Why is everyone going on strike?

05eaftqbrs9jlh

fliball123 wrote:

the rent allowance being restored 4k and a 15 Euro per holiday allowance incase the gard has to give up their holiday to be in court or somewhere else on the job. But they get this regardless of if it happens or not so that 15 * 30. They get the rent allowance even if they still live at home with mammy.

Except that gardai have to work outside of their own localities, so they're going to be travelling and staying away from home at least.

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

the rent allowance being restored 4k and a 15 Euro per holiday allowance incase the gard has to give up their holiday to be in court or somewhere else on the job. But they get this regardless of if it happens or not so that 15 * 30. They get the rent allowance even if they still live at home with mammy.

Rent allowance may be restored to a few hundred new recruits who were on 23k a year. ( It's nothing to do with renting by the way)
A premium of 500 euro or so is being given to gardai, as compensation for having to be 'on call' even when on leave.
So more senior gardai will get a raise of 500 euro, before tax, a year.
Far from the 5000 euro that the poster claimed

05eaftqbrs9jlh

fliball123 wrote:

the rent allowance being restored 4k and a 15 Euro per holiday allowance incase the gard has to give up their holiday to be in court or somewhere else on the job. But they get this regardless of if it happens or not so that 15 * 30. They get the rent allowance even if they still live at home with mammy.

Except that gardai have to work outside of their own localities, so they're going to be travelling and staying away from home at least.

fliball123

Zane Loose Male wrote: »

Except that gardai have to work outside of their own localities, so they're going to be travelling and staying away from home at least.

Ok so what about a dublin man who becomes a gardai and is based in say Leitrim should he have to give up a % of his wage as the rent down there is way less down there than it is in dublin. We all bear costs of employment. There are a large cohort in the private sector (including myself) who has to travel 90 minutes to get to work. I dont see why I should give more out in my wage via higher tax to a gardai who simply has the same costs that I have. I have a nephew who lives in Dunboyne who is based in blackrock coming out of the gardai and he will live at home with mammy and will still get this..Its a joke

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Ok so what about a dublin man who becomes a gardai and is based in say Leitrim should he have to give up a % of his wage as the rent down there is way less down there than it is in dublin. We all bear costs of employment. There are a large cohort in the private sector (including myself) who has to travel 90 minutes to get to work. I dont see why I should give more out in my wage via higher tax to a gardai who simply has the same costs that I have. I have a nephew who lives in Dunboyne who is based in blackrock coming out of the gardai and he will live at home with mammy and will still get this..Its a joke

I have pointed out before that this allowance was given to gardai, in lieu of a wage increase many years ago, by a government who didn't wish to be seen giving a raise to AGS.
It has been stated in court that it is basically wages.
And going forward, rent allowance will be abolished, should the deal be accepted.

Separately, do you think your nephew should stay at home for free??!

Mick1988

The Muppet wrote: »

Ah we're back to averages . I'm sure you don't need me to explain the flaw in using them but I will any way .

Take 4 people in an office. one earns 125 k the other 3 25 k . On average they are all equal earning 50 k each the reality of the situation of course is very different.

I see later in the thread you have referred to the above as a 'debunk' to the argument of using averages?!? This example is terribly flawed as a method of your agruement. You have only used a ratio of 1:3 higher to lower earners.

To explain why your method is flawed, If we take the gardai as an example c.12000 employees.

If we were to break the gardai into 7 income barckets. 1 being the highest paid and 7 being the lowest paid. Using and average pays per bracket find the averages pay, then remove the top 2 earner brackets you will see the the difference to the average will only be a few grand and thus disproving your theory that averages are a flawed way of representing pay conditions.

Below workings are purely to explains the use of averages and the gardai numbers and wages have been made up:
No. Of staff Pay
50 * €200,000
100. *€150,000
500 *€100,000
1000. *€80,000
2000. *60,000
3000. *50,000
5350 *30,000

The above workforce would have an average of €48,800, if we remove the top bracket of earners the average will be €48,200, remove top 2 brackets the average will be 47,300, and top 3 brackets the average will be €45,000.

So you see removing the top 650 earners from the population which are on significantly higher salaries only reduces the average earnings less the €4k.

