FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > NHS hiring more doctors
NHS hiring more doctors
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
"
Who says they will be paid less than the going rate?
Nhs pays in bands so they would be paid the rate for that band  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The point being that we will be poaching doctors from other parts of the world that most likely need them more than we do because of the stupid artificial borders created by brexit. They probably will get paid the same rate as European staff but I can just see the moaning from all the old leavers saying they can’t understand what these people are doing here. It won’t make any difference to the NHS in the long run but it will mean more foreign staff which might not be what the leavers wanted  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What a stupid argument.
Basically you're implying that the European Economic Area is awash with doctors and they have far more than they know what to do with so it was ok to poach them from there.!
But to offer jobs to people outside of the European Economic Area is wrong.
Then your also suggesting doctors from outside the European Economic Area are going to be paid less when they come hear. Where is your proof of this. As stated by someone else. The NHS has a pay structure and all employees will be paid via that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful. "
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs."
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The point being that we will be poaching doctors from other parts of the world that most likely need them more than we do because of the stupid artificial borders created by brexit."
It's nothing to do with Brexit. My hospital experiences over the past 10 years say that we have been importing Indian and Filipino doctors and nurses for a long time.
"... it will mean more foreign staff which might not be what the leavers wanted"
In my experience, leavers wanted to control immigration, not stop it. Educated and useful immigrants will be happily accepted by leavers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can."
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *9alMan
over a year ago
Bridgend |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can.
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back. "
It is surely better to make pay & conditions in the NHS better so doctors choose to stay or choose to come here from abroad |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can.
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back.
It is surely better to make pay & conditions in the NHS better so doctors choose to stay or choose to come here from abroad "
What..? Are you a communist..?
This is something Corbyn would say  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
I understand nurses now have a percentage grant not a full grant which is just wrong. It should all be free.
Full fact explains it costs £163k in taxpayer subsidy to train each doctor. The doctor can have student loans on top of this figure but the £163k is net cost to the tax payer.
Student loans are a choice . Nurses training should be totally free with a percentage claw back if they leave. The same with doctors and certainly dentists.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can.
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back. "
Just a thought but would you sign up to what effectively would be a third of your working life when a government that is in power for five or so years treats you as if you are unprofessional or lazy and constantly tinkers with the service you work for to make themselves look effective? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can.
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back.
Just a thought but would you sign up to what effectively would be a third of your working life when a government that is in power for five or so years treats you as if you are unprofessional or lazy and constantly tinkers with the service you work for to make themselves look effective?"
You take the money out of choice no one is forced. I would say reducing balance over 10 years personally,
The mess the NHS is in is due to how it’s managed and no government has the nerve to address that , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rNice.Man
over a year ago
Doncaster |
"what sort of country do we want to be "
we ve known there s been a shortage of Doctors and nurses for the last 30 years , all thats happened have been cuts to the NHS and Con servatives made it even harder for young people to get into the nursing profession , by weighing them down with debt ... we all need to look in the Mirror as a country and ask "what sort of country we want to be " ??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
"
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me. "
lol it does to me aswell |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me. lol it does to me aswell "
PMSL, so you voted for Brexit to stop immigration from the EU and encourage immigration from the rest of the world? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ostafunMan
over a year ago
near ipswich |
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me. lol it does to me aswell
PMSL, so you voted for Brexit to stop immigration from the EU and encourage immigration from the rest of the world? "
Did i say thats the reason??? It is the outcome of leaving though everyone has an even chance now do you not agree? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me. lol it does to me aswell
PMSL, so you voted for Brexit to stop immigration from the EU and encourage immigration from the rest of the world? Did i say thats the reason??? It is the outcome of leaving though everyone has an even chance now do you not agree?"
I wasn’t talking to you, in 2016 there were more doctors and nurses in Britain from non EU countries than from EU countries . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The NHS is hiring more doctors from outside the UK and the European Economic Area than from within for the first time, setting off a moral argument over the health service’s growing mentality of “poaching” from the developing world.
Is this what Brexit was all about - getting rid of doctors from within the European Union to target cheaper labour from developing countries?
What impact is this going to have on the countries that the doctors have been poached from - surely their investment in training and planning to have doctors in place to treat their own people will be affected?
What happened to the Brexit policy of getting rid of cheap labour to drive up wages - did this mean to drive up wages in developing countries so they can keep their doctors?
No it was about giving everyone an equal chance, the uk did not GET RID OF eu doctors they were entitled to stay.Why do you think a doctor from the eu should have preference over someone from Africa or Asia? now they all have an equal chance, sounds a bit racist to me. lol it does to me aswell "
When did the EU become a ‘race’ ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
Getting doctors and nurses from any other country is due to not training and supporting enough here. Also a reflection on the conditions they work under. If the UK needs more than available then I think it should be open to people that meet the criteria regardless of where they come from. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs.
