Demanding private healthcare
Aug 22 2006 10:50
So on a couple of threads jef costello has said that UK workers demanding health care or insurance from their employer would be reactionary.
This is only a hypothetical, cos not many people would be in a position to demand it, but hey.
Anyway I don't really see how this is reactionary, it's just putting the cost of workers' health onto the employer instead of the state (which is disproportionately funded by workers' taxes). And it's getting a better quality of care, and I believe in a sector where the workers are better treated+paid as well. How is it reactionary?
Aug 22 2006 11:59
#2
Since under the present conditions I see no real way for workers to defend the NHS - lame trot/TU protests aside - then I can quite understand if some want to regain free health care through demanding insurance from their bosses. However, as Jeff says, this will inevitably stratify the working class, as better organised workers (e.g. in the public sector) are able to impose good deals, while casual ones are left out in the cold even more.
Aug 22 2006 17:39
#3
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
Since under the present conditions I see no real way for workers to defend the NHS - lame trot/TU protests aside - then I can quite understand if some want to regain free health care through demanding insurance from their bosses. However, as Jeff says, this will inevitably stratify the working class, as better organised workers (e.g. in the public sector) are able to impose good deals, while casual ones are left out in the cold even more.
Isn't that a better argument for better organisation outside of the public sector, rather than for public sector workers not making big demands?
Aug 22 2006 18:00
#4
Hi
I can imagine some public sector workers like Firefighters being able to cut a good healthcare deal, but for local government and, of course, NHS workers, it’s not really going to work out. After all, it would have to be voted for by councillors and I can’t imagine the public would look too kindly on having to support private healthcare funded by tax, on top of those fat public sector pensions public sector workers enjoy.
Compulsory private health insurance is common in private sector “professions”, but normally only covers the employee, not their family, unless the employee tops up their contributions from their own pocket. This is going to sound a bit far fetched, but bear with me, improvements to the NHS over the last 10 years or so have put quite a lot of pressure on the likes of BUPA, and the firm I used to work for actually cut its private health insurance benefits to save money, resulting in marginally more money left over to help out some of the lowest paid employees.
I have to say, the other workers were quite happy with this because, like private education, anyone with any common sense sees that it undermines the services available for the wider public, not to mention being divisive in itself.
As for private sector workers going on strike for private healthcare demands, well, unless that’s endorsed by a registered union, they’re all sacked anyway, so querying whether such an act would be reactionary is a bit of red herring, as you all say.
So good luck to you all. What a pleasant and civilised discussion, by the way.
Love
LR
Aug 22 2006 19:09
#5
John. wrote:
And it's getting a better quality of care
Only in the short term. The only reason private health care in the UK is so good is because hardly anyone uses it compared to the NHS. Privatise the NHS and you will get a system like the fucked up US system: like the NHS at its worst, but you have to pay much more to use it. You can already see this happening with PFIs -- record amounts of money put into the NHS with hospitals closing or partly closing, laying off staff (and not just those with clipboards and high salaries).
Plus, healthcare insurance, from what I have heard, can be a bit of a gamble. Like most insurers, they tend not to look too closely at the form you fill in until it comes time to pay up -- then it turns out you forget to tell them you had a boil on the bum when you were six, and they refuse to pay up! Also, I think you will find that they will only cover you for certain problems -- if it ain't on the list, you ain't getting the money!
So I'm with Jef on this.
Aug 22 2006 19:16
#6
Hi
That's true as well, I've got some right horror stories from colleagues who've actually needed their private cover for stuff like back injuries and so on. All sorts of quibbles as to whether the condition existed prior to starting work there etc. A gamble indeed.
Love
LR
Aug 23 2006 12:34
#7
Just to start off as a New Communism and that means I believe in New Communism. Every one and very one has a right to free health care and services. People should get free medicin and the government must meet the demands of the wokring class since it is the biggest class in Society. John can you pleas tell me what the word reactionary means. Insurance must be free to. Under New Communsim the state is the employer but one you elect. If the employer/state kicks you out of your job or you don't like him you just not vote him. The working class pay for all their community serivces ect by the sales of the produce of thier labour. So John do you think New Communism great.
Aug 23 2006 12:50
#8
redfored wrote:
Under New Communsim the state is the employer but one you elect. If the employer/state kicks you out of your job or you don't like him you just not vote him. The working class pay for all their community serivces ect by the sales of the produce of thier labour. So John do you think New Communism great.
I don't want to put words in John.'s mouth, but I'm guessing not.
redfored, you should probably read up on Libertarian Communism and Anarchism before continuing. I suggest you start a new thread on it, if you have any questions.
You might like to start with this:
It was only on one thread I believe and it was a rather glib response, I can't be bothered to look for it as it was in one of the Lebanon catfights.
I am strongly against private healthcare and I see dismantling of free healthcare provision in this country as a major attack upon the working class.
This is true, but where does it leave those with no employer? As we are in a situation where mass unemployment is used to depress working conditions we cannot leave them out.
Also healthcare insurance connected to workplaces is unreliable, it is quite legal for an employer to terminate the contract of someone with a long term illness, I'd be surprised if they were obliged to continue insuring them afterwards. Which could leave someone with an treatable disease such as early stage cancer, finding that if they did not go into remission quickly enough their healthcare provision stopped.
Would you defend private schools on the same grounds?
I have no problems with workers fighting for better conditions, but I do not think that private healthcare will provide them. Whatever can be gained from the employer is a victory, but the NHS, even in its present state, is a larger victory and one that they are clawing back. The NHS should be defended and we've failed to do so, demanding private healthcare accelerates the process and falls into the way of thinking that succesive governments have been forcing us into.