LMCs to condemn ARRS being used to pay GPs ‘below market rate’
GP leaders will vote on a motion calling on the BMA to condemn the ‘two tier’ system created by using the additional roles reimbursement scheme (ARRS) to employ GPs.
At their conference in Manchester next month, LMC leaders from across England will vote on a motion highlighting ‘the inappropriate use of ARRS to employ newly qualified GPs at salaries significantly below market rate’.
The undercutting of GPs entering the workforce is ‘undermining the value of their professional status’ and ‘contributing to workforce attrition’, the motion says.
It asks the BMA’s GP committee in England to ‘condemn’ the introduction of ARRS GPs that has created a ‘two tier system of GPs’, due to the restrictions associated with employing ARRS GPs.
It also requests that the GPCE ‘campaign for greater transparency’ to ensure ARRS is not being used to undercut core GP roles or exploit early-career doctors on pay.
ARRS was extended to newly-qualified GPs last year with an £82m addition to the £1.4bn ARRS fund.
Health secretary Wes Streeting claimed last week the Government was ‘smashing through’ its target to recruit 1,000 extra GPs through the scheme after new figures showed cumulatively 2,533 GPs (by headcount) had been recruited since last October.
Ahead of the start of the 2025/26 contract year, the GPC said it had secured a commitment from NHS England to bring ARRS GP salaries in line with the union’s recommended pay range for salaried GPs.
NHS England increased the salary element of the reimbursement to PCNs by £9,305 – which increased the bottom of the salaried GP pay range to £82,418 in 2025/26.
But BMA leaders have told Pulse ARRS roles were being funded below the market rate which have led to BMA ‘bartering’ to secure uplifts.
A separate motion on the conference agenda requested limiting ‘blended learning’ for registrars to ‘targeted circumstances’ and while prioritising and protecting patient-facing clinical time.
Blended learning ‘dilutes professional standards and undermines registrar development’, according to the motion, which recommends ending it ‘as a default substitute for in-person education’.
The registrar committee previously raised concerns that the blended learning pilot was compromising training quality at the UK LMCs conference in May.
Then-committee co-chair Dr Victoria McKay told the conference GP training was ‘under threat of the equivalent of homeopathic dilution for training expert generalists’ via blended learning.
Another motion to be discussed proposed using undated contract resignations as part of ‘collective or industrial action’ due to the Government’s delay in negotiating a new substantive GMS contract.
The conference will be held at the Royal Northern College of Music in Manchester on 7 November. The deadline for representatives to suggest amendments to motions and to choose motions not prioritised for debate is midday on 5 November.
The motions in full
Motion 12
GP REGISTRARS COMMITTEE: That conference is concerned that the widespread use of blended learning in GP training dilutes professional standards and undermines registrar development, and:
(i) calls on GPCE to lobby RCGP, NHSE and the GMC to ensure blended learning is only used in targeted circumstances where clearly appropriate
(ii) demands that GMC approved curricula prioritise protected patient-facing clinical practice, with reasonable adjustments where required, as the default standard for GP training
(iii) insists that any blended learning component must be nationally quality-assured and explicitly justified, rather than left to local interpretation
(iv) insists that GP registrars must have protected time for structured learning, including patient facing and non patient facing components as the cornerstone of training
(v) demands an end to the use of blended learning as a default substitute for in-person education.
Motion 19
AGENDA COMMITTEE TO BE PROPOSED BY NOTTINGHAMSHIRE: That conference is deeply concerned by the inappropriate use of the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS) to employ newly qualified GPs at salaries significantly below market rate, and calls on GPCE to:
(i) condemn the introduction of ARRS GPs that has created a ‘two tier’ system of GPs, due to the restrictions associated with employing ARRS GPs
(ii) highlight the unacceptable situation in which some GPs face a real-terms pay cut upon qualifying, undermining the value of their professional status and contributing to workforce attrition
(iii) campaign for greater transparency and accountability in the deployment of ARRS funding to ensure it is not used to undercut core GP roles or exploit early-career doctors
(iv) urge that ARRS GPs be treated no differently to GPs directly employed by GP practices.
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [3]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles


All part of the game to get us all salaried and pay us less
If we are all salaried
then there is no unlimited liability
which is very high risk at the moment
As a salaried Doctor it’s going to be work to rule
Moral injury and long waiting times
Perhaps a private GP option for those who can afford it
60 to 80k per year for a GP. Why do people continue to go to work for this?