Free training ? Are you sure, they come out with student loan debt. I'm a nurse, I wouldn't advise anybody to undergo the training, my generation of women had few career options if you were bright but, working class. Nobody can be forced to work in a job they no longer enjoy or need to do. They've done away with the final salary pension, raised the pension age and stagnated pay. Young people do something else if you can.
The idea is they don't pay for the training with the understanding they have to work within the NHS for a set period once fully qualified.
If they leave the NHS before that time is complete then they have to pay the training costs back.
Just a thought but would you sign up to what effectively would be a third of your working life when a government that is in power for five or so years treats you as if you are unprofessional or lazy and constantly tinkers with the service you work for to make themselves look effective?
You take the money out of choice no one is forced. I would say reducing balance over 10 years personally,
The mess the NHS is in is due to how it’s managed and no government has the nerve to address that , "
???The government is the NHS manager. We have no doctors because the demand is increasing quicker than we can train them. The NHS will never keep up while people keep getting unhealthier. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
"
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers. "
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
In one particular unit I was amazed by the waste and it was mainly attributed to the directors.
The total staff count in that unit was around 75-80 from memory .
They had seven directors . Each director had their own PA . These guys would travel U.K. 90% of the time so two PA’s would have covered their admin and travel. Not only did they have one each they appointed a manager to oversee the PA’s.
The front line staff was around 40-45 providing the service.
So a director for every seven front line staff never mind the managers in between to help them manage.
It was supposed to be a profit centre and charge out it services to the rest of the NHS. It was two years before a PA asked in a board meeting if they were ever going to raise some invoices.
First question back from a director to a PA . Please can you look into how we do that? Two years in!!
The problem is there is very little accountability in the quality of the financial management of the service. The CQC needs better MBA type support for a start.
It’s like ISO’s . They used to be a tick box to say you complete a method. Now they are far more interactive and question as to why you do something and financial costs / risks. It also doesn’t let directors hide behind admin.
Good news.
On a positive note a new director who was in the excellent range managed to get a couple of non executive directors from outside the NHS involved . They set about the way it was run and slashed the management . The same department now employs hundreds of people and cares for thousands with less directors and a a lower ratio of managers . So no more managers managing managers . They concentrate on the service provision. It’s held as a beacon on how to do it but resistance is ingrained into the NHS.
It is possible to update the NHS it’s just those in charge are worried about their careers just as we all are, which is understandable. It needs to change. More money is not the answer.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
In one particular unit I was amazed by the waste and it was mainly attributed to the directors.
The total staff count in that unit was around 75-80 from memory .
They had seven directors . Each director had their own PA . These guys would travel U.K. 90% of the time so two PA’s would have covered their admin and travel. Not only did they have one each they appointed a manager to oversee the PA’s.
The front line staff was around 40-45 providing the service.
So a director for every seven front line staff never mind the managers in between to help them manage.
It was supposed to be a profit centre and charge out it services to the rest of the NHS. It was two years before a PA asked in a board meeting if they were ever going to raise some invoices.
First question back from a director to a PA . Please can you look into how we do that? Two years in!!
The problem is there is very little accountability in the quality of the financial management of the service. The CQC needs better MBA type support for a start.
It’s like ISO’s . They used to be a tick box to say you complete a method. Now they are far more interactive and question as to why you do something and financial costs / risks. It also doesn’t let directors hide behind admin.
Good news.
On a positive note a new director who was in the excellent range managed to get a couple of non executive directors from outside the NHS involved . They set about the way it was run and slashed the management . The same department now employs hundreds of people and cares for thousands with less directors and a a lower ratio of managers . So no more managers managing managers . They concentrate on the service provision. It’s held as a beacon on how to do it but resistance is ingrained into the NHS.
It is possible to update the NHS it’s just those in charge are worried about their careers just as we all are, which is understandable. It needs to change. More money is not the answer.
"
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
In one particular unit I was amazed by the waste and it was mainly attributed to the directors.
The total staff count in that unit was around 75-80 from memory .
They had seven directors . Each director had their own PA . These guys would travel U.K. 90% of the time so two PA’s would have covered their admin and travel. Not only did they have one each they appointed a manager to oversee the PA’s.
The front line staff was around 40-45 providing the service.
So a director for every seven front line staff never mind the managers in between to help them manage.
It was supposed to be a profit centre and charge out it services to the rest of the NHS. It was two years before a PA asked in a board meeting if they were ever going to raise some invoices.
First question back from a director to a PA . Please can you look into how we do that? Two years in!!
