Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

lostintransit2 · 15-03-2016 11:06PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

I'm a junior hospital biochemist. For the record, we are called Biomedical Scientists, and we are responsible for more deaths than doctors most years on average. And our wages aren't half that of a doctor, despite the same college modules, 5 years in college, with one main exception: Our junior year. Our junior year has us on 5 euro an hour compared to the "poor junior doctors" who make far more than that and actually have less responsibility.

Can you explain how you are responsible for more deaths than doctors please?

I'm not for a moment saying you don't have a very important job and errors in your work can prove fatal. All health professionals appreciate timely lab results and phone calls to warn of abnormal results but it is the "junior doctor" (often year 1) who faces the decision of what to actually do for the patient that has that result. I'm not aware of widespread errors in lab practice that have resulted in multiple patient deaths?

Edward Hopper · 15-03-2016 11:16PM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Can you explain how you are responsible for more deaths than doctors please?

I'm not for a moment saying you don't have a very important job and errors in your work can prove fatal. All health professionals appreciate timely lab results and phone calls to warn of abnormal results but it is the "junior doctor" (often year 1) who faces the decision of what to actually do for the patient that has that result. I'm not aware of widespread errors in lab practice that have resulted in multiple patient deaths?

I think the whole "we are more important than them" argument in healthcare is unhelpful. I appreciate that you didn't start this train of thought. Taken to the nth degree, if a porter doesn't collect the bloods or if a cleaner doesn't clean an infective space, a clerk doesn't file a note, an ambulance doesn't collect a patient, a radiologist misses a cancer, a nurse doesn't give the correct drug and so on and so forth. Each job should be paid a decent wage, irrespective of what an allied profession gets.

lostintransit2 · 15-03-2016 11:21PM

Edward Hopper wrote: »

I think the whole "we are more important than them" argument in healthcare is unhelpful. I appreciate that you didn't start this train of thought. Taken to the nth degree, if a porter doesn't collect the bloods or if a cleaner doesn't clean an infective space, a clerk doesn't file a note, an ambulance doesn't collect a patient, a radiologist misses a cancer, a nurse doesn't give the correct drug and so on and so forth. Each job should be paid a decent wage, irrespective of what an allied profession gets.

Absolutely, I fully agree. Good healthcare provision is completely reliant on a team pulling together in their various respective roles and often when something bad happens there are have been errors at multiple levels within the team. I just thought it was unjustified to suggest that junior doctors carry very little responsibility, when the opposite is true.

maudgonner · 15-03-2016 11:23PM

maryishere wrote: »

There ain't no such thing as a free dinner. Someone somewhere has to pay for it.

In England / Wales many students have to pay many thousands each year in fees. If people get greatly subsidised education here they should pay something back to the hard pressed taxpayer here, pay something back in to the system.

Fine, but then don't single out one profession or sector - be fair to all, or at least attempt to be.

osarusan · 15-03-2016 11:26PM

maryishere wrote: »

There ain't no such thing as a free dinner. Someone somewhere has to pay for it.

In England / Wales many students have to pay many thousands each year in fees. If people get greatly subsidised education here they should pay something back to the hard pressed taxpayer here, pay something back in to the system.

You'd be in favour of stopping new graduates in, say, journalism, or economics, from emigrating until they'd paid back (some of?) their subsidised education?

Edward Hopper · 15-03-2016 11:30PM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Absolutely, I fully agree. Good healthcare provision is completely reliant on a team pulling together in their various respective roles and often when something bad happens there are have been errors at multiple levels within the team. I just thought it was unjustified to suggest that junior doctors carry very little responsibility, when the opposite is true.

You're right of course, my post was about 5 posts late, and should have been in response to the post you were questioning. Apologies if you felt I was having a dig, was not my intention.

maryishere · 15-03-2016 11:36PM

osarusan wrote: »

You'd be in favour of stopping new graduates in, say, journalism, or economics, from emigrating until they'd paid back (some of?) their subsidised education?

