FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Sharks circling the NHS
Sharks circling the NHS
Jump to: Newest in thread
This has been predicted since the Tories got into power. Run the NHS down with decades of underfunding, declare it no longer fit for purpose, and swoop in with your private healthcare mates to make a killing in the guise of ‘Saving the NHS’.
Javid is the first to come out and publicly admit it. More to follow. Loads of them with big stakes in private healthcare businesses. We need these criminals out NOW. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *AFKA HovisMan
over a year ago
Sindon Swingdon Swindon |
"This has been predicted since the Tories got into power. Run the NHS down with decades of underfunding, declare it no longer fit for purpose, and swoop in with your private healthcare mates to make a killing in the guise of ‘Saving the NHS’.
Javid is the first to come out and publicly admit it. More to follow. Loads of them with big stakes in private healthcare businesses. We need these criminals out NOW. "
they have two years to do this. That's quick. Plus, any private company will know that labour will likely renationalise.
I think it's plausible the tories are either incompetent, or lack the simply lack the will (eg look at taxes) to do what is needed.
That said, it feels like this has been q burning issue for most of my adult life ... So even labour have some responsibility here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Before the next election we'll see a turbocharged assault from the Tories against many pillars of British culture.
They know they'll be unelectable for a generation. Its worse than things were under Thatcher, far worse. So that's how low the bar has been placed now.
I'm not a huge Starmer fab at all...but we need to get rid of pricks as soon as possible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"So... Javid says he wants us to pay for GP and A&E visits.
We already do pay for all that. it's called taxes..."
Very true. Although some abuse the system I would worry that some who genuinely need medical attention will not go due to costs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Before the next election we'll see a turbocharged assault from the Tories against many pillars of British culture.
They know they'll be unelectable for a generation. Its worse than things were under Thatcher, far worse. So that's how low the bar has been placed now.
I'm not a huge Starmer fab at all...but we need to get rid of pricks as soon as possible. "
This. They’re going to try and fuck things up as much as possible while enriching themselves as much as possible, and then blame Starmer when he gets in.
This lot are waaay worse than Thatcher. Whether you agreed with her or not, at least she had principles, and she was frighteningly competent. What we have now is a bunch of thick criminal yes men, given the job because they sucked up to Johnson. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Before the next election we'll see a turbocharged assault from the Tories against many pillars of British culture.
They know they'll be unelectable for a generation. Its worse than things were under Thatcher, far worse. So that's how low the bar has been placed now.
I'm not a huge Starmer fab at all...but we need to get rid of pricks as soon as possible. "
I understand the need to remove the Tories but Starmer has not ruled out more private involvement under Labour either. Hopefully he will make it clearer what he actually means |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This sums up Labours own moves to privatising the NHS quite well.
https://www.yournhsneedsyou.com/timeline/
People need to wake up to the fact that it is the government in general, not just the Conservatives that want the NHS privatised. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This sums up Labours own moves to privatising the NHS quite well.
https://www.yournhsneedsyou.com/timeline/
People need to wake up to the fact that it is the government in general, not just the Conservatives that want the NHS privatised."
Spot on.
There are some very large and financially powerful organisations with their sights set on gobbling up whatever parts of the NHS they can get their hands on.
They care little for the government of day, as all ministers of whatever political persuasion will be approached with offers for investment / offers to "solve" problems.
There's nothing wrong with solving problems for financial gain of course, but when you are dealing with tax-payer's money, it's a different kettle of fish altogether.
This is where private companies diverge from public ones.
Private ones desire to make profit, as much as possible.
Public ones still need to create a surplus, but even when they do, that surplus (should) stay within their own walls.
Private is parasitic.
Public is self-sustaining.
Somewhere along the way, we've lost the skills and ability of good governance nationally to manage a public service like the NHS.
I have no idea why that is.
Not that I can say large private organisations are any better at national governance either. (Thinking about all the Tech companies having to flex recently).
At a deeper level, all I can think is that humans are fundamentally flawed and imperfect, irrational and unpredictable.
Regardless of who crews the ship, privately or publicly, you will always have chaos. It's hard-baked in to the heart of the system.
Solutions ? There are none.
However I think the age of AI-supported machine learning and advice systems may help guide decision-makers who manage unwieldy behemoths like the NHS in future, if they do not do so already.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This sums up Labours own moves to privatising the NHS quite well.
https://www.yournhsneedsyou.com/timeline/
People need to wake up to the fact that it is the government in general, not just the Conservatives that want the NHS privatised."
