to think that doctors shouldn't go on strike over pension changes

[starwarrior]

Why shouldn't they just suck it up like the rest of us?

looktoshinford

its your "whatever" that says it all.

You don't know the figures and are not interested in finding out.

If you can get the government to ring fence the contributions then lets remove the "guarantee"

No - lets remove the guarantee, THEN produce the figures. Enough of this stalling.

We want a level playing field for all.

Bring on the CUTS!

looktoshinford
"No - lets remove the guarantee, THEN produce the figures. Enough of this stalling."

with that

I doff my cap and wave goodbye to the loons. )

I doff my cap and wave goodbye to the loons. )

....and your bloated pension

Look to shinefor

"No - lets remove the guarantee, THEN produce the figures. Enough of this stalling."

So you dont know what the figures are and apparently arent too interested in finding out.
The governent will have done the maths though, and if they are not willing to share their figures, counter the claims made by public sector unions or agree to ring-fence pension contributions (which should be a no-brainer shouldnt it if the scheme is costing the tax-payer money), then what does that tell you?

Is DC really that trustworthy that you dont need access to the actual information?

bubbles
I also earn under 40k..38 I think gross
I get the same as the night nirse practitioner/bed manager ..who call me whenever she can.t get bloods/someone is a bit poorly/ she hasn't got time to cannulate/she took five gp calls for admissions for me to deal with/she has concerns about...beds,ie not enough, yes thats in her job description,not mine
we get it all.They get 4/5 nights then a week off, we get 4/5 nights then back straight onto days

I think your complaint is groundless as I get the same as a med reg as the bed manager and do more hours and its infinitely more hard.

I still want her to have her pay/pension etc tho a bit more clinical input would be good rather than just referring all jobs back to the medical team.

Are the amounts relevant?
Isn't it the changes to T&C that are the msi issue?
I don't have a pension btw.
I support the DRs and anyone else willing to stand up to this sodding goverment.

not relevant but several posters have called doctors greedy and even nhs staff said doctors pay not in line with other nhs staff

"Is DC really that trustworthy that you dont need access to the actual information?"

Whats DC got to do with it? Labour would be making the same reforms.

Everyone is against you on this, except the unions and their supporters.

OhDoAdmitMrsDeVere

the amounts are relevant as they give the required size of the pension pot.
a teacher after 25 yrs service will get a "daily mail" figure of 24k
the actual figure is 6 - 8k. by giving a figure that is 3 to 4 times bigger the pension pot needs to be 3 - 4 times bigger (the size of the pot increases on expodentially so the pot could be 5 -6 times bigger).

The changes mean that people pay in more to get less out.

What do you want? Genuine question - it's not clear to me.

Option 1
Doctors to earn less and have lower pensions, but still paid for by taxpayers. Presumably if they earn less, doctors would then pay less tax themselves. (Possible danger of brain drain to New Zealand?) The rest of us would then have to pay marginally more tax, wouldn't we, if doctors pay less?

Option 2
Doctors to pay into private pensions schemes while still working for the NHS, so the taxpayer doesn't pay for their pensions but continues to pay their salaries. So would this be the same for all public sector workers? Bonanza for the private pension schemes! Doctors would end up with lower pensions and thus pay less in taxes. Private sector workers wouldn't be any better off as far as their own pensions are concerned, though they might pay slightly less in taxes.

Option 3
The govt sticks to the negotiated, sustainable pension scheme and actively encourages private companies to protect their workers in the same way.

Option 4
Like 3 above, but the government caps the amount those at the very top of public and private sector organisations can earn. To below 6-figures (why would anyone need more?)

Have I got it right?

I would be very surprised if the doctors win this pension battle and I don't think that this will be the last time that their pensions contributions and final pensions are modified over the coming years so they better get used to it.
Just remember that a pensioner is a pensioner - there's no difference in occupational status once you stop working.
However I think the NHS has to change and none of us is going to like it but it is too expensive and doctors pensions are evidence of this. Maybe doctors will end up running private practices because they can't make the money they expect to earn by working in the NHS.

