You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
GP complaining about only getting £36 per hour for a 12 hour shift - a mere £112k a year.....
He should probly do it for free, yes?
I stuffed their mouths with gold.
Plus ça change... the above quote is from Aneurin Bevan on how he got hospital consultants to sign up for the new NHS. Same principle still applies to GPs. Whatever generous settlement they get (and the one under Labour was very generous), there will still be demands for more...
£112K is a lot of money, but to get to your figure they would need to work 12 hour shifts 5 days a week 52 weeks a year. Average UK annual working hours (for all UK full time employees) in 2012 is 1654 - your figure indicates they would be working 3100 hours. That's not inconsiderable graft.
I'm not sure you'd get many plumbers/electricians to work for £36 an hour. It's all a lot of money, but I think I want to live in a world where the bloke/woman monitoring my health is paid more than the bloke/woman fitting my u bend.
The way Labour bought the silence of GPs has had long lasting effects - from lack of out of hours cover, flying ( sometimes incompetent ) doctors in from Germany to cover weekends, forcing people towards A&E as a first point of contact.
"We are not being paid a fortune - sometimes only £112k per year" is only the start of it.
To be fair, I presume the above is from a salaried GP - average pay starts in the mid-50Ks, which although sounds pretty good to the lay person, isn't massive in the context of similarly-skilled professionals.
If it's a partner whining though, he can bugger off!
No I don't expect them to work for free and I know two GPs personally and one in particular works really hard, my point is don't chuck houly rates around when 25% of the workforce is on minimum wage and most can use a calculator - however it is supposed to be puiblic service
It was a partner not salary GP - most partners earn more like £150k
I know many people earning more and doing less, 36/hr would get you a project manager in some industries. Want to tell us how much they should be paid? What does the OP earn, for what? I think we should be able to compare.
Convert the point was not 112k for 60 hours a week - she was complaining that her average turned out to be £36 per hour - so actual rate for 40 hours would be around £55 per hour
Not many sparks or plumbers pulling that much after tax
[quote=mikewsmith ]I know many people earning more and doing less, 36/hr would get you a project manager in some industries. Want to tell us how much they should be paid? What does the OP earn, for what? I think we should be able to compare.
Go one then I'll show my hand 1st. I'm an overpaid public sector worker at an amazing £14.71 pr hr with no shift or unsociable hrs allowance paid. circa £32k per annum
Flame me
£36 would get me one whole column of an excel spreadsheet filled, and maybe formatted...or so I hear.
£36 per hour for a 12 hour shift
So if you call that £1440 for a 40 hr week and they work 47 weeks per year, that gives you about £68k per year.
Not exactly mega bucks for a professional person and one who has to deal with "customers".
Although I don't normally believe some examples of NHS pay given in the media, when groups are looking for more money, so I would expect most GP's do better than £68k per year.
So how much training? What can you delivery for that? How many people can you treat in a day? People earning different montfort different job shocker.
You pay market rate, the NHS has enough trouble retaining staff as it is, if thy could pay less and fill all the posts I'm sure thy would.
And complaining about rennumeration is par for the course in all employment, call me cynical but in my experience not doing so is a pretty good way to ensure you don't get a pay rise any time soon. They had a former Goldman Sachs banker on the today program yesterday explaining just that, if you're seen to be happy with what you get then the instinctive reaction of your boss is to think they've over paid you.
GP's do an excellent job. They help you when you're a bit broken.
Whatever money they get is fine by me.
I hear nobody commenting on the well groomed ball kickers who get over twice a GP's annual salary per week for knocking it into the back of a net.
£36 would get me one whole column of an excel spreadsheet filled, and maybe formatted...or so I hear.
and that's mate's rates for you sunshine.
Actually for 36 I'd talk about how I'd fill the excel column and refer you to our graphic design to choose your colourway.
they're overpaid. Google your symptoms, tell you its a virus, and they can't give you anything,
I hear nobody commenting on the well groomed ball kickers who get over twice a GP's annual salary per week for knocking it into the back of a net.
That has nothing to do with it.
Any of those GP's are welcome to play football and if they are good enough then they could earn the same money.
So who should get that money from the advertisers, sponsors and TV rights? Rupert Murdoch? Richard Branson?
We live in a capitalist, free market, simple supply and demand.
Can we do total renumeration package please.
ie salary/rate(and if it's as an employee or under another format), pension, hours, holiday amounts, flexibility etc etc etc .......
Ah same as me bruneep except im on 12 quid an hour as im not your rank 😉
but dont forget your gold plated pension that you get given for a mere £320 deduction every 4 weeks
Damn i need a new job
I've always found it bizarre that the part of the NHS we all encounter most often has always been "privately owned" although most people don't realise this. Now this might be an argument that other parts could be too, actually I think the opposite is the case - the issues most people have with GP services are a consequence of the contractual arrangements and GPs managing their books not healthcare.
M6TTF - Member
they're overpaid
Do you have any idea how hard it is to become a GP?