I think you'll now see why the use of averages is both necessary and applicable to people's arguments when discussing the general pay conditions of a large work force.

fliball123

bubblypop wrote: »

I have pointed out before that this allowance was given to gardai, in lieu of a wage increase many years ago, by a government who didn't wish to be seen giving a raise to AGS.
It has been stated in court that it is basically wages.
And going forward, rent allowance will be abolished, should the deal be accepted.

Separately, do you think your nephew should stay at home for free??!

Well then it should not of been given. It is not part of the wage it is an allowance that they now see as core pay but its an allowance all the same.

A Dub in Glasgo

Mick1988 wrote: »

I see later in the thread you have referred to the above as a 'debunk' to the argument of using averages?!? This example is terribly flawed as a method of your agruement. You have only used a ratio of 1:3 higher to lower earners.

To explain why your method is flawed, If we take the gardai as an example c.12000 employees.

If we were to break the gardai into 7 income barckets. 1 being the highest paid and 7 being the lowest paid. Using and average pays per bracket find the averages pay, then remove the top 2 earner brackets you will see the the difference to the average will only be a few grand and thus disproving your theory that averages are a flawed way of representing pay conditions.

Below workings are purely to explains the use of averages and the gardai numbers and wages have been made up:
No. Of staff Pay
50 * €200,000
100. *€150,000
500 *€100,000
1000. *€80,000
2000. *60,000
3000. *50,000
5350 *30,000

The above workforce would have an average of €48,800, if we remove the top bracket of earners the average will be €48,200, remove top 2 brackets the average will be 47,300, and top 3 brackets the average will be €45,000.

So you see removing the top 650 earners from the population which are on significantly higher salaries only reduces the average earnings less the €4k.

I think you'll now see why the use of averages is both necessary and applicable to people's arguments when discussing the general pay conditions of a large work force.

Yet the average of the bottom 2 (which makes up almost 70% of your dataset) is €40k

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

Where are you getting this from??
What gardai are getting a 5k increase?

I said close to 5k

wrote:

If they do accept, it could mean their pay packet will increase by a total of €3,800-€4,100, with new recruits’ salaries increasing by an estimated €7,500.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/strikes-frontline-gardai-offered-pay-rise-of-up-to-3k-429140.html

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

I said close to 5k



https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/strikes-frontline-gardai-offered-pay-rise-of-up-to-3k-429140.html

500 euro is no where near 5k. Particularly as you said long term gardai.
The only people getting nearly 5k increase is a few hundred new recruits, who presently earn 23k a year.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

500 euro is no where near 5k. Particularly as you said long term gardai.
The only people getting nearly 5k increase is a few hundred new recruits, who presently earn 23k a year.

Nope you're wrong I'm afraid

The numbers for long term gardai add up to €4100.

That is made up of the Rent Allowance increase, Annual Leave increase, parade allowance, the knock on increase of existing allowances and the €1000 increase due to all public sector workers from 2017 under LRA.

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

Nope you're wrong I'm afraid

The numbers for long term gardai add up to €4100.

That is made up of the Rent Allowance increase, Annual Leave increase, parade allowance, the knock on increase of existing allowances and the €1000 increase due to all public sector workers from 2017 under LRA.

500 euro rent increase, 500 euro annual leave compensation. So, 1000 euro a year.
Parade allowance is money paid for the extra overtime worked every shift, so absolutely no raise there. Knock on increase on allowances is extremely small and varies wildly from member to member.
No overtime? No raise in the overtime allowance.
If the deal is accepted, next September gardai will begin to be paid the extra 1000 euro from LRA, so approx 300 euro next year.
It's no where near 4100 a year, and that's before tax.

Donal55

bubblypop wrote: »

500 euro rent increase, 500 euro annual leave compensation. So, 1000 euro a year.
Parade allowance is money paid for the extra overtime worked every shift, so absolutely no raise there. Knock on increase on allowances is extremely small and varies wildly from member to member.
No overtime? No raise in the overtime allowance.
If the deal is accepted, next September gardai will begin to be paid the extra 1000 euro from LRA, so approx 300 euro next year.
It's no where near 4100 a year, and that's before tax.

Annual leave compo should only be paid to those who are affected. Its a scam.

Mick1988

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Yet the average of the bottom 2 (which makes up almost 70% of your dataset) is €40k

That still proves my point. Less then a €9k (or18%) differential when you remove the TOP 30% of earners.

