
Ā š„āš·At some point, the endless cycle of strikes, negotiations, and disruption stops looking like a system under pressureāand starts looking like a system without a backbone.
Because if weāre serious about having a national health service, then it needs to be run like oneānot like an ongoing dispute waiting to erupt every 18 months.
š§± Build It ProperlyāThen Lock It In
The solution isnāt complicatedāit just requires commitment.
Set a clear, independent pay structure:
- Linked to inflation š
- Adjusted for experience and responsibility š©ŗ
- Reviewed automatically at fixed intervals ā±ļø
No political games. No delays. No last-minute brinkmanship.
Once that structure is in placeātransparent, fair, and consistentāthen it gets locked. Not tweaked every time pressure mounts. Not rewritten depending on whoās in power.
Locked.
Because certainty works both ways:
- Doctors know where they stand š¼
- The public knows what theyāre getting š„
š« National Service Means National Responsibility
Hereās the hard edge of the argument.
If youāre part of a national health service, providing an essential, life-critical function, then walking out shouldnāt be an option once a fair system is in place.
Because this isnāt just another jobāitās a public service people rely on when everything else has gone wrong.
And yes, that comes with responsibility.
So the trade-off becomes clear:
- You get a fair, guaranteed, structured system š¤
- In return, strike action is off the table š«
āļø Donāt Like It? There Are Other Options
And hereās where it gets blunt.
If the system is fair, transparent, and stableāand someone still isnāt satisfiedāthen they have choices.
Other countries. Other systems. Other paths.
Because what you canāt have is:
- Guaranteed structure
- Guaranteed pay progression
- And the ability to shut the system down anyway
Thatās not balanceāthatās leverage without limits.
š End the Cycleāor Keep Repeating It
Right now, weāre stuck in a loop:
Underpay ā Frustration ā Strikes ā Panic ā Short-term fix ā Repeat š
Your approach breaks that loopābut only if the first part is done properly.
Because if the structure isnāt genuinely fair, then banning strikes doesnāt solve the problemāit just buries it until it resurfaces in worse ways: staff shortages, burnout, and people leaving altogether.
So the real question isnāt just about banning strikes.
Itās this:
Can we build a system thatās fair enough to make them unnecessaryāand strong enough to stand without them?
š„Ā ChallengesĀ š„
Would you accept a no-strike NHS if pay was guaranteed and fairāor is the right to walk out essential no matter what? And if doctors start leaving instead of striking⦠are we better off or worse? šš¬
š Hit comment, hit like, hit share. Lock it downāor leave it open?
The best comments will be featured in the next issue of the magazine. šÆš


Leave a comment