Fiona Stanley, Royal Perth and Fremantle hospitals hardest hit in staff cuts
November 8, 2015
REGINA TITELIUSHealth ReporterPerthNow


METROPOLITAN hospitals are bracing for massive staff cuts with the Health Department imposing “budget management strategies”.

Fiona Stanley, Royal Perth and Fremantle hospitals will be the worst hit, with the Health Services Union expecting about 500 jobs to be shed at Royal Perth and similar numbers at Fiona Stanley.   

The union says its previous predictions of about 1000 job cuts “across the board” now appeared “conservative” and it urged the department to “come clean”.   :o

The union says job uncertainty is causing widespread stress, with some nursing staff left in tears this week.

The Sunday Times understands the department has asked hospitals to finalise “budget management strategies” by the end of January.

HSU state secretary Dan Hill said the Barnett Government’s midyear report, due next month, would be telling and he expected hospital budgets would be left in tatters.   :(


A department spokeswoman said the South Metropolitan Health Service, covering Fiona Stanley, Fremantle and Royal Perth hospitals, would “try to ensure permanent staff can be accommodated in the revised workforce”.


“RPH, Fiona Stanley and Fremantle Hospital are overstaffed for their activity levels and exceeding their budget,” she said.

“Hospitals around Australia have shown it is possible to maintain the highest possible standards using lower staffing levels than currently in place.”

Mr Hill said a recent survey showed that 60 per cent of staff experienced work related stresses adversely affecting their mental health.   :(

“The Government and the department need to come clean on it as quickly as possible and remove the uncertainty,” he said.

Meanwhile, the completion date for the new Perth Children’s Hospital continues to be pushed back. The department said “it anticipated construction will be completed early in 2016”.

Mr Hill said even an optimistic March completion, plus a five-month commissioning period, would shift the opening date to August.

WA Health Director General Dr David Russell-Weisz said on Sunday that he could not put an absolute figure on job cuts within the health department.   :(

“We know we are over staffed and over budget at some of our hospitals and we know we are more expensive to deliver care than we are with some of our Eastern States counterparts,” he said.

“We have to look at how we can be more efficient and that’s not just about job cuts it is about simple things like rostering, over time, the use of agencies and casuals and where there are too many staff it may be looking at some fixed term appointments, but it is not all about job cuts.”

He said some departments were increasing staff while others had to decrease.

Time to increase the GST so that State hospitals can get some sustainable funding.

Time to cut the outrageous and unaffordable tax exemption on super. That will raise $50Bn and rising steeply!

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 7:06am:

Time to cut the outrageous and unaffordable tax exemption on super. That will raise $50Bn and rising steeply!

No argument from me.

So you agree Howard was a crap PM and economic manager? Profligate with other peoples’ money?

Notice that that “lefty” PM, Malodorous, is not doing a damn thing about this increasingly unaffordable rort? Not so Lefty, eh? Rather neoconservative in fact, like the Greens and Libs.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

So you agree Howard was a crap PM and economic manager? Profligate with other peoples’ money?

Nope.


Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 7:11am:

Notice that that “lefty” PM, Malodorous, is not doing a damn thing about this increasingly unaffordable rort? Not so Lefty, eh? Rather neoconservative in fact, like the Greens and Libs.

You do know that PMs don't have totalitarian powers.... :D

??? Totalitarian powers not needed. It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income. In five or six years the amount will be over $100Bn, John Useless Howard’s work.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 7:50am:

It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income

That's just shuffling deck chairs.

The top 25% of tax-payers pay the vast majority of tax (about 67% of it).

http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg

I re-post the following here, as it is relevant!


perceptions_now wrote on Nov 8^th, 2015 at 7:49pm:

Fiona Stanley, Royal Perth and Fremantle hospitals hardest hit in staff cuts METROPOLITAN hospitals are bracing for massive staff cuts with the Health Department imposing “budget management strategies”. Fiona Stanley, Royal Perth and Fremantle hospitals will be the worst hit, with the Health Services Union expecting about 500 jobs to be shed at Royal Perth and similar numbers at Fiona Stanley. The union says its previous predictions of about 1000 job cuts “across the board” now appeared “conservative” and it urged the department to “come clean”. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/fiona-stanley-royal-perth-and-fremantle-hospitals-hardest-hit-in-staff-cuts/story-fnii5tho-1227600197884 ============================================== This story also appeared in the Perth Sunday Times today, along with a few other "interesting" articles. One of the other articles noted a patient who was unwell last June & whose GP wrote an urgent referral to have his prostate look at. What followed was - A category one biopsy appointment dropped off the system. An MRI took a whole year to be booked in. An Oncology appointment wa also lost in the system. The patient said, he "pushed every step of the way", But he got the complete run around! In another article, a patient & his family found out about him having cancer, via a "letter in the post". So, why are these issues worth writing about? Well, the answer lays with our Aging Demographic society! And, even with our Aging Demographics being a well known issue, which has been apparent for quite some time and that this would mean a dramatic increase in Health Costs, because of the ailments incurred by an Aging society, governments have not allowed for this obvious Cost increase. In fact, in is apparent they (the Politicians) are now planning on "running down the health system", because they haven't allowed for these obvious costs in their planning! And, burgeoning Health Cost increases are not the only thing, which neither Liberal nor Labor have planned for properly!    This is NOT the time to Decrease Health Services/Workers (sack a 1,000 Health Workers), IT IS A TIME TO INCREASE, BECAUSE OF OUR AGING DEMOGRAPHICS! This is a Political & Economic Reality!

