98% 0f 75% vote to strike
Comments
-
I think we can all agree that probably wouldn't compromise patient safety at all.not sure about managers, I think they can be safe at home0 -
Amazing. The doctors say their main concern is the patients welfare so they go on strike. Money is the reason. They are well paid. Get your lazy ars* to work and stop complaining. There are people on the minimum wage doing long hours to make ends meet. If you don't like it, get a different job.
Yeah because people saving lives and putting in years of training should be paid the same as someone ringing through my shopping at Aldi.
I earn much more than a junior doctor and if I didn't bother coming to work nothing would happen apart from me getting sacked but families wouldn't be affected for life and people wouldn't die. Oh and I don't have anything but GCSE's and didn't have any student debt. My wife is a teacher, another profession the government are well and truly screwing up and let me tell you that the education system isn't that far from disaster either.0 -
its almost like christmas 1914
the thing i find scary is JH wont be doing this without cabinet approval.0 -
So there's agreement with people with logical thought facilities that they want doctors to earn (relatively) decent wedge.
So the next question; who's gonna pay for it?0 -
So there's agreement with people with logical thought facilities that they want doctors to earn (relatively) decent wedge.
So the next question; who's gonna pay for it?
There's the rub.
Something else has to lose out. That is where the disagreement starts.0 -
So there's agreement with people with logical thought facilities that they want doctors to earn (relatively) decent wedge.
So the next question; who's gonna pay for it?
There's the rub.
Something else has to lose out. That is where the disagreement starts.
eh no, the disagreement was with those that thought the Dr s are right to strike against the changes in TC's and those who thought they shouldnt.
BUT if the tories hadnt stired this up, the Docs would nt be going on strike, they are not asking for more money IF things had been left as was.
to me the real question should why have the Tories done this? the w/e death rate think is ridiculous almost as crazy as getting GP surgeries to offer 24/7 appts.0 -
Champagne socialist me.
Well said Tim.Amazing. The doctors say their main concern is the patients welfare so they go on strike. Money is the reason. They are well paid. Get your lazy ars* to work and stop complaining. There are people on the minimum wage doing long hours to make ends meet. If you don't like it, get a different job.
I ll take home more than a Junior Doctor this year, for delivering post, I didn't train for over 7 years and I don't work anti social hours. My typical week is 39 hours for which any pay increase I receive is paid in full on all contracted hours and any over time I work is paid at an increase rate for the first 10 hours, of which whether I do it or not is entirely my choice. I put bits of paper through letter boxes.
Junior doctors will only get a pay rise on their basic 40 hour contract, but will have to contract in to work a minimum of 60 hours, 20 hours on call at no increase in rate on top of the basic 40 hours, They save peoples lives. Go figure.
Is there any one in the Tory Cabinet who hasn't got a private health scheme any way?
60 hours a week making life or death decisions on a £30 k a year basic, No its not minimal wage! But compared to an M.Ps salary and hours its pretty damn close.
I too earn more than a junior doctor but I would happily have them paid more than I. People can live without engineers, doctors not so.
Well I never!!
Frank the Fat Cat!!
I don't earn enough to pay more than the basic rate of income tax.
I'd say you are doing yourself and other engineers a disservice saying that Frank, those MRI scanners and other similar kit have to be created by someone.0 -
So there's agreement with people with logical thought facilities that they want doctors to earn (relatively) decent wedge.
So the next question; who's gonna pay for it?
There's the rub.
Something else has to lose out. That is where the disagreement starts.
eh no, the disagreement was with those that thought the Dr s are right to strike against the changes in TC's and those who thought they shouldnt.
BUT if the tories hadnt stired this up, the Docs would nt be going on strike, they are not asking for more money IF things had been left as was.
to me the real question should why have the Tories done this? the w/e death rate think is ridiculous almost as crazy as getting GP surgeries to offer 24/7 appts.
Untwist your knickers. I was answering Rick's post.
I wasn't commenting on the roots of the disagreement between docs and govt.0 -
Without going all out responding to various points I agree or disagree with here, I will respond to the comment made by Vtech about waste which coincides with why don't you get another job/min wage (I cba working what the hourly rate becomes, especially with the home life CPD and exams).