As I said these numbers were just made up as writing the post but of course in reality an again using the gardai as an example, an organisation like the gadai would not be as top heavy as the numbers I provided and thus the fall from the average would be far less then 18% for the bottom 70% earners. I would estimate it would be closer to 5%-10%.

Also is is not just the bottom 70% that are going on strike so to remove the rest of the population would be misleading.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

500 euro rent increase, 500 euro annual leave compensation. So, 1000 euro a year.
Parade allowance is money paid for the extra overtime worked every shift, so absolutely no raise there. Knock on increase on allowances is extremely small and varies wildly from member to member.
No overtime? No raise in the overtime allowance.
If the deal is accepted, next September gardai will begin to be paid the extra 1000 euro from LRA, so approx 300 euro next year.
It's no where near 4100 a year, and that's before tax.

You are wrong.

What is wrong with you. I am providing links to the numbers

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/gra-unable-to-recommend-pay-deal-for-members-430031.html

wrote:

An initial analysis based on early GRA estimates suggested the recommendation would benefit gardaí by roughly €2,800-€3,100 a year.

wrote:

These increases do not factor in the €1,000 per annum increase given to all public servants under the Lansdowne Road Agreement.

Therefore, I mentioned the €4100 amount.

And how is the pre-parade extra work? This was supposed to be done all along - it is standard policing practice.


A little slap on the wrist came from the Garda Inspectorate who noted not all stations were holding it.

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

You are wrong.

What is wrong with you. I am providing links to the numbers

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/gra-unable-to-recommend-pay-deal-for-members-430031.html

Therefore, I mentioned the €4100 amount.

And how is the pre-parade extra work? This was supposed to be done all along - it is standard policing practice.


A little slap on the wrist came from the Garda Inspectorate who noted not all stations were holding it.

There's nothing wrong with me, maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read in the papers, I have seen the labour court proposals myself.

And as for parading time, when gardai worked 8 hour shifts, parading time was the norm. Since the rosters changed, gardai now work 10 hour shifts, with an overlap, which allows for parading of a new unit while still having members operational.
Now, they are going to pay more money for gardai to work an extra 15 minutes every shift.
So no, no pay raise there.

newwan

Isn't the most important point of the garda raise is that is going to be funded by the overall garda budget anyway. No extra money will be going to spend on new cars equipment or that. So basically the whole thing will be a win in wages but a disaster for the day to day work

newwan

Isn't the most important point of the garda raise is that is going to be funded by the overall garda budget anyway. No extra money will be going to spend on new cars equipment or that. So basically the whole thing will be a win in wages but a disaster for the day to day work

Green Peter

newwan wrote:

Isn't the most important point of the garda raise is that is going to be funded by the overall garda budget anyway. No extra money will be going to spend on new cars equipment or that. So basically the whole thing will be a win in wages but a disaster for the day to day work

Government have no interest in providing equipment for Garda anyway, technology is 30 years behind, better a decent paid Garda with some moral than a well equipped one demoralised. Heavens forbid we get the two together!

Green Peter

newwan wrote:

Isn't the most important point of the garda raise is that is going to be funded by the overall garda budget anyway. No extra money will be going to spend on new cars equipment or that. So basically the whole thing will be a win in wages but a disaster for the day to day work

Government have no interest in providing equipment for Garda anyway, technology is 30 years behind, better a decent paid Garda with some moral than a well equipped one demoralised. Heavens forbid we get the two together!

newwan

Have we gone over the whole avergae wage debate yet? IE our average Public Sector wage is astronomical relatively speaking. Which means the right amount of money is going to the PS as a whole and that it just needs redirecting from top to the bottom?

evolving_doors

newwan wrote: »

Have we gone over the whole avergae wage debate yet? IE our average Public Sector wage is astronomical relatively speaking. Which means the right amount of money is going to the PS as a whole and that it just needs redirecting from top to the bottom?

Also public sector employment requires a higher education level (ON AVERAGE!).
More education = higher wages!

newwan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Also public sector employment requires a higher education level (ON AVERAGE!).
More education = higher wages!

Seriously?
Evidence please

newwan

Green Peter wrote: »

Government have no interest in providing equipment for Garda anyway, technology is 30 years behind, better a decent paid Garda with some moral than a well equipped one demoralised.

That sounds like bs to me. What tech is 30 years old?

barneystinson

newwan wrote: »

Have we gone over the whole avergae wage debate yet? IE our average Public Sector wage is astronomical relatively speaking. Which means the right amount of money is going to the PS as a whole and that it just needs redirecting from top to the bottom?