There is a general discontentment with the GPs and the way they run their practices, which seesm to be largely on a gatekeeping and piece rate system, and a lot of the work appears to be devolved to practice nurses now.
I think there is much less dissatisfaction with hospital doctors who are viewed by many as the real specialist physicians.

Oh and I know at least 6 GPs and all of them have second homes; one has scattered around UK and the rest of Europe, all bought in the last 6 years.

How big is this 'braindrain' going to be, Solopower? New Zealand can only accommodate so many.

justcheckingitout

Doctors pay is clearly in line with other NHS staff of comparable role.

Look at the NHS medical pay scale, look at the AfC scales and look at where the relevent medical jobs would sit under AfC.

Further upstream posters were talking about doctors emigrating to NZ in the face of the cuts. I don't think it's just because of the money, either. It is horrible for anyone who believes in the NHS, whether they work in it or not, to see it ripped apart like this.

Lucky New Zealand!

'general discontentment with GPs' Do you have any evidence for that? Apart from anecdotal evidence of the 6 GPs you know. And I'm assuming here you don't know them in a professional capacity but as acquaintances etc.

Footballfriend - I think she meant discontentment with GPs, rather than the GPs being disontented.

Yes, it's that I'm disputing. Are we talking Daily Mail type of evidence? Personal envy towards GPs you know and their houses abroad? Is there evidence for 'discontentment'?

Footballfriend - I listen. I haven't said I was discontented with the GPs I know - and I know there are some very good GPs. However I think a lot of people on this thread are unhappy with GP care.
Regarding second homes, I was responding to a point made by someone else about people the private sector buying second homes (BTL).

The rest of us would then have to pay marginally more tax, wouldn't we, if doctors pay less?

Are you being serious?

It's taxes that pay doctors' salaries. If they are paid less, less tax money is needed.

Any tax that doctors pay is being recycled back into the pot it came from.

If someone is paid £100k, there's approximately 35k in deductions.

If someone is paid £50k, there's approximately 15k in deductions.

In the first case a net £65k leaves the Treasury, in the second a net £35k leaves the Treasury.

In what world can someone being paid more out of public funds equal the rest of us having to pay less taxes?

By that logic, paying public sector employees an infinitely large salary would result in no one having to pay any taxes whatsoever!

the dissatisfaction with GPs comes from the new deal /contract offered by the govt as a package [without consultation]which took away their OOH responsibility and increased their pay..

As for the pensions its the Drs in their forties who have lost out most as perhaps they wouldn't have paid in if they knew the terms would change.

I am not sure what happens if u have a private pension and then there is not the projected amount at the end... is there just a shortfall?

Footballfriends - take a look around you -the DM, the Guardian, The telegraph, even the Lancet (not a paper, but look at the editoral). How many re suporting the doctors? even the doctors themselves are divided about this dispute.

I am not sure what happens if u have a private pension and then there is not the projected amount at the end... is there just a shortfall?

Yes. In theory you can get the sum total of £0 back from a private defined contribtion pension (I assume that's what you're talking about if you mention 'projected amount?).

It doesn't matter what the projection says. You can quite easily get back less than you actually put in, nevermind seeing any growth on the contributions.

Unhappy with GP care? Do you mean the actual care received or the way practices are managed or what exactly? All the GPs I know work very hard. I think the care they provide is good too. Lunchtimes are more likely to find them attending practice meetings or doing home visits than at the local golf course.

Justchecking- out of curiosity, what's your job that is much harder than a Medical Registrar's? (Apol. I've followed the thread intermittently and may have missed details.)

Justcheckingit out, the private sector pensions are mostly money purchase schemes and you don't really know what pension you are going to get at the end . You pay in a certain amount every month and usually your employer pays a % as well and when you retire you buy an annunity with the money which gives you a fixed pension. the amount of pension you get is dependent on the vagaries of the economy and interest rates at the time. Every time you change employer you are likely to have to join a different pension scheme.