GP surgeries have always been private ever since the inception of the NHS and they form a major part of the service. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile! "
Where did you get the interesting fact from? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"Where did you get the interesting fact from?
The fact that the cleaners, porters, and a lot of utilities staff are employed by a French company called Sodexo?"
This interesting fact.....
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Not sure the relevance of your answer though? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Where did you get the interesting fact from?
The fact that the cleaners, porters, and a lot of utilities staff are employed by a French company called Sodexo?"
Just Sodexo, what about OCS or the other FM companies that have contracts? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This has been predicted since the Tories got into power. Run the NHS down with decades of underfunding, declare it no longer fit for purpose, and swoop in with your private healthcare mates to make a killing in the guise of ‘Saving the NHS’.
Javid is the first to come out and publicly admit it. More to follow. Loads of them with big stakes in private healthcare businesses. We need these criminals out NOW. "
And it is going to be accomplished by people voting for it.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?"
Cambridge university 
They undertook the study.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Remind me which party engaged in the biggest exercise of privatisation when last in office and which party has already inducated that it will do more of it if they form the next government.
Yep, Labour.
The party that, at every election, accuses the Conservatives of wanting to privatise the NHS.
Now tell me, since the NHS was formed in 1948, how many Tory administrations have we had and how many Labour?
Conservatives have been in charge of the NHS fir far longer than Labour ever have and yet we're supposed to believe that it's the Toruies who will privatise it, when the evidence us clear that Labour are more likely to do so |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Remind me which party engaged in the biggest exercise of privatisation when last in office and which party has already inducated that it will do more of it if they form the next government.
Yep, Labour.
The party that, at every election, accuses the Conservatives of wanting to privatise the NHS.
Now tell me, since the NHS was formed in 1948, how many Tory administrations have we had and how many Labour?
Conservatives have been in charge of the NHS fir far longer than Labour ever have and yet we're supposed to believe that it's the Toruies who will privatise it, when the evidence us clear that Labour are more likely to do so"
Haha yeah ok. Got the figures for that? Or did you read it in the Express? The NHS is running so well right now isn’t it? Look at how many tory MPs have connections with private healthcare firms. Javid has literally come out and said he wants to start charging, having gone back to work for JP Morgan Healththcare.
But Labour…
Ffs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
"
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Remind me which party engaged in the biggest exercise of privatisation when last in office and which party has already inducated that it will do more of it if they form the next government.
Yep, Labour.
The party that, at every election, accuses the Conservatives of wanting to privatise the NHS.
Now tell me, since the NHS was formed in 1948, how many Tory administrations have we had and how many Labour?
Conservatives have been in charge of the NHS fir far longer than Labour ever have and yet we're supposed to believe that it's the Toruies who will privatise it, when the evidence us clear that Labour are more likely to do so"
Yes exactly, the Tories have been in charge of the NHS, so logically speaking, everything is the fault of someone else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked."
You missed the obvious...the profit motive of having any service outsourced to the private sector. Cut corners, pay cleaning staff peanuts (so low motivation), maximise profits for shareholders, fleece the NHS and taxpayers.
Get all these companies out of the NHS. Bring back facilities management and cleaning inside the NHS. Ensure clear line of sight and accountability. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked."
I knew a bloke who worked for a environmental services and cleaning co I used to call him Mr sa used to brag how he used to overdose the cleaning bucket place it in the operating theatre for half an hour giving it the smell of being cleaned without actually cleaning the rooms. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
I knew a bloke who worked for a environmental services and cleaning co I used to call him Mr sa used to brag how he used to overdose the cleaning bucket place it in the operating theatre for half an hour giving it the smell of being cleaned without actually cleaning the rooms. "
That is disgraceful and goes back to my point, the NHS should be checking on the job being carried out, especially one that is so important.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
You missed the obvious...the profit motive of having any service outsourced to the private sector. Cut corners, pay cleaning staff peanuts (so low motivation), maximise profits for shareholders, fleece the NHS and taxpayers.
Get all these companies out of the NHS. Bring back facilities management and cleaning inside the NHS. Ensure clear line of sight and accountability."
Outsourcing should not be cutting corners, it can cut costs and bring in expertise, if done properly, that is.
