The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I think negotiations should have been tougher last year if for no other reason than to dampen enthusiasm for further strikes the following year. The manner of the settlement from last year clearly hasn't solved the problem. 

What does "tougher" mean? Less money so the strikes continued? The same money but make them wait a bit longer for it? You're still not giving an actual answer. 

[hypochondriac]

28 minutes ago, whelk said:

No way they are getting their demands this time. Industrial action is likely to prevail when there is sympathy for their cause. The public will not be tooting their horns in support. They lose pay by striking of course so always a two way battle of who has the stomach for it. 
You seem to think it was complete capitulation that has empowered them. Lots of these unions find out the hard way that workers don’t hold all the power

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

[AlexLaw76]

24 minutes ago, egg said:

What does "tougher" mean? Less money so the strikes continued? The same money but make them wait a bit longer for it? You're still not giving an actual answer. 

Presumably , the government are about to get a little more tough with them.

[egg]

10 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

Cheeky sod! You still won't say what they should have done last time apart from to have been"tougher", which is vaguer than vague. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Cheeky sod! You still won't say what they should have done last time apart from to have been"tougher", which is vaguer than vague. 

FFS. You spend the entire time refusing to answer questions. You've done it on other threads too. I'm not party to individual negotiations, I believe the government were not tough enough in negotiations because they largely gave them what they were asking for last year and all that's done is encourage the people to to try again this year. I would have offered less last year and tried to come to agreements to give more security for the future but im not giving you minute detail of individual negotiations because that's ridiculous. 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Presumably , the government are about to get a little more tough with them.

Presumably the government aren't just going to give them what they ask for this year. Amazingly it seems like they are going to be tougher! We don't know the specific details of the negotiation though so apparently that's not a valid answer! 

Edited 22 hours ago by hypochondriac

[Gloucester Saint]

Junior doctors are greedy sods - it’s always been the case that they start on decent wages but sharp increases as they establish themselves.

If the country wasn’t obsessed with immigration, I’d replace them with better practitioners and attitudes from elsewhere, going by the so-so vs outstanding care my family members have received over the years. Our culture is not built on caring. 

BMA are up there with the RMT for the most self-serving union who don’t give a toss about the people who fund them. 

[egg]

56 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

FFS. You spend the entire time refusing to answer questions. You've done it on other threads too. I'm not party to individual negotiations, I believe the government were not tough enough in negotiations because they largely gave them what they were asking for last year and all that's done is encourage the people to to try again this year. I would have offered less last year and tried to come to agreements to give more security for the future but im not giving you minute detail of individual negotiations because that's ridiculous. 

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

Multi-year deal had to be the way with that Union. Thought Streeting would’ve had more sense. The only aspect I agree with him on is that the public won’t stand for it and they’re in for a shock. In their young and naive minds they have the same halo as the senior consultants - but that has to be earned. At least the RMT know the public doesn’t like them.

[egg]

11 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Multi-year deal had to be the way with that Union. Thought Streeting would’ve had more sense. The only aspect I agree with him on is that the public won’t stand for it and they’re in for a shock. In their young and naive minds they have the same halo as the senior consultants - but that has to be earned. At least the RMT know the public doesn’t like them.

Agreed. I think they'll have little or no sympathy this time. Hearing the union spokeswoman yesterday saying how the public won't be happy that doctors are earning £x per hour misses the rather obvious point that they settled for it last year. Dinlo's. 

[hypochondriac]

27 minutes ago, egg said:

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

I favoured a tougher deal. Are you going to answer any of my questions now then? 

[egg]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I favoured a tougher deal. Are you going to answer any of my questions now then? 

What questions? 

[hypochondriac]

On 08/07/2025 at 18:08, hypochondriac said:

OK so now they've come back again a year later promising more damaging strikes and demanding more money. Presumably we need to settle once again. How do we deal with it in a way that doesn't give them even more money or encourage them to simy strike yet again in a years time?

@egg

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

goodness me you think you'd be able to find it for yourself given that I asked you this yesterday and you still haven't answered it. You're the very thing you accuse me of 

[egg]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

@egg

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

goodness me you think you'd be able to find it for yourself given that I asked you this yesterday and you still haven't answered it. You're the very thing you accuse me of 

I thought you meant answer something I haven't answered. I've addressed this. You can repackage it all you like, but the answer is still to have a deal. The government can be tough too, whatever the fuck that means. 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

I thought you meant answer something I haven't answered. I've addressed this. You can repackage it all you like, but the answer is still to have a deal. The government can be tough too, whatever the fuck that means. 

