I think you have mis-interpreted my previous posting.
I brought up about qualifications because in Jill's last posting she stated "students are taught at degree level" when referring to nurse training.
I assumed by this that this meant that these trained nurses are not taught about equipment care
but lesser trained nurses are
I never assumed Jill was a "Nursey-type" I assumed she was a Clinical Technologist as her profile states!
I can't therefore see what gives you the right to assume that this is what John,Louis or Mark.E assumed.
Or indeed what gives you a right to say that that would be the case with others.
Indeed if Jill is "miffed" over the presumption that you
have said was "patronising" then I'm sure she can respond.
Do you take yourself as the "Alastair Campbell" to Jill's "Tony Blair".
As for patronising, isn't the "kettle calling the pot black" true here.
As for my interest in your qualifications, I think you have mis-interpreted, I have no interest in your academic or vocational background.
My slant on qualifications was the "appropriate level for the job" pitch, as mentioned in other subjects previously.
As to your assumption that we employ "a bunch of idiots who have difficulty in counting" I am deeply disturbed that you think to question their integrity or skill in this way.
My colleagues are well qualified, to degree level in some cases for the record, I am not.
They are well experienced and trained and choose
to work here because they probably enjoy it and consider themselves to be doing a worthwhile job.
I don't employ them, the Trust does.
I have no fears of them moving on, they will take that decision if and when it suits them.
I would take every effort to help them if this was their desired course of career development.
Several of the staff are also doing extra qualifications from technical to business management courses.
This is actively encouraged and procedures are put in place to benefit them during their period of study.
These are personal choices and I applaud them in their desire to acheive greater success, wherever this may take them.
They are however all sufficiently qualified to fulfill the posts they hold and my argument is that these "extra" qualifications will and should benefit them in their chosen career future progression, not in their current situation to which their structure is already formalised and planned.
I don't "keep hold" of staff, they stay for their own reasons, it has never been my way of thinking of keeping people down.
Indeed if you knew me you would know that nothing could be further from the truth.
I have worked in places where these regimes take place of keeping people down and paying them accordingly. I ,sir, am an egalitarian and consider it as one of my duties to be "proactive" in helping our staff progress both academically and financially.
Wether you think I'm jealous of these people or not is immaterial as you suggested that because I may "..have no interest in that.." are my reasons.
I hope the above points have clarified your misconception, I do have concerns as to qualification and job suitability but not in the areas you suggest.
It is also not an "us and them" thing.
What I believe in is relevant to all fields/disciplines whatever their area of expertise.
My areas of concern relate more to things like Agenda for Change, NHS Modernisation and Professional Accreditation.
If you want to see an example of "finger pointing", and "jockeying" for position just look at the common pay spine.
Hope this is of some clarification Richard and I hope this doesn't cloud the initial of the original point.