Hospital consultants - milking the system for their own benefit!

VinLieger

Roger_007 wrote: »

You sweeping statements about other staff, (admin in particular), reveals more about you than any of your other comments. Of course there are slackers amongst admin staff just as there are slackers amongst medical and para-medical and maintenance and cleaners. That's human nature, but to characterise a whole cohort of people as having "not an ounce of ability between them all" simply reveals that you have nothing but contempt for these people who are your co-workers. If this is your attitude as a trainee doctor, I shudder to think what your attitude will be when you become fully qualified.

Me thinks roger might be a bit closer to this than weve been led to believe, either you are a hse admin or have family/close friends who are because i have never met anyone who wasnt in agreement that the vast majority of hse admin are effin useless.

Which do you think is more important, their ability as a doctor or their opinions of admin staff?

I'd be delighted to be treated by someone who obviously cares about their patients well being more than being liked by absolutely useless admin staff.

Geuze

velo.2010 wrote: »

Restructuring the HSE to resemble something like the Nordic model of health care could be possible, but would need regionalisation of services and the acceptance of local taxation as well as PAYE. However, I think many people would be suspicious of a council tax and be reluctant to pay, as we've seen with the water charges.

Regarding how we rate worldwide, by funding of the HSE, Ireland falls in the middle of the rank of countries by % of health expenditure by government. The Nordic countries dominate the top with the US at the bottom. Just to show how fcuked up the US system is... while the government spend less as a percentage on health costs, as a percentage of GDP they spend more than anyone else in the OECD. Per capita spending is also higher than the other countries. Both figures are roughly 30% more than others. This shows the dominance of the insurance companies in the US healthcare system and how little regulation allows costs to spiral out of control.

https://twitter.com/susmitchellSBP/status/928944253329387520

Roger_007

VinLieger wrote: »

Me thinks roger might be a bit closer to this than weve been led to believe, either you are a hse admin or have family/close friends who are because i have never met anyone who wasnt in agreement that the vast majority of hse admin are effin useless.

Which do you think is more important, their ability as a doctor or their opinions of admin staff?

I'd be delighted to be treated by someone who obviously cares about their patients well being more than being liked by absolutely useless admin staff.

You thinks wrong. But like most people in this country, I know many people who who work in the HSE in various capacities.
But as to my particular interest in this matter, I have had experience where someone in my family circle was a victim of a certain consultant doctor in a certain maternity hospital who was literally out of control in carrying out ceaserian hysterectomies unnecessarily. After some complaints, his behaviour was 'reviewed' by three of his 'coleagues', (pals) in the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. They, naturally, gave him a 'clean bill of health' and he was allowed to carry on. In other words they circled the wagons.
All this information is in the public domain. The man in question was Dr Neary. He was eventually struck off, but not before he had done immense damage aided and abetted by his friends in the profession. I read all about it in the Harding Report on the case.
I don't particularly blame Dr Neary, he was obviously an incompetent idiot who had some delusion that he was doing the right thing. I blame the other doctors who protected him. Effin useless they were, (to use your own words).

Heckler

My brother is a consultant in one of the countrys major hospitals.

All I know is he works unreal hours and cares deeply for all of his patients.

We've sat down when we get together and the stories (obviously no names or specific details) he would tell you would break your heart (kids doctor).

When the likes of Ray D'arcy and Joe Duffy are earning up to 400,000 a year do I think my brother deserves what hes paid ?

Damn right I ****ing do.

Hes saving preborn lives because its his job to find out whats wrong in the womb before birth.

TallGlass

screamer wrote: »

I think the root cause here is not being scrutinized. We have a severe lack of doctors and consultants and part of it is money being offered elsewhere but the other part is that medicine is elitist and we need to open it up so that more people can go into medicine. TBH it takes lots of points to get into medicine but there's no regard for whether that intelligent person is suited to medicine. I think we need to address the chronic shortage and entry methods and then we might actually get people in medicine who are in it not for the money.