Do you have any idea how hard it is to [i]be[/i] a GP?
bruneep - MemberFlame me
That's hardly a fair fight, you've got a hose and stuff.
And they still don't offer an evening/weekend service so working folks can get to a surgery. Most of their job is dealing with old ladies bits so they get paid fairly I reckon.
Oh yeah my gold plated pension 14.7% of my pay a month just a tad over £400. Remember it's us greedy PS workers that nearly broke this country a few yrs back.
Oh yeah I forgot its gone up again hasn't it 🙁
Just to put things in proportion, 100k before tax puts you in the top 3% of earners in the UK
150k puts you in the much discussed 1%
Great stat ninfan but is that suitable compensation for the years of training (heafty contribution from the gp these days) and all the rest and the work they do based on the skills they have.
Would the stw wages board like to rule on what they should earn?
I'd want more than £36/h if I was doing a 60h week 52 weeks a year.
Of the doctors, GPs, Dentists I know (family, riding friends), few, if any are on 6 figure salaries.
IMO it is an exceptionally skilled and demanding job where one has to deal with people like you lot. I'd say they earn the money.
I believe that like teachers, because everyone thinks they have some knowledge of the job (we've all been to a GPs) they think they know what it entails. Is the £36/h is so appealing perhaps you should get yourself along to medical school.
I'm an overpaid public sector worker at an amazing £14.71 pr hr with no shift or unsociable hrs allowance paid. circa £32k per annum
Does the £400/month pension come from that £32k?
Great stat ninfan but is that suitable compensation for the years of training (heafty contribution from the gp these days) and all the rest
I think it would be hard for anyone to argue that being in the top 1% of earners in the country, indeed getting paid more than the prime minister, was not suitable compensation for any job.
Does the £400/month pension come from that £32k?
Before the taxman gets to it yes
.
In one year a GP will save more lives and help more people that the Prime Minister, they also need more training and study so why not? It's not an easy job in the end even getting into the first course is very hard so why not reward the top end well. They are clever people who have chosen to apply themselves to something that helps people better than most people earning that level of salary.
so why not reward the top end well.
Which part of being paid more than 99% of the rest of the population constitutes not being well rewarded?
Not many sparks or plumbers pulling that much after tax
Not sure if this is a joke.....
If not, you do realise GPs have to pay tax too?
They are clever people who have chosen to apply themselves to something that helps people better than most people earning that level of salary.
Exactly, and whilst there are folk in the city and finance sector (blessed with considerably less intelligence, and significantly less study) making orders of magnitude more without the public good of a GP I think there are better targets for us bottom feeders.
10 years of intensive and expensive training to be a GP
how many other professions take that long of schooling just to start out?
No one earning 6 times the minimum wage, or 4 times the average salary in the UK is going to get much sympathy during a huge 'underemployed' crisis.
"Woe is me, I have to work 12 hours a day, just to earn 6 figures" - I'm sure the 98% of people in the UK who don't earn over 100k a year could offer many useful bits of advice about how to 'get by' on £50k a year and they might be able to work part-time - they might have to shop in Sainsbury's rather the Waitrose, but they won't starve.
They don't have to be Doctors of course, it was their choice - they could re-skill as Nurses if they're like - then they'd only have to worry about getting £24k a year, for doing 12 hour shifts.
Just to put things in proportion, 100k before tax puts you in the top 3% of earners in the UK150k puts you in the much discussed 1%
Yup, but I'd bet my hat on <<1% of the population have spent 7 years in university (and then GP isn't the 'graduate' job, it's somewhere up the foodchain). Shouldn't the most qualified 1% be the best paid?
FWIW, you wouldn't struggle to find engineers earning that in office jobs, so why not Dr's having to deal with Jo Public suffering from a sense of entitlement and a scrotal rash?
I don't have a problem with how much they're paid. I'm a little bit tired of them whinging about it all the time.
GPs are so well paid that I know of a practice where not a single one works full time.
In one year a GP will save more lives and help more people that the Prime Minister
That's simply not true when you think about it, a Prime Minister can pass a bill to improve water supply quality or reduce industrial accidents and both would have more impact that a single GP.
I wish I had the opportunity to work 12 hours a day at my vocation to earn a 6-figure salary.
Every GP I've ever encountered seemed eminently relaxed.
WIW, you wouldn't struggle to find engineers earning that in office jobs, so why not Dr's having to deal with Jo Public suffering from a sense of entitlement and a scrotal rash?
Engineers aren't on the whole employed by the government, whereas pretty much all GPs are (well no employed per se, but money comes from NHS). So you slap 1% pay increase on GPs and everyone else has to pay through increased tax. Lets be honest there are no poor Dr's in the UK.
Can we please get away from calling GPs NHS or what the NHS pays them.
The NHS does not employ GPs. The NHS has contract for primary care services with thousands of private companies that provide GP services. It is upto these companies, usually owned by some or all of the GPs at the practice, who set the salaries that they and their staff are paid.GPs refused to join the NHS at its inception because they felt that the NHS wouldnt pay them enough.
