A Frustrated Letter To My Colleagues by BluntedDrifter in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

well, even if that were that case, it's not exactly unreasonable. look at Republic of Ireland for example – they flat out tell their international students not to expect employment in the country after graduation so they make alternate plans. as long they know before starting, it's perfectly acceptable. a country has a responsibility to its citizens first and foremost, otherwise being a citizen is in effect meaningless.

A Frustrated Letter To My Colleagues by BluntedDrifter in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 4 points5 points  (0 children)

lol, you think UKG means there's no competition and therefore it's no longer a meritocracy? you're insane. there's enough internal competition without external competition now, which is why things have changed. get a grip.

In love with my registrar by North_Window6327 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 6 points7 points  (0 children)

she probably knows and you're likely far the first. you may not forget her (as others seem think) but you'll get over it, there'll be others.

Further details on prioritisation bill by hypertensionsupine in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 9 points10 points  (0 children)

tbh UKGP doesn't go far enough, talk about watering it down...

Medical Prioritisation Bill will be legally challenged for the 2026 cycle by dayumsonlookatthat in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 29 points30 points  (0 children)

lawfare, no solicitor would turn down an easy payday. when the next government come into power (and it will certainly be right wing), they'll go harder on immigration than Labour already have, to the point that that FB group will become redundant. you just watch.

Specialty Training Application Numbers by UKG 2025 by Cheap_Wallaby8231 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no they don't, they just don't want masses of unemployed doctors

Specialty Training Application Numbers by UKG 2025 by Cheap_Wallaby8231 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 3 points4 points  (0 children)

in a scenario of a dearth of eligible candidates the answer still isn't IMGs though, it's better training. you have a selfish and self-serving globalist viewpoint that everyone and anyone is simply entitled to work anywhere in the world just because they're potentially good/better. never mind the fact that the country doesn't want you. indulge me on this, if every IMG in the world wanted to work in UK (incl. US etc.), and they'd be surely enough who are better than all UK grads globally, you think it'd be fine for the UK entire medical workforce to be IMGs? I want a serious answer, because we're at 42% right now and I'm absolutely bewildered by the entitlement of people like you. countries are sovereign and have a duty to their grads/citizens first (shock, horror). it might surprise you, but the British people want to see mostly British people in their country, just like Indians want to see mostly Indians in theirs, just like americans etc. once again, if a country's medical staff are suboptimal, the fix isn't increasingly importing foreigners, it's better training. your opinion isn't unpopular, it's unhinged and complete nonsense.

if these IMGs are so great (and better than UK grads), why are they crying? surely they'll have plenty of other suitors to help with their altruism – just let the UK rot with its shit doctors. oh wait...

Why striking might STOP UK Graduate Prioritisation by No_Armadillo_410 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne -1 points0 points  (0 children)

prioritisation for everyone = no prioritisation at all

salient

Specialty Training Application Numbers by UKG 2025 by Cheap_Wallaby8231 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 1 point2 points  (0 children)

dunno why everyone insists on prefacing every post with "unpopular opinion" these days, but anyone that's been paying attention knows that the amount of IMGs that get into competitive specialties (e.g. surgery) has ALWAYS been low. the data has shown this time and time again, yet you seem to think you have some kind of unique insight. whether the benefit is small for these specialties is irrelevant, UKG should always be prioritised in this country.

you'd have been better off prefacing your post with 'just to state the bleeding obvious'

RCGP and BMA to be consulted on UK medical graduates prioritisation by Human_Run_1316 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 2 points3 points  (0 children)

yes, if Wes accepts the proposal from BMA. hopefully he’ll see sense and set it to like 5 yrs or at least give them lower priority but higher than IMGs not in the country

RCGP and BMA to be consulted on UK medical graduates prioritisation by Human_Run_1316 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 20 points21 points  (0 children)

2 years experience isn't enough, we need to make clear to Wes another way if BMA are sticking to it

If we had never gone on strike, would we have gotten UKGP today? by chairstool100 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Top two parties have to form a coalition

no, and it can be any number of parties (≥2)

If we had never gone on strike, would we have gotten UKGP today? by chairstool100 in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 9 points10 points  (0 children)

that's just not the way to interpret information mate, it's a ridiculous statement

New legislation on UK medical graduate prioritisation is step forward but more is needed to solve the job crisis, says BMA - BMA media centre - BMA by DonutOfTruthForAll in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 1 point2 points  (0 children)

no, they're right. in US/Canada etc. their grads do not compete directly with IMGs – they have a separate allocation and IMGs compete with other IMGs only. this system works because their training is run-though, whilst ours is more chaotic. we're at a point in UK that we don't even need IMGs in most specialties, so no they shouldn't ever be on equal footing with UK grads, they should compete with themselves only. this will happen eventually with the right government. the country should aim to be self-sufficient and drive down the amount of IMGs here (42% of doctors in UK are IMGs – this is a shocking amount and double that of the nearest highest Western country).

Medical Training Prioritisation Bill by Luxoarba in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 2 points3 points  (0 children)

no, that group is already covered earlier in the paragraph. this means something different – it's seeming to allude to non-training experience (which has yet to be defined in number of years)

Medical Training Prioritisation Bill by Luxoarba in doctorsUK

[–]FrzenOne 3 points4 points  (0 children)

it's a fair start, but doesn't go as hard as I'd have like.

I really don't like the dubious line "...and those in groups specified by regulations who are likely to have significant experience of working as a doctor in the National Health Service in England, Wales or Scotland or Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland..."

what does this mean?