Entry methods are poor, there are loads of people myself included that would really give it a shot, but my age, education is against me, I could sort my education out but you don't know if you'll pass. Plus the cost is mental. 100k or so.

Rodin

Roger_007 wrote: »

If you are not a consultant why, in a previous post, did you refer to "my theatre lists"?

I have a theatre list yet am not a consultant.

jimmycrackcorm

Ihave yet to hear a convincing argument as to why there can be private patients in public hospitals.

I have one. Private patients are also public patients. I've health insurance but I'm also a taxpayer and entitled to use public fabulous just like anyone else.

Anita Blow wrote:

As I have said, I agree that private patients should not be treated in public hospitals. But if you think that consultants not working their contracted hours, or our theatre lists being filled up with private patients and public patients being discommoded is a regular occurrence then I can assure you that you're incorrect.

As above private patients are entitled, the issue really is about whether or not private patients can get quicker access.

But even that isn't as clear cut. If a public and private patient both need a hip replacement, both equal requirements, who should get access first? Bear in mind that hospitals are using private income towards provision their public services.

An overnight stay will cost a public patient an initial 80, but hospitals charge insurance companies 800 for the same despite a private patient being entitled to the same treatment.

the_syco

Broke my elbow a while back. Went to Blanch, and after waiting in A&E for 10-12 hours (I wasn't critical, no blood), I got on a trolley. After a while, I was put in a dorm with 15-20 other men. 6 hours later, at about 4am, a nurse came in and moved my bed into a semi-private room (there was space for another bed). VHI paid for this room, as I had insurance through them. The room wasn't been used, but my insurance allowed me to get my own room.

If I didn't have health insurance, I'd have been left in dorm room, and the semi-private room would have been empty.

I pay my taxes. Heck, I'd say I paid more tax than the 12 "ethnic minority" that caused my wait in ER to be 5 hours longer than it should, and forced the hospital to have 4 police stand guard near said group the entire time I was there, to protect everybody else, and the staff.

And as I paid my taxes, I can be in the public hospital, and have a public doctor treat me. The private insurance got me a nicer bed.

VinLieger

Roger_007 wrote: »

You thinks wrong. But like most people in this country, I know many people who who work in the HSE in various capacities.
But as to my particular interest in this matter, I have had experience where someone in my family circle was a victim of a certain consultant doctor in a certain maternity hospital who was literally out of control in carrying out ceaserian hysterectomies unnecessarily. After some complaints, his behaviour was 'reviewed' by three of his 'coleagues', (pals) in the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. They, naturally, gave him a 'clean bill of health' and he was allowed to carry on. In other words they circled the wagons.
All this information is in the public domain. The man in question was Dr Neary. He was eventually struck off, but not before he had done immense damage aided and abetted by his friends in the profession. I read all about it in the Harding Report on the case.
I don't particularly blame Dr Neary, he was obviously an incompetent idiot who had some delusion that he was doing the right thing. I blame the other doctors who protected him. Effin useless they were, (to use your own words).

While that is awful and what the stain of a human being did was incredibly wrong as well as the doctors who covered for him, you have also admitted you have your own personal agenda against all consultants, you are just as guilty of painting all consultants with the same brush as the other poster is of painting all admin staff with the same brush.

Roger_007

VinLieger wrote: »

While that is awful and what the stain of a human being did was incredibly wrong as well as the doctors who covered for him, you have also admitted you have your own personal agenda against all consultants, you are just as guilty of painting all consultants with the same brush as the other poster is of painting all admin staff with the same brush.

I do not have a personal agenda against all consultants. I used an example to illustrate that consultants have incompetent people amongst their numbers just like all professions and all walks of life.
I have had dealings with a few consultants over the years and mostly found them perfectly competent and efficient. In the same way any other staff that I have had dealings were mostly competent and efficient as well.
This thread was about how the two-tier system benefits the consultants financially. Nobody has yet denied that this is the case.
You, and Laserlad2010, (the 'other poster', I presume you refer to), were the ones who decided to attack the admin people to deflect attention away from what this thread was about rather than address the issue.
May I remind you what you said in a previous post :
"I have never met anyone who wasnt in agreement that the vast majority of hse admin are effin useless.".
So don't be blaming the 'other' poster for crass comments. Yours was as crass as they come and has nothing to do with the issue.

