Junior Doctors Strikes

But the benefits package (wage and pension) should be compared as a package. I was always under the impression that the public sector had poorer pay but much better pensions than the equivalent private sector.

As @Infidelus says, employer contributions have increased by 50% since 2019. Has that happened in the private sector?

Even if there has been zero growth in private sector, this still all means that Junior Doctor wages - including benefits - have fallen, whereas private sector wages have risen.

The public sector is quick to complain that their wages don't match private sector wages. Fine, let's equalise them to private sector. Shall we do the same for their pensions?

I've got a better idea: how about the private sector stop letting this divide and conquer approach drive down their pay and conditions. The private and public sector are not in opposition.
 
GTr36ZMWoAAU4Ca


Data from the FT. This nonsense of "we've all suffered because of inflation" is just factually and patently untrue. Doctors have experienced the worst erosion of pay of any professional group in the country by a country mile.

Have to admit I'll be shocked and a bit disappointed if they don't take that, and all public support will just evaporate.

Me too, even on my wage, 22% is HUGE !

If they don't take that then public support will disappear very fast.

Imagine a 22% wage for someone whos basically training on the job under supervision...


everyone else above them will want a wage rise next

2 is really 22%? or 22% + increased pension contributions paid by the nhs....


20bn black hole.... going to be about 100bn at this rate

22% is good. They should take that and see how things look in two years time.

If the JDs refuse this deal and decide to strike then, IMO, they are just being unreasonable.

Yes, their pay has been eroded over the last decade but so has most others. People's lifestyles adapt to their income so, regardless of comparing it to 10 years ago, a 22% rise will have a significant improvement on their quality of life.

I will have zero sympathy or respect for the JDs if they refuse it.

If the deal is rejected all public support will be gone.

Personally I will be voting to reject the deal. Here's why. The 21% figure is nonsene and just marketing spin from the government.
  • ~8% was already awarded to us last year. 6% + £1000 consolidated is already being awarded to us this year by the DDRB (works out to about 9%). So effectively the only new thing that has been offered by this Labour government is 4% extra for the 23/24 year.
  • My background, like many of my colleagues, is that of academic excellence since childhood. Straight A*s at GCSE. Straight A*s at A-level. My mates who went into the city (law/finance/tech) have been on £100-150k since their mid 20s. Those of us that went into medicine knew we'd never match the private sector earnings we could get, but there has always been a social contract that if you're going to bring the exceptionally skilled doctor workforce under a monopsony employer then there has to be a fair financial compensation for that in exchange for their public service. Consultants in this country earn ~£100k-£140k regardless of specialty, after the longest specialty training of any country in the world (to squeeze maximum labour from you). It's a joke. Ireland 280k euros. Australia 400k+. Canada 500k+. The middle east 250-300k tax free. The USA even sillier numbers into the 7 figures.
  • I have well over a decade of training, am a dual specialist in two fields, and run major tertiary/national level intensive care units at nights and out of hours. I worked in insane conditions during the COVID pandemic, and experienced things most members of the public with office jobs could never even have nightmares of. All of this is to say, I am NOT worth less than an equivalent doctor from 10 or 12 years ago.
  • Even with this deal, we're still ~23% away from pay restoration to 2008 levels.
  • A physician's assistant (now called physician associates) start on £47k now. That is someone who didn't have the grades or ability to get into medical school, has nowhere near the same academic pedigree, and has done a 2 year watered down crash course to be able to work as a PA. There is no circumstance where any doctor, of any grade (even a 1st year doctor starting on £36k now after 6 years of medical school) should be paid significantly less than their assistants.
The concept of public sympathy or support is just nonsense I'm afraid. The public have always been ****** off about train/tube drivers and their strikes, and yet they consistently get their annual pay rises. The fact is, this is an employment and pay dispute with the government. Whether you have support and sympathy for my colleagues and I or not, when you are a major trauma victim and your body and limbs are unrecognisable mush on a pavement, or you go into cardiogenic shock and feel like you're drowing as your lungs fill with fluid, or your intracranial pressure rises so high that your brain starts leaking out of your ears, you will be dependent on my skillset and I will gladly apply my years of knowledge, qualifications, and experience toward saving your life. I just expect to be paid properly.

And if you can't that's fine, if you want to pay third world salaries then that's a choice you can make. But then expect third world level healthcare (as the NHS is currently experiencing and providing), whilst my colleagues and I enjoy triple/quadruple salaries abroad.

Whether my skillset goes toward saving an Australian or Canadian or British life, it's all the same to me. I'm fulfilled and happy helping people and performing miracles on the ICU. The nationality of my patients doesn't matter to me, so why not get paid properly for it and provide a good life for my family and children?
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about the actual wages or benefits, I'm talking about the change in wages. The private sector is, on average, paid more in real terms than in 2010 despite the long bad period that Tory policy induced through the 2010s; but that's not true of the public sector and it's particularly bad for Junior Doctors.