The problem is there is very little accountability in the quality of the financial management of the service. The CQC needs better MBA type support for a start.
It’s like ISO’s . They used to be a tick box to say you complete a method. Now they are far more interactive and question as to why you do something and financial costs / risks. It also doesn’t let directors hide behind admin.
Good news.
On a positive note a new director who was in the excellent range managed to get a couple of non executive directors from outside the NHS involved . They set about the way it was run and slashed the management . The same department now employs hundreds of people and cares for thousands with less directors and a a lower ratio of managers . So no more managers managing managers . They concentrate on the service provision. It’s held as a beacon on how to do it but resistance is ingrained into the NHS.
It is possible to update the NHS it’s just those in charge are worried about their careers just as we all are, which is understandable. It needs to change. More money is not the answer.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively. "
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes the lazy incompetent culture in government feeds down into the incompetent director level in the NHS. Rather than say you are not getting any more money and why is your management structure so over staffed and inefficient they just say we are investing more. The politicians don’t understand the problem. How can they decide on changes?
Make the directors earn their money or sack them without a gold laden good bye.
From personal experience I am staggered by the waste overseen and instigated by the senior management in the NHS. So many good people are rendered useless by being controlled by overpaid idiots.
There are a lot of good people in the NHS so my comments are not directed at everyone .
I’m not saying we don’t need more doctors but director and middle management culls would more than cover the added costs.
The reason the health service is seeing a rise in patients is the fact we’re all getting fatter and unhealthy so yes they could address that such as sugar and salt taxes but will they ? Of course they won’t as shown recently.
Bad timing right now but they should pursue it going forward
The government want to be seen making popular decisions rather than the proper ones. It’s why they say they have cut taxes a lot but in reality they have gone up. 5p discount on fuel duty sounds great but they’ve kept more than that in the extra vat to offset.
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
In one particular unit I was amazed by the waste and it was mainly attributed to the directors.
The total staff count in that unit was around 75-80 from memory .
They had seven directors . Each director had their own PA . These guys would travel U.K. 90% of the time so two PA’s would have covered their admin and travel. Not only did they have one each they appointed a manager to oversee the PA’s.
The front line staff was around 40-45 providing the service.
So a director for every seven front line staff never mind the managers in between to help them manage.
It was supposed to be a profit centre and charge out it services to the rest of the NHS. It was two years before a PA asked in a board meeting if they were ever going to raise some invoices.
First question back from a director to a PA . Please can you look into how we do that? Two years in!!
The problem is there is very little accountability in the quality of the financial management of the service. The CQC needs better MBA type support for a start.
It’s like ISO’s . They used to be a tick box to say you complete a method. Now they are far more interactive and question as to why you do something and financial costs / risks. It also doesn’t let directors hide behind admin.
Good news.
On a positive note a new director who was in the excellent range managed to get a couple of non executive directors from outside the NHS involved . They set about the way it was run and slashed the management . The same department now employs hundreds of people and cares for thousands with less directors and a a lower ratio of managers . So no more managers managing managers . They concentrate on the service provision. It’s held as a beacon on how to do it but resistance is ingrained into the NHS.
It is possible to update the NHS it’s just those in charge are worried about their careers just as we all are, which is understandable. It needs to change. More money is not the answer.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector. "
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernathCouple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
When we have a Medical Graduate rate of around 7000 per year. Its the elitism of the Medical profession which blocks more students from poorer backgrounds from taking careers in this profession.
We should be looking at the entire system of training medical professionals because it seems that there is problem there.
But it’s the age old problem, how do you keep a skill in demand and maintain a monopoly, you restrict and prevent to that skill. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get. "
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks. "
Can't believe I agree with you twice in a week.! Lol
The NHS does need reform, the front line staff do an amazing job but as a whole it could be so much better and cost effective. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks. "
No, all jobs have to advertised outside. As middle managers are paid above the equivalent in the private sector, I'm not sure why you think they are inferior. Again, you post stuff with no evidence. As I have said the NHS isn't perfect but the idea you can just get a few special people from outside to come in and turn it into a more efficient organisation is just not true. If you had a decent knowledge of the transformation programme and the calibre of people progressing it you just wouldn't post some of the stuff you have. The NHS is currently going through a 5% efficiency drive combined with reorganisation of its structure and looking to increase activity by 20% above 2019 to try and decrease the backlogs caused by covid. I don't know what position you had in the NHS but you clearly didn't have access to the wider management structure. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
Can't believe I agree with you twice in a week.! Lol
The NHS does need reform, the front line staff do an amazing job but as a whole it could be so much better and cost effective."
How? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
No, all jobs have to advertised outside. As middle managers are paid above the equivalent in the private sector, I'm not sure why you think they are inferior. Again, you post stuff with no evidence. As I have said the NHS isn't perfect but the idea you can just get a few special people from outside to come in and turn it into a more efficient organisation is just not true. If you had a decent knowledge of the transformation programme and the calibre of people progressing it you just wouldn't post some of the stuff you have. The NHS is currently going through a 5% efficiency drive combined with reorganisation of its structure and looking to increase activity by 20% above 2019 to try and decrease the backlogs caused by covid. I don't know what position you had in the NHS but you clearly didn't have access to the wider management structure. "
I didn’t say the rate for the jobs are inferior so please correct that. I said their ability tends to be inferior in my many years of experience.
You are avoiding my points completely.
Please feel free to address my points in regards to the facts I posted as you have now claimed no facts twice when blatantly they are facts. . Or are you just saying to don’t believe me? The business and the narrative is fact.
You’re are just waffling against them again. That one deal I mentioned had been wasting millions for years and there was absolutely no due diligence or checks in place. Please explain why you think that is acceptable?
Also I repeat yet again please show me evidence of cuts made over the years to reduce the burden of admin in relation to new technology and practice?
You just repeat wishful thinking mantra to try and defend a fabulous institution which is failing in far too many ways.
5% . My god that’s awesome. FFS
It’s a typical government quote. We are aiming or we are looking to or we are driving towards or we are reviewing. There are no hard actions just words and all the while the cost keeps mounting out of proportion. Maybe start sacking s few and see how the rest step up?
I’ve dealt with the NHS for many years at a very senior level so know exactly what I’m taking about thanks.
You’re obviously voicing a vested interest which is fine as I said. No doubt you are better than the average aren’t you? The sheer ratio of admin to front line should tell you something is fundamentally wrong.
All jobs are advertised in most of the private sector too but as with the NHS internal progression is bias towards the incumbent staff. That’s also a fact if you care to check.
Just another example . How can nurses and service managers quit and then start a few weeks later on twice the money through an agent? I don’t blame them as it’s flexible and better pay. My beef is why isn’t the senior management addressing this by two actions?
One, bar anyone from working for the NHS for two years after leaving so no re-hiring as an agency worker. Two address the need for better shift pattern management to make working inside the NHS more attractive to its workers.
Also as I said in an earlier post. There are indeed many talented managers and directors in the NHS but they are drowned out by the ridiculous outdated processes and incompetent staff that surround them.
So a combination of a more ruthless attitude to promoting talent along with adopting outside practices to extract the best result is needed. Not a revolution but an evolution but definitely at a pace that private industry works not the present NHS.
Btw in case you hadn’t worked it out I have never had a position in the NHS only contracts around. I operate in the private sector so not sure why you made that comment?
Anyway if you refuse to address the actual facts I’ve raised or answer any questions you are of course confirming the NHS approach of kicking the can or putting something in the too difficult box and surrounding it with waffle, so I’ll leave it there.
I wish you good luck in your challenges around your “transformation”
I’m a great supporter of the principal of the NHS. Through years of bad management we are failing this great institution. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
Can't believe I agree with you twice in a week.! Lol
The NHS does need reform, the front line staff do an amazing job but as a whole it could be so much better and cost effective."
Be careful I’ll be expecting an invite for a pint sometime soon? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernathCouple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
No, all jobs have to advertised outside. As middle managers are paid above the equivalent in the private sector, I'm not sure why you think they are inferior. Again, you post stuff with no evidence. As I have said the NHS isn't perfect but the idea you can just get a few special people from outside to come in and turn it into a more efficient organisation is just not true. If you had a decent knowledge of the transformation programme and the calibre of people progressing it you just wouldn't post some of the stuff you have. The NHS is currently going through a 5% efficiency drive combined with reorganisation of its structure and looking to increase activity by 20% above 2019 to try and decrease the backlogs caused by covid. I don't know what position you had in the NHS but you clearly didn't have access to the wider management structure.
I didn’t say the rate for the jobs are inferior so please correct that. I said their ability tends to be inferior in my many years of experience.
You are avoiding my points completely.
Please feel free to address my points in regards to the facts I posted as you have now claimed no facts twice when blatantly they are facts. . Or are you just saying to don’t believe me? The business and the narrative is fact.
You’re are just waffling against them again. That one deal I mentioned had been wasting millions for years and there was absolutely no due diligence or checks in place. Please explain why you think that is acceptable?
Also I repeat yet again please show me evidence of cuts made over the years to reduce the burden of admin in relation to new technology and practice?
You just repeat wishful thinking mantra to try and defend a fabulous institution which is failing in far too many ways.