Despite the evidence being that more public servants are underpaid relative to the private sector equivalent while the greatest public sector pay premium exists at the lower end of the public sector...?

newwan

barneystinson wrote: »

Despite the evidence being that more public servants are underpaid relative to the private sector equivalent while the greatest public sector pay premium exists at the lower end of the public sector...?

Explain that and show evidence please.

A Dub in Glasgo

newwan wrote: »

Seriously?
Evidence please

Evidence of what exactly? evidence that the Government requires more education for public sector jobs or evidence that higher educated level jobs are higher paid than lower educated level jobs?

evolving_doors

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Also public sector employment requires a higher education level (ON AVERAGE!).
More education = higher wages!

newwan wrote: »

Seriously?
Evidence please

Sure... from HERE
I dont think the figures would have changed much... although I would surmise with the upswing in the conomy there would be more employed in the services and sales side in the private sector.... dunno if there would be more in the public sector due to the moritorium!

I'll post the other breakdowns in the following posts
EducationandEarnings.jpg

Anyhow this confrims that the more education=more money

evolving_doors

Distribution_Of_Education.jpg



Which one has the highest/furthest education?

evolving_doors

And by occupation/job spec distribution public vs' private


Distribution_By_Occupation.jpg

newwan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

And by occupation/job spec distribution public vs' private


Distribution_By_Occupation.jpg

Great so all the cops who only have a leaving cert should have their wages cut is what you mean. Your ps boys are gonna love you!

evolving_doors

newwan wrote: »

Great so all the cops who only have a leaving cert should have their wages cut is what you mean. Your ps boys are gonna love you!

Well you did ask for a source! The 'meaning' is up to you.
So do you accept that a higher education = higher wage

newwan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Well you did ask for a source! The 'meaning' is up to you.
So do you accept that a higher education = higher wage

Lol
I don't really.
I don't agree anyone should get anything unless they deserve it.
How anyone can think that every single nurse cop or teacher works equally hard and equally intelligently is ludicrous and actually sounds like communism...

Jawgap

newwan wrote: »

Lol
I don't really.
I don't agree anyone should get anything unless they deserve it.
How anyone can think that every single nurse cop or teacher works equally hard and equally intelligently is ludicrous and actually sounds like communism...

Define 'deserve' and 'work' in the context of nursing and policing?

Who is the better nurse, the one who shoves her thumb into a severed artery to stop someone bleeding out or the one who takes 20 minutes to have a cup of tea with a lonely pensioner or the one who stops a junior doctor making a mistake or turns medical treatment into playtime to try to distract a sick child from the severity of their illness?

Who is the better Garda - the one from the NSU who lies in a hedgerow for 12 hours to observe a criminal gang's operations or the one who helps organise a kids football team or the one who chases a burglar across back gardens at night or the one who shoots an armed robber brandishing a sawn-off shotgun?

.....and for the sake of transparency.....my sister-in-law is a nurse who has done all the above in her nursing career and my brothers and brothers-in-law did the all the above in their policing careers.

evolving_doors

newwan wrote: »

Lol
I don't really.
I don't agree anyone should get anything unless they deserve it.
How anyone can think that every single nurse cop or teacher works equally hard and equally intelligently is ludicrous and actually sounds like communism...

The context was about averages... Not nurses, cops or teachers.

Cookie_Monster

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-unions-want-1000-rise-for-all-workers-35219464.html

Unions trying to set out their stall now, what planet are these people on?

newwan

"Pay restoration for nurses and midwives is desperately needed to alleviate over crowding in our hospitals."

Can someone explain this to me? Nurses don't admit or discharge and are not in any way the sole reason for bed closures.
Surely paying more will cause more overcrowding as that money has to be taken from elsewhere...

evolving_doors

newwan wrote: »

"Pay restoration for nurses and midwives is desperately needed to alleviate over crowding in our hospitals."

Can someone explain this to me? Nurses don't admit or discharge and are not in any way the sole reason for bed closures.
Surely paying more will cause more overcrowding as that money has to be taken from elsewhere...

Where did you get that quote from?

evolving_doors

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Well you did ask for a source! The 'meaning' is up to you.
So do you accept that a higher education = higher wage

newwan wrote: »

Lol
I don't really.
I don't agree anyone should get anything unless they deserve it.
How anyone can think that every single nurse cop or teacher works equally hard and equally intelligently is ludicrous and actually sounds like communism...

