This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

PMS GPs can earn 22% more than GMS

PMS GPs can earn up to 22 per cent more than GMS colleagues in the two years after switching contracts, according to GP accountants.

Practices are pocketing extra cash from Government PMS growth monies and by negotiating high baseline budgets based on their historic GMS earnings.

GMS GPs last week learned they would get an average of 33 per cent extra resources over the next three years from a £1.9 billion investment in the new GMS contract.

PMS GPs will be entitled to a share of the £1.3 billion allocated for the quality and outcomes framework.

Rosemary Smith, GP liaison manager for Sanderson Easson accountants, said GPs were getting a 15 per cent pay uplift in their first year of PMS and earning 7 to 8 per cent more than GMS GPs in subsequent years.

Ms Smith said that many new PMS GPs had increased their income because they were unable to spend the growth money to recruit a salaried GP.

'Practices have a demand for salaried GPs but there is not the supply. So the GPs may opt for locums or do extra

sessions themselves,' she said.

Other GPs used a salaried GP or nurse to free up time to do private work, such as medical insurance reports that command a fee of up to £108, she added.

Pressure on trusts to hit PMS targets meant GPs switching contracts were able to strike a good deal for their baseline income.

One London practice that had employed 42 locums in a year had its growth money increased from £15,000 to £70,000 because the trust accepted the locums had failed to submit many item-of-

service forms.

David Hubbard, partner at Griffin Chapman accountants, said trusts had agreed to high budgets for new PMS GPs which were based on 'exceptional circumstances' in the practice's final year in GMS.

Former PMS adviser to the Government, Dr James Kingsland, said political incentive was clouding trusts' financial decisions.

He said: 'It was never the policy to boost the GPs' income. It was the policy to

attract more human resources.'

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say