We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE IRISH MEDICAL Organisation said in a statement today that they “will attend at the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) with a view to hearing what the HSE has to say in respect of sanctions and other issues”.
A spokesperson for the IMO said:
I think yesterday’s Day of Action has demonstrated the huge level of public support for our campaign for safer hours for NCHDs and for patients.The ball is now in their (HSE) court if they wish to avoid an escalation of the dispute.
Invitation to talks
The invitation to talks at the LRC followers a letter received by the IMO from the HSE accepting the need for sanctions to enforce rules on working hours.
The union’s committee met this morning to discuss the next stage of industrial action following yesterday’s 24-hour strike.
Following this morning’s meeting, the IMO said they agreed to attend at the LRC today at midday in order to hear the views of the HSE on this critical issue.
The strike action is over the working hours of junior doctors who want their working week reduced to 48 hours. They are also calling for an end to shifts that are more than 24 hours, as required by European law. They also want sanctions imposed on hospitals that impose these hours.
Yesterday’s strike by 3,000 non-consultant hospital doctors strike affected about 7,400 patients.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Having a lay majority on a committee to appoint judges is just ridiculous. Would you have a randomly selected lay majority panel to appoint and interview a chief of medicine ?
As for the argument of judges been political can somebody point out where a judges political interest has swayed a case ?
This is a Shane Ross SF vanity project.
Well the present system is not working needs reform….Regularly on the Journal there are reports of cases where the judge gives a laughable sentence…Also there seems to be no consistency between judges in similiar cases….Also it is impossible to fire or even reprimand a Judge at present….
Its also a pointless bill as the committee can nominate a judge but the government can refuse the nomination and still appoint whoever they like.
To change this a referendum is needed.
Would be far better off putting in place minimum sentencing terms and making sure judges stick to them. Mandatory 15 year sentences for those with massive amounts if convictions would be a start.
This Judicial Appointments Commission Bill needs to be scrapped in its entirety. It’s fundamentally flawed from its conception, no amount of amendments will make it worthy.
Easily satisfied apparently!
If this dog’s dinner of a bill manages to ingest itself into the statute books this year, but then Fianna Fail replaces the current government after the general election, Fianna Fail must repeal Ross’ judicial appointments legislation.
That’s too nice a puppy to spoil with an article like this. Shame on your Journal
have your say