VinLieger wrote: » Are you suggesting because we arent all experts in how to run the HSE we shouldnt have an opinion on it or be able to voice that opinion on a discussion forum?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Here's one way to improve it - let's leave the improving to people who know what they are talking about.
Sam Russell wrote: » If I get bad service from an enterprise, I have a very good understanding of how they might improve their offering. Many users of the services provided by the HSE have a very good idea how the services could be improved. One does not need to be an expert to see the major failings of the HSE. No-one should be left on a trolley for 48 hours, particularly if they are over 90 years of age as has been the case last year. Waiting lists for scoliosis operations of many years for growing children is unforgivable.Who needs to be an expert to see such failings and call for a better system?
AndrewJRenko wrote: » Here's one way to improve it - let's leave the improving to people who know what they are talking about. If I walk into your job and after 20 minutes, I start telling you all the things you're doing wrong, will you be taking my instructions?
Tell me how wrote: » I can't understand their position in trying to shut down discussion on this. They are an active poster in many threads with national political/strategy themes.
VinLieger wrote: » Indeed, a strange attitude to have for someone who has expressed quite strong views on a variety of other topics.
Geuze wrote: » It was a few years ago.https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-hires-outside-help-despite-having-full-staff-26699221.html 2010: Just last week, HSE head of human resources Sean McGrath said it was widely accepted that too many staff were employed in certain areas within the HSE. ''There are about 2,000 people working in the HR function. I could probably get away with having 700 or 800 in that department," he said then.
Tell me how wrote: » Not to mention that outside of education, the HSE is probably the one government body of which everyone in the country has at least some experience with it.
blanch152 wrote: » In any online discussion there are always some posters who don't have a clue what they are talking about. We have our fair share of those, and we also have a fair share of people who are ideoligally or politically tied to certain positions and posturing. However, from reading this thread and others, it is also clear that there are plenty of posters on here who have experience of working in the public sector, both front-line and management examples, as well as those who have worked in management in the private sector. They don't have to be experts in health care to be able to identify critical problems or to suggest credible solutions. They also have the ability to critically analyse the bleating and whinging of unions or the pathetic excuses of management, all of whom have a role in the issues of the health service.
blanch152 wrote: » One thing is clear - we spend an awful lot of money per capita on the health service, yet it doesn't work. It is not a problem of money, it is a problem of policy, management, working arrangements and employees. We can argue about where the balance of responsibility lies between those four, but most of the problems and nearly all of the solutions lie within the HSE. The remaining problems are problems of policy and fall between the political body and the HSE. Is the HSE strong enough in standing up to unsustainable policies (over 2 million medical cards?) put forward by politicians? Are politicians strong enough to resist the populist bleating in the media and among the opposition?
Sam Russell wrote: » If I get bad service from an enterprise, I have a very good understanding of how they might improve their offering. Many users of the services provided by the HSE have a very good idea how the services could be improved. One does not need to be an expert to see the major failings of the HSE. No-one should be left on a trolley for 48 hours, particularly if they are over 90 years of age as has been the case last year. Waiting lists for scoliosis operations of many years for growing children is unforgivable. Who needs to be an expert to see such failings and call for a better system?
Matt Barrett wrote: » Do we, (various governments) try anything outside of hiring/having a recruitment freeze, increased funding, wage freeze etc? It seems agreed the organisation needs work I don't see how any more money or staff will help if the organisation needs changing. Didn't this government bring in some consultants or other a while back? Any news there? My impression is they (governments we've had) just want it to go away. Just to note, again, Unions do an excellent job. They don't work for the tax payer, they work for their members. What Unions do or don't do as a membership entity is for our political representatives to look at. If a deal is struck that favours the Unions to the detriment of the tax payer, that's the Union being good at their job IMO. Looking to them to help the taxpayer out makes as much sense as looking at private business.
Tell me how wrote: » Absolutely, Unions are there to protect their members. And all of them thinks there needs to be change, they just are not willing for that change to affect their members. It is a societal issue because not only do so many of us end up using it, but also, we or someone close to us works within the system and so we have a vested interests of sorts in not wanting them to lose their position. Maybe the government should target a single relatively small region such as the mid west or south east or so on and try to make that self sustainable and efficient in terms of all services being available within acceptable time frames and where possible within the region. Allow them to have only the required number of administrators and managers but give them funds for front line staff and then critically and rigidly assess performance. Essentially, try to treat it like a private business as much as possible. Appoint a single person not influenced by elections to own the delivery of this project. Then, if that is proven to be successful, try to replicate it in the next region and so on. But, could any of that realistically be done? Would union influence be the sole reason it might fail?
