This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

RCGP launches petition to demand 'cast iron guarantee' that GP trainees' pay will not be cut

The RCGP has launched a petition calling on the health secretary to provide a ‘cast iron guarantee’ that GP trainees will not see their pay cut as a result of the new imposed junior doctors contract.

The college said it remained ‘very concerned’ that the proposals would cut trainees’ pay, despite being given reassurances by Jeremy Hunt that trainees would not be adversely affected.

Dr Maureen Baker, the chair of the college, said there is ‘growing confusion and alarm’ around the issue.

As Pulse reported last week, the GP Survival group claimed that trainees were facing a one-third pay cut due to the Government removing the GP Registrar (GPR) supplement – which increases GP trainee pay in line with junior hospital doctors – as part of its imposition of a contract on junior doctors.

However, Dr Baker soon said that the college had been given assurances by the health secretary in a letter that other incentives to join general practice would be brought in to replace the GPR supplement.

But in the latest move, the RCGP said it was launching a petition to seek clarification from the health secretary on what these other incentives will be.

The petition calls on Mr Hunt to give ‘urgent and imperative’ reassurances that the new contract will ‘not have a detrimental effect on pay and conditions of medical graduates choosing general practice, and to provide clarification about how the proposals will work, particularly in light of the proposed removal of salary supplements that GPs receive during their training’.

A statement from the RCGP said: ‘The college is concerned that despite reassurances from the secretary of state following this letter, there remains a lack of clarity and transparency about his plans to replace the supplement and that is already having a chilling effect on the number of young doctors choosing to train as GPs.’

In a letter accompanying the petition, Dr Baker says that the ‘alarm’ surrounding the new contract threatens to ‘drive a coach and horses through our joint recruitment efforts’ to get graduates into general practice.

She adds: ‘The Government now needs to move quickly to plug the information vacuum by sending out a clear message that no GP trainee will be worse off under the new arrangements than under the GP trainee supplement.’

The college is demand clarification on:

  • What the new basic level of pay will be for a GP trainee.
  • The level of the recruitment and retention premium and whether this will be equivalent to the current GP trainee supplement.
  • Whether the premium will cover all GP trainees, regardless of location.
  • Whether the premium will remain in place for all future GP trainees.
  • Whether those in other specialities who choose to retrain in general practice will continue to benefit from pay protection, so that they are not penalised financially as a result of their decision.

NHS Employers has adopted the recommendations of the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration (DDRB) to remove the GPR supplement. But both NHS Employers and the DDRB said that it should be replaced with a ‘flexible pay premium’.

However, there are no details about what this will encompass.

GP Survival issued a statement warning that the effect of the removal of the existing supplement would be a one-third pay cut for GP trainees.

But NHS Employers said that the rates of pay for all trainees had not yet been negotiated, and any calculations made were based on speculation.

The BMA last week told Pulse that it is still trying to determine how much GP registrars will be paid.

A spokesperson said: ‘We are seeking to clarify the position with the Government,’ adding that the BMA’s position was set out in a statement on its website.

The statement said that the Government’s proposals could potentially mean ‘less pay for GPs’. It said: ‘The Government continues to state that it is going to introduce thousands of GPs to fill the shortfall, but how can that be achieved if GP trainees are paid much less, on average, than hospital trainees? This would be the effect of removing the GP supplement.’

Pulse revealed in July that almost half of GP training places remained unfilled in some areas this year.

Readers' comments (31)

  • RCGP has to decide finally which side it is on and should be mobilizing medicos for a general all out strike and not going through a petition. Hard talk is not enough. We've just seen the arrogance of our politicians and what 220k signatures were worth.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Petition?? Shove it where the sun don't shine.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • There needs to be a BMA vote on strike action,It needs to be via the internet as theyre many research questionaires are sent.THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN ASAP.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Useless RCGP. Unsubscribed a long time ago.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • BMA vote? shove it - will never happen. Quit this quango which is an arm of the government and a parasite in situ.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Listen pay cuts for all Drs. Bet you the GPC / BMA / RCGP will all say it could have been worse, they did what they could etc etc.
    It's the same old thing day in day out. Can someone in the above bodies (actually someone in each of the bodies) please start making some proper noise in the press and on TV? Just a thought they could possibly represent us?? At least a few comments on here would be welcome…..

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • how bout petition to join junior drs if they strike?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • i'm ashamed of the rcgp - they are such an embarrassment to all GPs

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I suspect the college is worried how GP trainees will pay for AiT/ eportfolio subs and their 'cost neutral' AKT and CSA exam fees!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @10:21pm you hit the nail on the head!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say