Save the NHS!

[cm1179]

Which is why you award to the best value tender, not the cheapest. Of course, the challenge comes in setting up the bidding process to ensure you get the best value...

the bidding process will come down to specification which every party tendering for the work will have to meet. it wont be the spec of the equipment that will be poor comparitively as it will be exactly the same as the other submissions as the spec has to be met to qualify for submission.

all public sector tenders are awarded to the lowest bidder, no matter what their track record. there is a certain track record and reputation that a company or individual must meet to get on the list of approved bidders but the lowest bid will get it and we all know why they're the lowest bidder.

i can only assume that the people on the list ( a lot of brown envelopes involved ) are marking up materials by a certain % as they know they will get away with it and the people purchasing couldn't really give a stuff as they've got a generous budget.

 

[[TW]Fox]

2% of GDP per annum is affordable to pay out for a tiny proportion of the population?

20% of the working population is a 'tiny proportion'?

 

[Dolph]

20% of the working population is a 'tiny proportion'?

20% of the working population aren't claiming a pension...

 

[[TW]Fox]

The public sector isn't exclusive in dealing with vomit or risk to life.

I absolutely agree. But the private sector worker is rewarded in a different way - better pay.

Why is this public sector employee making a lifelong commitment, but private sector isn't? Why is there some belief that the roles are different? Can private sector employees not be dedicated to their customers (some of whom I'm sure may be public sector - after all, we're only talking about who pays them for delivering their service)?

You miss my point entirely. The commitment is the same - the package is different. Overall, it probably balances out - thats my point.

I wonder what the average management accountant earns in the fire service?

What does the same position pay in a private practice or within BP or HSBC?

Think of it like this - one says 'We dont pay you much, but we'll look after you when you retire'. The other says 'We pay you properly, but you ought to sort yourself a pension...'. Net they are probably both the same..

 

[The_Abyss]

Worse than a worse-case scenario? You haven't a clue what you're talking about.

The calculations the government uses for unfunded defined benefit pensions schemes are less onerous than those used by the private sector.

Making insulting comments about my knowledge of pensions isn't going to change the facts.

 

[cm1179]

Why is this public sector employee making a lifelong commitment

nice benefits. the irony is, every single person who works in a benefits office, is there purely for the benefits when they retire.

 

[The_Abyss]

I absolutely agree. But the private sector worker is rewarded in a different way - better pay.

They're not. Check ONS.

You miss my point entirely. The commitment is the same - the package is different. Overall, it probably balances out - thats my point.

I wonder what the average management accountant earns in the fire service?

What does the same position pay in a private practice or within BP or HSBC?

I don't miss the point. You do. The pension scheme is unaffordable, whether it balances or not.

Why not pay the same then and have parity over wages and pensions. And working conditions and terms of employment.

My other half is a management accountant, seeing as you bring it up.

 

[[TW]Fox]

They're not. Check ONS.

Who will do what, give a skewed average figure because the top execs are paid well?

Why not pay the same then and have parity over wages and pensions.

You and Dolph would still be complaining if they reformed the pension and then gave everyone a pay rise.

My other half is a management accountant, seeing as you bring it up.

Perhaps she should check for jobs doing the same as she does in the police or fire service, she'll probably decide not to apply

 

[Fr0dders]

We're not stupid you know.

The whole point of having a flaming procurement department is that if someone goes out of business they find someone else.

Thats one of the points of their jobs!!

Personally I think NHS procurement needs a massive shake up. ANYONE who signs these deals knowing how much of a rip off they are should be fired.

Procurement should be about tough and gruelling negotiations in getting the best possible deal for the NHS and the taxpayer, not just being a ****ing lazy ****wit and signing any old contract cos they can't be arsed to do their jobs properly and negotiate.

Whenever I order up stuff for us, I ALWAYS ALWAYS manage an extra discount on stuff. If you dont ask then you dont get!

Best discount I ever got for one of our bigger purchases was 41%. Had I not pushed and pushed this would have never happened.

If I can do it for my department, why cant the utterly useless, lazy ****wits who are signing off the big stuff do it?