Seeing that other posters on the thread seem to just want to use it to vent their contempt for other staff in the health service, I will not be posting here again.

jcon1913

suicide_circus wrote: »

^^^then watch a further flight of consultants from Ireland to countries where they can make the big bucks. This ludicrous system we operate is probably the only thing keeping some of them in the country

Doctors in France are paid a fraction of what our doctors are paid. $95,000 according to www.kevinmd.com

Medical greed is a major issue in this country.

jcon1913

Anita Blow wrote: »

To clarify, the HSE doesn't really pay for postgraduate training. Training is funded by the doctors themselves who must pay their membership fees to the colleges, pay for participation in their courses and pay for their examinations. Training is through the colleges, not the HSE.

With regard to medical education, undergraduate is majority funded by foreign tuition fees while 50% of our Irish medical graduates fund their tuition themselves to the tune of 60k so there is no basis for forcing graduates to stay in the Irish system. Not least because it would be extremely damaging to the quality of care in the Irish system as we are a small country and are absolutely reliant on people training abroad.

What Irish medical undergraduate pays €60,000 towards the cost of their college fees in Ireland?

jcon1913

Rodin wrote: »

I have a theatre list yet am not a consultant.

Theatre manager , theatre nurse, porter - yawn

RDM_83 again

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

NutmegGirls post is spot on.

I would love if I could clock in and get paid by the hour! I currently do 50-60 hrs per week, 39 of which are paid. I don't do private practice.

There was no mention of how the HSE are breaching consultants contracts, and underpaying them. There will be high court cases going ahead in new year re this. Also amused by the references to allowances- we had to fight to get them to agree to pay for time spent in the hospital at weekends, despite it being in the contracts, they tried to pay a lower rate than in contract and after eventually getting letter from DG directing appropriate payment, we're still not getting it.

But yeah, those fat cat greedy docs are the bad ones, not the behemoth employer who has the minister on its side and complicit in breaching contracts. No primetime investigates on that.

Oh and btw, patients have a role to play too. I spent 2.5 hrs on Monday twiddling my thumbs. I was at a clinic, in an off-site location. Not one, yes, not one, of the patients turned up for their appointments. One had the decency to cancel but none of the others did. Total waste of my time, and one of the causes of long waiting lists.

I am curious about this, because the Doctors work 80 hours thing for 35k is brought up regularly, whats the upto date figures for the HSE overtime bill for Dr's on the lower grade.
I can pull an article from 2012 showing that the average overtime bill for the people your talking about was 31,000 with some on overtime figures much higher.

That was the height of the recession and the same line was being used then, is there a more up to date analysis of HSE overtime wage bill.

I know Doctors do a hard job but some figures would be useful here, I do expect a bit of hate for this post but realistically the data should be available and in the past at least the data didn't reflect doctors being on low salaries when you looked at the take home pay.

tldr: HSE wage bill figures please

headtheball14

jcon1913 wrote: »

What Irish medical undergraduate pays €60,000 towards the cost of their college fees in Ireland?

Graduate medical students ?
Fees 14,850 in UCC for example, by 4 comes out at just under 60,000 for the 4 years before maintenance or keeping yourself

jcon1913

headtheball14 wrote: »

Graduate medical students ?
Fees 14,850 in UCC for example, by 4 comes out at just under 60,000 for the 4 years before maintenance or keeping yourself

An Irish undergraduate medical student pays €3,000 per year according to UCCs website.

headtheball14

jcon1913 wrote: »

An Irish undergraduate medical student pays €3,000 per year according to UCCs website.