The fact (if true) the NHS are allowing their contracted staff to deliver substandard services is alarming but not unexpected. It would be worse if the contracted services have been agreed to be substandard, I would love to get my hands on a contract..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
You missed the obvious...the profit motive of having any service outsourced to the private sector. Cut corners, pay cleaning staff peanuts (so low motivation), maximise profits for shareholders, fleece the NHS and taxpayers.
Get all these companies out of the NHS. Bring back facilities management and cleaning inside the NHS. Ensure clear line of sight and accountability.
Outsourcing should not be cutting corners, it can cut costs and bring in expertise, if done properly, that is.
The fact (if true) the NHS are allowing their contracted staff to deliver substandard services is alarming but not unexpected. It would be worse if the contracted services have been agreed to be substandard, I would love to get my hands on a contract....."
Lolz says the consultant (don’t worry I have been a consultant too). Contract management in the public sector tends to be weak and day-to-day monitoring is based too much on trust! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked."
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked."
The facts are true as they were published and reported on.
As for anyone being held accountable then you are now in the realms of the comedy club.
On the contract point again look at who’s managing all this.
When have you seen any minister or senior NHS manager or director be held accountable,
If NHS staff are found wanting or incapable they move to another trust taking their accrued benefits with them.
Ministers are just moved regularly anyway so no one actually takes responsibility.
It’s a shocking reflection of the way our government and NHS in particular are run.
The workers at the bottom carry the strain whilst being lead in many incidents by incapable, incompetent, lazy greedy directors and Ministers. ( please note not all) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ"
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services. "
The savings will not only be speed.
It is not only bottom line that can be benefited, there are many other factors that come with outsourcing, which make it so popular. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
The savings will not only be speed.
It is not only bottom line that can be benefited, there are many other factors that come with outsourcing, which make it so popular."
I believe the benefits of outsourcing lie squarely in the one-off project needing specialists domain. Eg large scale IT systems, building/construction/fitting out of a new hospital or extension etc.
Any activity or function that will be an ongoing requirement, eg cleaning, facilities management, should be delivered by internal functions.
The real reason the NHS outsource functions like that is to get the staff off their books and no longer be liable for employment benefits such as pensions. It is a false economy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
The savings will not only be speed.
It is not only bottom line that can be benefited, there are many other factors that come with outsourcing, which make it so popular.
I believe the benefits of outsourcing lie squarely in the one-off project needing specialists domain. Eg large scale IT systems, building/construction/fitting out of a new hospital or extension etc.
Any activity or function that will be an ongoing requirement, eg cleaning, facilities management, should be delivered by internal functions.
The real reason the NHS outsource functions like that is to get the staff off their books and no longer be liable for employment benefits such as pensions. It is a false economy."
You are spot on getting them off the books! Employees are OpEx and expensive as you point out, they also need to be managed, which is more staff needed and again more costs.
They also need training, equipment, holidays, national insurance x2, insurance, pensions.
Having said all of that, certain tasks within any business should remain in-house, especially if reputation could be at risk.
Hospital cleaners tick the box in this case it seems. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I believe over 51% of people employed in the nhs have no medical background.
That's a huge part of the problem.
Get rid of them all, leave medics in charge and it might be salvaged. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
The savings will not only be speed.
It is not only bottom line that can be benefited, there are many other factors that come with outsourcing, which make it so popular.
I believe the benefits of outsourcing lie squarely in the one-off project needing specialists domain. Eg large scale IT systems, building/construction/fitting out of a new hospital or extension etc.
Any activity or function that will be an ongoing requirement, eg cleaning, facilities management, should be delivered by internal functions.
The real reason the NHS outsource functions like that is to get the staff off their books and no longer be liable for employment benefits such as pensions. It is a false economy.
You are spot on getting them off the books! Employees are OpEx and expensive as you point out, they also need to be managed, which is more staff needed and again more costs.
They also need training, equipment, holidays, national insurance x2, insurance, pensions.
Having said all of that, certain tasks within any business should remain in-house, especially if reputation could be at risk.
Hospital cleaners tick the box in this case it seems. "
Don’t forget Mat/Pat leave and sick pay.
However, I do think it would be better all round (especially from an accountability and pride in your work way) for all ongoing functions to be inhouse. I suspect the mark up needed to generate profits for private sector companies would offset employment and equipment costs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny. "
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!"