A friend of mine who is now in their 7th year of being an MD (Registrar in A&E) saw a administrative managerial job in her hospital paying a higher salary that what she earns, (she had the qualifications to apply for said job, technically a degree, experience of the NHS and managing people)
Logic says go change, make more money for less hours, stress, skip the risk of being sued or verbally abused every weekend. I can't imagine her changing so many of my medical friends didn't go in for the money alone, the money was a nice reward but not the purpose.
The point is, it highlights a top heavy, wasteful business. The NHS does need well paid support staff, not something I nor she would disagree with, I believe it just has to be careful how this is done and where the balance of wage is.0 -
What somehow seems to be getting obscured here is that the changes are supposed to be cost neutral: so on average, everyone gets paid roughly the same.So there's agreement with people with logical thought facilities that they want doctors to earn (relatively) decent wedge.
So the next question; who's gonna pay for it?
There's the rub.
Something else has to lose out. That is where the disagreement starts.
eh no, the disagreement was with those that thought the Dr s are right to strike against the changes in TC's and those who thought they shouldnt.
BUT if the tories hadnt stired this up, the Docs would nt be going on strike, they are not asking for more money IF things had been left as was.
to me the real question should why have the Tories done this? the w/e death rate think is ridiculous almost as crazy as getting GP surgeries to offer 24/7 appts.
But doctors in specialties like EM, where they already work 24/7 shifts, will see their pay go down quite significantly. Others will be in a position where they can be moved onto evening- and weekend-heavy work patterns with no benefit whatsoever - remember, up till 10pm on Saturday is now "normal working hours".
Presumably, this is the whole point - you can't have a "7 day NHS" without making people work seven days, and the government don't want to have to pay for their ridiculous brainwave.0 -
Mamba, I hope all goes well for your mum.
Some months back, my mum had an appointment to see a consultant, an orthopedist, on a Saturday.
During the appointment he said that they were having to work Saturdays because a back log had built up.
If we are to have the situation whereby this is the norm, whereby it is necessary for more staff to work more weekends it is right that t&c are looked at so that staffing levels can be managed effectively.
That means a significant rise in basic salary, way above the 11% offered.
The present system is antiquated.0 -
Mamba, I hope all goes well for your mum.
Some months back, my mum had an appointment to see a consultant, an orthopedist, on a Saturday.
During the appointment he said that they were having to work Saturdays because a back log had built up.
If we are to have the situation whereby this is the norm, whereby it is necessary for more staff to work more weekends it is right that t&c are looked at so that staffing levels can be managed effectively.
That means a significant rise in basic salary, way above the 11% offered.
The present system is antiquated.
thankyou, she is in heart failure and realises there is probably little that they can do for her long term.
Many trusts have gone to some sort of 7 day working patterns in voluntary aggreements, but as i ve said before, the support staff also have to be bought in and the nhs is chronically short of nurses, mainly due to cuts training new ones in 2010. so given the new restrictions on using agency staff, where r the nurses going to come from for 24/7 working? the whole idea is at best
I dont want to see a similar shortage in doc's in a few years time and remember todays jun drs are tomos consultants.
i just wish there was more consultation, less arrogrance on behalf of employers, Docs are very intelligent people & some of hunts statements pre strike ballot, just seemed to be designed to pee them off.0 -
Amazing. The doctors say their main concern is the patients welfare so they go on strike. Money is the reason. They are well paid. Get your lazy ars* to work and stop complaining. There are people on the minimum wage doing long hours to make ends meet. If you don't like it, get a different job.
Last time I checked, most "Minimum wage" workers hadn't had several years of (expensive, self-funded) training and didn't have to make life-or-death decisions on a routine basis.
And many docs may well vote with their feet. As for lazy...you have no idea.
Source: work in healthcare, alongside lazy, feckless, overpaid doctors :twisted:
It's just a hill. Get over it.0 -
So how does Bally think?
Is the dispute about money, as I said earlier - yes.
Covering out of hours or unsocial hours is expensive. Healthcare trusts undoubtedly look at these periods where they can save costs and cut manning levels as far as possible, sometimes too far. The pay review is designed to save money to, it would seem, the detriment of the doctors.
Finchy, I am glad your nipper was ok but there is a problem with weekends.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/evidence-base.pdf
There needs to be provision whereby weekend cover is not so much more expensive than cover Mon - Friday.