Is it particularly bad for junior doctors? Have they been left behind while the rest of the public sector has enjoyed good pay increases. My partner works in pharmacy and they get treated like **** compared to the doctors. So do nurses. Unless we have a big windfall incoming for unpaid wages, my partner hasn't seen pay increases of any note either.

And pay is a combination of everything. Thats part of the reason why they talk about TC far more than wages in the US. I know that over there health insurance is a big thing as part of a salary but they talk about it because your bank balance at the end of every month is only part of what a company is paying you and it all matters.

The fact many doctors maxed out their pension pots in their early to mid 50s previously should tell you how much they have been getting in pension contributions. Previously the ceiling was just over a million before you start losing out to serious taxation. So if people are working for 25-30 years and maxing out a £1m pot they are putting probably about £30k/year into their pensions. You would need to be on a ridiculous salary to be doing that in the private sector.

Part of the problem is that doctors in the past had it very, very good and unsurprisingly todays junior doctors look at the lifestyle and wealth of those guys and wonder why they don't have the same outlook. Well, unfortunately, no one really does. No one will earn an equivalent wage of the boomers and have the same lifestyle these days. Thats just life.
 
The main issue with this offer is the lack of commitment to pay restoration.

The Scottish government were able to avert strikes entirely by just committing to that. Any sensible person knows that if it took 14-15 years for your pay to be eroded by such a huge amount, it will take some years to restore it to where it should be.

But a lack of any fixed commitment by the government is unacceptable. All that will happen is next year's DDRB or soon after will be more sub-inflationary pay rises, and we'll be back on strike again. What's the point. Just commit to a few years of RPI + 1% or similar.

Secondly, there's nothing about T&Cs in the offer. There's a lot of abuse in the system that happens currently, and it would be pretty easy for some of those things to be rectified and sweeten the deal. Things like minimising being rotated up and down the country every few months/every year which make it impossible to settle down and buy a house or easily start a family. And things like having to pay £120 a month to park at work could easily be addressed.
 
Equivalent wage talk is nonsense when doctors could get better pay and conditions NOW either in the private sector or abroad.
where costs of living are more expensive, evens most of that if not all of it out.

and you might be a lot further away on your commute...

The grass is always greener.


With how Great Australia is according to their adverts in the papers about doctors and nursing emigrating I'm surprised we have any left.

Seems paradise awaits my friend!
 
Last edited:
And here's some more data from the Financial Times explaining why this is a problem and this deal doesn't go far enough. And why anyone still parroting the "we've all had it hard" line has their head in the sand.

Is it particularly bad for junior doctors? Have they been left behind while the rest of the public sector has enjoyed good pay increases.
Yes

ftcms%3Af3793e50-d830-4166-8afc-07142927809c


https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2F41cefd50-e51d-11ed-8c4f-3db961753528-standard.png


https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2F150e62b0-e51d-11ed-b74a-53cd5a93dd9a-standard.png
 
Last edited:
GTr36ZMWoAAU4Ca


Data from the FT. This nonsense of "we've all suffered because of inflation" is just factually and patently untrue. Doctors have experienced the worst erosion of pay of any professional group in the country by a country mile.















Personally I will be voting to reject the deal. Here's why. The 21% figure is nonsene and just marketing spin from the government.
  • ~8% was already awarded to us last year. 6% + £1000 consolidated is already being awarded to us this year by the DDRB (works out to about 9%). So effectively the only new thing that has been offered by this Labour government is 4% extra for the 23/24 year.
  • My background, like many of my colleagues, is that of academic excellence since childhood. Straight A*s at GCSE. Straight A*s at A-level. My mates who went into the city (law/finance/tech) have been on £100-150k since their mid 20s. Those of us that went into medicine knew we'd never match the private sector earnings we could get, but there has always been a social contract that if you're going to bring the exceptionally skilled doctor workforce under a monopsony employer then there has to be a fair financial compensation for that in exchange for their public service. Consultants in this country earn ~£100k-£140k regardless of specialty, after the longest specialty training of any country in the world (to squeeze maximum labour from you). It's a joke. Ireland 280k euros. Australia 400k+. Canada 500k+. The middle east 250-300k tax free. The USA even sillier numbers into the 7 figures.
  • I have well over a decade of training, am a dual specialist in two fields, and run major tertiary/national level intensive care units at nights and out of hours. I worked in insane conditions during the COVID pandemic, and experienced things most members of the public with office jobs could never even have nightmares of. All of this is to say, I am NOT worth less than an equivalent doctor from 10 or 12 years ago.
  • Even with this deal, we're still ~23% away from pay restoration to 2008 levels.
  • A physician's assistant (now called physician associates) start on £47k now. That is someone who didn't have the grades or ability to get into medical school, has nowhere near the same academic pedigree, and has done a 2 year watered down crash course to be able to work as a PA. There is no circumstance where any doctor, of any grade (even a 1st year doctor starting on £36k now after 6 years of medical school) should be paid significantly less than their assistants.
The concept of public sympathy or support is just nonsense I'm afraid. The public have always been ****** off about train/tube drivers and their strikes, and yet they consistently get their annual pay rises. The fact is, this is an employment and pay dispute with the government. Whether you have support and sympathy for my colleagues and I or not, when you are a major trauma victim and your body and limbs are unrecognisable mush on a pavement, or you go into cardiogenic shock and feel like you're drowing as your lungs fill with fluid, or your intracranial pressure rises so high that your brain starts leaking out of your ears, you will be dependent on my skillset and I will gladly apply my years of knowledge, qualifications, and experience toward saving your life. I just expect to be paid properly.

