Sorry pulse but unless I misunderstood the article, there is nothing in there about "shorter hours"
GPs are doing less WTE (i.e. sessions, rather then actual hours) and you might find as we are working longer, 0.83WTE today may not be that much different to 0.9WTE 13 years ago. With 25% less pay.
This is just an attempt to get cheap labour.
I didn't feel my medical knowledge could have improved with further 2 years of VTS.
The bit I really could have done, such as practice politics, abusive patients, unreasonable NHSE targets, finance, regulations, employment law etc cannot be taught in VTS. Real life practice wins
Wow so we now have a GPC chair who accepted honors from conservative government charing BMA? Same chairman who resided over imposed contract, accepted below inflation rises (aka income cut) and told us if it wasn't for him things would have been much worse? And people are congratulating him?
Clearly a great politician. Well done. But for making a difference?? I doubt it. Mark my words, BMA will not be protecting it's subscribers
Theoratical concept of avoiding duplication and standardizing services is not a bad thing.
But if that is the true intention, why do we have 44 plans across the country? Why not just have one plan made by DoH? Why exclude clinicians and public from consultation? And why task local areas with X millions to save, rather then national saving?
I think the above question leads to answer we all know.
I spend about 8% of my income on indemnity.
Yes, this means I'm working almost a month every year just to be able to work (actually it'll be more as I should add GMC, training, locum insurance, personal equipments, building cover etc so in reality more like 12%). Crazy
That's not what I said.
Money spent on security should be shown separately from money needed for patient care. Otherwise we'll be in danger of having great security with no clinical staff to use it!
NHS should not be spending this money. It should be part of national cyber security funds and I hate to see it being counted as "money spent on NHS" (i.e. used as justification for less money spent on everything else in NHS)
Stelvio | Locum GP12 May 2017 6:01pm
Not sure what kind of meeting you goto but at all the meetings I go, I go, I get told there is no such thing as unhackable data. NHS security standard gives good standard of protection but no such things as 100% secure.
What I do get told is that digital record is more secure then paper ones and data breaches are down to human errors rather then hacking. Track record shows this to be true - until today :)
According to BBC radio 4 this morning which covered this article, NHSE does not recognise the figure and it's irrelevant as it is only a small number in the survey.
HappyJulien | Locum GP08 May 2017 12:00pm
Don't forget CQC rating is not evidenced based and completely made up. So a "inadequate" does not necessarily mean unsafe practice no does change into "good" rating equals better patient care.
Pulse - I'd love to see CQC quantifying better patient care. As far as I know, GP rating in the country as slightly decreased, mortality, morbidity, AED attendance, NHS spending etc etc has gone up at the rate it has done (or more) prior to CQC being introduced. More regulation does not equal better patient care as my colleagues has pointed out!
This was announced by Radio4 this morning as "GPs failing to spot cancer" in their 8am news.
Another reason why we should go private and tell the nation lack of selfcare and awareness is the nation's problem and scapegoating us won't work
I thought the whole point of having a CCG was to well, commission services inline with the allocated budget. What's the point if it needs to ask permission every time and NHSE take no responsibility for any failure to achieve the forcasted out turn.
If I'm cynicial I'd say NHSE is deliberately trying to fail CCGs. Oh wait........
I hope the next article won't be "how the resignation was messaged on facebook"
Depends on the definition of abuse.
Do I get physical violence or have swear words thrown at me? Very rarely.
Do I get emotional abuse with blackmailing and unreasonable demands? On daily basis.
Does anyone work in an environment latter does not exist? I doubt it. That's not to say we should tolerate it but it will only change if the society as a whole changes it's attitude towards others within it and not unique to medical profession.
Great result for the doctor and hope he/she gets full apology from the GMC with just compensation.
How do we make sure those accountable in GMC is made to be responsible? The bill for the payout should be footed by the government and not us, can pulse ask on FoI when the money is paid out how it was resourced?
I'm happy for this to happen as long as we are remunerated correctly.
Just yesterday, I had a retainer GP call me 1/2 way through the afternoon that she can't finish her work as she's run late from morning surgery and I had to bail her out (doing extra visits etc) on top of my usual work. As a salaried GP, I'll be telling her to call her employer and it'll be none of my problem!
As our juniors are sadly becoming accustomed to this way of working, NHS will find it will not be able to mange primary care in cost effective manner. But soon, it will not be our problem to solve.
I think DoH meant they'll find a GP called Dr Moore, first name Fivethousand
This is politics.
On one side, they slug us off for not referring more. On the other side, through deliverately starving healthcare funds, they try and put in "innovative" ways of stopping referrals.
Well, which do they want? If they want more referrals, I can certainly manage that much easier then what we are currently doing.
Or, as the Caldicott2's 7th standard, you could also be sued for not sharing.
We are damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Angus is right. We are already seeing competition on recruiting GPs. Local practices are complaining they cannot match salaried GP position being offered by bigger organizations. We have even less chance of recruiting partners as our income is no better then salaried position in those organization with all the risk and none of the benefits.
Thus we are accelerating the demise of general practice. May be we should get our house in order first? (yes, I realize it may not be that simple as work load in secondary care has impact on general practce.)