A rise of 11% has been offered but this is less than the minimum 14.9% that the Dr and Dentist review body recommended.
I understand the doctors anger and say without reservation that they deserve a fair return for their commitment and I hope the money is found to satisfy them.. I don't believe a strike is necessarily in anyone's interests. THere you go, I said they deserve a decent rise.
As I said, the dispute is about money, the government is trying to save it and the docs don't want it to be at their expense. Don't let's pretend otherwise.
On a side note, my bros in law works for a company tasked with the maintenance of IT systems within various Trusts. He works at the QE in Brum, fantastic salary that would make a doc's eyes water. How can that be right?
The dispute is not just about money as I pointed out earlier. There are quite a few other issues outlined in the new contract.
For example in the current contract, women get pay progression during maternity leave. In the new contract that is lost. That means that once again women who have children lose out to those who focus solely on careers and male equivalents. Previous contract changes were meant to have stopped this inequality.
'The weekend effect' has been taken out of context. Further analysis has shown the increased death rate is not due to lower staffing levels but due to higher amounts of elective procedures being done during the week. This means the weekends are mostly emergency admissions. An emergency admission is by definition more unstable than an elective admission and therefore more likely to die. So you end up with a high death per admission ratio.0 -
I accept that the dispute is not just about money but a raft of issues concerning changes in t&cs.
The issue regarding pay progression whilst on maternity leave? I get that women on such leave are entitled to receive any pay rises warded during that period but I fail to see how they should qualify for pay increments when not actually working. Besides, is there not now such a thing as Shared Parental Leave whereby 52 weeks leave can be shared between both parents? So affects men as well as women.
You say the weekend effect is taken out of context. Well I bow to your experience as I am on the outside and accept your insider knowledge.
Finchy earlier gave the example of his lad and we are all grateful that he received the treatment he needed as is well. I may have shared this story before. If so, I apologise for boring you.
A 78 year old man was taken ill one Saturday evening. His wife summoned an ambulance which arrived promptly. The paramedics examined him and realised that he had suffered a stroke. They conveyed him to the local stroke unit where the staff nurse agreed that he had suffered a stroke. The registrar refused his admission as he didn't meet the criteria.(?) Now this patient had only one part functional kidney, diabetes, bladder cancer and COPD. He was forced to return home in an ambulance at 3.00am. When the question was posed what would happen if no-one was at home to look after him or even to unlock the door, the reply was that he would have to wait in the waiting room until someone was at home to accept him.
At 8.00 am the following morning his wife again summoned an ambulance and he was conveyed to hospital where he was immediately admitted. Infer from that what you will. His condition hadn't changed.
This poor gent was my old man, who died eighteen months later. There was an inquest and the Coroner saw fit to call the registrar to give evidence. He duly attended accompanied by a Trust legal advisor.
The beauty of the Coroners Court is that you get to direct questions at any witnesses. Squirming doesn't accurately describe this guy when he had to answer the family's questions. We were not looking to sue, just to highlight what we thought shocking circumstances.
That is my experience of out of hours care in the NHS. I appreciate that it may not be the norm, but neither do I believe it to be unique.0 -
I accept that the dispute is not just about money but a raft of issues concerning changes in t&cs.
The issue regarding pay progression whilst on maternity leave? I get that women on such leave are entitled to receive any pay rises warded during that period but I fail to see how they should qualify for pay increments when not actually working. Besides, is there not now such a thing as Shared Parental Leave whereby 52 weeks leave can be shared between both parents? So affects men as well as women.
You say the weekend effect is taken out of context. Well I bow to your experience as I am on the outside and accept your insider knowledge.
Finchy earlier gave the example of his lad and we are all grateful that he received the treatment he needed as is well. I may have shared this story before. If so, I apologise for boring you.
A 78 year old man was taken ill one Saturday evening. His wife summoned an ambulance which arrived promptly. The paramedics examined him and realised that he had suffered a stroke. They conveyed him to the local stroke unit where the staff nurse agreed that he had suffered a stroke. The registrar refused his admission as he didn't meet the criteria.(?) Now this patient had only one part functional kidney, diabetes, bladder cancer and COPD. He was forced to return home in an ambulance at 3.00am. When the question was posed what would happen if no-one was at home to look after him or even to unlock the door, the reply was that he would have to wait in the waiting room until someone was at home to accept him.
