Nurses v R W media

[MolteniArcore]

From what I've been reading one of the major problems the NHS is having is that there isn't enough management, the rate is like 2% whereas in the private sector it's closer to 10%. Effectively the NHS needs more managers to allocate resources better, so will actually need much more nurses on the higher pay grades. I'm not sure if that's band 9 mind, may be more band 7 upwards?

Can you imagine if the RW media got hold of this stat? There would be a field day. It is the laziest trope of the NHS that RW media luvvies use to beat it with 'the money is getting wasted on too many managers'.

And that's what the NHS has to deal with - muppets with no knowledge ranting on TV about things they know nothing about.

 

[r00fie1]

* Just for information - the "Black Alert" [Critical Incident] staus declaration is the default status of most major hospitals in the UK every winter.
Strikes or no strikes.
PFI and PPP + 12 years of....(?) is the reason.

 

[Andy_W]

Can you imagine if the RW media got hold of this stat? There would be a field day. It is the laziest trope of the NHS that RW media luvvies use to beat it with 'the money is getting wasted on too many managers'.

And that's what the NHS has to deal with - muppets with no knowledge ranting on TV about things they know nothing about.

I think they know, as I think it was shared by John Burn Murdoch of the financial times. I suppose a lot of Tory's read that (maybe not the thick RWNJ's though)? Not that I'm saying JBM is right-wing, as I don't think he is, seems pretty central to me. Not sure about the paper either mind, I don't rally read it much, and mainly just follow JBM on twitter as he talks a lot of sense and just gets the numbers out.

It's a hard stick for the RW media to use mind, the NHS is hard for them to attack. It's also the Tories which have cut down on the number of managers, not kept funding up with the EU, cut down bed numbers not adapted for our population etc. The finger is pointing squarely at Jeremy (the c**t) Hunt, as he changed course and set it on this path.

Even if all the lower-level roles were filled, and if there were massive budgets, there would still be big problems if they're not managed well. To get the best people, and best results everywhere, means paying a lot of people a lot of money to sit behind desks, but that's reality. This will also mean they have to pay more money into social care and ways of getting the people out of beds, as apparently the lack of options to transfer people out of hospital, is causing a blockage in the hospitals. Sounds complicated, and the numbers won't get better unless the Tories pay the staff more, get more management, sort out social care. There's no way they're doing all of those, and they have no chance of getting power back with the NHS wrecked.

 

[JackG]

I think they know, as I think it was shared by John Burn Murdoch of the financial times. I suppose a lot of Tory's read that (maybe not the thick RWNJ's though)? Not that I'm saying JBM is right-wing, as I don't think he is, seems pretty central to me. Not sure about the paper either mind, I don't rally read it much, and mainly just follow JBM on twitter as he talks a lot of sense and just gets the numbers out.

It's a hard stick for the RW media to use mind, the NHS is hard for them to attack. It's also the Tories which have cut down on the number of managers, not kept funding up with the EU, cut down bed numbers not adapted for our population etc. The finger is pointing squarely at Jeremy (the c**t) Hunt, as he changed course and set it on this path.

Even if all the lower-level roles were filled, and if there were massive budgets, there would still be big problems if they're not managed well. To get the best people, and best results everywhere, means paying a lot of people a lot of money to sit behind desks, but that's reality. This will also mean they have to pay more money into social care and ways of getting the people out of beds, as apparently the lack of options to transfer people out of hospital, is causing a blockage in the hospitals. Sounds complicated, and the numbers won't get better unless the Tories pay the staff more, get more management, sort out social care. There's no way they're doing all of those, and they have no chance of getting power back with the NHS wrecked.

I misread this the first time and thought you had taken leave of your senses. I'd read JBM as JRM!

 

[Andy_W]

I misread this the first time and thought you had taken leave of your senses. I'd read JBM as JRM!

Haha, no, I've very differing opinions on those two!

JBM comes across as a decent knowledgeable guy, but JRM is probably my most despised politician, which takes some doing with the current and recent crops.