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
The savings will not only be speed.
It is not only bottom line that can be benefited, there are many other factors that come with outsourcing, which make it so popular."
Others have mentioned specialist outsourcing which is a good to a point however, looking at the billions on failed IT systems kind of pushes that theory back a little too if it’s not managed correctly. ( Back to poor management again)
I would love to hear of the multitude of benefits derived from outsourcing cleaning contracts other than bottom line. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't."
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't.
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people"
You think we are healthier now than say 40 years ago?
I've never seen so many folk with nhs walking sticks, obese people...all increased as spending on the nhs has increased and as it has expanded.
Your health is dependent on your lifestyle, diet,exercise, alcohol, cigarettes etc.... not the nhs.
We were at our healthiest during ww2 when we had strict diets. No I'm not advocating going back to that but to assume your health is dependent on someone else, once again socialist mindset, absolve myself of responsibility, is ludicrous. It's not the nhs that keeps you healthy it's you and your actions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't.
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people
You think we are healthier now than say 40 years ago?
I've never seen so many folk with nhs walking sticks, obese people...all increased as spending on the nhs has increased and as it has expanded.
Your health is dependent on your lifestyle, diet,exercise, alcohol, cigarettes etc.... not the nhs.
We were at our healthiest during ww2 when we had strict diets. No I'm not advocating going back to that but to assume your health is dependent on someone else, once again socialist mindset, absolve myself of responsibility, is ludicrous. It's not the nhs that keeps you healthy it's you and your actions."
This is a gross misunderstanding of what socialism means.
And to suggest the NHS does not contribute to the health of British people is silly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't.
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people
You think we are healthier now than say 40 years ago?
I've never seen so many folk with nhs walking sticks, obese people...all increased as spending on the nhs has increased and as it has expanded.
Your health is dependent on your lifestyle, diet,exercise, alcohol, cigarettes etc.... not the nhs.
We were at our healthiest during ww2 when we had strict diets. No I'm not advocating going back to that but to assume your health is dependent on someone else, once again socialist mindset, absolve myself of responsibility, is ludicrous. It's not the nhs that keeps you healthy it's you and your actions."
You again avoided the points on insurance. Just interested in how you think you will be able to afford healthcare?
You entirely missed the point of my post. Nobody is saying your health is not your responsibility but if you take away universal healthcare funded through taxation and resort to an insurance based system you will actually see too many people excluded either due to cost or pre-existing/hereditary conditions ergo the overall health of the country will decline.
It is all linked. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't.
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people
You think we are healthier now than say 40 years ago?
I've never seen so many folk with nhs walking sticks, obese people...all increased as spending on the nhs has increased and as it has expanded.
Your health is dependent on your lifestyle, diet,exercise, alcohol, cigarettes etc.... not the nhs.
We were at our healthiest during ww2 when we had strict diets. No I'm not advocating going back to that but to assume your health is dependent on someone else, once again socialist mindset, absolve myself of responsibility, is ludicrous. It's not the nhs that keeps you healthy it's you and your actions.
You again avoided the points on insurance. Just interested in how you think you will be able to afford healthcare?
You entirely missed the point of my post. Nobody is saying your health is not your responsibility but if you take away universal healthcare funded through taxation and resort to an insurance based system you will actually see too many people excluded either due to cost or pre-existing/hereditary conditions ergo the overall health of the country will decline.
It is all linked. "
I'm afraid we do not live in a perfect world and the idea that the state will look after you is just ludicrous.
And,
I'm not here to justify myself to you or explain myself, I'm here making comments.
What I can or cannot afford isn't really anyones business.
The nhs does a spectacular job of avoiding patients ( see covid ).
How big would the nhs have to be and how much would it cost to see the entire population?
It cannot be costed and what you get is a system where some pay and some pay nothing. There are legions of people who play the system,get a sick line,claim benefits and we just cannot afford it. Plus as with all state sector jobs there is no mechanism for failure so no matter how hopeless, lazy or feckless you are no one seems to be held to account. The private sector has a reason to work. If they don't perform they don't get paid. In the state sector you get paid no matter what. No one lost their job in the state sector during covid. The private sector got hammered. The state sector is why we have record debt. We have to borrow to pay for a bloated whale and the private sector is getting taxed even more heavily. Yes yes so is the state sector but if that system worked we could all work for the government and we would be well off. That model just doesn't work. If it did north Korea would be rich and the soviet system would still exist. It collapsed because the private sector was nonexistent and the state sector was huge. All paid for by borrowing.
