Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Alex - I'm sure you are aware the NHS salaries are a matter of public knowledge. they are negotiated by the national bodies and published twice a year - April and (sometimes) october or so.


This is for every sector within the NHS, which for non-medics, was harmonised into a 'banding' system (so called Agenda for Change) from 1-9 (most clinical people 5-7, admin 3-5). The medics are subject to a separate pay circular. EVERY aspect of pay is outlined and described including locum pay (i.e. non-substantive). Pay is essentially according to experience in a given grade, so the longer you work the more your pay (slightly) until you jump up a grade (e.g. from Admin assistant to Admin manager or Registrar to Consultant), which is when pay can increase more significantly (relatively speaking).


Here is the link:

NHS Pay circular


It is true that INDIVIDUAL salaries are not published - and I believe that there should be some discretionary privacy for an individual. Public servants do certainly given enough of their lives without having to have intimate details exposed. Lets face it most people would be only interested in what CEO or medical director earns and not Mr Joe Porter or Dr. X Registrar. Those figures are actually available if you look at the board meeting minutes end of year reports.


cheers

CoI: local NHS Dr.

Of course the prescriptions for NHS pay are published. I'm NHS-paid myself. To publish these prescriptions is a Good Thing.


How individuals employed by the NHS are paid is veiled. I am not sure that the veiling is a Good Thing; I believe that it may be instead a Bad Thing.


Whether Peckham Rose, as a NHS Trust Governor, can accomplish various goals that she might set out when electioneering is not something on which I can comment. If one of her goals is PUBLISH THEIR SALARIES, however, I shall vote for her. To be disappointed in matters like this won't surprise me overmuch, or embitter me.


I'm rabble, and I'm used to being roused to no purpose. **goes back to checking the DAILY MAIL on-line**

Well it's a good discussion but I am not going for election, indeed have just voted myself on my voting forms for the governors. I believe it's every three years, I may be in a better place then to reconsider. including reconsidering whether I could do a better job than those already in post!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Apparently a tourist tax was Raynor's idea, but Reeves has put the kibosh on it because of the push-back she'll get from businesses
    • But a larger number, in a more hotly contested election, didn't. It is an anomaly that Starmer won a landslide in seats with a turnout for Labour which would have shamed Labour leaders in all the 21st and much of the post war 20th century.
    • I was not suggesting anything else!   I'm not sure how you interpret what I said  as "irrelevant"? I was responding to a post saying that Corbyn was "unelectable". My point was that a  large number  of the electorate  voted for him!
    • that's exactly what happened - Brickhouse were forced to close due to rent hike and then Gail's didn't move in until covid restrictions lifted and normality resumed. Gail's would have opened much sooner as they were lined up and able to offer the landlord much higher rents. Brickhouse was a local favourite
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...