Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia
Low pay in medical services isn't a new thing. Nurses used to be genuinely poorly paid but that he been addressed and addressed and should continue to be addressed where it applies. However, threatening to strike removes all of my sympathy for them and once the first death occurs during their industrial action their cause will be dead.
|
It hasn't been taken lightly and is unprecedented, and one of the major reasons for trying so hard to drive meaningful change is that people within the whole medical profession understand all too well that the cost of not sorting it out, properly, and quickly, is going to be staff numbers continuing to drop, staff skills beginning to drop, patient safety being compromised further and ultimately FAR more deaths caused than will be caused by strike action. Unfortunately no the general public won't understand that as the reaction of the general public is just that - reactionary - and most won't see or understand the bigger picture.
So yes it will erode pubic sympathy but that doesn't mean the cause will be dead because frankly... public support and public sympathy isn't worth ****. They've had public support and public sympathy all along. It's worth pats on the back and clapping on the doorstep in the evening (so long as it isn't too cold). Meaningless platitudes. The nurses don't need the backing of the public for strike action to be successful... what the public thinks of it is largely irrelevant. It's too big a profession and too essential to particularly need public backing in industrial action.
Look at the dock workers unions in the US - they have amazing pay and rights. Why? Is it because the public supports their strike action? No it's because when they strike the docks shut down and trade grinds to a halt, money starts being lost immediately, and they can't be replaced with unskilled staff so the negotiations proceed very quickly and favourably. Public opinion is good to have on side but it isn't always a necessary part of leverage.