Yes but they are not all of the medical graduates.
Not sure if you are deliberately misinterpreting the posts but original poster quoted 50% of medical graduates paying 60 thousand for their course
Approx 50% of medical graduates are coming through graduate entry programs these pay 60 thousand. here are the links to the fees in UCC. Over 14,000 a year.
https://www.ucc.ie/en/ck791

_Whimsical_

the_syco wrote: »

Broke my elbow a while back. Went to Blanch, and after waiting in A&E for 10-12 hours (I wasn't critical, no blood), I got on a trolley. After a while, I was put in a dorm with 15-20 other men. 6 hours later, at about 4am, a nurse came in and moved my bed into a semi-private room (there was space for another bed). VHI paid for this room, as I had insurance through them. The room wasn't been used, but my insurance allowed me to get my own room.

If I didn't have health insurance, I'd have been left in dorm room, and the semi-private room would have been empty.

I pay my taxes. Heck, I'd say I paid more tax than the 12 "ethnic minority" that caused my wait in ER to be 5 hours longer than it should, and forced the hospital to have 4 police stand guard near said group the entire time I was there, to protect everybody else, and the staff.

And as I paid my taxes, I can be in the public hospital, and have a public doctor treat me. The private insurance got me a nicer bed.

And your insurance paid 10 times more for that private bed than a public patient would have meaning your insurance will be increasingly expensive in years to come.

It's actually unusual that they will move you to a private room just because you have insurance. In a lot of hospitals private rooms are kept for immunocompromised patients or patients with an infection that needs to be contained so even with top notch insurance you still find yourself on a public ward. Insurance these days is mostly about ensuring swift access to diagnostics and consultants or being treated in private hospitals.

Ardillaun

In Canada, most of our system is funded by each province. A salaried physician can only fee-for-service outside normal working hours i.e. evenings, weekends or annual leave. The same would apply to private work.

Ardillaun

The logical thing to do would be separate public and private systems and make doctors choose one.

jcon1913

headtheball14 wrote: »

Yes but they are not all of the medical graduates.
Not sure if you are deliberately misinterpreting the posts but original poster quoted 50% of medical graduates paying 60 thousand for their course
Approx 50% of medical graduates are coming through graduate entry programs these pay 60 thousand. here are the links to the fees in UCC. Over 14,000 a year.
https://www.ucc.ie/en/ck791

Thanks for the information.

In the contrary I have tried to tease out some facts, your colleague has engaged in selective quotes of information.

There are a lot more facts in your post than the post that baldly stated that 50% of medical graduates qualifying in Ireland pay €60,000. Now how many of thise graduates end up working in Ireland? I think the vast bulk of medical graduates who pay €60,000 to go graduate medical school go back to Canada and the US.

Do you know?

KellyXX

I'd rather they were paid handsomly than they all leave the public system , or worse, leave the country.

ChikiChiki

From lawyers to hospital consultants the system provided is there to be milked. And milk it they do. The processes in place are f**ked. No value at all provided for taxpayers.

Look towards Dail Eireann people. Thats where fingers need to be pointing at.

Beasty

Ardillaun wrote: »

The logical thing to do would be separate public and private systems and make doctors choose one.

If you make them choose, the vast majority (not all, I am sure) would go into the private sector, and the private sector would cease subsidising the public sector in the way it currently does. There is a fair chance the public sector would be pretty much destroyed

headtheball14

jcon1913 wrote: »

Now how many of thise graduates end up working in Ireland? I think the vast bulk of medical graduates who pay €60,000 to go graduate medical school go back to Canada and the US.

Do you know?

I have seen numbers before on it but I think you are mixing things up. The vast majority of graduate medical participants tend to be Irish resident mature students . A lot of places on the undergraduate courses tend to be overseas students,also UK and EU students.

jcon1913

headtheball14 wrote: »

I have seen numbers before on it but I think you are mixing things up. The vast majority of graduate medical participants tend to be Irish resident mature students . A lot of places on the undergraduate courses tend to be overseas students,also UK and EU students.