5% . My god that’s awesome. FFS
It’s a typical government quote. We are aiming or we are looking to or we are driving towards or we are reviewing. There are no hard actions just words and all the while the cost keeps mounting out of proportion. Maybe start sacking s few and see how the rest step up?
I’ve dealt with the NHS for many years at a very senior level so know exactly what I’m taking about thanks.
You’re obviously voicing a vested interest which is fine as I said. No doubt you are better than the average aren’t you? The sheer ratio of admin to front line should tell you something is fundamentally wrong.
All jobs are advertised in most of the private sector too but as with the NHS internal progression is bias towards the incumbent staff. That’s also a fact if you care to check.
Just another example . How can nurses and service managers quit and then start a few weeks later on twice the money through an agent? I don’t blame them as it’s flexible and better pay. My beef is why isn’t the senior management addressing this by two actions?
One, bar anyone from working for the NHS for two years after leaving so no re-hiring as an agency worker. Two address the need for better shift pattern management to make working inside the NHS more attractive to its workers.
Also as I said in an earlier post. There are indeed many talented managers and directors in the NHS but they are drowned out by the ridiculous outdated processes and incompetent staff that surround them.
So a combination of a more ruthless attitude to promoting talent along with adopting outside practices to extract the best result is needed. Not a revolution but an evolution but definitely at a pace that private industry works not the present NHS.
Btw in case you hadn’t worked it out I have never had a position in the NHS only contracts around. I operate in the private sector so not sure why you made that comment?
Anyway if you refuse to address the actual facts I’ve raised or answer any questions you are of course confirming the NHS approach of kicking the can or putting something in the too difficult box and surrounding it with waffle, so I’ll leave it there.
I wish you good luck in your challenges around your “transformation”
I’m a great supporter of the principal of the NHS. Through years of bad management we are failing this great institution. "
Value for Money is important, procurement contracts need to be reviewed on a 2 yearly basis, however, the major challenge would be preventing a race to the bottom. You might get ridiculously low bids which cannot be possibly fulfilled and there is no thorough oversight.
Don’t get me wrong I agree with the thrust of the argument. But there needs to be safeguards in place to prevent the quality of third party services from dropping during the period of contracts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
No, all jobs have to advertised outside. As middle managers are paid above the equivalent in the private sector, I'm not sure why you think they are inferior. Again, you post stuff with no evidence. As I have said the NHS isn't perfect but the idea you can just get a few special people from outside to come in and turn it into a more efficient organisation is just not true. If you had a decent knowledge of the transformation programme and the calibre of people progressing it you just wouldn't post some of the stuff you have. The NHS is currently going through a 5% efficiency drive combined with reorganisation of its structure and looking to increase activity by 20% above 2019 to try and decrease the backlogs caused by covid. I don't know what position you had in the NHS but you clearly didn't have access to the wider management structure.
I didn’t say the rate for the jobs are inferior so please correct that. I said their ability tends to be inferior in my many years of experience.
You are avoiding my points completely.
Please feel free to address my points in regards to the facts I posted as you have now claimed no facts twice when blatantly they are facts. . Or are you just saying to don’t believe me? The business and the narrative is fact.
You’re are just waffling against them again. That one deal I mentioned had been wasting millions for years and there was absolutely no due diligence or checks in place. Please explain why you think that is acceptable?
Also I repeat yet again please show me evidence of cuts made over the years to reduce the burden of admin in relation to new technology and practice?
You just repeat wishful thinking mantra to try and defend a fabulous institution which is failing in far too many ways.
5% . My god that’s awesome. FFS
It’s a typical government quote. We are aiming or we are looking to or we are driving towards or we are reviewing. There are no hard actions just words and all the while the cost keeps mounting out of proportion. Maybe start sacking s few and see how the rest step up?
I’ve dealt with the NHS for many years at a very senior level so know exactly what I’m taking about thanks.
You’re obviously voicing a vested interest which is fine as I said. No doubt you are better than the average aren’t you? The sheer ratio of admin to front line should tell you something is fundamentally wrong.
All jobs are advertised in most of the private sector too but as with the NHS internal progression is bias towards the incumbent staff. That’s also a fact if you care to check.
Just another example . How can nurses and service managers quit and then start a few weeks later on twice the money through an agent? I don’t blame them as it’s flexible and better pay. My beef is why isn’t the senior management addressing this by two actions?
One, bar anyone from working for the NHS for two years after leaving so no re-hiring as an agency worker. Two address the need for better shift pattern management to make working inside the NHS more attractive to its workers.
Also as I said in an earlier post. There are indeed many talented managers and directors in the NHS but they are drowned out by the ridiculous outdated processes and incompetent staff that surround them.