And if you can't that's fine, if you want to pay third world salaries then that's a choice you can make. But then expect third world level healthcare (as the NHS is currently experiencing and providing), whilst my colleagues and I enjoy triple/quadruple salaries abroad.

Whether my skillset goes toward saving an Australian or Canadian or British life, it's all the same to me. I'm fulfilled and happy helping people and performing miracles on the ICU. The nationality of my patients doesn't matter to me, so why not get paid properly for it and provide a good life for my family and children?
My mate is a consultant, I think he said he was picking up £1200 each extra 12 hr shift he does. If you want to make a lot of money you can go private I guess. I paid £300 for a 15 minute consultation when I went to London Bridge, the doctor was a wearing a 100K Patek so I guess he is doing alright. Salaries in general are quite bad in the UK, in my field I could make way more abroad. You do also have to factor in that as a doctor you have basically 100% job security….

Another friend has family over here from Australia who came to do a year in the NHS, they said they can’t believe how backwards and understaffed the NHS is, way behind what they are doing in Australia.
 
And here's some more data from the Financial Times explaining why this is a problem and this deal doesn't go far enough. And why anyone still parroting the "we've all had it hard" line has their head in the sand.


Yes

ftcms%3Af3793e50-d830-4166-8afc-07142927809c

But is that not also telling part of the problem? Training doctors is expensive. Look at the US doctors, they end up in hundreds of thousands of $ worth of debt after qualifying. Here it's relatively cheap and so needs to be recouped. If you're constantly having to re-train new doctors because people use your country to train cheaply and then run abroad then is it not contributing to the problem?
 
But is that not also telling part of the problem? Training doctors is expensive. Look at the US doctors, they end up in hundreds of thousands of $ worth of debt after qualifying. Here it's relatively cheap and so needs to be recouped. If you're constantly having to re-train new doctors because people use your country to train cheaply and then run abroad then is it not contributing to the problem?
People are not using our country to train cheaply.

U.K. funded medical school places only go to people eligible for U.K. student finance.
 
Last edited:
But is that not also telling part of the problem? Training doctors is expensive. Look at the US doctors, they end up in hundreds of thousands of $ worth of debt after qualifying. Here it's relatively cheap and so needs to be recouped. If you're constantly having to re-train new doctors because people use your country to train cheaply and then run abroad then is it not contributing to the problem?

Where do you get the idea that the UK is cheap? It's not true. The UK is very expensive compared to everywhere else in Europe and most international comparators further afield; comparing to an absolute basket case like the US is missing the wood for the trees.

And, yes, it's very much part of the problem. Doctors are able to be mobile, something benefits the NHS with our mass pilfering of trained doctors and nurses from the second and third world, but also means that doctors can easily go elsewhere if the UK doesn't offer good terms: pay, quality of life, etc.
 
Whether my skillset goes toward saving an Australian or Canadian or British life, it's all the same to me. I'm fulfilled and happy helping people and performing miracles on the ICU. The nationality of my patients doesn't matter to me, so why not get paid properly for it and provide a good life for my family and children?

Some of what you are saying is completely reasonable but some of it reads like someone with a bit of an ego as well. Your intelligence is largely luck and your ability to do a well paid technically tricky job is a product of that. You have benefitted from the country's education system and university/ medical training program to become a doctor so disappearing off to another country to earn far more money isn't entirely the victimless crime you appear to be suggesting. America pays silly money because they have a morally bankrupt medical system and have to pay an insane amount to actually become doctors. Aus has a high CoL and their economy is largely based on their massive wealth from natural resources, they simply have more money than the UK.

