Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. " It can’t make them any worse. The people “working” at NHS England are obviously not effective at all given the current state of services provided. As they are public sector the difficulty will be getting rid of them without paying exorbitant redundancy and pension costs. Hopefully the Musk style email will come today so they can start to be ed out on Monday- but I’m not holding my breath. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sir Kier goes full Elon ! 💪" Shame that the political forum on here has become the TDS/EDS bashing ground with just regurgitating BBC hatred and never any evidence for their speaking points. Really quite pathetic. https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/voluntary-separation-incentive-payments/#:~:text=Description,an%20incentive%20to%20voluntarily%20separate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hopefully not done ala "Elon Stylee" with an email to all staff next Monday. ("How many lives did you save last week ?") Slowly and softly, through natural retirement cohorts first of all, then careful and considered trimming after that with full union support." Oxymora, this is why I'm conflicted, government and unions paving the way slowly in agreement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff..." If you consider NHS England as the back office, you will get an idea of the changes ahead. Typically they set target, strategy, workflow and other services that underpin operations. The idea is to bring those services into the Department of Health and Social Care, that in theory frees up the money being spent on duplicated roles to be spent on the front line. Reading your post that should be a positive for you, if funds actually make it to the front line operational services. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff... If you consider NHS England as the back office, you will get an idea of the changes ahead. Typically they set target, strategy, workflow and other services that underpin operations. The idea is to bring those services into the Department of Health and Social Care, that in theory frees up the money being spent on duplicated roles to be spent on the front line. Reading your post that should be a positive for you, if funds actually make it to the front line operational services. " If I view back office, that's good. However, NHS England is the NHS in England (as opposed to NHS Scotland etc). The devolved nations run their NHS with funding from Westminster. Hence Streeting can only pick on England  . Now if he'd stated DHSC... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff..." Most people work more than their contracted hours. NHS workers aren’t uniquely hard done by. They just think they are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff... If you consider NHS England as the back office, you will get an idea of the changes ahead. Typically they set target, strategy, workflow and other services that underpin operations. The idea is to bring those services into the Department of Health and Social Care, that in theory frees up the money being spent on duplicated roles to be spent on the front line. Reading your post that should be a positive for you, if funds actually make it to the front line operational services. If I view back office, that's good. However, NHS England is the NHS in England (as opposed to NHS Scotland etc). The devolved nations run their NHS with funding from Westminster. Hence Streeting can only pick on England . Now if he'd stated DHSC..."NHS England is the admin, not the entire NHS in England. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff... If you consider NHS England as the back office, you will get an idea of the changes ahead. Typically they set target, strategy, workflow and other services that underpin operations. The idea is to bring those services into the Department of Health and Social Care, that in theory frees up the money being spent on duplicated roles to be spent on the front line. Reading your post that should be a positive for you, if funds actually make it to the front line operational services. If I view back office, that's good. However, NHS England is the NHS in England (as opposed to NHS Scotland etc). The devolved nations run their NHS with funding from Westminster. Hence Streeting can only pick on England . Now if he'd stated DHSC...
NHS England is the admin, not the entire NHS in England."I'm just watching question time, and let's just say every day is a school day  . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven't looked at the story, but it cannot be nurses as 30,000 vacancies still exist. Unless they just squash that number so that theoretically savings are made. I hope you realise how much frontline staff work over and above their wages. How much each nurse works over their paid time because they are never given enough time for all the work they complete. I would love to see how managers could make that more efficient... oh I know, pay nurses their worth, give them more time and attrition would drop. IE means less induction expenses, less one off training sessions, less time supervising new staff... Most people work more than their contracted hours. NHS workers aren’t uniquely hard done by. They just think they are." Blah blah blah Am not going to bite this time, cos I honestly think you're a master at baiting (yeah a master baiter , Captain Pugwash at its finest). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen?" Apparently, under the tories. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories." ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. " Didn't do anything to improve HMRC 🥴🙈🤷 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark." It was stated on QT.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT. "I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. " Saving £500 million a year, but it will cost £100 million a year having those 10,000 out of work on £10,000 a year benefits.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT.
I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990."Nhs England is only 12 years old. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT.
I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990.
Nhs England is only 12 years old."....and how was it formed? From the administrative arms of the NHS within England and was described as a rebranfding perhaps? Your blind faith is admirable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT.
I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990.
Nhs England is only 12 years old.
....and how was it formed?
From the administrative arms of the NHS within England and was described as a rebranfding perhaps?
