To ask if you support the proposed strike by Nursing and Midwifery staff?

[SeattleGraceMercyDeath]

For the first time in I think 32 years nursing staff have voted to go on strike and midwives, having never voted to strike in their history will be joining them in a four hour walkout from 7am on 13th October.

The NHS pay review recommended a 1% pay rise across the board, yet government decided they could ignore this and only award the rise to those at the top of their band and would take it away again next year. Despite awarding themselves an 11% pay rise after proclaiming they couldn't possibly ignore their review bodies recommendation.

Essential services will still be covered, eg Delivery suite, ITU etc.

Do you support the staff? If you are a frontline healthcare worker will you be striking? I'm not due to work that day but I will be at the picket line showing my support.

Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right, though. MP's definitely do not deserve an 11% payrise - quite the contrary. But even if they did, there are only 600 of them. The NHS is the second or third largest employer in the world!

To give you an example, in my private pension scheme, to obtain the same benefits as DH will receive by purchasing an annuity, I would need to save about 2.8 million quid before retirement. Yes, he is paying into the pot, but nothing like to that extent.

That level of remuneration on retirement is beyond the reach of just about everyone (unless you happen to work for the NHS).

Petula - I am a highly skilled professional. In 2008 I took a 7% pay cut, and I took work overseas because in real terms I was still worse off in 2012. I was lucky compared to many of my friends who were made redundant and had to take any job they could find.

It's not a race to the bottom, but it would be irresponsible not to take into account the fact that the economy is still fragile and not exactly awash with cash.

How much would a 1% payrise cost?

How much money is wasted on the false market mechanism set up in the NHS? How much money goes directly to the profits of ineffective private firms?

If this was about affordability then the NHS would be simplified and costs reduced that way.

But it isn't. It is ideological.

I agree that if the NHS was started from scratch tomorrow, there is no way on earth it would resemble what we now have, which I think we can both agree is a mess!

Simply repeating that "it's idealogical" does not actually answer any of my points. I could say that the strike is "idealogical" because I would bet my boots it wouldn't be happening if Labour was in power.

It is ideological to refuse the payrise to NHS workers on the basis that there isn't enough money when across the board it isn't being applied consistently.

MPs and senior civil servants are getting payrises. And bonuses.

Why not just say, everyone paid by the taxpayer should get no payrise?

If there truely was not enough money, the government would be making fundamental changes to things instead of going for easy pickings and playing one group of people against another.

That's why it is ideological and not driven by a true need to cut costs.

Just look at the budget deficit - there really isn't enough money!

Everything you say about the MP's payrise is correct. That is naked self-interest and I find it sickening. MP's should lead by example, particularly as for many of them it's a second income.

However, I am in favour of public sector pay restraint in view of the deficit - I would 100% support an across the board no payrise, for example. I wonder whether the strike could have been avoided if the same decision had been made but with more consistency.

oldfarticus, i don't see why the fact that you experienced such horrible changes in terms and conditions and staff redundancies means that other professions can't object?

i don't think that prioritising emergency and healthcare services pay is problematic

i am highly trained and my pay, terms and conditions and pension is much worse than that of HCPs working in the NHS, but i don't begrudge (and actively support) them legitimately objecting

They can object - but I think they are wrong to do so.

Something has to give - public sector pay and pensions are significantly more generous than the average worker's. By all means be consistent (as Iggly suggested re: MP's and civil servants) but until someone finds a magic money tree, we need to cut our public services cloth according to our means.

The NHS is not too expensive, it is underfunded for what it needs to deliver, it is a political decision not to give it enough money.

When you look at what it does with what it has (look at the costs per capita) it is a miracle and that's down to the front line staff so I wholeheartedly support them and what they have given the majority of us, directly or indirectly.

on the news it said that midwives were striking because they were no longer going to get their annual pay increase and another which reflected their progression through the pay grades. Is that correct?

If so, then i don't support the strike. this just brings them in line with practically everyone else. 2 pay increases got chopped for us about 20 years ago

OldBoots - I think that is a separate issue. There are many other countries with better healthcare systems than us that are still free (or largely free) at the point of delivery. Check out some of the WHO statistics.

Ultimately whether you think the NHS is too expensive or not depends upon your experiences of it. I think it sucks a huge proportion of the GDP into a black hole, in return for poor quality care and inefficient service, but that's a product of my own (dire) experience.

