Readers of this column will, perhaps, recall that I am generally unsympathetic towards strikes, and generally unsympathetic towards the behaviour of trade unions.

I have attempted to inject nuance into my arguments over the last year-or-so. I distinguish between different workforces. I am of the view, for instance, that striking refuse workers earning less than the average salary were able to sharpen the minds of those with higher wealth who were significantly inconvenienced by their bins going uncollected for a month. They also sharpened the minds of a city, Edinburgh, which every summer becomes a global magnet for mesmerised tourists, but last summer looked like a dump and will have undoubtedly left them not keen to return.

I did not, and generally do not, support striking but I, for one, considered the refuse workers deserving of a pay increase. The cost of living crisis was biting hard and they were struggling to put food on the table. People who do such a critical job deserve a little bit more in return.

Read more:Kevin Pringle’s appointment may mean Humza Yousaf’s summer is brighter

I take a different view towards striking train drivers.

The far left element of the union movement would wish us to think the same way about all workers, and about all strikes. You’re either with us, or against us, and so on. However, out here in the world we know that in addition to the black and the white, there are myriad shades of grey.

We know the public takes a similar view, with polling showing that the country is far more sympathetic to some workers than to others. YouGov, the pollster, regularly tracks sentiment on this. None of the outcomes are hugely surprising. The population would largely support nurses striking but would not think the same of barristers. Sympathetic to teachers but not to train drivers. C’est la vie.

After something of a hiatus, Scotland now faces another strike, with the junior doctors to withdraw their labour for four days in July. It has encouraged me to reflect on the thumping insistence from the union fat cats that it’s all-for-one and one-for-all. It is, of course, overtly ridiculous. We are not all the same. Some workers deserve to be paid more than others, because some workers are more qualified than others, and some workers carry more responsibility than others, and some workers work harder than others.

This is a fairly basic aspect of human existence that, in our country, in the pursuit of mediocrity and homogeneity, we seem determined to suppress.

Now, I do not support the ability of doctors to strike. They should be categorised along with police officers, for instance, who are prohibited from striking on public safety grounds. Nonetheless, I understand why they are, because the case for junior doctors to be paid more is compelling on all grounds, yet both governments have been selectively deaf to them for years.

It is inconvenient that they continue to be referred to as "junior" doctors. They are often, in fact, quite the opposite. All doctors beneath Consultant level are classified as junior doctors, but some juniors have been qualified doctors for a decade or more. "Junior" physicians will run wards and hospitals; ‘junior’ surgeons will lead complex operations.

They have to get there first of course. Being a doctor is a career choice that must be prepared for from the early stages of secondary school. If, in S3, a child fails to study all three sciences, they have effectively already ruled themselves out of becoming a doctor.

They must go on to achieve 5 A-grades at Higher, of course, then also perform well at Advanced Higher, all the while having excelled at a variety of extracurricular activities in order to improve their chances in the clinical aptitude test that they must also pass to be admitted to university. If they get there, they have six years ahead, before two Foundation years as a qualified doctor and then up to eight years as a Registrar.

Readers will be perplexed, I would hope, to learn that after two decades of dedication, excellence and often debilitating working hours, doctors can expect to be paid only around £57,000.

Read more: Labour may be winning over red wall but SNP yellow wall stands strong

I will compare this, as I have before, with train drivers, not because there is anything objectionable about train drivers, but because their industry is an example of where militant trade unionism has hideously skewed public sector pay.

There are no academic requirements for being a train driver - it is open to anyone over 21 years old and, after a year of training and a further nine months as a driver, they will earn over £50,000. A doctor at the same career stage, after a year of qualifying, is paid less than £30,000.

If you, reader, wish to write to The Herald’s Letter Pages today to tell me that I am wrong, and this is fair, then I wish you the very best of luck.

The truth is that we live in a country which not only fails to encourage excellence, but also fails to reward it. This is not replicated elsewhere in the world. Hospital doctors in Scotland and the UK are paid significantly less than those in other OECD countries and in Australia, for instance, newly qualified doctors receive around £60,000 - double their British peers.

And we scratch our heads wondering why doctors leave.

There is a way around this. In the short-term, yes, a very large pay award is required. Public money is not short, so much as it is being spent on other things. It should be spent on this.

In the longer-term, though, we need to find a more equitable way of enumerating public sector workers than throwing money at the macho union leader who bangs loudest on the table, and who has the most voters in his workforce.

Instead, there should be an independent body composed of a mix of industry, civil service, HR professionals and workers’ representatives, including those unions who can behave like grown-ups, who will create pay structures accounting for qualifications, experience, responsibility, difficulty and so on.

We are in a hole, still digging. Time to put down the spade and grab the ladder.