FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W210786258> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W210786258 endingPage "545" @default.
• W210786258 startingPage "545" @default.
• W210786258 abstract "Editor—Like most correspondents, I am filled with a mixture of disbelief and horror about the proposed new consultant contract.1 At a recent BMA meeting in Leeds the audience did not leave “reassured and ready to spread the word” like those described by our chief negotiator, Peter Hawker, in the press release of 8 July. The general mood was one of disappointment and at times open hostility. Several points arose which have not been addressed in the correspondence—here are two.Firstly, the new contract contains an iniquitous anomaly affecting consultants recently appointed at the bottom of the existing pay scale. This is not included in any BMA document. Under the new framework, existing consultants appointed at the top of the pay scale will receive five years of seniority credit in comparison with those appointed on exactly the same date at the bottom of the scale. In the current contract those who start on minimum salary take five years to achieve parity of pay. Under the new contract it will take 20 years. For consultants recently appointed at minimum salary this equates to lost earnings in excess of £100 000. Appointments to top scale are rarely made on the basis of experience or merit but are commonplace where posts are difficult to fill—this is blatant discrimination against those of us appointed on minimum salary.Secondly, the BMA reassures us that regular evening and weekend sessions are unlikely to become the norm because of the difficulty in finding non-medical staff to support them. It seems blindingly obvious to everyone except our negotiators that this is the cheapest way for the government to deliver a 50% increase in outpatient and operating theatre capacity. Our new outpatient manager pointed this out to me four months ago: she would have no difficulty in recruiting nurses for evening clinics but conceded that consultants would prove a much harder obstacle. Cynical consultants would expect the Department of Health to suggest such a move, but it is quite astonishing that the BMA should not just suggest but commend this to us—and at standard rates of pay.The whole approach of the BMA has been to sell rather than explain this proposal. In the press release of 8 July it even describes the consultation process as the vote yes campaign. The negotiators have clearly had a gruelling two years, and we can conclude only that their apparent enthusiasm for the framework results more from a dread of further negotiations than from a belief that it is a good deal.2 We must send them back to renegotiate with a resounding no vote." @default.
• W210786258 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W210786258 creator A5041458222 @default.
• W210786258 date "2002-09-07" @default.
• W210786258 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W210786258 title "More on the consultant contract. Framework doesn't consider anomaly of 100 000 pounds sterling in lost earnings for some." @default.
• W210786258 cites W1975567697 @default.
• W210786258 cites W2111669860 @default.
• W210786258 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/1124064" @default.
• W210786258 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12224104" @default.
• W210786258 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W210786258 type Work @default.
• W210786258 sameAs 210786258 @default.
• W210786258 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W210786258 countsByYear W2107862582015 @default.
• W210786258 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W210786258 hasAuthorship W210786258A5041458222 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C195487862 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C2778755073 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C2779628136 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C2780090960 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C2780783599 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C2781426361 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W210786258 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C121332964 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C121955636 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C144133560 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C15744967 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C17744445 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C195487862 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C199539241 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C2778755073 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C2779628136 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C2780090960 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C2780783599 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C2781426361 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C62520636 @default.
• W210786258 hasConceptScore W210786258C77805123 @default.
• W210786258 hasIssue "7363" @default.
• W210786258 hasLocation W2107862581 @default.
• W210786258 hasOpenAccess W210786258 @default.
• W210786258 hasPrimaryLocation W2107862581 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W1583628851 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W1969947793 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W2082702890 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W2107782270 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W2132609226 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W2141422040 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W2281760178 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W3121942396 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W3123113571 @default.
• W210786258 hasRelatedWork W3123479932 @default.
• W210786258 hasVolume "325" @default.
• W210786258 isParatext "false" @default.
• W210786258 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W210786258 magId "210786258" @default.
• W210786258 workType "article" @default.