Good loser wrote: So, for instance, the number of staff nurses could be halved and half of what they currently do could be divvied up amongst technicians. Over time.
Martina1991 wrote: » I dont understand what you mean by technicians?
Tell me how wrote: » Matt Barrett wrote: » Do we, (various governments) try anything outside of hiring/having a recruitment freeze, increased funding, wage freeze etc? It seems agreed the organisation needs work I don't see how any more money or staff will help if the organisation needs changing. Didn't this government bring in some consultants or other a while back? Any news there? My impression is they (governments we've had) just want it to go away. Just to note, again, Unions do an excellent job. They don't work for the tax payer, they work for their members. What Unions do or don't do as a membership entity is for our political representatives to look at. If a deal is struck that favours the Unions to the detriment of the tax payer, that's the Union being good at their job IMO. Looking to them to help the taxpayer out makes as much sense as looking at private business. Absolutely, Unions are there to protect their members. And all of them thinks there needs to be change, they just are not willing for that change to affect their members. It is a societal issue because not only do so many of us end up using it, but also, we or someone close to us works within the system and so we have a vested interests of sorts in not wanting them to lose their position. Maybe the government should target a single relatively small region such as the mid west or south east or so on and try to make that self sustainable and efficient in terms of all services being available within acceptable time frames and where possible within the region. Allow them to have only the required number of administrators and managers but give them funds for front line staff and then critically and rigidly assess performance. Essentially, try to treat it like a private business as much as possible. Appoint a single person not influenced by elections to own the delivery of this project. Then, if that is proven to be successful, try to replicate it in the next region and so on. But, could any of that realistically be done? Would union influence be the sole reason it might fail?
Topgear on Dave wrote: » There was some debate over introducing theatre assistants instead of nurses to do some jobs. This was in 2015.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/hse-to-look-at-introducing-hospital-theatre-assistants-1.2405731 Im not sure of the ins and outs of it but the SBP reported on Sunday that they were finally going to go ahead. "Cork University Hospital has started to train operating theatre assistants after a battle with the INMO which opposed the move."
blanch152 wrote: » The INMO are brilliant at protecting their patch. Ireland is near the top of the EU list for nursing salaries. Ireland is near the top of the EU list for nurses per capita. We cannot sustain both of those statistics indefinitely.
marieholmfan wrote: » Those over 90 years of age have had their whole lives to work to improve the public health system. If anyone should be left on a trolley for seven hours it is a 90 year old.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Anyone in their 80's or 90's comes from a time when people knew their place and the church ruled with an iron fist. The majority left school early, got any job, stuck with it, retired. The idea that even today the average person can carry much sway in regard of changing the HSE is a joke surely? We vote for people who claim to intend to tackle it, we assume they must have a plan. Sadly that's the best most of us can do. We can however discuss it and I don't see any problem with that.
Sam Russell wrote: » No-one should be left on a trolley for any extended period, especially a 90 year old.
Uriel. wrote: » Do you have a link to these lists, I'd like to see the figures involved.
Matt Barrett wrote: » Anyone in their 80's or 90's comes from a time when people knew their place and the church ruled with an iron fist.
Matt Barrett wrote: » We vote for people who claim to intend to tackle it.
marieholmfan wrote: » Why especially a 90 year old?
Tell me how wrote: » 1 in 23 workers in Ireland work in the HSE. Vicky Phelan is going a long way towards influencing behaviour change in a certain element of Health Care delivery (And yes, because of her tragic story and even so she is still having difficulty doing so). We all vote in elections to put the politicians in place to run essential services. We actually have more power to direct focus on the HSE than we realise. If we had protests in relation to it in the same way as we had against Water Charges maybe there would be something done. But, the reason I am interested in a discussion is to see if anyone can suggest something which is either definitively the source of the problem or is likely to improve it. This is an anonymous online discussion forum. No one is suggesting it is the citizens council or Dail Eireann.
marieholmfan wrote: » Because the people let them. People in their 90s didn't and would have regarded a trolley as luxury when they were young.