opinion? It would be more difficult than the majority of courses... Obviously certain courses with say a lot of maths or physics or something would be more complex but they have less to cover... People in medicine typically have a much higher work ethic than the average student also and the harder you work at something the easier it becomes..

And people saying about how medicine should be graduate route only. I don't see how this would offer much benefit as the same people will probably be the ones doing medicine whether is undergrad or grad, they will just be older on graduating and so less likely to become surgeons/consultants...

And it's important for people to remember than 'new entrant consultants' have probably been training and working for around 15 years by that stage and not to thinks doctors are earning that sort of money coming out of college..

wolfpawnat

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well its a tough job and I wouldn't be able for it that's for sure. I wish there was a way to weed the ill suited out. The current undergraduates where complain about biochemistry being hard. No sh1t its hard but what can we do? Dumb it down maybe?

You can't really dumb certain things down can you. I think secondary school needs to be preparing people for college more. I noticed when I did my LC and then when I did it again, it seemed to have been dumbed down. We need people smarter and ready for college, not worrying about getting them higher points by lessening the course content! Then again increased classroom sizes are a lot to blame too. We have so many unemployed qualified people in so many fields, smaller classrooms means more time for each student to help them along, more skilled and ready for world work force, employ more doctors to ensure the European Working Hours Directive was upheld, meaning more refreshed doctors and better decisions made, etc would be ideal, but that means spending money. Meaning a better country in general. Annoying really that money is really the root of everything!

john.han

Grayson wrote: »

It's the same in the UK too isn't it? the only people exempt are Police, the army and junior doctors.

Junio doctors are not exempt, they just continue to break the law.

wolfpawnat

dlouth15 wrote: »

What I'm trying to find out is whether the long hours are an imposition by the HSE management or whether they are part of a sort of medical culture - a rite of passage so to speak.

It seems to me that a large part of the problem is that senior medical professionals ensure that life is hard for junior ones and newer entrants to the profession and that the HSE being weak has been unable to stand up to senior doctors in this regard.

There are documents on the HSE site outlining to management how the working time directive needs to be implemented in practice for example. Other staff in the HSE don't seem to have the same problems or at least not to the same extent.

Funny enough you are not the first person to say that to me, that the consultants feel that since they had it hard, they want to make it harder for the younger doctors. As you said, a rite of passage. My partner and his friends from medicine were saying that too.

Some people in the HSE are worked like dogs, then there are others that have the life of riley. Seriously, some of them don't do near a 40 hour week, others do 40 hours shifts. I wonder about that service to be frank.

April O Neill

caroline1111 wrote: »

What made you form this opinion? It would be more difficult than the majority of courses.

Two things.

1) Looking at final year medicine exam papers and being surprised at how easy the sciency stuff was.

2) My friend who is studying graduate medicine being told she would never need to know here primary degree subject (a science related to medicine) as in depth as she knows it when using it in medicine.

wolfpawnat

April O Neill wrote: »

Two things.

1) Looking at final year medicine exam papers and being surprised at how easy the sciency stuff was.

2) My friend who is studying graduate medicine being told she would never need to know here primary degree subject (a science related to medicine) as in depth as she knows it when using it in medicine.

The course itself seems to be more anatomy, physiology and pharmacology based and getting practice and then specialising into the sciences after you do your intern year if that what tickles your particular fancy. 5 years is not that long to shove everything into. Science is not the main part of medicine, but learning what drugs are needed to treat each patient and learning every little muscle in the body, its function and what it is connected to and where is not an easy task either.

The last year is more based on hospital experience rather than book based academics which is crammed into the first 3 and a bit years.

caroline1111

April O Neill wrote: »

Two things.

1) Looking at final year medicine exam papers and being surprised at how easy the sciency stuff was.

2) My friend who is studying graduate medicine being told she would never need to know here primary degree subject (a science related to medicine) as in depth as she knows it when using it in medicine.

I haven't seen any final med papers yet but as far as I know it's a lot more clinically based and relevant to the job rather than focusing on the basic sciences. Perhaps if you saw a 2nd or 3rd year exam it would seem a lot more scientific.
Of course you do not need to know the content of every branch of science degree in medicine - a lot of it isn't relevant to the job though when I was in 1st med we were in with 3rd year physiology students and had to do the same exam as them with extra questions for us, in 2nd year I was in with 3rd year neuroscientists, etc..

Annabella1

It needs to be said that Junior Doctors are true heroes of the Health System continually working illegal long hours.They also consistently take the lowest sick leave in the Health Service

sock puppet

Grayson wrote: »

It's the same in the UK too isn't it? the only people exempt are Police, the army and junior doctors.

I'm pretty sure in the UK anyone can be exempt if they agree to it. In Ireland people just ignore it.

awec

April O Neill wrote: »

Once you get in, it's not particularly difficult. There's a large volume of work but say the science you need to know isn't massively in-depth. It would be no more intellectually difficult than a great many college courses.

Strange.

I have a Computer Science degree and I lived with a dentistry student during college (they do the same course as medicine students for the first year) and I can tell you now his course was vastly more difficult than anything I was doing.

And that's along with longer hours (I had a 15 hour week, he was in 9-5 Monday to Friday).

Do I begrudge any consultant getting 116 grand a year? Nope.

I'd love to earn that amount myself, hopefully I will some day. I aspire to get there, rather than aspiring to drag them down to my level.

April O Neill

wolfpawnat wrote: »

The course itself seems to be more anatomy, physiology and pharmacology based and getting practice and then specialising into the sciences after you do your intern year if that what tickles your particular fancy. 5 years is not that long to shove everything into. Science is not the main part of medicine, but learning what drugs are needed to treat each patient and learning every little muscle in the body, its function and what it is connected to and where is not an easy task either.

The last year is more based on hospital experience rather than book based academics which is crammed into the first 3 and a bit years.

caroline1111 wrote: »

I haven't seen any final med papers yet but as far as I know it's a lot more clinically based and relevant to the job rather than focusing on the basic sciences. Perhaps if you saw a 2nd or 3rd year exam it would seem a lot more scientific.
Of course you do not need to know the content of every branch of science degree in medicine - a lot of it isn't relevant to the job though when I was in 1st med we were in with 3rd year physiology students and had to do the same exam as them with extra questions for us, in 2nd year I was in with 3rd year neuroscientists, etc..

I'm not saying there's aren't tough parts, but I think it's a misconception that it's a particularly difficult degree.

April O Neill

awec wrote: »

Strange.

I have a Computer Science degree and I lived with a dentistry student during college (they do the same course as medicine students for the first year) and I can tell you now his course was vastly more difficult than anything I was doing.

You lived with people doing different courses to you and because of that know how difficult those courses were? Strange indeed!

awec

April O Neill wrote: »

I'm not saying there's aren't tough parts, but I think it's a misconception that it's a particularly difficult degree.

It just has very high entry requirements for the craic does it?

awec

April O Neill wrote: »

You lived with people doing different courses to you and because of that know how difficult those courses were? Strange indeed!

Well, it's as valid a comparison as yours. :pac:

steddyeddy

awec wrote: »

It just has very high entry requirements for the craic does it?

It's just based on demand not difficulty.