What should be done about the IMO? (If anything)

opinion guy

Are you connected to the IMO Dr Z ????

sam34

drzhivago wrote: »

The expense I don't agree with but also the comparison between the two, it will take a while to figure it our but most do eventually

nice snide remark there, drz. :rolleyes:

bottom line, my trade union subscription is over €200 less per year now that I'm in the IHCA.

and, on an anecdotal level, any dealings I've had with the IHCA have been very satisfactory, with Donal Duffy ringing me at 9pm on one occasion to discuss something urgent, and having a letter in the post to me and my employer the next day. I'm still waiting for soneone in the IMO to return a call I made in 2009.

TC80

Some interesting discussion here.

The main reason that NCHDs are shabbily treated is not the HSE, or consultants, or any union. It is NCHDs themselves.

The prevailing mood among NCHDs regarding the IMO at the moment is “What is this organisation of doctors that I do not subscribe to and do nothing for doing for me?” This is unsustainable. For their part the IMO have been negligent in how they have allowed themselves to become marginalised over recent years. There were plenty of spaces they could have got themselves into but failed to do so and are reaping the rewards now.

Many NCHDs stick their head above the parapet for their colleagues. In a previous life I was very active in the IMO and involved in a dispute at a hospital that I worked in where NCHDs were not being paid overtime. I organised the NCHDs against this and it ended up within 3 months going to the LRC where the HSE were imposed upon to pay the money. Eventually they did and within 6 months over 200 NCHDs got cheques on average of €1000 each.

During this period I was subjected not only to hassle from NCHDs but I was threatened with suspension by hospital management and innuendoes regarding where I might stand in relation to future consultant appointments at the hospital. It was a pretty stressful time but with the help of Shirley at the IMO we all got back every cent owed. Of the 200 doctors that got payouts, 3 sent emails to thank me. None that were not members of the IMO signed up, so basically those who weren’t members were piggybacking on the subscriptions of those who were to fight this fight, which I thought was desperately uncollegial. From that point onward I thought :Feck it, why bother? And since that moment, I haven’t. One of the earlier posters might like to know that I got a hell of a lot more support in that difficult time from consultants than other NCHDs. One of the funniest aspects was a series of spiteful emails I got from a surgical SpR who denounced me as a “money grabbing beard who was getting in the way of a hospital being managed”. I’d love to know if he cashed his hefty cheque for back overtime.

Someone raised a good point about the IMOs policies on public health matters. This is a classic example of how the IMO, or any other organisation, works. Public health doctors are very active and engaged with the IMO and have very high levels of membership, including the current president. These are the issues that matter to them so they fill out their forms and put them on agendas, have them discussed and implement them, very successfully. NCHDs don’t do this. They don’t attend meetings, they don’t join organisations. they don’t fill out motion forms, they generally won’t talk on radio and television about it, Therefore there is a disproportionate emphasis placed on issues that are of importance to public health doctors, such as smoking and road safety, than issues that are important to NCHDs like hours, career progression and overtime.

This being busy thing is a load of triple. We’re all busy, someone still has to do the stuff. I don’t say this lightly but as someone who is in their last year as an NCHD and who has spent countless days in the LRC and Labour Court and management offices : NCHDs are getting what they deserve at the moment for their cowardice and immaturity in respect of taking ownership of their own affairs as a group. The IMO is a flawed organisation which at the very least provides them with a mechanism for doing so.

Over the course of 9 years as an NCHD our sense of looking out for one another and standing up for one another has collapsed. It’s all about me, me, me. And to briefly touch on the IHCA, I think it must be acknowledged that they are an organisation that was set up in response to NCHDs going on strike in 1987. And if people think the IMO don’t do enough for junior doctors PR, then I’d love to know what their opinion on the IHCA on that score as “hospital consultant” is (most unfairly in my view) one of the terms people use in the same tone of voice as “banker” and ”developer” these days.

drzhivago

opinion guy wrote: »

Are you connected to the IMO Dr Z ????

Connected as in I am an ordinary jobbing doctor who pays a membership, I have no role, not part of any group or committee BUT as an NCHD I did in the past and as a worker I did also when I worked with Waterford co-op

I was brought up in trade unions and a union is only as strong as the members who force the rep to hassle the executive (workers in the unions) to sort the problems

If the union members never meet in their workplace (Hospital) to elect a local union rep (doctor/NCHD who is willing to give up time to sort issues) then that union is unlikely to ever have a co-ordinated group of workers (NCHDS) and management will take liberties as they see fit

This is why I say people need to get involved, if a lot of people meet and strategies local issues it makes reps job easier and can also force the Union to do something

If you sit back and expect the union to walk in and sort the issues out that you haven't told them about it will never work

As much as people blame the IMO (and when I say that I hope you or others out there mean the employees of the IMO and not your colleagues who are giving of they time to solve your problems), if the workers/members/NCHDs don't actually organize themselves and are willing to get involved and act unions then have no power

I may be saying things you don't want to hear BUT Medicine is too middle class to understand how a union works and how members should act to solve problems

This sort of sounds very labour movement/Jim Larkinesque but NCHDS are on their knees and it is only they that get themselves on their feet with the help of the IMO, it won't happen through one or two people but through massive engagement

drzhivago

TC80 wrote: »

Some interesting discussion here.