So you asked me to provide evidence as to the reason why public sector wages are higher than private sector on average.
Then when I ask if you accept it's validity you say "Lol, I don't really". :rolleyes:

Could you provide some evidence to counter mine.. apart from mentioning communism.

K-9

newwan wrote: »

Great so all the cops who only have a leaving cert should have their wages cut is what you mean. Your ps boys are gonna love you!

Well if people are going to group 10's of thousands of the ps into one group for pay, why not for education? Because it doesn't suit the argument?

newwan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

So you asked me to provide evidence as to the reason why public sector wages are higher than private sector on average.
Then when I ask if you accept it's validity you say "Lol, I don't really". :rolleyes:

Could you provide some evidence to counter mine.. apart from mentioning communism.

I asked you for proof that public sector ppl were higher educated than private.

And no I don't have to accept that higher education must mean higher wages and ill tell you why.

If a private sector guy with PhD opens his own business and it goes bust does he still deserve high wages?

No he deserves unemployment support and to be encouraged to restart until he gets it right.

Giving people things for free or when they don't deserve it breaks the economy and not only demotivates the receiver but also demoralises the hard working productive guy who sees these other getting things they don't necessarily deserve.

I've no problem with productive public servants getting well paid. I have a major problem with everyone getting the same.
And if anyone tells me that these things are hard to audit I'll scream. They are 1000s of managers in the PS....

newwan

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Where did you get that quote from?

Quote from author of largest Facebook page leading this

Jawgap

newwan wrote: »

"Pay restoration for nurses and midwives is desperately needed to alleviate over crowding in our hospitals."

Can someone explain this to me? Nurses don't admit or discharge and are not in any way the sole reason for bed closures.
Surely paying more will cause more overcrowding as that money has to be taken from elsewhere...

It's simple really, once you pay people enough they start to look at other aspects of their job to determine their self-worth and value - a nurse paid enough is more likely to be 'creative' and 'innovative' when it comes to caring and from a practical point of view - more likely to work extra unpaid hours (as in a few here and there) because being a nurse, psychologically, becomes about the vocation of nursing and less about the instrumental approach of earning a wage.

Now, you can disagree with that all you want - I expect you will - but a quick perusal of any decent organisational behaviour textbook (I recommend Mulins - Management & OB, just recently updated and published) will provide you with the theoretical and practical insight to realise this is correct.

newwan

Jawgap wrote: »

It's simple really, once you pay people enough they start to look at other aspects of their job to determine their self-worth and value - a nurse paid enough is more likely to be 'creative' and 'innovative' when it comes to caring and from a practical point of view - more likely to work extra unpaid hours (as in a few here and there) because being a nurse, psychologically, becomes about the vocation of nursing and less about the instrumental approach of earning a wage.

Now, you can disagree with that all you want - I expect you will - but a quick perusal of any decent organisational behaviour textbook (I recommend Mulins - Management & OB, just recently updated and published) will provide you with the theoretical and practical insight to realise this is correct.

Yes you are right. I will disagree lol.
I agree that nurses may feel better about the hard work they undoubtedly do. They may work harder too.
But none of this is going to fix overcrowding in our hospitals this winter...
And if Peter has to be robbed to pay Paul in my opinion it will undoubtedly worsen overcrowding.

What would certainly fix overcrowding in a very short period of time would be if senior docs were paid more to supervise junior docs who admit 'soft' admissions at night that don't need admission. Or pay GP s more to work extra hours and not send these people to hospital in the first place. Or hire more gps

That will instantly drop the admission rate by a significant amount in my opinion

Paying more to people who neither discharge nor admit people in attempt to alleviate overcrowding makes no sense

Jawgap

newwan wrote: »

Yes you are right. I will disagree lol.
I agree that nurses may feel better about the hard work they undoubtedly do. They may work harder too.
But none of this is going to fix overcrowding in our hospitals this winter...
And if Peter has to be robbed to pay Paul in my opinion it will undoubtedly worsen overcrowding.

What would certainly fix overcrowding in a very short period of time would be if senior docs were paid more to supervise junior docs who admit 'soft' admissions at night that don't need admission. Or pay GP s more to work extra hours and not send these people to hospital in the first place. Or hire more gps

That will instantly drop the admission rate by a significant amount in my opinion

Paying more to people who neither discharge nor admit people in attempt to alleviate overcrowding makes no sense

Well unless you're a hospital systems expert why should we accept your view?

