Jump to content

NHS staff - 50% higher rate of sickies

MrBen

By MrBen
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

Keef

Keef

Posted
Posted
Timster, I'm on the same side as you in this, but I think we have to admit that there are people who do take the absolute p!ss. It's because of these people that everyone else gets tarred with thirs brush, but we can't go claiming that there are no bad apples, because frankly, there are.
LuLu Too

LuLu Too

Posted
Posted

No one has claimed that there are "no bad apples" employed in either the NHS or the Public Sector in general. I have certainly raised the issue of poor performance and also acknowledged that some sickness absence will be less than honest. But this is true across all sectors of employment.


However for SteveT to state that there are individuals employed by the NHS who would be unemployable elsewhere is frankly insulting to the NHS/Public Sector.


I am spending today interviewing candidates for a relatively high grade position. All of them will be educated to Doctorate level. I very much doubt they would be "unemployable" elsewhere. In fact they would vastly increase their earning potential by not working in the Public Sector.

We are priviledged to have such people willing to devote their careers to the NHS.

Keef

Keef

Posted
Posted

That may have come across a bit wrong. I'm NOT saying people with GCSEs are unemployable, it was just a response to;


I am spending today interviewing candidates for a relatively high grade position. All of them will be educated to Doctorate level. I very much doubt they would be "unemployable" elsewhere.


As I'm not really sure that that paints a particularly broad picture, any more than Steve's somewhat sweeping statement did.

Timster

Timster

Posted
Posted
As LuLu Too says, it wasn't the assertion there are some bad apples in the NHS I was objecting too, it was the suggestion that the NHS provides a career for people who would be unemployable anywhere else. Every workplace has its share of incompetent and lazy staff, and I'm sure we've all worked with people whose ability to hold down any job is a mystery. I don't agree with SteveT's claim that the NHS provides an easy ride for these people or can be distinguished from any other employer - private or public sector - in this respect.
david_carnell

david_carnell

Posted
Posted

I agree timster.


I have worked in probably a dozen different jobs in a mixture of industries in both private and public sectors. There has been a constant - in every one there has been at least one lazy or useless member of staff. And when there wasn't it was probably me.


The NHS is far from unique in this respect.


I often wondered how they functioned in society let alone at work.

  • 2 weeks later...
SteveT

SteveT

Posted
Posted

Timster wrote:-

I'm sorry but that last sentence - that is, the last 16 words of it - is complete and utter nonsense!! What is so frustrating is people throwing out these sorts of comments without any evidence - in this case not even anecdotal - to back it up!


What more evidence could you possibly need than to go and look in any hospital anywhere in the land and you will see them for yourself Timster, not everyone who gets paid by the NHS, works for them.


Anecdotal evidence might come from the twenty five years I have travelled to almost every major ITU in the land from Cornwall to Edinburgh and the Isle of Wight to Aberytswyth.

My ex-wife is a Consultant and too many of whom she worked with neglected their NHS patients, in favour of the cash from the private sector.


How much anecdotal evidence do you need Timster?


I am sure AnnaJ and Bignumber5 have far more evidence of it than myself, being full-time employees in the industry.

Timster

Timster

Posted
Posted

I had thought this thread was dead but since I've been directly challenged. The point, as I think subsequent posts made clear, is that you have no evidence to suggest that absenteeism in the NHS (where it undoubtedly is a problem to some extent)is any worse than with any other employer. Your anecdotal evidence - which still seems very vague and non-specific - only demonstrates your experience of the NHS. I am sure you could find someone who has visited every council office or call centre or insurance company in the land to say they are all full of lazy people who couldn't get a job anywhere else. Oh, and my wife also works full time for the NHS, for what that's worth.


Your point about consultants neglecting NHS patients is, with respect, a completely different issue and I don't see how it is relevant to this thread. It is also a very serious accusation which again you have thrown out there without much evidence to back it up.

LuLu Too

LuLu Too

Posted
Posted

SteveT Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Your wife in all her time served in the nhs has

> never noticed the amount of hugely obese personell

> who seem to gravitate towards the nhs then

> Timster.

> I wonder if they are employable by any other

> company?



??

I don't understand this post.

The Chair

The Chair

Posted
Posted

Previous message deleted as the gratuitous name-calling was in no way suited to the ethos or raison d'etre of the Drawing Room.


More generally, The Chair has an extremely low tolerance for any message which purports to be some form of apology or explanation, but resorts to phrases like "I was only joking" or "It's just my sense of humour", or anything else along similar lines.

  • 3 weeks later...
Alan Dale

Alan Dale

Posted
Posted

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We can all delete the content of our own posts -

> although the empty box and the "." remain as a

> ghostly reminder of opinions we regretted

> expressing...

>

> Just use the 'Edit Post' link and drop in a full

> stop.

>

> I should add that it ruins your reputation - Alan

> Dale did it once a year after he pushed

> buy-to-lets with a passion of a Camberwell candy

> man. As the credit crunch crumbled our dreams to

> dust he went back months 'editing' to give

> 'plausible' deniability that he'd promoted

> anything of the sort.

>

> It wasn't 'plausible' at all. Never recovered poor

> chap, attracted the attentions of *Bob*





Au contraire mon frere.


http://www.woosterstock.co.uk/Detail.php?id=6972


Life in the 'village' has never been so sweet..



How's Singapore? Be honest. I dare you..

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • HeadNun
      Taxes

      By HeadNun · Posted

      Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • David Peckham
      Taxes

      By David Peckham · Posted

      Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • jazzer
      Is Rachel Reeves becoming the new Liz Truss?

      By jazzer · Posted

      "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • CPR Dave
      Cllr Williams to stand down

      By CPR Dave · Posted

      He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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