So a combination of a more ruthless attitude to promoting talent along with adopting outside practices to extract the best result is needed. Not a revolution but an evolution but definitely at a pace that private industry works not the present NHS.
Btw in case you hadn’t worked it out I have never had a position in the NHS only contracts around. I operate in the private sector so not sure why you made that comment?
Anyway if you refuse to address the actual facts I’ve raised or answer any questions you are of course confirming the NHS approach of kicking the can or putting something in the too difficult box and surrounding it with waffle, so I’ll leave it there.
I wish you good luck in your challenges around your “transformation”
I’m a great supporter of the principal of the NHS. Through years of bad management we are failing this great institution.
Value for Money is important, procurement contracts need to be reviewed on a 2 yearly basis, however, the major challenge would be preventing a race to the bottom. You might get ridiculously low bids which cannot be possibly fulfilled and there is no thorough oversight.
Don’t get me wrong I agree with the thrust of the argument. But there needs to be safeguards in place to prevent the quality of third party services from dropping during the period of contracts. "
I agree totally . The fact is in the cases I’ve been involved with the lack of oversight and simple checks has allowed ridiculous over charging by in effect middle men and not actual manufacturers or service providers . But yes you are right I certainly don’t want a race to the bottom, my reference to the substandard cleaning contracts proves that direction can be terribly flawed.
But it’s not just procurement it’s managers numbers which are far to high as a percentage. I accept they are possibly more needed due to the wide scope of healthcare but having seen first hand the over staffed hierarchy overseeing Indians rushed of their feet this definitely needs addressing and quickly before it gets even worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe just maybe we should be training more in this country and making them work solely in the NHS for at least ten years or they pay the money back. No private practice either in that period.
If they pay for their own education happy days do as they like.
Why should we pay and then they leave for Australia .
Please correct me if I’m wrong in any of this assumption.
We should not be poaching from developing countries . That’s rich man benefiting at the expense of the poor and is disgraceful.
Actually for once (Lol) I agree with you on this about training more doctors. I would go further and say nurses, dentists etc as well. They get free training but once fully qualified I would make 15 years plus working for the NHS.
If they leave earlier they pay back the full training costs."
I knew a nurse who worked ger way through the NHS, thrn got a job for more money in a private hospital. She then went to work for an agency, she went back to the private hospital but was on twice the salary. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *bernathCouple
over a year ago
Gloucestershire |
"
The procurement of PPE definitely lays at the feet of the government and their VIP fast track.
They say they reacted to a need in a crisis. In 2016 the government were told we weren’t ready for a pandemic and our stocks of PPE weren’t sufficient. They did absolutely nothing . That’s why we were in a mess in the first place.
tbh your just plain wrong. Managers in the NHS are of the highest calibre. There are always a few bad ones in any industry but when you consider the amount of managers the NHS need to operate the quality they have is remarkable. Obviously front line staff were fantastic but the NHS would have collapsed during 2020 without the managers.
I agree with you in the fact sone are as I stated above so I’m not wrong thanks.
Like I said, from “personal” experience and interaction with directors in the NHS I can confirm that the majority were incompetent or at least unfit for a senior role. Some as I said are good and in fact excellent.
The ratio of managers to staff in any other service industry would never happen as they would not accept such inefficiency.
As I said, I'm sure there are examples of bad practice but it is not reflected throughout the NHS, far from it. The idea that there isn't enough accountability for finances and quality is just plain wrong. The NHS has a separation of commissioning and provision and it works very effectively.
It works effectively in regards to procurement given the price of drugs . Not so great in equipment as they pay over in many cases. A friend of mine is never challenged on prices in repeat business ever! He is a major equipment supplier to the NHS.
Can you say also it works effectively in regards to staffing levels? Please show me an example of accountability in relation to staffing levels .
I don’t mean cutting cleaners as that’s proven by Oxford university to have resulted in less clean hospitals . And I don’t mean caters or nurses being cut . I’m taking about admin and senior management .
I’m asking out of interest not just being argumentative . I have an example above so I do know it can be done . There should never be more admin than front line in a service industry. They reduce profit in the private sector and Increase taxpayers costs in public sector.
You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about specific incidents and the old unclean hospitals gripe. Its all just media and political propaganda which you seem to have bought in to. The NHS is massive (one of the biggest employers in Europe). In no way can it work 100% efficiently at any time, that's just bonkers. Your argument is backwards. You are pointing out anonymous examples of inefficiency. I'm not doubting you but if you want to 'win' this debate you have to be explicit about your examples. But in truth it is clear the NHS is efficient as can be expected (all I am doing is putting my point of view about the NHS forward). I think there are a few too many bean counters in this world that like nothing more than to apply financial theories to various services in the public sector. There are plenty of jobs for managers in the NHS and they pay well. Feel free to apply for one and see how tough they are to get.