I would consider a system – pioneered in Australia and now adopted by a number of countries such as the Netherlands – that operates by linking repayments to the level of income of the borrower
By linking repayment to income levels, it helps to remove the risk that the debt burden will become unmanageable.
This ensures that, at any time, the amount a graduate has to repay is a manageable portion of disposable income.

It allows higher-paid graduates to repay proportionately more of the cost, and lower-paid graduates to repay proportionately less of the cost of their education.
The cost of loans could be kept to affordable levels by ensuring the State continues to heavily fund third-level education, as happens in the Netherlands and Australia.
Sources says there may also be scope to have a regulatory body – possibly the Higher Education Authority – to set the costs of individual courses.
This would prevent a rush by universities to increase their fees, as happened in England when it introduced a similar system.
Loan repayments could be collected by the Revenue Commissioners, according to an expert group discussion document, as it is by “far and away the most cost-effective, simple, efficient and transparent way to collect loan repayments.”

Edward Hopper · 15-03-2016 11:38PM

maryishere wrote: »

I would consider a system – pioneered in Australia and now adopted by a number of countries such as the Netherlands – that operates by linking repayments to the level of income of the borrower
By linking repayment to income levels, it helps to remove the risk that the debt burden will become unmanageable.
This ensures that, at any time, the amount a graduate has to repay is a manageable portion of disposable income.

It allows higher-paid graduates to repay proportionately more of the cost, and lower-paid graduates to repay proportionately less of the cost of their education.
The cost of loans could be kept to affordable levels by ensuring the State continues to heavily fund third-level education, as happens in the Netherlands and Australia.
Sources says there may also be scope to have a regulatory body – possibly the Higher Education Authority – to set the costs of individual courses.
This would prevent a rush by universities to increase their fees, as happened in England when it introduced a similar system.
Loan repayments could be collected by the Revenue Commissioners, according to an expert group discussion document, as it is by “far and away the most cost-effective, simple, efficient and transparent way to collect loan repayments.”

Well you want to pay the public service sh#t, so maybe the low loan repayments will encourage people in.

maryishere · 15-03-2016 11:43PM

Edward Hopper wrote: »

Well you want to pay the public service sh#t,

no, I want to pay them a million each per year, but this little country is still borrowing billions per year and is €200,000,000,000.00 in the red. Thats right.

Irish hospital consultants remain among the best paid in the world despite pay cuts in recent years, according to OECD figures.
Irish health professionals generally are well paid by international standards, even when earnings are adjusted for local purchasing power, OECD Health Statistics 2015 shows.
Patients here spend an average of 120 to 165 days on waiting lists for common medical procedures, while Ireland has a relatively low number of hospital beds, according to the report.
The figures on pay appear to fly in the face of conditions in the health service, where hundreds of consultant posts are unfilled and medical emigration is rising.
According to the OECD, Irish specialists earned €164,494 on average in 2014, not including private income, down from €173,646 the previous year. This is the highest figure for any country apart from Australia and Luxembourg.
GPs earned an average of €115,940 in 2013, down from €118,677 the year before. This compares with €101,000 in Australia and €131,000 in New Zealand, two favoured emigration destinations for Irish doctors.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/irish-hospital-consultants-among-world-s-best-paid-oecd-finds-1.2276783

Jimlh86 · 15-03-2016 11:44PM

Victor wrote: »

A newly sworn-in Garda (not a student garda) is on about €31,000 per year + shift allowances (for working evenings, nights, weekends and public holidays) and overtime. http://www.gra.cc/pay__scales_budget_2010.shtml

After 17 years, if still at Garda rank, they are on about €51,000 basic.

Promotion and technical skills get higher pay and some additional allowances - detectives get 'walking around money'.

How to they achieve a bachelors degree in under 2 years?