At 8.00 am the following morning his wife again summoned an ambulance and he was conveyed to hospital where he was immediately admitted. Infer from that what you will. His condition hadn't changed.
This poor gent was my old man, who died eighteen months later. There was an inquest and the Coroner saw fit to call the registrar to give evidence. He duly attended accompanied by a Trust legal advisor.
The beauty of the Coroners Court is that you get to direct questions at any witnesses. Squirming doesn't accurately describe this guy when he had to answer the family's questions. We were not looking to sue, just to highlight what we thought shocking circumstances.
That is my experience of out of hours care in the NHS. I appreciate that it may not be the norm, but neither do I believe it to be unique.
On the issue of weekend cover I wasn't talking from experience but analysis of the weekend death reports and new evidence recently published in the BMW.
I'm sorry to here about your dad. I obviously don't have the information but just from that story regardless of whether he had a stroke or not he certainly needed to be seen in an A&E and the doctor should have referred you to one. Unfortunately some people make mistakes regardless of their job.
I just don't want to see that kind of thing happen more, and almost certainly being overworked and underpaid will lead to that.0 -
I am not saying docs should be underpaid. In fact I'm saying the opposite. They should be on a salary that reflects their responsibility BUT do away with enhanced pay for unsocial hours. That way, cover can be rostered in respect of need, not load staff in respect to saving cost.0
-
First of all, my sympathy to you for your Dad's case. TBH, I was very disappointed with the out-of-hours care we received. Not the doctor, who was helpful enough, but the fact that we had to wait so long due to the fact that one doctor was meant to deal with a whole waiting room.
If it's not being too nosy, how did the registrar justify his actions? Because that's absolutely disgraceful.
On the whole issue of OOH care, it would be better to increase the number of doctors that we have in this country to the sort of levels that other EU countries have. This needs to be done from our own population, we can't just see Eastern Europe as one endless supply of skilled labour, because one day they will stop coming. As long as we lack doctors, healthcare will be inadequate, regardless of the quality and skill of those who work in the health service.0 -
First of all, my sympathy to you for your Dad's case. TBH, I was very disappointed with the out-of-hours care we received. Not the doctor, who was helpful enough, but the fact that we had to wait so long due to the fact that one doctor was meant to deal with a whole waiting room.
If it's not being too nosy, how did the registrar justify his actions? Because that's absolutely disgraceful.
On the whole issue of OOH care, it would be better to increase the number of doctors that we have in this country to the sort of levels that other EU countries have. This needs to be done from our own population, we can't just see Eastern Europe as one endless supply of skilled labour, because one day they will stop coming. As long as we lack doctors, healthcare will be inadequate, regardless of the quality and skill of those who work in the health service.
Thanks to both yourself and Smiley for your sympathy, but that isn't why i posted, but thanks anyway.
In short, he couldn't. he squirmed and repeated that my dad's condition didn't meet the criteria. I still don't know what the criteria were as he couldn't say, only that each case is different, judged on its merits etc. The Coroner actually came to his rescue and told me that I had more than made my point and to move on. There were no histrionics or shouting, I managed to keep my tone calm and even which on reflection added to his embarrassment. The look on the Coroner's face when the doctor had to agree that it was policy to refuse admittance to someone in my dad's condition; giving him the choice of either going home or waiting in the waiting room was priceless.
My dad's death ultimately had another cause and could not be attributed to the stroke.
I did derive some sort of satisfaction from the inquest though.0 -
Smiley, I know people make mistakes , God knows I may have made one myself sometime.
I can't see the logic in holding a grudge or taking punitive action over a mistake.
I have a post on here somewhere that refers to a misdiagnosis which I found quite amusing. As I said, I understand and forgive mistakes.0 -
Sorry to hear about your dad fella, losing a parent is to be expected but still sh1t when it happens. I've lost both my mum and dad.I am not saying docs should be underpaid. In fact I'm saying the opposite. They should be on a salary that reflects their responsibility BUT do away with enhanced pay for unsocial hours. That way, cover can be rostered in respect of need, not load staff in respect to saving cost.
I believe people should be paid an enhanced rate for unsociable hours working. Whether it be in the form of overtime or as an increased salary with a continental shift system.