So - either you know and wont put in your analysis. Or like me you dont know.

homerjay2005

im going to play the devils advocate here. a friend of mine is a cancer consultant and he ends up working about 70 hours a week - leaves his house at 6am, gets home at 7pm some nights, works saturday. his dedication to his patients is incredible.

he has his own part time private practice built into that 70 hours a week and works for some private hospitals however his own practice is nothing but a drain on his finances. The money he makes is minimal as his tax, rent, insurance, staff costs can touch many 1000s in some months yet all people will talk about is how much his top line is. he does private because theres not many people who are able to do it and those patients also need to be treated.

if he gave up the public, he could go private full time and he would be a wealthy man but he has no desire to do so as he has so much loyalty to public patients and the job he does is nothing but incredible.

Ardillaun wrote: »

The logical thing to do would be separate public and private systems and make doctors choose one.

this would be a very bad idea. we are short people in the public as it is, this would just make it even worse.

jcon1913

homerjay2005 wrote: »

im going to play the devils advocate here. a friend of mine is a cancer consultant and he ends up working about 70 hours a week - leaves his house at 6am, gets home at 7pm some nights, works saturday. his dedication to his patients is incredible.

he has his own part time private practice built into that 70 hours a week and works for some private hospitals however his own practice is nothing but a drain on his finances. The money he makes is minimal as his tax, rent, insurance, staff costs can touch many 1000s in some months yet all people will talk about is how much his top line is. he does private because theres not many people who are able to do it and those patients also need to be treated.

if he gave up the public, he could go private full time and he would be a wealthy man but he has no desire to do so as he has so much loyalty to public patients and the job he does is nothing but incredible.



this would be a very bad idea. we are short people in the public as it is, this would just make it even worse.

Fair points. But unless he became a consultant under the new contracts, hes earning €250,000 a year from his public work. Clear. No rent or salaries to be paid out of that.

So he well paid in most peoples eyes Id say. Would you say he is well paid or just scraping by?

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

Fair points. But unless he became a consultant under the new contracts, hes earning €250,000 a year from his public work. Clear. No rent or salaries to be paid out of that.

So he well paid in most peoples eyes Id say. Would you say he is well paid or just scraping by?

Nope. The full salary increase as agreed (and written into contracts) with Mary Harney was never paid to consultants. There are a number of high court cases being taken about this breach of contract issue at the moment.

Geuze

Ardillaun wrote: »

The logical thing to do would be separate public and private systems and make doctors choose one.

To remove private practice from public hosps might be possible.

But to remove consultants from doing both would be impossible, I suggest.

Take a large town or small city.

A specialist might not have enough work in the public hosp, so they could work 3 days public and 2 days private instead.

SlainteCare suggests removing private practice from public hosps.

But I don't think it suggests making consultants all-public or all-private?

Roger_007

Geuze wrote: »

To remove private practice from public hosps might be possible.

But to remove consultants from doing both would be impossible, I suggest.

Take a large town or small city.

A specialist might not have enough work in the public hosp, so they could work 3 days public and 2 days private instead.

SlainteCare suggests removing private practice from public hosps.

But I don't think it suggests making consultants all-public or all-private?

A universal insurance model, as has been suggested by some politicians, might solve the problem. All consultants would be paid on the basis of procedures carried out or patients treated. There would be no two-tier system as there is now. The role of the state would be to subsidise the insurance premiums for those who can't afford to pay.

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

Nope. The full salary increase as agreed (and written into contracts) with Mary Harney was never paid to consultants. There are a number of high court cases being taken about this breach of contract issue at the moment.

According to the IMO the top paid consultants were earning €226,000 in 2008. This is now down to according to an article in the Irish Times by Martin Wall on 1st Feb 2017. Thats for public practice consultants who are not permitted to do private work on top of that.

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

According to the IMO the top paid consultants were earning €226,000 in 2008. This is now down to according to an article in the Irish Times by Martin Wall on 1st Feb 2017. Thats for public practice consultants who are not permitted to do private work on top of that.

The top point on the scale was 226k, IIRC. However as I stated, that was never actually paid. The increases under the new contracts from 2008 were to be paid in two stages, the first were paid but the second weren’t. You won’t find that mentioned in many articles about doctors salaries though. But as I said, there are a number of breach of contract cases going on at the moment in relation to the failure to pay as per the contract, and last year the attorney general advised the HSE to withdraw its appeal against the court findings in the test cases.