Detectives get walking around money. Really?

maudgonner · 15-03-2016 11:44PM

maryishere wrote: »

I would consider a system – pioneered in Australia and now adopted by a number of countries such as the Netherlands – that operates by linking repayments to the level of income of the borrower<snip>

That's basically a student loan scheme. Which is completely different to forcing medical professionals to work in Ireland for a set number of years after graduation, which is what you mentioned in the earlier post though?

maryishere · 15-03-2016 11:50PM

maudgonner wrote: »

That's basically a student loan scheme. Which is completely different to forcing medical professionals to work in Ireland for a set number of years after graduation, which is what you mentioned in the earlier post though?

Its not completely different. The point is the person has the option of repaying the system by either repaying money or working here for a few years.

steddyeddy · 15-03-2016 11:52PM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Can you explain how you are responsible for more deaths than doctors please?

I'm not for a moment saying you don't have a very important job and errors in your work can prove fatal. All health professionals appreciate timely lab results and phone calls to warn of abnormal results but it is the "junior doctor" (often year 1) who faces the decision of what to actually do for the patient that has that result. I'm not aware of widespread errors in lab practice that have resulted in multiple patient deaths?

Well they can be called biochemists or biomedical scientists. I prefer clinical biochemists. I was briefly employed as a hospital biochemist before going into research. For the training and skills involved they are seriously underpaid. They are often seriously unappreciated as evident by posts like these.

They test bloods and other substances which makes a lot of diagnosis possible. They are also human and make mistakes which completely changes the diagnosis.

The poster was saying that biochemists are underpaid and have a lot of responsibilities. I don't think they were putting down junior doctors they were simply pointing out biochemists are undervalued and also have massive massive responsibility.

If biochemists weren't there doctors couldn't do their job.

xLisaBx · 15-03-2016 11:53PM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Can you explain how you are responsible for more deaths than doctors please?

I'm not for a moment saying you don't have a very important job and errors in your work can prove fatal. All health professionals appreciate timely lab results and phone calls to warn of abnormal results but it is the "junior doctor" (often year 1) who faces the decision of what to actually do for the patient that has that result. I'm not aware of widespread errors in lab practice that have resulted in multiple patient deaths?

To start, I didn't say that we are more important than any other profession- absolutely everybody plays an equally vital role in the hospital.
The doctors do not always decide what's best for a patient, although you will be told that is so. For instance, we decide on the course of antibiotics that a doctor will prescribe for a patient presenting with an infection. If we choose antibiotics that are unsuitable, that patient could very well die from infection (especially if they are immunocompromised). We often decide on best chemotherapy cocktails for cancer patients and type up to 200 blood groups an hour- even one mistake is fatal here.
We make decisions every day that patients believe their doctor made for them. So I believe that we deserve a salary closer to the doctors end of the scale.

maudgonner · 15-03-2016 11:54PM

maryishere wrote: »

Its not completely different. The point is the person has the option of repaying the system by either repaying money or working here for a few years.

Did I miss that in the description of the loan scheme you quoted? I've read it a couple of times and can't see where it comes in?

And do you propose that the option of working here to avoid repaying fees be limited to medical professionals or open to all graduates?

steddyeddy · 15-03-2016 11:55PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

To start, I didn't say that we are more important than any other profession- absolutely everybody plays an equally vital role in the hospital.
The doctors do not always decide what's best for a patient, although you will be told that is so. For instance, we decide on the course of antibiotics that a doctor will prescribe for a patient presenting with an infection. If we choose antibiotics that are unsuitable, that patient could very well die from infection (especially if they are immunocompromised). We often decide on best chemotherapy cocktails for cancer patients and type up to 200 blood groups an hour- even one mistake is fatal here.
We make decisions every day that patients believe their doctor made for them. So I believe that we deserve a salary closer to the doctors end of the scale.