( edited out paragraphs above for ease of reading)
No bees in any bonnets only experience and facts.
The hospital cleaning issue was produced recently by Oxford university when studying contracted out cleaning. The contracted out hospitals had lower standards and higher infection rates. So I’m not a fan as it’s obviously badly managed. To show I’m not being bias in my views. See below. Cheaper isn’t always better.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-12-21-nhs-hospitals-outsource-cleaning-‘linked-higher-rates-mrsa
As for bean counters. Why should a poorly paid tax payer subsidise an overstaffed and in many cases overpaid NHS system? Burying your head and saying in your opinion it isn’t true doesn’t make you right. Again I’ll ask, please give me some examples where admin has been cut? In such a huge organisation that should be very easy for you. Not a hospital closure as that includes front end loses and services so just admin please. Technology and efficiency should have done away with a large number of jobs as with every other major non government organisation. My main gripe is the staff ability levels not necessarily the numbers. If the quality was higher the numbers would reduce naturally. 1.4million and counting. Better staff would see the inefficiencies.
You make a lot of assumptions that I’m just reading and soaking up the media bias. So let’s put that to bed.
One of my companies is a supplier to the Home Office . They quietly came to us to help out with a national NHS supply problem. ( no not PPE)
We sat down with the department heads who we’re in absolute meltdown and set out how we could help. Much to their obvious relief.
We knew the business well but were excluded previously because it’s “never” tendered and one of the major utilities management companies has had the contract for many years. That utility company had kept us well away and tried to sit in the middle of the meetings. Fortunately at our request they were told no. They knew full well we were actually capable of doing the job far better and they were just middleman who were failing. So what exactly is the NHS procurement doing allowing this type of cosy and comfortable set up? Where’s the due diligence you’re claiming exists?
We looked into the production problem and after sourcing supplies put a market price in with a decent profit allowing for the NHS tick box costs.
As our price was presented during the next meeting there was a sharp intake of breath . It was a healthy profit but nothing too obscene so why that reaction? The lead representing the NHS quietly stated, the price they had been paying was “four” times as high. FACT.
The procurement department of the NHS had not gone to the market in years. The price had increased year on year. They subcontracted their own roles for an easier life.
So no it’s not an anecdotal and media lead opinion in my posts. I have with this example and other incidents, first hand experience of the appalling way “some” parts of the NHS are run both financially and strategically.
Is that explicit enough?
I’m not trying to win anything. Especially not an argument on a swingers forum!! I’m trying to show something you and many others involved obviously refuse to acknowledge, that the NHS is it’s own worst enemy and needs substantial reform. Sadly far too many of its managers and directors are blatantly not of the highest calibre. They would therefore be sorely tested in private industry. Sone would be great I’m sure.
For the record I do NOT want the NHS privatised. I want it revamping into a much more efficient organisation with more front lines staff being supported by a smaller but much more sophisticated support function.
As for a job; internal promotion based on time served is the mode of progression so I’m sure the jobs are very hard to get into if your not in the system.
I am however doing just fine so don’t need a job thanks.
No, all jobs have to advertised outside. As middle managers are paid above the equivalent in the private sector, I'm not sure why you think they are inferior. Again, you post stuff with no evidence. As I have said the NHS isn't perfect but the idea you can just get a few special people from outside to come in and turn it into a more efficient organisation is just not true. If you had a decent knowledge of the transformation programme and the calibre of people progressing it you just wouldn't post some of the stuff you have. The NHS is currently going through a 5% efficiency drive combined with reorganisation of its structure and looking to increase activity by 20% above 2019 to try and decrease the backlogs caused by covid. I don't know what position you had in the NHS but you clearly didn't have access to the wider management structure.
I didn’t say the rate for the jobs are inferior so please correct that. I said their ability tends to be inferior in my many years of experience.
You are avoiding my points completely.
Please feel free to address my points in regards to the facts I posted as you have now claimed no facts twice when blatantly they are facts. . Or are you just saying to don’t believe me? The business and the narrative is fact.
You’re are just waffling against them again. That one deal I mentioned had been wasting millions for years and there was absolutely no due diligence or checks in place. Please explain why you think that is acceptable?
Also I repeat yet again please show me evidence of cuts made over the years to reduce the burden of admin in relation to new technology and practice?
You just repeat wishful thinking mantra to try and defend a fabulous institution which is failing in far too many ways.
5% . My god that’s awesome. FFS
It’s a typical government quote. We are aiming or we are looking to or we are driving towards or we are reviewing. There are no hard actions just words and all the while the cost keeps mounting out of proportion. Maybe start sacking s few and see how the rest step up?