Its pathetic. They should all be fired. THEY are part of the problem and they should be disgusted with themselves.

The NHS potentially has mega bargaining power, they should be using it.

True story

I know of a buyer in the NHS who went to his supplier

Said "we've been given a budget of 10k, do what you can with it"

Leaving it up to the supplier to spend all of that budget, regardless of whether that was what the actual solution they needed cost.

Its this sort of "it doesn't matter" attitude that needs stopping, and could ensure that money gets spent on patients, and not greedy suppliers.

If it gets to that point I'd say the procurement department have already failed I'd say.



How do you know they don't negotiate discounts?

See above. We speak to people with contracts for the NHS, and with connecting for health staff. This sort of attitude is rife throughout the NHS and its disgraceful.

 

[The_Abyss]

Who will do what, give a skewed average figure because the top execs are paid well?

Paid by the public sector...

Perhaps she should check for jobs doing the same as she does in the police or fire service, she'll probably decide not to apply

I didn't say where she worked.

Oops.

 

[The_Abyss]

You and Dolph would still be complaining if they reformed the pension and then gave everyone a pay rise.

Why not pay the same then and have parity over wages and pensions. And working conditions and terms of employment.

Yes and no. No because parity would be fair - you seem to have missed the above. Yes because it is already unfair. Public sector are paid more.

Are you employed by or contracted to the public sector, or work for an organisation that works with the public sector?

 

[cm1179]

Said "we've been given a budget of 10k, do what you can with it"

this is what annoys me about this country and its spending. it's the same with the roads. a department gets a budget, it carries out all the work required within the budget and still has a nice chunk left over. instead of being sensible and giving it back, they use it up on areas that don't really need money spent on, purely because if they don't use up all of their budget, they wont get the same amount next year. the buyers don't give a stuff and tbh, why should they? unless they were offered a bonus for cost cutting, it's no skin off their nose.

 

[Dolph]

Sorry, under Labour the number of qualified nurses working for the NHS rose by almost 100,000 (Source)

This is like the 'police officer' stat though, just because they are a qualified nurse doesn't mean they are working in a frontline nursing role, nor does it mean that the total FTE staff has increased (as your source acknowledges).

 

[scorza]

NHS plans will mean putting wealthy first according to chairman of the British Medical Association and will rebuild the NHS according to a "philosophy that relies on a market-based health system rather like the one we see in the United States."

 

[Dolph]

NHS plans will mean putting wealthy first according to chairman of the British Medical Association and will rebuild the NHS according to a "philosophy that relies on a market-based health system rather like the one we see in the United States."

Well, except of course it doesn't, there's no evidence to support this, and the BMA is a trade union, with all the bias involved.

I'm still waiting for any sort of independent, evidence based approach as to why the proposals are bad, rather than 'evidence' (alternatively known as ideological positioning with no evidential backing whatsoever) from pressure groups and trade unions...

 

[Danthus]

DOLPH BINGO - UNIONS !

 

[Dr. Pain]

you purchased off someone who was willing to drop by 41%

does that make sense to you?

What a stupid question. I almost wasnt going to rise to it.

Yes and you should thank me, as I saved the taxpayer money.

It was an enormous order, so on that particular product the margin was there to be reduced in order to get our business.

This is the type of hard negotiating the NHS needs and should be doing on everything.

Either that, or the government sets up its own medical supply companies to do the job cheaper.

 

[Dolph]

DOLPH BINGO - UNIONS !

And yet still no evidence that the changes are a bad idea...

It's sad that this sort of post is considered an acceptable alternative to actually trying to debate a point in a mature fashion.

 

[stockhausen]

DOLPH BINGO - UNIONS !

Back in the good old days, you scored triple points if Lolph mentioned both Unions AND Gordon Brown in the same post - now that it is routine, you don't even score any extra points at all

 

[Danthus]

And yet still no evidence that the changes are a bad idea...

It's sad that this sort of post is considered an acceptable alternative to actually trying to debate a point in a mature fashion.

Calm down it is GD, I wouldn't have replied in way were we in SC.

And I support NHS reform but I think we should listen to people who deliver the patient care and not the people who look at spreadsheets.