Your blind faith is admirable."Read nhs England devolution. Blind faith my butt. I've worked within for over a quarter of a century. Rebranding/reforming/renaming departments is a politician's favourite past-time re the nhs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark." I think it was Andrew Langley, who set up things this way, after a £multimillion reorganization that they said wouldn't happen. The conservatives spent £millions on health service waste being established and developed, then continued. Much or all of what they do will still need to be done but costs will be incurred, going through the changes. And there will probably be some inefficiencies, whilst it's new. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT.
I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990.
Nhs England is only 12 years old.
....and how was it formed?
From the administrative arms of the NHS within England and was described as a rebranfding perhaps?
Your blind faith is admirable.
Read nhs England devolution.
Blind faith my butt. I've worked within for over a quarter of a century.
Rebranding/reforming/renaming departments is a politician's favourite past-time re the nhs."So...big questions.....what elements formed NHS England in 2012? What were the comparative units that made up the administrative function of this soon to be defunct unit? We're the elements larger, smaller or just the same in 1990? As a knowledgeable and practicing NHS employee (hopefully operational as opposed to administrative), have you looked at the NHS Annual Report from 1990? (which along with other Civil Service wide publications were the standard yearly publication for each department). That would give you a clue as to administrative staffing levels then consequently. The point is that administrative levels within the NHS have increased since 1990 under all governments. You seem to think that the only problem with this is caused when one side do this...which is in my view, blind faith that the other side cannot be criticised at all. I admire your blind faith. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. Saving £500 million a year, but it will cost £100 million a year having those 10,000 out of work on £10,000 a year benefits. "Similar was said about the mining and steel industries. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. Saving £500 million a year, but it will cost £100 million a year having those 10,000 out of work on £10,000 a year benefits.
Similar was said about the mining and steel industries."COAL NOT DOLE! Oops, just got my knuckles rapped by the Green Party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a moment to soon. Hard to imagine any private sector company running with a surplus of 10,000 staff at HQ level. How did that happen? Apparently, under the tories. ....and the previous Labour government. This isn't a single government failing. It is a succession. To fault a single party is clearly wide of the mark. It was stated on QT.
I bow to your faith in what may have being stated on QT as being the complete story without reference to the history of how the administration resources of NHS England has spiralled since 1990.
Nhs England is only 12 years old.
....and how was it formed?
From the administrative arms of the NHS within England and was described as a rebranfding perhaps?
Your blind faith is admirable.
Read nhs England devolution.
Blind faith my butt. I've worked within for over a quarter of a century.
Rebranding/reforming/renaming departments is a politician's favourite past-time re the nhs.
So...big questions.....what elements formed NHS England in 2012?
What were the comparative units that made up the administrative function of this soon to be defunct unit?
We're the elements larger, smaller or just the same in 1990?
As a knowledgeable and practicing NHS employee (hopefully operational as opposed to administrative), have you looked at the NHS Annual Report from 1990? (which along with other Civil Service wide publications were the standard yearly publication for each department).
That would give you a clue as to administrative staffing levels then consequently.
The point is that administrative levels within the NHS have increased since 1990 under all governments.
You seem to think that the only problem with this is caused when one side do this...which is in my view, blind faith that the other side cannot be criticised at all.
I admire your blind faith.""A politician's favourite past time ", IE whoever is in government. Hardly blind faith. I have no faith in any government. However, historically, and maybe because it's Labour’s baby, they appear to be better governors of the institution. I'm frontline. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The majority of people in the England "had" no idea what NHS England was or is. I will give Starmer credit in attempting to reduce overspend in the NHS, I suspect it is Streeting that has worked out how to cut spending. I also suspect Reeves is crushing most areas to limit the damage she has done to date. \which brings me onto quangos, how is GB energy coming along...." A quick Google news search about GB Energy shows things aren't rosy there. They haven't hired a single employee and it's already facing funding cuts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A quick Google news search about GB Energy shows things aren't rosy there. They haven't hired a single employee and it's already facing funding cuts" Good news! If they can cut all funding to GB Energy, they'll prevent a large amount of government wastage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sir Kier goes full Elon ! 💪" Exactly...!!! An idiot with too much power who knows NOTHING what he's doing. Going in with a sledgehammer instead of a scalpel and finding the issue. 😡🤬🤬 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Streeting says this will save £500 million a year But will it improve NHS services. " He is getting rid of zNHS England a Tory initiative that's wasted a lot of money needed on front line service | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