So should there be a deal in the next two weeks to prevent strike action? Or do we accept some strikes in order to get a better deal? 

[Wade Garrett]

Those Junior Doctors are a bunch of cunts.  So what if their pay is 20% less in real terms than in 2008.  After the banking crisis and COVID, so are most peoples.

Government did a good deal with them, and have offered more than inflation now.  Would like Keir U-Turn to actually tough this one out.

Fucking wankers.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Wade Garrett

[egg]

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So should there be a deal in the next two weeks to prevent strike action? Or do we accept some strikes in order to get a better deal? 

Ooh, I can't be specific Hypo. Just be tough. 

In all seriousness, how can any of us say how negotiations will go. Obviously we want it sorted asap on the best terms. 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Ooh, I can't be specific Hypo. Just be tough. 

In all seriousness, how can any of us say how negotiations will go. Obviously we want it sorted asap on the best terms. 

Right so you criticised me for saying I wanted the government to be tougher but you've essentially given the same answer for this round of negotiations! You can't tell me whether you'd be prepared for some strikes this year or not and if you are happy with that then why were strikes so unacceptable last year? 

Given that the doctors have just waited a year and then threatened more strikes, I'd have preferred a tougher stance last year which may have meant they hadn't given up so much last year so they could have maybe been a bit more generous this year. Maybe that would have meant some industrial action last year but all we've really done is delayed the industrial action a year. With how much was given last year there's very little left to concede from the government side short of giving even more money which will be hideously unpopular with the electorate. 

Edited 21 hours ago by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Those Junior Doctors are a bunch of cunts.  So what if their pay is 20% less in real terms than in 2008.  After the banking crisis and COVID, so are most peoples.

Government did a good deal with them, and have offered more than inflation now.  Would like Keir U-Turn to actually tough this one out now.

Fucking wankers.

 

I agree. Their problem was thinking that the union were reasonable people last year rather than the money grabbing cunts they are. 

[rallyboy]

Tories had the right idea, talk tough, look strong, refuse compromise, repeat hollow soundbites, offer nothing, preside over chaos - and definitely don't plan anything in the budget for the inevitable agreement.

 

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Right so you criticised me for saying I wanted the government to be tougher but you've essentially given the same answer for this round of negotiations! You can't tell me whether you'd be prepared for some strikes this year or not and if you are happy with that then why were strikes so unacceptable last year? 

Given that the doctors have just waited a year and then threatened more strikes, I'd have preferred a tougher stance last year which may have meant they hadn't given up so much last year so they could have maybe been a bit more generous this year. Maybe that would have meant some industrial action last year but all we've really done is delayed the industrial action a year. With how much was given last year there's very little left to concede from the government side short of giving even more money which will be hideously unpopular with the electorate. 

I've given a far more comprehensive answer than your vague answer. The issue last year wasn't that we weren't "tougher" (a bollox vague term), but that it wasn't a multi year deal, and that the door was left open. As I've said, not tying that up was a failure. 

[hypochondriac]

45 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Tories had the right idea, talk tough, look strong, refuse compromise, repeat hollow soundbites, offer nothing, preside over chaos - and definitely don't plan anything in the budget for the inevitable agreement.

 

Nope. Neither party had the best approach. 

[hypochondriac]

27 minutes ago, egg said:

I've given a far more comprehensive answer than your vague answer. The issue last year wasn't that we weren't "tougher" (a bollox vague term), but that it wasn't a multi year deal, and that the door was left open. As I've said, not tying that up was a failure. 

Bollocks did you! Your "answer" such as it was was that you want it sorted ASAP on the best terms. Zero detail on how to achieve that, zero idea about whether you'd accept some strike action or if it needed to be sorted I bthe next two weeks, no idea about whether you'd accept more taxpayer money given to junior doctors. Comprehensive answer my arse. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Bollocks did you! Your "answer" such as it was was that you want it sorted ASAP on the best terms. Zero detail on how to achieve that, zero idea about whether you'd accept some strike action or if it needed to be sorted I bthe next two weeks, no idea about whether you'd accept more taxpayer money given to junior doctors. Comprehensive answer my arse. 

"Be tougher". Yeah, that clarifies what they should have done. Nice detail mate👏

I'm glad you're irritated. It comes from people giving the kind of half arsed answers that you specialise in. 

 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, egg said:

"Be tougher". Yeah, that clarifies what they should have done. Nice detail mate👏

I'm glad you're irritated. It comes from people giving the kind of half arsed answers that you specialise in. 

 

More deflection. You accuse me of not answering a question and then you quite clearly refuse to answer in any detail the questions I asked. Simply pathetic.