 

[Stanny]

£350 million pounds extra per week, for God knows how many weeks, going in to the NHS since Brexit. Now the nurses are striking for the first time ever due to the lack of a reasonable inflationary pay increase. It's all very confusing to me.

 

[ThePrisoner]

£350 million pounds extra per week, for God knows how many weeks, going in to the NHS since Brexit. Now the nurses are striking for the first time ever due to the lack of a reasonable inflationary pay increase. It's all very confusing to me.

Reece-Mogg says the NHS is getting the £350m per week. So have other tories. I haven't seen one jot of evidence presented that this is the case. If it was the case surely the Brexiteers would have been crowing about it from the rooftops, or maybe put ads on the side of a bus?

 

[Nano]

I've been having this argument for years. I can't be bothered typing it all right now but the "too many managers" argument is completely nonsense. There are nowhere near enough managers, just like there are nowhere near enough of any other staff group in the NHS. The biggest problem is that clinical staff end up being over-involved in management which means they have less clinical time so fewer patients are seen. It's less efficient/productive to have fewer managers. They also reduced all the admin roles so clinical staff are doing that as well which also reduced clinical time.

 

[r00fie1]

I've been having this argument for years. I can't be bothered typing it all right now but the "too many managers" argument is completely nonsense. There are nowhere near enough managers, just like there are nowhere near enough of any other staff group in the NHS. The biggest problem is that clinical staff end up being over-involved in management which means they have less clinical time so fewer patients are seen. It's less efficient/productive to have fewer managers. They also reduced all the admin roles so clinical staff are doing that as well which also reduced clinical time.

I will back that up 100% with experience

 

[Jonny Ingbar]

I've been having this argument for years. I can't be bothered typing it all right now but the "too many managers" argument is completely nonsense. There are nowhere near enough managers, just like there are nowhere near enough of any other staff group in the NHS. The biggest problem is that clinical staff end up being over-involved in management which means they have less clinical time so fewer patients are seen. It's less efficient/productive to have fewer managers. They also reduced all the admin roles so clinical staff are doing that as well which also reduced clinical time.

Yes, it's a well worn out trope that there's 'too many mangers' in the public sector.

It's nonsense and the absolute opposite to my experience.

 

[On The Bob]

I was watching a BBC news snippet the other day. Interesting how they aren’t trying to make Villains out of the Nurses and interviewing / reporting their side of the story.

A complete contrast to their reporting of the Rail strikes - barring the odd Mick Lynch interview where they consistently get embarrassed when trying to be confrontational!

It’s so obvious, it’s becoming embarrassing. I’ve always been a supporter of the BBC and don’t mind the license fee. But the more their “balanced reporting” becomes increasingly like Tory propaganda, I’m starting to think we need to get rid all together!

 

[Cambsred]

3 times this week in my clinic. Variations of discussion. "we support you and your colleagues striking and everything you do, not like those greedy train drivers"

The media are very successful at pushing their agenda.

My Father in law only watches bbc news. "those train drivers already earn far too much"

Even when they are corrected that its not train drivers they carry on ranting about how the drivers earn too much.

 

[r00fie1]

 

[festa5]

I was watching a BBC news snippet the other day. Interesting how they aren’t trying to make Villains out of the Nurses and interviewing / reporting their side of the story.

A complete contrast to their reporting of the Rail strikes - barring the odd Mick Lynch interview where they consistently get embarrassed when trying to be confrontational!

It’s so obvious, it’s becoming embarrassing. I’ve always been a supporter of the BBC and don’t mind the license fee. But the more their “balanced reporting” becomes increasingly like Tory propaganda, I’m starting to think we need to get rid all together!

It's the most dangerous news source for me. If you're not interested in politics, or even world affairs really but just to want an awareness of what's going on, many probably rely on the BBC as a factual, unbiased source.

It obviously doesn't have the overt agenda of the likes of the sun or the mail, but that's what makes it so powerful. Only daft racists or the hard of thinking are likely fall for everything those rags spew out. But the BBC is "trusted". Anyone not really paying too much attention will probably still take what they report at face value.