By the time I got appointed the HSE had unilaterally amended the contract and revised the payscales downwards. I am on a type A public only contract and my max salary as per contract is not near 226k.

The new entrant contracts are another issue altogether, with cuts made that won the populist vote but saved relatively little in the big scheme of things and have led to difficulties with recruitment and retention.

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

The top point on the scale was 226k, IIRC. However as I stated, that was never actually paid. The increases under the new contracts from 2008 were to be paid in two stages, the first were paid but the second weren’t. You won’t find that mentioned in many articles about doctors salaries though. But as I said, there are a number of breach of contract cases going on at the moment in relation to the failure to pay as per the contract, and last year the attorney general advised the HSE to withdraw its appeal against the court findings in the test cases.

By the time I got appointed the HSE had unilaterally amended the contract and revised the payscales downwards. I am on a type A public only contract and my max salary as per contract is not near 226k.

The new entrant contracts are another issue altogether, with cuts made that won the populist vote but saved relatively little in the big scheme of things and have led to difficulties with recruitment and retention.

So what is your salary?

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

So what is your salary?

178k. Which is a good salary, I’m not disputing that, and I have a very comfortable standard of living. But it’s not what is in the nationally agreed consultants contract. The HSE are breaching that. I don’t think many private sector employees would put up with an employer saying “come work for us and only us and we’ll pay you more to make up what you could get elsewhere” and then not actually paying that! And the HSE are challenging it to the courts when the consultants are asking them to pay what they, the HSE, agreed to pay.

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

178k. Which is a good salary, I’m not disputing that, and I have a very comfortable standard of living. But it’s not what is in the nationally agreed consultants contract. The HSE are breaching that. I don’t think many private sector employees would put up with an employer saying “come work for us and only us and we’ll pay you more to make up what you could get elsewhere” and then not actually paying that! And the HSE are challenging it to the courts when the consultants are asking them to pay what they, the HSE, agreed to pay.

Well your views may go some way to explain why some people form the opinion that medical consultants as a group are well-paid, but still want more.

I agree that if you have a contract to be paid an amount you should be paid in accordance with that.

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

Well your views may go some way to explain why some people form the opinion that medical consultants as a group are well-paid, but still want more.

I agree that if you have a contract to be paid an amount you should be paid in accordance with that.

My views that people should be paid according to their contracts? Yeah, a shocking notion altogether! Let’s all sign contracts and then let our employers disregard their obligations therein.

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

My views that people should be paid according to their contracts? Yeah, a shocking notion altogether! Let’s all sign contracts and then let our employers disregard their obligations therein.

You are a priviledged member of an esteemed profession. Taxpayers make up the shortfall between €3,000 per year in fees which undergraduates pay, and the real cost of their years in university.

Most doctors leave college pretty debt-free and ready to enter a well regarded, stimulating career with lots of opportunities open to them.

Doctors in Ireland are well-paid compared to other first world countries. I agree with you on the contract. Whether it is gouging the taxpayer is amother question.

Arbie

jcon1913 wrote: »

Taxpayers make up the shortfall between €3,000 per year in fees which undergraduates pay, and the real cost of their years in university.

This is true of every college course. If you want people to pay back their fees then it would have to apply to all students.

jcon1913 wrote: »

Most doctors leave college pretty debt-free

What is that based on?

jcon1913 wrote: »

Doctors in Ireland are well-paid compared to other first world countries.

This is a very broad statement. There are over 50 specialties in medicine in Ireland and maybe a dozen grades within each and as noted above there are even different contracts for the same grades, so which doctors are you comparing and against which countries?

jcon1913

Arbie wrote: »

This is true of every college course. If you want people to pay back their fees then it would have to apply to all students.



What is that based on?



This is a very broad statement. There are over 50 specialties in medicine in Ireland and maybe a dozen grades within each and as noted above there are even different contracts for the same grades, so which doctors are you comparing and against which countries?

