Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

GP recruitment scheme offering MBAs scrapped after it attracts no GPs

Exclusive A radical recruitment scheme offering sabbaticals and MBAs to GPs willing to come and work in under-staffed practices has been scrapped after failing to recruit a single new GP in a year, Pulse can reveal. 

The scheme, launched in October last year by NHS Hull CCG, offered a package of incentives aimed at keeping GPs in the area for six years, as it was particularly hit by the national recruitment crisis. 

Although it is not funded by Government’s 10-point plan for relieving the GP recruitment crisis, NHS England followed NHS Hull CCG’s lead and offered GP trainees ’an additional flexible year of training, where they can… get an MBA in leadership skills or another academic pursuit’.

GP leaders said the similarity of the schemes meant this was what they might ‘expect to see’ nationally.

Hull’s scheme, for which the CCG, Hull City Council, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust and the Hull York Medical School had made available £600,000 has so far only spent £5,000 - all on advertising costs - as no new GPs have joined.

As part of the deal, the CCG promised to find overseas placements for trainee and qualified GPs, to fund an MBA or a Master’s degree in education or leadership. In return it expected GPs to work across multiple under-staffed practices and remain in Hull for a minimum of six years.

Responding to a Pulse FOI request, NHS Hull CCG said: ‘The CCG has not recruited any GPs as a result of the scheme.’

The FOI response further revealed that the scheme was ‘amended and re-launched in May 2015’ to reduce the time applicants needed to spend in Hull to three years, give more flexibility in terms of sessions worked and scrap the idea of rotation between practices.

It added: ’We received five applicants to the second offer, all of which were shortlisted. However four withdrew prior to interview and the final candidate was not appointed.’

An NHS Hull CCG spokesperson said: ‘The scheme, following two unsuccessful recruitment attempts, is not still on offer. However the CCG is looking at various other ways to support general practice and address workforce issues.’

Dr Susie Bayley, vice chair of GP Survival, said: ‘The innovative scheme run by Hull CCG is similar to what we are expecting to see nationally, as CCGs use money from the 10 point recruitment plan to tie GPs into longer term salaried posts [but] there are several problems with this.’

She said the problems included doctors being ‘hesitant to commit themselves to long-term schemes’, while there was still ‘a great deal of mistrust’ between GPs and the Department of Health regarding its ‘long-term vision’ for general practice, and as such schemes would need to offer a more ‘considerable incentive’.

Dr Russell Walshaw, chief executive of the Humberside Group of LMCs, said: ‘Maybe CCGs aren’t the best [organisations] for recruiting for GP practices. It may be better for practices to recruit their own doctors.’

One of NHS England’s ten points to tackle the recruitment crisis said: ’Offering GP trainees an additional ‘flexible’ year of training where they can train in a special interest, get an MBA in leadership skills or another academic pursuit.’

This is the latest proposal for relieving the pressures in Hull, previously including a suggestion of moving to a wholly salaried model of general practice which the CCG said was ‘never a plan’.

Meanwhile, NHS Hull CCG has also set out plans for all of its 55 GP practices to come together by geography and merge into eight super practices by April 2017.

The CCG spokesperson said: ’We hope that by practices working together collaboratively and developing new models of care they will be in a better position to deliver an expanded range of services which will make working in Hull as a GP potentially a more attractive proposition.

Readers' comments (31)

  • Editor, could we please have no flashing ads on the screen.Thanks

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Yay!

    With the counter still stuck at 5000 GPs to be hired let's see what's next on recruitment bingo.

    My guess: anything that actually improves conditions or makes the job better.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Difficult to recruit in Hull - I'm astounded.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Pay them and they will come.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Innovative schemes dreamt up by numpties. HMG from Thatchers day turned medicine in the NHS into a commodity and marketised it, the final outcome is poor conditions and pay, no workers.
    Echo GP partner 11.19am.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Question: What would make me move to Hull?
    Answer: Good schools, good staff, more than average pay and respect. In other words: NOTHING

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That's a pity. The scheme, as described in the article, actually sounds attractive and well thought out. A decent Masters degree costs at least £15000 and to be given the opportunity to do it for free and with PCT support would suit young GPs who want to diversify. Fairly or not, the perceived unattractiveness of the location probably played a part.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    ''a great deal of mistrust’ between GPs and the Department of Health regarding its ‘long-term vision’ for general practice.........''
    This said it all
    Yes. It is about trust . Get rid of the SOS.Junior doctors are all fired up to go for the ballot......

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Never apply for a job not advertised by the practice. Never.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "The scheme, as described in the article, actually sounds attractive and well thought out. "

    It would seem that the potential new GPs did not agree.

    I am not sure why anyone would take on a 6 year commitment in the current climate. Anyone with sense will want the flexibility to react to changes in general practice as them come so thick and fast. I cannot imagine being stuck in any job for 6 years with, no doubt, a clause saying you had to pay back enormous sums if you decided to leave. Especially when a lot of us are not sure that general practice will even exist in 6 years time.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.