But GPs are doing it already. That's my point. And yes, I accept that GPS are self-employed bu aren't most consultants/surgeons working in the NHS self-employed too? I don't quite see what point you're trying to make. As far as I can see, this job advert is for a role that is already being fulfilled, on the ground, at GP level so I can't see the value in someone else further up in the Trust hierarchy duplicating it.

Although unsourced (but I trust you), do those statistics you quoted tell the whole story? Is the figure for the US or Germany spent by government or by the (private) healthcare industry? In other words, is it public expenditure?

I take your point that WRES reports (had to look up what they actually were and grimaced) are mandatory, but why? Is it to monitor 'equality' (whatever that means) for staff or for patients? 'Equality' in or for what? Is it more important than actually hiring staff to heal the sick, which is what I understood to be one of the NHS's primary raisons d'être? And what 'fairness' towards BMEs (which I presume is a euphemism for ethnic minorities) needs someone on a large salary to monitor? Again, this is money which is diverted from the main task of the provision of healthcare.

I'm guessing that you actually work in or close to the NHS so I'm always happy to hear your take on the situation but I find it irritating to hear the hackneyed whining about how the NHS is chronically underfunded when firstly you see lumpy salaries on offer for what many would see as non-jobs and secondly when the NHS is perceived as bureaucratically top-heavy. For instance, what is the ratio of clinical to admin staff?

Your unnecessary and aggressive use of statistics is allowed, as long as context is explained when given.

Thanks!

Because on one side you have the Tories who want to f*** you into oblivion with tax.

And

On the other side you have Labour who want to f*** you into oblivion on the other.

If you want to call it candidate v candidate for the genuine self employed person running a small business there is very little to choose.

And as for not working for the man, no you end up working for the Inland Revenue - the most utterly f***** up organisation that makes the NHS seem like a bastion of effiency. The only organistion in the world that could be improved with Diane Abbot's maths.

Edited by robdave2k (03 Jun 2017 4.00pm)

Edited by robdave2k (03 Jun 2017 4.01pm)

Credit where it's due - that made me laugh. Willo well and truly led with his chin there.

And, for your information, I loathe this version of the Conservatives (almost) as much as I despise Corbyn.

Thank you Cucking

Obviously the spend in the US is private sector as there isn't really a public sector.

In Germany it is mixed, as it is in the UK.

GPs will acknowledge they find it almost impossible to access large swathes of the population. Men are the worst and also big groups of immigrants can be reluctant to engage. Anything that gets them a bit closer to the system is helpful. This is a pin prick of expenditure compared to the potential savings through early interventions.

Regarding WRES - I don't make the rules. However, as stated, large private sector corporations have far more assertive equality and inclusion functions than the NHS. WRES is in respect of employees. There are also inclusion departments that (try to) interact with minority groups of 'service users'. This is important as they are often internationally mobile and so can have different problems than the norm. Sickle cell anaemia could be an example.

My point is that I am guessing you got these adverts for rather rarified jobs from the interweb. Proper NHS jobs are not to be found there, they are exclusively in NHS Jobs.

Chance would be a fine thing.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I'm with yea brother...lets storm the barricades!

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)