Plus 1000. Very well explained.

xLisaBx · 15-03-2016 11:56PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well they can be called biochemists or biomedical scientists. I prefer clinical biochemists. I was briefly employed as a hospital biochemist before going into research. For the training and skills involved they are seriously underpaid. They are often seriously unappreciated as evident by posts like these.

They test bloods and other substances which makes a lot of diagnosis possible. They are also human and make mistakes which completely changes the diagnosis.

The poster was saying that biochemists are underpaid and have a lot of responsibilities. I don't think they were putting down junior doctors they were simply pointing out biochemists are undervalued and also have massive massive responsibility.

If biochemists weren't there doctors couldn't do their job.

Thank you! You have probably said it better.

For those of you who have spoken about strikes and the likes over pay, I doubt it will go ahead. If we went on strike, even for an hour, multiple patients would die. It's not a nice thing to say, but it's the truth, and I don't think any of us would agree to strike with such horrid results.

Icemancometh · 15-03-2016 11:58PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

To start, I didn't say that we are more important than any other profession- absolutely everybody plays an equally vital role in the hospital.
The doctors do not always decide what's best for a patient, although you will be told that is so. For instance, we decide on the course of antibiotics that a doctor will prescribe for a patient presenting with an infection. If we choose antibiotics that are unsuitable, that patient could very well die from infection (especially if they are immunocompromised). We often decide on best chemotherapy cocktails for cancer patients and type up to 200 blood groups an hour- even one mistake is fatal here.
We make decisions every day that patients believe their doctor made for them. So I believe that we deserve a salary closer to the doctors end of the scale.

I fully agree about the importance of accurate lab work, and the hidden nature of it too. Out of sight, out of mind I suppose. But can you show me an example of a biochemist making a mistake, and then being held responsible for it? I'm not saying it doesn't happen; just I'm not aware of any cases of it.

lostintransit2 · 16-03-2016 12:00AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

They test bloods and other substances which makes a lot of diagnosis possible. They are also human and make mistakes which completely changes the diagnosis.

.

Which is exactly the point I made in my post.

However, the poster then made the point that they deserve more money more than "poor junior doctors" do, as the doctors have less responsibility. As another poster has said, saying my job is more important than yours in healthcare is a silly argument as everyone's job is vital to the patient. That is the issue I took with their post.

Trust me, doctors know they cannot do their job to the same level without biomedical scientists.

Padraig Mor · 16-03-2016 12:01AM

tayto lover wrote: »

What about the rest of them?

According to the HSE (who should know), average pay for nurses is about €55k including premium payments etc. Sounds pretty good to me, and it will no doubt go up with the government having recently given into their recent pay claim (disguised as concern for overcrowding).

As they've also been frequently mentioned here as supposedly poorly paid, it's worth noting that average pay for rank and file Gardai (ie only Garda rank, not 'higher ups') is about €60k (inclusive of the many allowances to which they are entitled).

xLisaBx · 16-03-2016 12:03AM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Which is exactly the point I made in my post.

However, the poster then made the point that they deserve more money more than "poor junior doctors" do, as the doctors have less responsibility. As another poster has said, saying my job is more important than yours in healthcare is a silly argument as everyone's job is vital to the patient. That is the issue I took with their post.

Trust me, doctors know they cannot do their job to the same level without biomedical scientists.

Equal pay. We want equal pay to junior doctors. Because living in Cork City for placement on 5 euro an hour is pretty impossible, there has been junior biomeds going to work without eating over it.

TheHillOfDoom · 16-03-2016 12:05AM

maryishere wrote: »

I know health care professionals in secure jobs in Irish hospitals on 70k, 80k and 200k a year. And with great pensions to look forward to.

There are many people paid and treated "less properly" in this country.

Joe Duffy?

maryishere · 16-03-2016 12:06AM

maudgonner wrote: »

And do you propose that the option of working here to avoid repaying fees be limited to medical professionals or open to all graduates?

