All I want is some PPE (along with that colouring book & crayons from the RCGP - to help me become more mindful)
Does anyone have a pencil sharpener to share? I need to colour in some of those pictures in my RCGP distributed (happy) book.
Senior managers salaries(on the GMC website) - link below:
We publish annual salaries based on the Information Commissioner’s Office guidance.
Name Position Salary
Charlie Massey Chief Executive and Registrar £240,000 - £250,000
Susan Goldsmith Chief Operating Officer and Deputy Chief Executive £205,000 - £215,000
Anthony Omo Director of Fitness to Practise £195,000 - £200,000
Una Lane Director of Registration and Revalidation £195,000 - £200,000
Neil Roberts Director of Resources and Quality Assurance £195,000 - £200,000
Paul Buckley Director of Strategy and Policy £195,000 - £200,000
Colin Melville Medical Director and Director of Education and Standards £195,000 - £200,000
Paul Reynolds Director of Strategic Communications and Engagement £175,000 - £185,000
Senior managers salaries as of 1 April 2019
@ Christopher Ho, I read your response with mild amusement, it is very clear that you are not comfortable with being challenged. Well, I will challenge your response, for it is important that you understand that it is important to respect contributions from your peers on this platform, and further, that you try to do that without trying to 'ridicule' them.
You make the following points in your reply: Christopher Ho | GP Partner/Principal 27 Feb 2019 9:19am
1. "but at least stand up for your beliefs by giving your name." I would like to respectfully remind you that a 'belief' is a highly subjective phenomenon, it is not qualified by a name, nor is it qualified by race, gender and or sexuality, and so it seems immaterial to me that you feel a point needs to be substantiated by providing a 'name'. What difference would it make if my name were Dr Patel or Dr Smith? Would my name help change the content of my response? No;
2. "My original comment was simply an approval" - I would add that your blind 'approval' does not validate and or substantiate reasoning that is set out in a poorly thought out response. Perhaps you ought to consider carefully what it is that you blindly 'approve' with a redundant and somewhat flippant 'thumbs up';
3. "The other comments did offer something positive to the discussion. Its telling you virtue-signallers to look deeper, not denying it exists. That's a good place to start, isn't it?" - actually, I don't agree, I think the gist of those comments forgets that racism does in fact exist and one must challenge it without proffering an excuse that the likes of you offer with your ill judged 'thumbs up approval'. Only with the recognition of a problem can one start to think about solutions - I trust you will agree with that;
4. "I respond perfectly well, in the way all responses should be to bad ideas - with ridicule" - I would state that the only person that is ridiculing themselves would be you with your 'bad' response. It might be worth your while considering the contributions of the writer in this case, someone who has put thought and effort into an issue that is important - but that you feel is worthy of 'ridicule'. I would suggest that racism (and any discourse on it) should be given due consideration to encourage positive dialogue. Your responses indicative of 'ridicule' or collusion with that line of thinking do nothing but shut down intelligent debate. Perhaps you ought to consider the impact of your ridiculing' comments;
5. "There were no ad-hominem attacks, unlike yours 'The excuses proffered by some of these 'commentators' are nothing but poorly intellectualised and self-serving nonsense'." - I would state that your initial collusion with responses that are in denial of racism are an attack in themselves on the writer and the concept of racism; the writer deserves respectful debate.
Oh, and before you do a knee jerk response, please note that I will not ingratiate you with another reply. I will leave you to think about the points above and I sincerely hope that you will be able to reconcile with some of the points made. Best wishes.
@Christopher Ho. Firstly, you ought to understand that I have no need to share my personal contact details with you online. Secondly, I see nothing in your original comment: "I wish we could thumbs up on comments :)" that adds anything positive to the discussion on the issue of racism. My comments proffered an opinion on the denial that exists when it comes to acknowledging and tackling racism: a good place to start discourse. Perhaps you ought to take some time to reflect on the way you respond to your fellow colleagues on this platform.
What a fantastic and insightful piece. Some of the comments made by 'contributors' detract from the message in the article (and come across as nothing but sheer denial of a problem that needs tackling head on i.e. racism). The excuses proffered by some of these 'commentators' are nothing but poorly intellectualised and self-serving nonsense.
I write back with a standardised note: letting them know that I expect them to organise and follow up on any tests that they deem appropriate. GPs need to stop acting like house officers.
I've STOPPED all subscriptions to the BMA and RCGP. What an absolute waste of time. I will be giving that money to UNICEF instead and hopefully they will spend it on some worthwhile cause in the developing world. Where are the 'leaders' of our profession? Chasing gongs no doubt!
I will not be doing this additional work. We GPs need to learn to say 'No'. We do not have the resources, time or capacity to be taking on additional risky work. This ought to lie with the Police who should employ there own physician/Psychiatrist to do the assessment and make a recommendation.
Wait! What happened to those colouring pens & drawing pads from the RCGP? I think we all need to get those back out again.
A truly distressing and shocking case.
We all work in extremely pressured environments with multiple demands being made on us.
Seeing 50 patients a day (10 minute appointments) with responsibility for reviewing & actioning results, reading clinical correspondence, taking phone calls, supervision of juniors, signing prescriptions - all with poor staffing/support levels is beyond comprehension. The thought of being criminally culpable in such conditions is a terrifying thought. When is the profession going to take a stand.
A truly devastating state of affairs when doctors are attacked and left frightened to carry out their roles in line with those premises that are clearly set out in the GMC GOOD MEDICAL PRACTICE charter. As a GP of 15 years, I am appalled at the distressing circumstances that both my colleagues and I function in. The sheer volume of work, riddled with ever increasing levels of risk is a one way downwards spiral: away from quality healthcare provision. It's harsh, frightening and unrealistic to expect experienced GPs to function in an environment that is essentially ill prepared to meet the needs of our patients on a shoestring budget. A dire dire state for the once glorious NHS, Many will look further afield and those staying on this NHS float risk going down with an overburdened ship.
Dr I Hussain, GP Principal, City & Hackney CCG, London.