It just doesn't work.
It's had it's day.
A streamed down nhs ,means tested, might work but people whine "discrimination".
If you dumped all the red tape,bureaucracy and the medics ran it,it might work. But the way it stands,sorry?! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I dunno why folk think the nhs is underfunded. We spend 40% of our GDP on it. We could spend 100% on it would still be rank.
Too many bureaucrats, too much waste, red tape, theft...
They get bloody well paid, then go on strike. They hid for 18 months due to covid and still got full pay and benefits while the private sector was nailed.
More private medicine. Pay insurance every month.
If I don't use something I don't want to pay for it.
And before someone whines " your selfish " isn't it selfish to ask me to pay for your appointment?
The NHS might have worked years ago but years of bureaucratic meddling have screwed it.
Sorry but the jig is up. It was never designed to last 80 years. There are legions who use it and never paid a penny.
So you want a private healthcare/medical insurance approach?
Have you looked into whether that will cover pre-existing conditions? Hereditary conditions? Lifestyle related conditions? Will the cost increase with age? If you make a claim will your premium increase? Will you be able to transfer to another insurer now that you have a pre-existing condition? What about excess/deductibles on the policy? Can you cover that? What about if you then need medication for the rest of your life? Will the Policy cover that too?
Your NI and Tax contribution to the NHS is a bargain!
What you pay in taxes nowhere near covers the NHS. It is borrowing that pays for it.
It's the same tired old socialist rubbish. You always run out of other peoples money eventually. I dunno why people trust the state sector!? If you want a solution get the private sector involved.
The NHS is not the envy if the world. If it were more would cost it. They don't.
So you didn’t answer a single question. Good luck with your private medical insurance. Hope you have deep pockets.
BTW a healthy population is a productive workforce. It is all interlinked...
Less illness = less people on benefits = more people working and able to work = increased productivity = higher GDP = more taxes collected = better public services = richer country = fairer society = happier people
You think we are healthier now than say 40 years ago?
I've never seen so many folk with nhs walking sticks, obese people...all increased as spending on the nhs has increased and as it has expanded.
Your health is dependent on your lifestyle, diet,exercise, alcohol, cigarettes etc.... not the nhs.
We were at our healthiest during ww2 when we had strict diets. No I'm not advocating going back to that but to assume your health is dependent on someone else, once again socialist mindset, absolve myself of responsibility, is ludicrous. It's not the nhs that keeps you healthy it's you and your actions.
You again avoided the points on insurance. Just interested in how you think you will be able to afford healthcare?
You entirely missed the point of my post. Nobody is saying your health is not your responsibility but if you take away universal healthcare funded through taxation and resort to an insurance based system you will actually see too many people excluded either due to cost or pre-existing/hereditary conditions ergo the overall health of the country will decline.
It is all linked.
I'm afraid we do not live in a perfect world and the idea that the state will look after you is just ludicrous.
And,
I'm not here to justify myself to you or explain myself, I'm here making comments.
What I can or cannot afford isn't really anyones business.
The nhs does a spectacular job of avoiding patients ( see covid ).
How big would the nhs have to be and how much would it cost to see the entire population?
It cannot be costed and what you get is a system where some pay and some pay nothing. There are legions of people who play the system,get a sick line,claim benefits and we just cannot afford it. Plus as with all state sector jobs there is no mechanism for failure so no matter how hopeless, lazy or feckless you are no one seems to be held to account. The private sector has a reason to work. If they don't perform they don't get paid. In the state sector you get paid no matter what. No one lost their job in the state sector during covid. The private sector got hammered. The state sector is why we have record debt. We have to borrow to pay for a bloated whale and the private sector is getting taxed even more heavily. Yes yes so is the state sector but if that system worked we could all work for the government and we would be well off. That model just doesn't work. If it did north Korea would be rich and the soviet system would still exist. It collapsed because the private sector was nonexistent and the state sector was huge. All paid for by borrowing.
It just doesn't work.
It's had it's day.
A streamed down nhs ,means tested, might work but people whine "discrimination".
If you dumped all the red tape,bureaucracy and the medics ran it,it might work. But the way it stands,sorry?! "
You are conflating a lot of different things there!
