and would it leave more money for real health care.Iwas in a six patient ward recently they had a secretary[two posts to cover seven days] an assistant ward manager and a ward manager.
2006-10-25 05:40:38 · 17 answers · asked by joseph m 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
uk citizen we dont have healthcare billing.
2006-10-25 05:48:18 · update #1
Yes, because all of a sudden things would start getting done, instead of being sent to some committee for approval. The budget would then be available for nurses, healthcare assistants, cleaners who actually clean, ward porters to take patients where they need to be on time, and so on.
Brilliant idea, just a shame that no one wants to do the dirty work in the NHS any more, they all want to be ward managers and not deal with patients. Apparantly the sick get in the way of their job now.
2006-10-25 05:47:56 · answer #1 · answered by Lynn S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'll tell you who would feel the shock of "losing" those desk jockeys the most, Patients! It would make a massive difference for the standard of care your average patient receives.
I mean, all those extra nurses and shiny new equipment the hospital would be able to afford - do you think ill people could handle it?
All a hospital needs, admin-wise, is a Head Surgeon; a Matron and a bloody good legal team in today's Claims Direct society!
2006-10-25 09:16:10 · answer #2 · answered by alfie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so. Because the goal of health care now is billing. If they sacked all those secretaries, and ward manager ther would be no one to process our claims. It the hospitals can not insure payment they will not give care. This all about making mega profits not providing health care.
2006-10-25 05:46:08 · answer #3 · answered by copestir 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are the One Hundred Thousand extra administrators doing anything useful for patient care ? It just seems to me that the Labour government has just used public money to buy their votes by creating these jobs that add very little to patient care. As they have done across government - in their hundreds of thousands. They just shuffle paper about if they can be bothered doing their jobs at all.
Government agencies are created to provide pointless, interfering, bureaucrats that are just a waste of public money - Scottish Enterprise is another completely pointless organisation. I have never before witnessed such a hive of inactivity.
So can we comfortably get rid of these people not just in the NHS but across British life ? - a resounding 'Yes' !
2006-10-25 06:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by LongJohns 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No,nobody would notice.
My friend was a P.A. to a surgeon and she was shocked one day to see 15 limousines pull up at the hospital to take lots of the admin staff to town for a banquet to discuss funding.
Why on earth couldnt they use the huge conference room at the hospital?
It stinks !
2006-10-25 05:49:24 · answer #5 · answered by Pat R 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Most of the money in all Government Social Programs goes to the Bureaucrats.
What little that's left over goes to the people that it's aimed at.
2006-10-25 05:43:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, definitely some of them.
By logical extension you could apply the same cost saving measures to the numerous duplicitous arms of government.
2006-10-25 05:44:18 · answer #7 · answered by Bazm0 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
who knows what the answers are on health care. here in wisconsin are trying to get a bill to legistration just to have them recognize that there is a health care problem.
2006-10-25 05:45:20 · answer #8 · answered by jpknute1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the other 50% would.
2006-10-25 07:42:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only 50% sure a few more could go.then it may be back in the black and working like it should.
2006-10-25 05:51:57 · answer #10 · answered by Andyp P 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