I have espoused for a long time that doctors should have a similar sort of contract as the armed forces, whereby you sighn up and do your training. After that you're guaranteed your employment for X amount of years. If you wish to leave prior to that you have to "buy yourself out" i.e. pay for your training. At the end of X years you then decide whether to sign up again.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Sorry to hear about your dad fella, losing a parent is to be expected but still sh1t when it happens. I've lost both my mum and dad.I am not saying docs should be underpaid. In fact I'm saying the opposite. They should be on a salary that reflects their responsibility BUT do away with enhanced pay for unsocial hours. That way, cover can be rostered in respect of need, not load staff in respect to saving cost.
I believe people should be paid an enhanced rate for unsociable hours working. Whether it be in the form of overtime or as an increased salary with a continental shift system.
I have espoused for a long time that doctors should have a similar sort of contract as the armed forces, whereby you sighn up and do your training. After that you're guaranteed your employment for X amount of years. If you wish to leave prior to that you have to "buy yourself out" i.e. pay for your training. At the end of X years you then decide whether to sign up again.
The police will be happy to hear that. They get a flat rate irrespective of day of week or hour of day.0 -
Sorry to hear about your dad fella, losing a parent is to be expected but still sh1t when it happens. I've lost both my mum and dad.I am not saying docs should be underpaid. In fact I'm saying the opposite. They should be on a salary that reflects their responsibility BUT do away with enhanced pay for unsocial hours. That way, cover can be rostered in respect of need, not load staff in respect to saving cost.
I believe people should be paid an enhanced rate for unsociable hours working. Whether it be in the form of overtime or as an increased salary with a continental shift system.
I have espoused for a long time that doctors should have a similar sort of contract as the armed forces, whereby you sighn up and do your training. After that you're guaranteed your employment for X amount of years. If you wish to leave prior to that you have to "buy yourself out" i.e. pay for your training. At the end of X years you then decide whether to sign up again.
The police will be happy to hear that. They get a flat rate irrespective of day of week or hour of day.
Absolutely terrible what you experienced with your Dad, heartfelt sympathies Bally.
Once upon a time, doing a nhs job, an admin manager said to me in total seriousness that the nhs would run a lot better if it didnt have any patients, he was not joking either.
i guess if you tie down doc's like this, they ll go and study something else and what if they just upped sticks and went to abroad? bring em back and chuck them in Colchester, with a DD?
there are too many Police, hence trimming their numbers :shock: 0 -
I know it's off topic but as I've posted so much of the story, I'll post the rest.
My old man was a miner for nearly 40 years.
The last witness at the inquest was the pathologist who had carried out post mortem examination. Now miners suffer dust in their lungs, to what extent can only be determined during post mortem. If there are speckles in their lungs it is deemed simple pneumonomycosis, if there are clumps it is deemed complex and qualifies the widow for a compensation payment, of only a few hundred quid.
The pathologist read through her evidence, stating she found speckles, ie the simple form of the disease. The Coroner suggested to her more than half a dozen times that dust was a factor in my dad's death. Each time she denied it and was actually becoming narked at the repeated suggestion.
Imagine everyone's surprise when the Coroner announced that dust was a factor in my dad's death and therefore my mother would be entitled to a compensation payment.
I am convinced that this was his way of giving my mom what he could in the light of what he had heard.0 -
Good, the police endevour to provide a good service.
Sorry to hear about your dad fella, losing a parent is to be expected but still sh1t when it happens. I've lost both my mum and dad.I am not saying docs should be underpaid. In fact I'm saying the opposite. They should be on a salary that reflects their responsibility BUT do away with enhanced pay for unsocial hours. That way, cover can be rostered in respect of need, not load staff in respect to saving cost.
I believe people should be paid an enhanced rate for unsociable hours working. Whether it be in the form of overtime or as an increased salary with a continental shift system.
I have espoused for a long time that doctors should have a similar sort of contract as the armed forces, whereby you sighn up and do your training. After that you're guaranteed your employment for X amount of years. If you wish to leave prior to that you have to "buy yourself out" i.e. pay for your training. At the end of X years you then decide whether to sign up again.
The police will be happy to hear that. They get a flat rate irrespective of day of week or hour of day.