The charts comparing earnings are also disingenuous as the "baseline" is a combination of all earnings. So the fact that the top few % of earners in the public sector have seen massive pay increases over the past 15 years while the rest of us worker bees have barely kept our heads above water is handily ignored.
 
But is that not also telling part of the problem? Training doctors is expensive. Look at the US doctors, they end up in hundreds of thousands of $ worth of debt after qualifying. Here it's relatively cheap and so needs to be recouped. If you're constantly having to re-train new doctors because people use your country to train cheaply and then run abroad then is it not contributing to the problem?

Training in this country costs the same as most other countries. The average doctor here graduates with about 90-100k in student debt, which they will end up paying double or more because of the interest. Then from the moment they graduate, they're working and providing service to the NHS. So they've paid for any costs involved with their training. Unless you believe the fiction from Jeremy Hunt from 2016 of £250k, which is a figure that includes the salaries you're paying these postgraduate doctors.

So the bottom line is, these people are not indentured servants or slaves to the NHS. They're highly educated, highly qualified professionals that can earn double or more abroad. The skillset is in high demand globally. They've paid for the costs of their own training, likely multiple times over.

It sucks for the UK if the disparity in pay and conditions is so significant that those UK trained doctors go abroad. Pay and treat them properly and they'll stay, it's that simple.

Secondly we don't have much of a leg to stand on when we ruthlessly poach and import doctors from Pakistan/India/Nigeria who are experiencing the same thing coming from those countries and doubling their salaries. The only issue is, for many of them once they've got a few years of UK experience on their CV they go back home. Thus there's no long term retention of senior and experienced doctors in the UK.
 
People are not using our country to train cheaply.

U.K. funded medical school places only go to people eligible for U.K. student finance.

Hes not suggesting that, hes suggesting that people from the UK are using the UK system to get trained and then they go off abroad to earn far more.
 
Hes not suggesting that, hes suggesting that people from the UK are using the UK system to get trained and then they go off abroad to earn far more.
This is very common, particularly IMGs coming to complete GP training and move on immediately after.
 
Here's another chart that will really get the ReformUK voters riled up.

This is very common, particularly IMGs coming to complete GP training and move on immediately after.

9ToYKCA.jpeg


The chart shows what % of new starters in UK specialty training programmes (to become a consultant) are taken up by international/foreign medical graduates. You can see that Anaesthesia (one of my specialties) remains very British-graduate dominated, because it's highly competitive to get into.

But 60% of the GPs this country is training, and 50% of the psychiatrists this country is training are foreign doctors. A significant % of these doctors have absolutely 0 intention to stay long term in the UK, and the moment they complete their training and become consultants, they'll be moving to the middle east/abroad/their home countries for significantly higher pay and better conditions. After all, they have no long term ties to the UK. They just want the reputational and CV boost.

What's the problem with that? Well we're desperately short in this country on specialists and GPs. And if a majority of the ones you do produce end up leaving, things are going to get a lot, lot worse. Many of these guys are only able to get onto these specialty programs because they're taking the spots that British doctors have left when they went to Australia/NZ/Canada/the USA.

So the bottom line, once again, is pay and treat British doctors properly and your problems will be solved. Don't, and enjoy the continued crumbling of the NHS and the ongoing descent into third-world healthcare.
 
I would suggest that the main things we should be doing for Junior doctors is essentially giving them the offered pay rise and removing any debt burden they have accrued throughout their training... as long as they continue to work in the NHS. ie. you could reduce the amount owed by £10k / year of work or something along those lines. That alone is a not insignificant effective pay increase and honestly, working in medicine shouldn't saddle you with debt.

Both sides of this debate are cherry picking statistics and numbers that suit their arguments. I would love to see how much the average salary has decreased in real terms if you took out all the top earners and the finance sector. I think it would be eye opening.
 
pay = total package including pensions, benefits and bonuses.

You're correct. The only issue is that bonuses are not guaranteed whereas wages and employer pension contributions are. Not sure how that could be taken into account though.

In terms of the public sector, the latter 2 are nonexistent in the public sector.

In terms of the private sector, the first one (pension) is nonexistent as well so there is that.


I've got a better idea: how about the private sector stop letting this divide and conquer approach drive down their pay and conditions. The private and public sector are not in opposition.

I agree but why are you laying the sole blame of the "divide and conquer" approach with the private sector? Doesn't it take 2 to tango?

My point wasn't to convey a conflict between private and public sectors. I was trying to highlight that, when there is a comparison between them in order to highlight how badly the public sector is compared to the private, they use 1 measure (wages) as their stick when it's not the whole picture.

By leaving out things like employer pension contributions, it shows a skewed argument.
 
Back
Top Bottom