We've had years of overcrowding......with suppressed wages....maybe it's time to try something new?

Here's an interesting thought, if wages were restored maybe nurses who opted out of the workforce might be incentivised to return? Maybe nurses who opted out of the public system to go the agency route would be incentivised to return? Maybe nurses who emigrated would be incentivised to return?

All that experience coming back into the system......you think it wouldn't benefit from it?

And yes nurses don't discharge patients but they make a huge contribution to making them 'dischargeable' and influencing the junior doctors who process the discharges......

......they're like the NCOs of the health system - they are the repository of medical wisdom.

newwan

Jawgap wrote: »

Well unless you're a hospital systems expert why should we accept your view?

We've had years of overcrowding......with suppressed wages....maybe it's time to try something new?

Here's an interesting thought, if wages were restored maybe nurses who opted out of the workforce might be incentivised to return? Maybe nurses who opted out of the public system to go the agency route would be incentivised to return? Maybe nurses who emigrated would be incentivised to return?

All that experience coming back into the system......you think it wouldn't benefit from it?

And yes nurses don't discharge patients but they make a huge contribution to making them 'dischargeable' and influencing the junior doctors who process the discharges...

......they're like the NCOs of the health system - they are the repository of medical wisdom.

Maybe I am lol.

I am proposing something new. You are proposing something that cannot directly work and is not new. Our nurses were supremely well paid in the noughties.

Absolutely, more experience the better. But it won't do anything for overcrowding this winter. It can't... The same effect with less cost to the system would be if you told all those who job share that they must do 39 hour weeks. That is a vast untapped nursing resource... But no one wants to mention that

I'm sorry I'm not going to comment on your last two paragraphs...

Jawgap

newwan wrote: »

Maybe I am lol.

I am proposing something new. You are proposing something that cannot directly work and is not new. Our nurses were supremely well paid in the noughties.

Absolutely, more experience the better. But it won't do anything for overcrowding this winter. It can't... The same effect with less cost to the system would be if you told all those who job share that they must do 39 hour weeks. That is a vast untapped nursing resource... But no one wants to mention that

I'm sorry I'm not going to comment on your last two paragraphs...

Well the evidence would suggest otherwise.

My proposals are based on my experiences of working in/with the NHS, the BMG (in Germany) and BIDMC (in Boston).

Anita Blow

We already have one of the highest rates of nurses per capita (2nd in the EU I believe) and we have the highest nurse:doctor ratio in the EU, more than double the average. Overcrowding is largely due to:
1) Not enough doctors & consultants who are the ones coordinating care, carrying out medical procedures & discharging patients. We have 2.7 doctors per 1000 population, which is below OECD average. We are so bad at retaining our medical graduates that we have the highest proportion of foreign-trained doctors of any EU country. 35% of our doctors are from abroad. Sweden which is in 2nd is at 25%
2) Not enough nursing home beds (or funding for them) which means we have tons of elderly patients occupying beds awaiting funding while they aren't requiring active medical treatment

Jawgap

Anita Blow wrote: »

We already have one of the highest rates of nurses per capita (2nd in the EU I believe) and we have the highest nurse:doctor ratio in the EU, more than double the average. Overcrowding is largely due to:
1) Not enough doctors & consultants who are the ones coordinating care, carrying out medical procedures & discharging patients. We have 2.7 doctors per 1000 population, which is below OECD average. We are so bad at retaining our medical graduates that we have the highest proportion of foreign-trained doctors of any EU country. 35% of our doctors are from abroad. Sweden which is in 2nd is at 25%
2) Not enough nursing home beds (or funding for them) which means we have tons of elderly patients occupying beds awaiting funding while they aren't requiring active medical treatment

Only because we count all nurses/doctors whereas a lot of OECD countries only count nurses / doctors working in their public health system or equivalent.

Anita Blow

The Health at a Glance 2015 report only includes actively employed nurses & physicians "providing a direct service to patients in a public and private system". The only country for which the OECD said it was unable to provide a statistic was Portugal because they were the only ones to provide the total amount licensed to practice, rather than actively practicing.
http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/social-issues-migration-health/health-at-a-glance-2015/nurses_health_glance-2015-26-en#page1