I'll reiterate, unsociable hours should attract a higher wage/salary.Weekends and nights are not "normal" working hours IMHO.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
[quote=On the whole issue of OOH care, it would be better to increase the number of doctors that we have in this country to the sort of levels that other EU countries have. This needs to be done from our own population, we can't just see Eastern Europe as one endless supply of skilled labour, because one day they will stop coming. As long as we lack doctors, healthcare will be inadequate, regardless of the quality and skill of those who work in the health service.[/quote]
IME the issue at weekends is not doctors, it's physios, occupational therapists, pharmacists, radiographers, social workers etc. There is adequate medical knowledge and nursing care given over the weekend, but the lack of further input post treatment is the biggest cost to the NHS. Out of 28 patients on my ward today at least 70% of them could have gone home but they needed carers or were awaiting rehab.
A 24/7 emergency service for in hospital treatment exists and runs well but unfortunately the NHS can't afford to help people at home and can't provide that help at a weekend. Several times a weekend I have to admit people for 'social issues', where they have no medical problems but simply cannot cope at home.
That person needs physio to improve mobilisation, an occupational therapist to assess her needs, a social worker to implement those needs and a pharmacist to give them a lovely bag of medications. All for someone who need never have entered a hospital if the community services were adequate in the first place.
And none of that is available at the weekend.0 -
Interesting snippet about the new one being put about - the study that shows that there's a higher perinatal (immediately before, during or immediately after birth) mortality rate in babies born at the weekend.
Just a couple of points (out of a lot of criticism that could be thrown at the study, or more accurately how the study is being reported and used for political purposes):
a) Maternity departments are already as fully staffed at weekends as it is humanly possible to be, they're about as 24/7 as you can get
b) what the papers didn't say is that the day with the highest mortality rate is Thursday. Turns out that the rate is better on Monday and Tuesday, and the whole rest of the week is more or less the same. To suggest that all babies are induced so they are born on Mon or Tues would be as rational as current government policy.0 -
Without going all out responding to various points I agree or disagree with here, I will respond to the comment made by Vtech about waste which coincides with why don't you get another job/min wage (I cba working what the hourly rate becomes, especially with the home life CPD and exams).
A friend of mine who is now in their 7th year of being an MD (Registrar in A&E) saw a administrative managerial job in her hospital paying a higher salary that what she earns, (she had the qualifications to apply for said job, technically a degree, experience of the NHS and managing people)
Logic says go change, make more money for less hours, stress, skip the risk of being sued or verbally abused every weekend. I can't imagine her changing so many of my medical friends didn't go in for the money alone, the money was a nice reward but not the purpose.
The point is, it highlights a top heavy, wasteful business. The NHS does need well paid support staff, not something I nor she would disagree with, I believe it just has to be careful how this is done and where the balance of wage is.
And therein lies the problem in pretty much every part of public service. I used to see this working at a Council, the Councillors (who would claim they were doing a voluntary job to serve their community) were getting paid more in attendance allowances etc. than many of the staff undertaking a full time job in their authority.0 -
Resurrecting an old thread.
Not my words, but a contributor elsewhere but it sums up my view of the debacle.
We as a nation with a health care system which, under current funding methods, we cannot afford. We throw our toys out of the pram at any attempt to alter the funding in any way. Meanwhile demand rockets, capital equipment costs rise, drugs cost more etc.
Jeremy Hunt is the latest poor fool to discover that change is a dirty word in the NHS and will probably have to fall on his sword.
We do not have the best health service in the world, we have moved on over many decades since its inception and it's about time the great British public realised that the machine is broke and is in need of drastic surgery.
From what the junior doctors say they could all be made redundant since nobodies health is at risk if they are not there. Both sides in this shambles are a joke0 -
But why should doctors pay the price when they are the front line?
Surely we need to
a) look after ourselves a touch better
b) get ride of wasteage - middle management
c) take a serious look a procurement
The long term impact of dissuading young doctors could be rather detrimental some years down the line, unless we are deciding on a policy of only using foreign young doctors who view the terms of junior contracts as pretty good, and all young graduates study something else?
How cant the gov't justify 11% pay rises and cuts to doctors and increase working hours? From what I can tell they want them to work longer hours for less. This seems to me pretty unfair and potentially dangerous if we have wards full of zombies. Remember too that juniors in any role tend to party more, so that added to the endless working hours can hardly be 'for the long term benefit' of the NHS.0