The Howard government have had their time.  Now they are where they belong.  In the rubbish bin of history, with their work choices.   :(

Welcome to third world Australia.


It's looking grim for our baby boomers, no nursing home beds, no hospital beds......maybe they can send the old and frail to Manus Island to die.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 11:19am:

Welcome to third world Australia. It's looking grim for our baby boomers, no nursing home beds, no hospital beds......maybe they can send the old and frail to Manus Island to die.

God your full off @# >:( >:(

Swagman wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 10:47am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 7:50am: It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income That's just shuffling deck chairs. The top 25% of tax-payers pay the vast majority of tax (about 67% of it). http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg

As usual Swagi, you, like most Politicians, only tell a part of the story!

I repost the following here, as it is relevant!


perceptions_now wrote on Oct 18^th, 2015 at 12:25pm:

US wealth inequality - top 0.1% worth as much as the bottom 90% Not since the Great Depression has wealth inequality in the US been so acute, new in-depth study finds. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%. For the bottom 90% of families, a combination of rising debt, the collapse of the value of their assets during the financial crisis, and stagnant real wages have led to the erosion of wealth. The share of wealth owned by the top 0.1% is almost the same as the bottom 90%. http://static.guim.co.uk/ni/1415721490539/Wealth_line-chart.svg The chart shows how the top 0.1% of families now own roughly the same share of wealth as the bottom 90%. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/13/us-wealth-inequality-top-01-worth-as-much-as-the-bottom-90 ============================================== The thing is that nothing goes on forever & there are limits to everything! We are also now more interlocked than at any other time in modern Economic history! All of which means, change must come or everyone will lose! To start the ball rolling, the Politicians (all  of them) will have to put aside their own short term benefits & those of their supporters (Businesses, Unions, etc). They will have to start ensuring that everyone pays their fair share of Taxes, which is not happening now, particularly for those at the top 10% of income earners/wealthy & for those large businesses, particularly Global Businesses AND they will have to roll back some of the Entitlements, particularly for those who don't need them! We can no longer afford, the days of PLAYING Politics!

aussie100percent wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 11:22am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 11:19am: Welcome to third world Australia. It's looking grim for our baby boomers, no nursing home beds, no hospital beds......maybe they can send the old and frail to Manus Island to die. God your full off @# >:( >:(

You only tell half the story, so I'm only half full of poo.

You should be at work dear, go on.....on yer bike!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 11:31am:

aussie100percent wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 11:22am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 11:19am: Welcome to third world Australia. It's looking grim for our baby boomers, no nursing home beds, no hospital beds......maybe they can send the old and frail to Manus Island to die. God your full off @# >:( >:( You only tell half the story, so I'm only half full of poo. You should be at work dear, go on.....on yer bike!

;D ;D  "poo"  your word not mine..But if the cap fits   ;D ;D

Swagman wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 10:47am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 7:50am: It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income That's just shuffling deck chairs. The top 25% of tax-payers pay the vast majority of tax (about 67% of it). http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg

More crap from Catallaxy?

Rich are getting rapidly richer thanks to overgenerous tax cuts and exemptions etc courtesy of our second worst PM, John Useless Howard.