Not all college students courses are worth €14,000 in fees -are they? Whereas US /Canadian students will pay that for a medical course. So the shortfall is €11,000 per year.

See "Irish hospital consultants among worlds best paid, OECD finds" in the Irish Times on 8th July 2015. The study also states "Irish health professionals are well paid by unternational standards".

Have you any sources for your opinion?

Anita Blow

jcon1913 wrote: »

Not all college students courses are worth €14,000 in fees -are they? Whereas US /Canadian students will pay that for a medical course. So the shortfall is €11,000 per year.

See "Irish hospital consultants among worlds best paid, OECD finds" in the Irish Times on 8th July 2015. The study also states "Irish health professionals are well paid by unternational standards".

Have you any sources for your opinion?

The total tuition cost for medicine in Ireland is 8900 euro.The majority of that is subsidised by international fees. The exchequer contributes relatively little to medical training. And that's ignoring the 42%+ of Irish medical graduates now which are mature/graduate-entry who pay for their training completely themselves.

On the topic of consultant pay, there's no denying that they are paid a good wage. But it's not simply about how much they are paid, it's about how much they are paid relative to their colleagues in other countries. It's an extremely mobile profession and we have to compete for workers. If you offer a CEO post for 100k you might say that's great compared to what most in the country are earning, but if it's below what he/she could earn as CEO in another company then that post will still go unfilled.

So yes pay is good but it's still less than Australia, Canada & the US (the English-speaking countries with which we compete for medics). And these countries don't have the appalling work conditions that we have. The OECD data also omitted salary supplements for the UK so we're at least no different than them for consultant pay.

As has been said before, we have a record number of unfilled consultant posts so clearly there is something which is deterring people from applying.

notsoyoungwan

I love the “Doctors in Ireland are well paid compared to other countries” argument. It’s almost like we don’t have 200 or so consultant posts either unfilled or filled in a temporary capacity, or that we aren’t advertising posts and getting no applicants, or that there are consultants in Canada, Australia, NZ etc who are falling over themselves to get posts here.

Back when I applied for my job, there were 31 applicants and they interviewed 26 candidates. And I’m in a relatively unpopular specialty and a relatively undesirable part of the country. In my department we now have more temporary consultants than permanent ones and we have 3 vacancies, despite the fact we are willing to pay agency rates.

But yeah, the pay is so great in comparison to elsewhere, I just can’t figure it out!

laserlad2010

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

I love the “Doctors in Ireland are well paid compared to other countries” argument. It’s almost like we don’t have 200 or so consultant posts either unfilled or filled in a temporary capacity, or that we aren’t advertising posts and getting no applicants, or that there are consultants in Canada, Australia, NZ etc who are falling over themselves to get posts here.

Back when I applied for my job, there were 31 applicants and they interviewed 26 candidates. And I’m in a relatively unpopular specialty and a relatively undesirable part of the country. In my department we now have more temporary consultants than permanent ones and we have 3 vacancies, despite the fact we are willing to pay agency rates.

But yeah, the pay is so great in comparison to elsewhere, I just can’t figure it out!

I am willing to make the step up from Paeds to whatever you're doing for agency rates:p:p I've an UpToDate subscription and I can delegate, where do I sign?

I thought we'd made some progress with the public until the Primetime programme ran. As frustrating as the waiting lists are, consultants have so little control over them it's depressing. More theatres, more consultants, more ancillary staff and more money and boom, cataract waiting lists drop.

Anita Blow

laserlad2010 wrote: »

More theatres, more consultants, more ancillary staff and more money and boom, cataract waiting lists drop.[/B]

That money would be better spent on more HSE area managers, directors and Values in Action seminars for middle management

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

I love the “Doctors in Ireland are well paid compared to other countries” argument. It’s almost like we don’t have 200 or so consultant posts either unfilled or filled in a temporary capacity, or that we aren’t advertising posts and getting no applicants, or that there are consultants in Canada, Australia, NZ etc who are falling over themselves to get posts here.