The main reason that NCHDs are shabbily treated is not the HSE, or consultants, or any union. It is NCHDs themselves.

The prevailing mood among NCHDs regarding the IMO at the moment is “What is this organisation of doctors that I do not subscribe to and do nothing for doing for me?” This is unsustainable. For their part the IMO have been negligent in how they have allowed themselves to become marginalised over recent years. There were plenty of spaces they could have got themselves into but failed to do so and are reaping the rewards now.

I feel I now have 1 friend in the world swimming against the tide with me and I agree with your sentiment regarding the IMOs lackadaisical approach in recent years where they ahem effectively lost the hard fought gains
Training grant
Living out allowance and now diploma allowances to go as well as all the pay cuts

TC80 wrote: »

Many NCHDs stick their head above the parapet for their colleagues. In a previous life I was very active in the IMO and involved in a dispute at a hospital that I worked in where NCHDs were not being paid overtime. I organised the NCHDs against this and it ended up within 3 months going to the LRC where the HSE were imposed upon to pay the money. Eventually they did and within 6 months over 200 NCHDs got cheques on average of €1000 each.

During this period I was subjected not only to hassle from NCHDs but I was threatened with suspension by hospital management and innuendoes regarding where I might stand in relation to future consultant appointments at the hospital. It was a pretty stressful time but with the help of Shirley at the IMO we all got back every cent owed. Of the 200 doctors that got payouts, 3 sent emails to thank me. None that were not members of the IMO signed up, so basically those who weren’t members were piggybacking on the subscriptions of those who were to fight this fight, which I thought was desperately uncollegial. From that point onward I thought :Feck it, why bother? And since that moment, I haven’t. One of the earlier posters might like to know that I got a hell of a lot more support in that difficult time from consultants than other NCHDs. One of the funniest aspects was a series of spiteful emails I got from a surgical SpR who denounced me as a “money grabbing beard who was getting in the way of a hospital being managed”. I’d love to know if he cashed his hefty cheque for back overtime.

That was my experience over all also, everyone happy for me to be the mouth piece but didn't want to be seen discussing issues anywhere in case they were guilty by association with me, it was great as long as the wins came but when we didn't get double overtime at one point we had to change home phone number because of the hate calls my then girlfriend was getting at night

TC80 wrote: »

Someone raised a good point about the IMOs policies on public health matters. This is a classic example of how the IMO, or any other organisation, works. Public health doctors are very active and engaged with the IMO and have very high levels of membership, including the current president. These are the issues that matter to them so they fill out their forms and put them on agendas, have them discussed and implement them, very successfully. NCHDs don’t do this. They don’t attend meetings, they don’t join organisations. they don’t fill out motion forms, they generally won’t talk on radio and television about it, Therefore there is a disproportionate emphasis placed on issues that are of importance to public health doctors, such as smoking and road safety, than issues that are important to NCHDs like hours, career progression and overtime.

I have to agree the Public health doctors use the UNION aspect of the IMO effectively knowing how to play the long game, much better than GP or Consultant while I would class the NCHD group at the bottom regarding their ability to capitalise on opportunities through Union

TC80 wrote: »

This being busy thing is a load of triple. We’re all busy, someone still has to do the stuff. I don’t say this lightly but as someone who is in their last year as an NCHD and who has spent countless days in the LRC and Labour Court and management offices : NCHDs are getting what they deserve at the moment for their cowardice and immaturity in respect of taking ownership of their own affairs as a group. The IMO is a flawed organisation which at the very least provides them with a mechanism for doing so.

Have to agree here also, almost all NCHDS are busy in their careers but who do they expect to go to these meetings, respect to you for doing so and for doing it for a number of years

TC80 wrote: »

Over the course of 9 years as an NCHD our sense of looking out for one another and standing up for one another has collapsed. It’s all about me, me, me. And to briefly touch on the IHCA, I think it must be acknowledged that they are an organisation that was set up in response to NCHDs going on strike in 1987. And if people think the IMO don’t do enough for junior doctors PR, then I’d love to know what their opinion on the IHCA on that score as “hospital consultant” is (most unfairly in my view) one of the terms people use in the same tone of voice as “banker” and ”developer” these days.

I wish your ell in your career and this is a very dodgy time for you as the HSE seek to bring in another sub consultant grade at around 100k per year. This is a race to the bottom now