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 11:24am:

Swagman wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 10:47am: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 7:50am: It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income That's just shuffling deck chairs. The top 25% of tax-payers pay the vast majority of tax (about 67% of it). http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg As usual Swagi, you, like most Politicians, only tell a part of the story! I repost the following here, as it is relevant! perceptions_now wrote on Oct 18th, 2015 at 12:25pm: US wealth inequality - top 0.1% worth as much as the bottom 90% Not since the Great Depression has wealth inequality in the US been so acute, new in-depth study finds. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%. For the bottom 90% of families, a combination of rising debt, the collapse of the value of their assets during the financial crisis, and stagnant real wages have led to the erosion of wealth. The share of wealth owned by the top 0.1% is almost the same as the bottom 90%. http://static.guim.co.uk/ni/1415721490539/Wealth_line-chart.svg The chart shows how the top 0.1% of families now own roughly the same share of wealth as the bottom 90%. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/13/us-wealth-inequality-top-01-worth-as-much-as-the-bottom-90 ============================================== The thing is that nothing goes on forever & there are limits to everything! We are also now more interlocked than at any other time in modern Economic history! All of which means, change must come or everyone will lose! To start the ball rolling, the Politicians (all  of them) will have to put aside their own short term benefits & those of their supporters (Businesses, Unions, etc). They will have to start ensuring that everyone pays their fair share of Taxes, which is not happening now, particularly for those at the top 10% of income earners/wealthy & for those large businesses, particularly Global Businesses AND they will have to roll back some of the Entitlements, particularly for those who don't need them! We can no longer afford, the days of PLAYING Politics!

I'm not a politician, and I'm not telling stories, just providing facts.

It is a simple fact that around 67% of income tax is paid by 25% of tax payers.

As for a "fair share" of tax?  Robbing individuals of their reward for effort and redistributing to other individuals it is not a definition of "fair".  That is simply theft.  At best, it's is forced charity.

Every individual gets roughly an equal share of all those broad Govt services funded from taxation (despite what they pay).  Defense, law and order, public infrastructure, etc etc, etc etc.

But those that pay 100 times the average amount of tax, certainly don't receive 100 times the benefits back from Govt.  Now that would be fair.  Practical? No.  But fair, yes.

The System is what it is.  The majority that pays the minority of tax simply extorts from the rewards for effort of the minority that pays the majority of tax.  Because they can.  They are the majority and in a democracy ochlocracy, the majority rules.  And without a Bill of Rights prohibiting such behaviours, the majority will always exploit the minority.

That is our tax system.  Fact.  Not a palatable fact for Lefties I'd admit, but a FACT nevertheless.  :-?

swaggie


Quote:

...............It is a simple fact that around 67% of income tax is paid by 25% of tax payers.............

Well, that's unfair.

Swagman wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 12:03pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 11:24am: Swagman wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 10:47am: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9th, 2015 at 7:50am: It will be necessary at some stage to end the bleeding from the Budget of tens of billions of dollars going to the top 10% by income That's just shuffling deck chairs. The top 25% of tax-payers pay the vast majority of tax (about 67% of it). http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg As usual Swagi, you, like most Politicians, only tell a part of the story! I repost the following here, as it is relevant! perceptions_now wrote on Oct 18th, 2015 at 12:25pm: US wealth inequality - top 0.1% worth as much as the bottom 90% Not since the Great Depression has wealth inequality in the US been so acute, new in-depth study finds. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%. For the bottom 90% of families, a combination of rising debt, the collapse of the value of their assets during the financial crisis, and stagnant real wages have led to the erosion of wealth. The share of wealth owned by the top 0.1% is almost the same as the bottom 90%. http://static.guim.co.uk/ni/1415721490539/Wealth_line-chart.svg The chart shows how the top 0.1% of families now own roughly the same share of wealth as the bottom 90%. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/13/us-wealth-inequality-top-01-worth-as-much-as-the-bottom-90 ============================================== The thing is that nothing goes on forever & there are limits to everything! We are also now more interlocked than at any other time in modern Economic history! All of which means, change must come or everyone will lose! To start the ball rolling, the Politicians (all  of them) will have to put aside their own short term benefits & those of their supporters (Businesses, Unions, etc). They will have to start ensuring that everyone pays their fair share of Taxes, which is not happening now, particularly for those at the top 10% of income earners/wealthy & for those large businesses, particularly Global Businesses AND they will have to roll back some of the Entitlements, particularly for those who don't need them! We can no longer afford, the days of PLAYING Politics! I'm not a politician, and I'm not telling stories, just providing facts. It is a simple fact that around 67% of income tax is paid by 25% of tax payers. As for a "fair share" of tax?  Robbing individuals of their reward for effort and redistributing to other individuals it is not a definition of "fair".  That is simply theft.  At best, it's is forced charity. Every individual gets roughly an equal share of all those broad Govt services funded from taxation (despite what they pay).  Defense, law and order, public infrastructure, etc etc, etc etc. But those that pay 100 times the average amount of tax, certainly don't receive 100 times the benefits back from Govt.  Now that would be fair.  Practical? No.  But fair, yes. The System is what it is.  The majority that pays the minority of tax simply extorts from the rewards for effort of the minority that pays the majority of tax.  Because they can.  They are the majority and in a democracy ochlocracy, the majority rules.  And without a Bill of Rights prohibiting such behaviours, the majority will always exploit the minority. That is our tax system.  Fact.  Not a palatable fact for Lefties I'd admit, but a FACT nevertheless.  :-?

