I can say as a rural GP I was having to think about 'what now' when I heard the details of the new contract.
Next year I need to recruit an associate again, but I wasn't sure from the lack of detail and Deloitte assessing my practice as needing less than 1 GP whether I was able to afford it. Even if I was being assured that there would be the 71K a year ( less than 1 GP) there was no detail on dispensing, out of hours, or more to the point - associates.
Now I pay my associate 60K for 26 weeks of he year. That would leave me 11K. Why would I carry on with such risks to my pension?
And whats more, assessed as needing less than 1 GP to cover the 168 hours a week that we cover, how was that to work? Deloitte assessed this without setting foot in my practice and not so much as a phonecall.
What a shambles.
At 60 the obvious thing would be to reitire now, not that I want to, or hand the practice over to my board, with the risks to the practice that entails.
The whole thing was making me ill. What about my patients? my staff?
Then I discovered that as a 17C practice we can really ignore the new contract and carry on as we are.
Phew.
What a relief for us.
But not a relief for the rest of the small practices who are not 17C.
What about them?
We didn't need a contract that reduced workload.
We didn't need a contract that fragmented our small teams.
We needed a contract that supported the economies of generalism. .
We needed a contract that would help us recruit.
We needed a contract that would support those of us doing our own OOHs.
We needed a contract that strengthened the existence of our small practices, and our small tight teams.
We needed a contract that helped integrate DNs within our teams.
We needed a contract that would help us (with locums) when we are ill or when our staff are ill.
We needed a contract that would strengthen our associates, and ensure time off.
We needed a contract that would support rural GP
We didnt get that.
Hopefully the working group will address some of our issues. But surely these issues should have been looked at before the contract went to press?
Rapid Response:
Re: GPs in Scotland vote to accept new contract
I can say as a rural GP I was having to think about 'what now' when I heard the details of the new contract.
Next year I need to recruit an associate again, but I wasn't sure from the lack of detail and Deloitte assessing my practice as needing less than 1 GP whether I was able to afford it. Even if I was being assured that there would be the 71K a year ( less than 1 GP) there was no detail on dispensing, out of hours, or more to the point - associates.
Now I pay my associate 60K for 26 weeks of he year. That would leave me 11K. Why would I carry on with such risks to my pension?
And whats more, assessed as needing less than 1 GP to cover the 168 hours a week that we cover, how was that to work? Deloitte assessed this without setting foot in my practice and not so much as a phonecall.
What a shambles.
At 60 the obvious thing would be to reitire now, not that I want to, or hand the practice over to my board, with the risks to the practice that entails.
The whole thing was making me ill. What about my patients? my staff?
Then I discovered that as a 17C practice we can really ignore the new contract and carry on as we are.
Phew.
What a relief for us.
But not a relief for the rest of the small practices who are not 17C.
What about them?
We didn't need a contract that reduced workload.
We didn't need a contract that fragmented our small teams.
We needed a contract that supported the economies of generalism. .
We needed a contract that would help us recruit.
We needed a contract that would support those of us doing our own OOHs.
We needed a contract that strengthened the existence of our small practices, and our small tight teams.
We needed a contract that helped integrate DNs within our teams.
We needed a contract that would help us (with locums) when we are ill or when our staff are ill.
We needed a contract that would strengthen our associates, and ensure time off.
We needed a contract that would support rural GP
We didnt get that.
Hopefully the working group will address some of our issues. But surely these issues should have been looked at before the contract went to press?
Competing interests: I am a very Rural GP