I’ve dealt with the NHS for many years at a very senior level so know exactly what I’m taking about thanks.
You’re obviously voicing a vested interest which is fine as I said. No doubt you are better than the average aren’t you? The sheer ratio of admin to front line should tell you something is fundamentally wrong.
All jobs are advertised in most of the private sector too but as with the NHS internal progression is bias towards the incumbent staff. That’s also a fact if you care to check.
Just another example . How can nurses and service managers quit and then start a few weeks later on twice the money through an agent? I don’t blame them as it’s flexible and better pay. My beef is why isn’t the senior management addressing this by two actions?
One, bar anyone from working for the NHS for two years after leaving so no re-hiring as an agency worker. Two address the need for better shift pattern management to make working inside the NHS more attractive to its workers.
Also as I said in an earlier post. There are indeed many talented managers and directors in the NHS but they are drowned out by the ridiculous outdated processes and incompetent staff that surround them.
So a combination of a more ruthless attitude to promoting talent along with adopting outside practices to extract the best result is needed. Not a revolution but an evolution but definitely at a pace that private industry works not the present NHS.
Btw in case you hadn’t worked it out I have never had a position in the NHS only contracts around. I operate in the private sector so not sure why you made that comment?
Anyway if you refuse to address the actual facts I’ve raised or answer any questions you are of course confirming the NHS approach of kicking the can or putting something in the too difficult box and surrounding it with waffle, so I’ll leave it there.
I wish you good luck in your challenges around your “transformation”
I’m a great supporter of the principal of the NHS. Through years of bad management we are failing this great institution.
Value for Money is important, procurement contracts need to be reviewed on a 2 yearly basis, however, the major challenge would be preventing a race to the bottom. You might get ridiculously low bids which cannot be possibly fulfilled and there is no thorough oversight.
Don’t get me wrong I agree with the thrust of the argument. But there needs to be safeguards in place to prevent the quality of third party services from dropping during the period of contracts.
I agree totally . The fact is in the cases I’ve been involved with the lack of oversight and simple checks has allowed ridiculous over charging by in effect middle men and not actual manufacturers or service providers . But yes you are right I certainly don’t want a race to the bottom, my reference to the substandard cleaning contracts proves that direction can be terribly flawed.
But it’s not just procurement it’s managers numbers which are far to high as a percentage. I accept they are possibly more needed due to the wide scope of healthcare but having seen first hand the over staffed hierarchy overseeing Indians rushed of their feet this definitely needs addressing and quickly before it gets even worse. "
What is the percentage? All people hear is there are too many managers, but every time we go into a hospital we don’t see them, I don’t see ten managers hovering over a doctor in A&E.
What are their functions? This is the problem, there needs to be more transparency on the jobs these managers do? I don’t think fundamental change will occur unless we get the details.
Before we tear down the house, maybe we should find out the reasons why we are tearing it down in the first place. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A friend of mine came over last night and was telling me about her 28 year old daughter’s job in the NHS which is basically deciding who is superfluous (her description was lazy and time serving!) to their position and sacking them! She said the problem is the banding system within the NHS that creates a situation where to increase your earnings you have to move up a band and that too much weight is given to time served in the NHS rather than ability and that people are then moved up into roles they are unsuited for which actually reminds me of many larger corporations like the civil service etc. I questioned whether a 28 year old had the necessary life experience to make these judgements but as she is being paid 60k+ to do a job nobody wants to do I can see why it is attractive to her. Funny thing is the NHS has made sure she has spent a lot of time assessing different areas to gain the experience to pass these judgments, the most recent of which was in theatre watching a hip replacement in close up to see how the clinical team functioned. She wasn’t too keen on the bits of bone flying around but it certainly helped her understand why so many people were required in theatre. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A friend of mine came over last night and was telling me about her 28 year old daughter’s job in the NHS which is basically deciding who is superfluous (her description was lazy and time serving!) to their position and sacking them! She said the problem is the banding system within the NHS that creates a situation where to increase your earnings you have to move up a band and that too much weight is given to time served in the NHS rather than ability and that people are then moved up into roles they are unsuited for which actually reminds me of many larger corporations like the civil service etc. I questioned whether a 28 year old had the necessary life experience to make these judgements but as she is being paid 60k+ to do a job nobody wants to do I can see why it is attractive to her. Funny thing is the NHS has made sure she has spent a lot of time assessing different areas to gain the experience to pass these judgments, the most recent of which was in theatre watching a hip replacement in close up to see how the clinical team functioned. She wasn’t too keen on the bits of bone flying around but it certainly helped her understand why so many people were required in theatre."
No such person in the NHS. None, nowhere never. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