The fact is, the system can only work, IF Tax is paid on Income earned, NOT on the numbers of various Tax Payers!

If the Tax system was based on your numbers, then those in the Lowest income earning quintiles would pay ALL OF THEIR INCOME BACK IN TAXES,  BUT THAT STILL WOULDN'T PAY ENOUGH TAX, TO PROVIDE WHAT IS REQUIRED!

The Fact is, THE TOP 1% have the earnings & assets and they MUST PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAX, BASED ON THE $'s, NOT THE NUMBERS.
IT'S THE ONLY WAY IT CAN POSSIBLY WORK!

So, whilst they may pay 60% of Taxes, they earn more than they pay & they must pay more, as will Business (particularly BIG BUSINESS & GLOBAL BUSINESS) or the whole system will collapse!

Sprintcyclist wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 12:17pm:

swaggie Quote: ...............It is a simple fact that around 67% of income tax is paid by 25% of tax payers............. Well, that's unfair.

Not in the 'Truebeliever' dictionary.... ;)

Hospitals and health in general is a bottomless pit.
With the number of octogenarians set top quadruple in the next 20 years, there can be little doubt that the only way governments will be able to cope financially is access block.

The total number of acute hospital beds in many states is not even rising, it is falling.

The take home lesson is that you really are going to become more dependant then ever on family and friends to care for you. This is a good thing.
All right thinking members of society see their family, their social circle, their workplace , their church group, the people who live in their street as their "kin"

Only a brain dead numptie would ever ask the government to look after something as important as their health. They will put in the time and effort to ensure they have great community ties, so , if they become ill, people are literally queueing at their door to help. this is the concept of the "social bank account"

if you are a leftard on welfare who has no friends, no family,no workmates has not earnt community respect and has not been a giver.  If you have just been a leaner all your life, then woe betide you when you hit 80 and have a stroke and are taken by ambulance to a public hospital casualty department. i see untold suffering in your future. Time to get out there and be a lifter, a giver and contributor before its too late

More boring crap from Walter Mitty.

Leftards work and want better for their kids etc and have friends and family. Christ you are BORING Scoot! Full of wrong ideas, not capable of learning.

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 12:47pm:

The fact is, the system can only work, IF Tax is paid on Income earned, NOT on the numbers of various Tax Payers! If the Tax system was based on your numbers, then those in the Lowest income earning quintiles would pay ALL OF THEIR INCOME BACK IN TAXES,  BUT THAT STILL WOULDN'T PAY ENOUGH TAX, TO PROVIDE WHAT IS REQUIRED! The Fact is, THE TOP 1% have the earnings & assets and they MUST PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAX, BASED ON THE $'s, NOT THE NUMBERS. IT'S THE ONLY WAY IT CAN POSSIBLY WORK! So, whilst they may pay 60% of Taxes, they earn more than they pay & they must pay more, as will Business (particularly BIG BUSINESS & GLOBAL BUSINESS) or the whole system will collapse!

Which is why I said this..............
                                             

Swagman wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 12:03pm:

But those that pay 100 times the average amount of tax, certainly don't receive 100 times the benefits back from Govt.  Now that would be fair.  Practical? No.  But fair, yes.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 2:10pm:

More boring crap from Walter Mitty. Leftards work and want better for their kids etc and have friends and family. Christ you are BORING Scoot! Full of wrong ideas, not capable of learning.

You  do seem very negative which usually results in people not wanting to join your social circle....so i worry about you monk.  i dont want your family to "grandpa dump" you at casualty and drive off.
Rememeber to construct an awesome personality full of optimism and positivity. This is very attractive to people. ;)

Rich benefits the most from paying taxes - they have the most to lose.  If police force was less effective, they would suffer the most material loss.  As poor people don't drive much according to Hockey, rich people are the ones that needs roads the most.  Etc etc.  They might as well pay more tax.

stunspore wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 5:12pm:

Rich benefits the most from paying taxes - they have the most to lose.  If police force was less effective, they would suffer the most material loss.

Exactly, and this why the left are critical of the police and are soft on criminals because its the police standing in the way of you getting more free sh!t and its the criminals that are going to get it for you.  :)

Swagman wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 7:03am:

Time to increase the GST so that State hospitals can get some sustainable funding.

I heard a radio report on the news the other day where the person interviewed stated that the amount of money being spent on the health budget in NSW has risen by >300% in the past decade or so. The problem isn't funding - it's spending.