Back when I applied for my job, there were 31 applicants and they interviewed 26 candidates. And I’m in a relatively unpopular specialty and a relatively undesirable part of the country. In my department we now have more temporary consultants than permanent ones and we have 3 vacancies, despite the fact we are willing to pay agency rates.

But yeah, the pay is so great in comparison to elsewhere, I just can’t figure it out!

It is not an argument it is a fact. Can you quote an article / study /opinion ( apart from your own ) that supports your arguments? Otherwise you have to accept what you are being told

jcon1913

Anita Blow wrote: »

The total tuition cost for medicine in Ireland is 8900 euro.The majority of that is subsidised by international fees. The exchequer contributes relatively little to medical training. And that's ignoring the 42%+ of Irish medical graduates now which are mature/graduate-entry who pay for their training completely themselves.

On the topic of consultant pay, there's no denying that they are paid a good wage. But it's not simply about how much they are paid, it's about how much they are paid relative to their colleagues in other countries. It's an extremely mobile profession and we have to compete for workers. If you offer a CEO post for 100k you might say that's great compared to what most in the country are earning, but if it's below what he/she could earn as CEO in another company then that post will still go unfilled.

So yes pay is good but it's still less than Australia, Canada & the US (the English-speaking countries with which we compete for medics). And these countries don't have the appalling work conditions that we have. The OECD data also omitted salary supplements for the UK so we're at least no different than them for consultant pay.

As has been said before, we have a record number of unfilled consultant posts so clearly there is something which is deterring people from applying.

The total cost of training a person from leaving cert through medicine to graduate is €125,000. Accordimg to the Herald on August 17, 2012. Apparently Senator Colm Burke FG did a study.

How did you arrive at a figure of €8,900?

I accept your point about appallimg, illegal and inhumane working conditions.

Stheno

Anita Blow wrote: »

That money would be better spent on more HSE area managers, directors and Values in Action seminars for middle management

Did you forget the sarcasm emoji?

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

It is not an argument it is a fact. Can you quote an article / study /opinion ( apart from your own ) that supports your arguments? Otherwise you have to accept what you are being told

Have a read of this: https://www.imo.ie/policy-international-affair/documents/Irish-Medical-Organisation-Submission-to-the-Public-Service-Pay-Commission.pdf

jcon1913

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

Have a read of this: https://www.imo.ie/policy-international-affair/documents/Irish-Medical-Organisation-Submission-to-the-Public-Service-Pay-Commission.pdf

Fair points in the report - Irish doctors are on €50,000 after adjustment for tax and purchasing power. But the IMO is a lobbying organisation. Wheres the comparison against the rest of the world?

Take Kenya, where the doctors can hope for $40,000 per annum, which according to the East African newpaper on 22nd March 2017 puts them on a par with South African doctors. The IMO left them out of their study - no guessing why

notsoyoungwan

jcon1913 wrote: »

You are a priviledged member of an esteemed profession. Taxpayers make up the shortfall between €3,000 per year in fees which undergraduates pay, and the real cost of their years in university.

Most doctors leave college pretty debt-free and ready to enter a well regarded, stimulating career with lots of opportunities open to them.

Doctors in Ireland are well-paid compared to other first world countries. I agree with you on the contract. Whether it is gouging the taxpayer is amother question.

Taxpayers make up the shortfall for all college courses.

Your second point applies equally to other graduates such as engineers, lawyers etc

You haven’t mentioned the post-graduate training that doctors do, mostly at their own expense. After my basic medical degree, I completed professional exams- the fees for these were paid for me, the training courses needed to pass we’re not paid. I obtained two more degrees, 4 diplomas and 2 certificates, all paid for out of my own pocket and done mostly in my own time, with me often taking annual leave to attend college days. I don’t know of any other profession that undergo such extensive post-graduate study and training, and certainly not at their own cost.

But once you resort to such petty insults as “gouging the taxpayer”, I’m out. I simply couldn’t be bothered engaging further with someone who engages at that level. Others here may have more patience than me!