Open to all. People have to put something back in to the system, the country cannot afford otherwise.

maryishere · 16-03-2016 12:07AM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

According to the HSE (who should know), average pay for nurses is about €55k including premium payments etc. Sounds pretty good to me, and it will no doubt go up with the government having recently given into their recent pay claim (disguised as concern for overcrowding).

As they've also been frequently mentioned here as supposedly poorly paid, it's worth noting that average pay for rank and file Gardai (ie only Garda rank, not 'higher ups') is about €60k (inclusive of the many allowances to which they are entitled).

Plus they have guaranteed pensions which most people in the private sector could never afford....defined benefit pensions.

Edward Hopper · 16-03-2016 12:08AM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

According to the HSE (who should know), average pay for nurses is about €55k including premium payments etc. Sounds pretty good to me, and it will no doubt go up with the government having recently given into their recent pay claim (disguised as concern for overcrowding).

As they've also been frequently mentioned here as supposedly poorly paid, it's worth noting that average pay for rank and file Gardai (ie only Garda rank, not 'higher ups') is about €60k (inclusive of the many allowances to which they are entitled).

Could I get a link to the HSE publication you got the figures from, was trying to find the same myself. Someone's doing me out of some serious money if it's accurate.

xLisaBx · 16-03-2016 12:10AM

Icemancometh wrote: »

I fully agree about the importance of accurate lab work, and the hidden nature of it too. Out of sight, out of mind I suppose. But can you show me an example of a biochemist making a mistake, and then being held responsible for it? I'm not saying it doesn't happen; just I'm not aware of any cases of it.

Cant find a link, but there has been cases where a biomedical scientist has failed to screen donated blood properly, thus giving patients HIV contaminated blood.

TheHillOfDoom · 16-03-2016 12:12AM

xLisaBx wrote: »

Cant find a link, but there has been cases where a biomedical scientist has failed to screen donated blood properly, thus giving patients HIV contaminated blood.

Well that's a bit of a failure there. If your job is to look at and work blood work, attention to detail might be important.

steddyeddy · 16-03-2016 12:12AM

xLisaBx wrote: »

Thank you! You have probably said it better.

For those of you who have spoken about strikes and the likes over pay, I doubt it will go ahead. If we went on strike, even for an hour, multiple patients would die. It's not a nice thing to say, but it's the truth, and I don't think any of us would agree to strike with such horrid results.

No you explained it better and with examples. I'm in the UK and a few friends said they were talking about it in their respective organisations.

You're right. If a biochemist went on strike there would be little or no "timely" blood testing and many many deaths would occur. This is a high responsibility job and I agree the pay should be closer to junior doctor level.

The training involved is very intense. I'll put it this way a lot of doctors fail the basic biochemistry component of their course and biochemists have to do 3-5 years. We also have fewer graduates than doctors. Biomedical science and biochemistry courses have less and less people enrolling due to its perceived difficulty. One year had eight graduates.

lostintransit2 · 16-03-2016 12:13AM

xLisaBx wrote: »

Equal pay. We want equal pay to junior doctors. Because living in Cork City for placement on 5 euro an hour is pretty impossible, there has been junior biomeds going to work without eating over it.

According to the HSE payscales, a new entrant medical scientist starts on e31,048 per year. An intern starts on e30,257. That is a pretty equivalent starting salary. I'm not sure why you are earning 5 euro an hour to be honest.

Anyway, I think this thread is meant to be about professions that are felt to be underpaid. I agree that biochemists play a vital role and should be well paid.

steddyeddy · 16-03-2016 12:14AM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

Which is exactly the point I made in my post.

However, the poster then made the point that they deserve more money more than "poor junior doctors" do, as the doctors have less responsibility. As another poster has said, saying my job is more important than yours in healthcare is a silly argument as everyone's job is vital to the patient. That is the issue I took with their post.

Trust me, doctors know they cannot do their job to the same level without biomedical scientists.

They certainly deserve a similar level of pay.

Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

Comments