I definitely support them. One hundred per cent.

Of course it's about what we can afford - we should be able to afford for women to receive good quality care from staff who aren't dangerously over worked and under resourced, who are paid in a way that reflects their training and responsibilities. No one is suggesting there is a magical money tree somewhere, they're saying that this should be a higher priority for government spending. The NHS is not too expensive, we just don't place enough value on what it does.

And stop talking about how good the public sector pension is compared to the shit offered to private sector workers. This isn't a race to the bottom, we should be aiming a bit higher than 'well, it could be as bad as this so be grateful for your bread and gruel'.

You have my support, 100%.

none of the posts on here actually mention what the current pay is though, or confirm if the argument is around making 2 pay increases per year into one (as reported on the news).

i do not understand how you can sensibly argue either way when you don't have the correct information to judge. you are basing your argument on immotive things - just cause having babies is high in our priorities, doesn't necessarily mean the people doing it are getting a good/bad deal and should go on strike

Job type and bands
pay at each band/point
Pay ranges per band in 2010

Hopp - it's in your post, we should be able to afford it, but we can't. Even if the government spent 100% of GDP on the NHS it still wouldn't be enough because healthcare is expensive and demand is infinite.

And like it or not, pensions are relevant. They are completely dependent on the value of investments (see my comment above about needing 2.8 million quid to purchase my DH's pension as an annuity). If the rest of the country is seeing the value of their investments tank, they will not be best pleased to see taxes rise yet again to pay for the public sector to enjoy yet more preferential treatment.

"Race to the bottom" it isn't but all of us "bottom feeders" are expected to shell out for public sector pensions hand over fist while funding our own retirements with ever-stagnating net wages.

And FWIW - DH's pension on retirement will be nearly twice the average UK wage. Hopefully, he will live for 30 years after retirement. I am extremely happy about this - from a selfish perspective- but then I also wonder how that can possibly be affordable across the board (without a magic money tree)?

And yet staff are still complaining about wages? I think Frank's point earlier was excellent - they have excellent terms and benefits, generous sick pay, mega-generous maternity leave etc.

And yes, it irritates me that the strike wouldn't be happening if Labour was in power (even though no promises to change any of the Tories policies have been made!)

It is a race to the bottom.

We are not all in this together.

Ironically I wouldn't be so bothered if the Tories were more honest instead of making excuses for hammering the lower paid and public sector.

What are they doing actively to increase wages in the private sector? Living wage anyone? What are they doing to bolster the rights of employees so that they can have pensions and the like? Nothing.

Nothing at all.

No I don't whilst delivery and ITU might be covered there are other very important job that may not get done or the compromised numbers may mean women are turned away.

Yes of course I do and will be striking too (Occupational Therapist).

I'll be paying hand over fist in taxes for all the people in the private sector who have a crap pension or no pension, and are reliant of the state for their welfare in the later years too. And everyone who doesn't save up hundreds of thousands to cover care costs (since no one will own a house to sell to pay for these in the future anyway).

I want the people who care for me to be treated well, and paid well, and work in good conditions. If I'm putting my health and life in your hands, I do not want you to be on your 12th hour at work without a sip of water or a visit to the loo. FFS.

We manage to afford many other things, we can afford the NHS. We just don't want to. NHS style medical care is workable and affordable in other countries. It's just the ethos of 'personal responsibility' (or ME! ME! ME! FUCK YOU!) spouted by the current government (and used as a softener by the opposition) that is the problem. We've stopped giving a shit about each other.

iggly - they are doing more for job creation (by rescuing our economy) than any other gov - so maybe your pay might not be rocketing up but at least you are employed. i understand that there have been more jobs created over the last few years in the uk than anywhere else in europ.

in some areas of the country the pay rates on here would enable a decent level of living. In London or the south a poor standard. If people are complaining about a bad deal wouldn't regional pay levels be a solution

But what have they done about wages? Living costs?

Also the jobs being created are part time or people are going self employed. Not enough to live on.

I would be more amenable if they were stronger on employment rights and the loving wage. And proper policies on childcare costs. When you get beneath the policies to the actual substance, they don't stack up.

*living wage. Loving wage - ha!