No medical system in any country can see the entire population. That is why there are waiting lists. Only the very wealthy can afford to jump the queue even in private insurance based systems. The waiting list has more than doubled under the Conservative Govt.
Of course your personal finances are private but I reckon you will be shocked by the cost of the premium vs how much you currently pay in tax. I raise it because some people seem to believe there is this private healthcare nirvana out there. There isn’t. It is the media being very highly lobbied by a very wealthy private healthcare sector.
You are right about inefficiencies but seem to contradict yourself by both criticising healthcare workers and then suggesting they should be the ones running the NHS 
You also seem to lay the blame on NHS failings on benefit scroungers and those playing the system. It’s a great line often peddled by the Daily Mail but do you have actual stats on that and do those stats provide a correlation to identify cause and effect?
Finally this idea that the state is not there to look after us...well what is the purpose of the state? I have laid huge sums in tax and NI. Sorry but one day I may need some help and I will expect it. If I don’t need it then happy days, there are plenty of people less fortunate than me who need help. Are there spongers and people gaming the system? Yes for sure but that isn’t the majority and in any case they operate at both extremes of the spectrum, benefit fraudsters and tax evaders. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"“The state sector is why we have record debt.”
This is bollocks. Tories syphoning off money to their rich mates is the reason. And you’ve swallowed their bullshit hook line and sinker. "
Also this “record debt” is a myth too. It is gaslighting to allow the Tory’s to enact austerity again. Our debt levels are lower than they were at any time prior to the 1960s but before that it was waaaay higher (two world wars and the depression being the cause). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services. "
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"I would love to hear of the multitude of benefits derived from outsourcing cleaning contracts other than bottom line.
See a few post above "
Nope , nothing up there. Lots of theory on outsourcing specialist work which I agree may be necessary but no arguments for any perceived benefits in outsourcing cleaning.
Given the increased need for treatment of those affected by poor cleaning standards I would doubt bottom line is justifiable either. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"I would love to hear of the multitude of benefits derived from outsourcing cleaning contracts other than bottom line.
See a few post above
Nope , nothing up there. Lots of theory on outsourcing specialist work which I agree may be necessary but no arguments for any perceived benefits in outsourcing cleaning.
Given the increased need for treatment of those affected by poor cleaning standards I would doubt bottom line is justifiable either. "
You read nothing about the OpEx costs, pensions, mat leave, NI x2, insurances, tools, training?
I bet you didn't read that I agreed that outsourcing NHS cleaning wasn't a great idea too.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip"
I agree with you, a decision has been made to pass work to a 3rd party, that 3rd party need to be managed to provide the right outcome.
If the service does not improve, I'm sure the contract will contain a service improvement clause that will end the contract rather swiftly. The managers in these areas need to wake up!
The NHS is not only doctors and nurses, the infrastructure is crucial too, as being shown in these posts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"I would love to hear of the multitude of benefits derived from outsourcing cleaning contracts other than bottom line.
See a few post above
Nope , nothing up there. Lots of theory on outsourcing specialist work which I agree may be necessary but no arguments for any perceived benefits in outsourcing cleaning.
Given the increased need for treatment of those affected by poor cleaning standards I would doubt bottom line is justifiable either.
You read nothing about the OpEx costs, pensions, mat leave, NI x2, insurances, tools, training?
I bet you didn't read that I agreed that outsourcing NHS cleaning wasn't a great idea too.... "
I did read your second point and we both agree .
All the others are directly related to the bottom line which I claimed so not sure what extra benefits your meaning? They are all financial reductions and nothing more of any benefit. There is no upping of skill, efficiency or technical service in any way. There is no benefit other than cost and that’s debatable.
The only thing and I think we can all agree is that it may highlight how poorly run the service may be at certain trusts. . But the statistics on cleanliness shut down that point too.
I feel there will always be a need for technical outsourcing in any industry. Pure labour is just cost cutting and in my opinion lazy management. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip"
And here lies the problem 40 years ago you payed some one to do a job and they had pride in there clean floor there polished chrome etc now you have to pay a manager to check there work cos they can't be trusted to do what they are payed to do. Then the manager has to have a manager as they can't be bothered to check the work of the cleaners etc etc etc people just don't have pride in there work. I was prased yesterday working in a production fertility for typing up as I went but it's second nature to me old school some would say. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip
And here lies the problem 40 years ago you payed some one to do a job and they had pride in there clean floor there polished chrome etc now you have to pay a manager to check there work cos they can't be trusted to do what they are payed to do. Then the manager has to have a manager as they can't be bothered to check the work of the cleaners etc etc etc people just don't have pride in there work. I was prased yesterday working in a production fertility for typing up as I went but it's second nature to me old school some would say."
I think there is more to it than simple pride in your work. Over the past 20-30 years we have seem the gap between the low paid workers and high paid executives/CEOs grow exponentially AND people are more aware of that difference. Lower paid workers are being exploited while cats get fatter. Pride is the victim of demoralisation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip
And here lies the problem 40 years ago you payed some one to do a job and they had pride in there clean floor there polished chrome etc now you have to pay a manager to check there work cos they can't be trusted to do what they are payed to do. Then the manager has to have a manager as they can't be bothered to check the work of the cleaners etc etc etc people just don't have pride in there work. I was prased yesterday working in a production fertility for typing up as I went but it's second nature to me old school some would say."
I’ve had a little look into what the NHS are paying for delivering new services through projects, and it really didn’t surprise me at all..
First role being advertised on a site that contains 100’s of similar roles in both public and private sectors.
Role: senior project manager, to deliver a project in 6 weeks. £350 per day outside IR35.
That role is total nonsense! 6 week project, wtf!
The same job role elsewhere, I would expect to be seeing £600 - £750 per day and a contract length of 6 months, with possible extensions.
Checking other gov departments, they are paying near market rates, so what’s going on with the NHS?
They’re not in the market for talent and their expectations are way off that’s for sure…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The privatisation has been happening for the last 20 years. PFI with labour but direct contracting out by the Conservatives.
Things like testing and I noticed recently services such as dialysis are being taken over by private companies.
An interesting fact is the contracted out hospital cleaning. Those hospitals using private companies have a higher rate of infections related to a dirty environment.
Pay less, push to be quicker over thoroughness. Result - higher healthcare costs wiping out and savings on cleaning by a country mile!
Where did you get the interesting fact from?
Cambridge university
They undertook the study.
I don't understand why outsourced cleaning would drive higher infection rates. The cleaning company must be contracted to offer a service and that service can be managed if not delivering against the requirements in the contract.
If your fact is true, surely the NHS manager responsible for the service needs to be held accountable? Or the contract was not negotiated with the best possible outcome in mind, again I would hold the NHS management team accountable for that.
Either way, if the evidence is available it should be remedied, not left unchecked.
To me both the NHS management and the contract company are at fault. The contract company should provide a good service especially knowing it is in a medical environment. The NHS management should ensure that the contract company are meeting the required levels and if they are not then deal with them, even replace them. If I pay a company to do a job they are almost certainly a private company doing it for profit. Like a car garage. If they do a poor job I complain and get the issue resolved and / or money back. I do not ignore it and blame it on the fact they are private and looking to make a profit. That's just me, others may differ
How can a for profit be financially better if the in-house is managed in a professionally skilled way?
The majority of workers in this field are on minimum wage so the only savings are speed.
Speed in cleaning is never a positive.
This is the fault of very poor NHS management and greed in privatisation which is how private for profit is driven. It’s not a fault it’s why it exists.
.When you take that profit attitude into a service as crucial as health then you are asking for trouble .
Our water and energy providers are presently falling up very short in service due to years of profits for dividends overriding investments. It’s the main failing of privatisation in regard to critical infrastructure and services .
Free markets should not involve our key services.
I think wether in house or out sourced the management should ensure the job is done correctly. If it is not done correctly then they should take action. If it's managed in a professional and skilled way then they should achieve that. If however the hospital management are lacking in this then standards may well slip
And here lies the problem 40 years ago you payed some one to do a job and they had pride in there clean floor there polished chrome etc now you have to pay a manager to check there work cos they can't be trusted to do what they are payed to do. Then the manager has to have a manager as they can't be bothered to check the work of the cleaners etc etc etc people just don't have pride in there work. I was prased yesterday working in a production fertility for typing up as I went but it's second nature to me old school some would say."
I think there is more to it than pride in work though that's always good and I don't think pride is restricted to in house staff. What you write underpins the point about managers are part of the problem, especially if they need another manager to double check. To me regardless of if the people are in house or out sourced then it needs managing properly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