Exactly, and whilst there are folk in the city and finance sector (blessed with considerably less intelligence, and significantly less study) making orders of magnitude more without the public good of a GP I think there are better targets for us bottom feeders.
You're right of course, you merely have to show up in Bishopgate or Canary Warf clutching a 4 C or above grades at GCSE and a 50M Swimming Badge to be handed a few million pounds of pension fund to play with.
Frankly I'm amazed more people don't do it!
Getting into Banking and Finance is incredibly difficult, the completion for Grad places is brutal, less than half a percent of applicants get a place - when they do they will go through 2 years of on the job training in various departments, less than half will make it to the end - once they've completed it they join about 3 grades higher than if they simply applied for an Admin role at 18 - so they're usually be on par with their peers of the same age - and whilst they'll have 'fast track' on their file it won't count for anything when interviewing for the next promotion - they've simply spent 2 years building their own network. Very few will move into a position of responsibility until they're 30 and they won't be earning 6 figures at that point - very few ever will, but they'll laugh in the face of 12 hour days.
Engineers aren't on the whole employed by the government, whereas pretty much all GPs are (well no employed per se, but money comes from NHS). So you slap 1% pay increase on GPs and everyone else has to pay through increased tax. Lets be honest there are no poor Dr's in the UK.
So are bin collectors, teachers, and the accountant who does the councils spreadhseets. Sould they all be paid less than what they'd earn in the private sector with the same qualifications?
s.^Getting into Banking and Finance is incredibly difficult, the completion for Grad places is brutal, less than half a percent of applicants get a place - when they do they will go through 2 years of on the job training in various departments, less than half will make it to the end - once they've completed it they join about 3 grades higher than if they simply applied for an Admin role at 18 - so they're usually be on par with their peers of the same age - and whilst they'll have 'fast track' on their file it won't count for anything when interviewing for the next promotion - they've simply spent 2 years building their own network. Very few will move into a position of responsibility until they're 30 and they won't be earning 6 figures at that point - very few ever will, but they'll laugh in the face of 12 hour day
yes! but the only reason they are doing it, is to try and make a lot of money
yes! but the only reason they are doing it, is to try and make a lot of money
Isn't that pretty much the reason most of us do our jobs? There's a disproportionate number of Process Engineers in investment banking, they probably put more effort into recruiting us than the Oil and Gas companies! Now I could have gone down that route, but frankly the working conditons sounded horrible with the rewards sometime in the future if you were the 1% who made it that far rather than getting spat out the machine.
You need to add in the value of their pension too, about £1.5m over a working life which is co-incidently more money than you can save in a private pension without attracting high rates of tax on the pension pot.
As per @dragon's post my friend who's a GP chooses to work 3 days a week for about £65k
how many other professions take that long of schooling just to start out?
You are right society has invested massively in their training so that they can earn these fantastic amounts of money. You would think they would be more appreciative eh
WHAT DD said in the main they deserve to be well paid but to hear them moan about it ,when other do more work on the Minimum Wage is, does not elicit any sympathy from me.
GPs refused to join the NHS at its inception because they felt that the NHS wouldnt pay them enough.
I'm afraid that's incorrect. Compulsion was involved. My grandfather, having bought his practice in 1946 after 20 years of voluntary service overseas, ended up earning so little from NHS he couldn't service and repay the purchase debt. It was only when my father qualified as a GP and joined the practice that the combined earnings were able to deal with that.
For what its worth, my father now considers that politicians have messed up GP contracts to the point where they are paid more than they deserve for what they do.
At work we charge our Service Engineers out to end users at around £1k per day.(Industrial refrigeration)
A good one who does a bit of overseas work can clear £55k+ P/A, if not more.
When put into context, GPs getting £36 per hour doesn't feel that expensive.
My wife can earn £25 per hour doing private tutoring - which involves sitting at someone's dining table helping their kids revise.
So are bin collectors, teachers, and the accountant who does the councils spreadhseets. Sould they all be paid less than what they'd earn in the private sector with the same qualifications?
It's all about budgets and priorities at the end of the day. The UK doesn't have an infinite pot of money, and does anyone think GP's have a bad deal? TBH I don't think teachers do pay wise either, but they should be allowed to work more efficiently.
As someone mentioned above it isn't about pay it's about the complete package. and that includes holidays, pension and other benefits.
Sounds like a reasonable hourly rate too - if not a bit on the low side. There are many IT and business consultants on a lot more than that. Oh and footballers.
pk13 - MemberNot many sparks or plumbers pulling that much after tax
Then again, if you plumb in a sink wrong people don't generally die, and it doesn't take 5 years of university plus 2 years foundation programme plus 3 years GP training to become a plumber.
Sounds like a reasonable hourly rate too - if not a bit on the low side. There are many IT and business consultants on a lot more than that. Oh and footballers
Market forces dictate what we charge - we're benchmarked against our competitors.
However there are others in our wider industry who charge a lot more..
Have you seen the people they have to put up with?
I wouldn't do it for the money.
*shudders*
That's simply not true when you think about it, a Prime Minister can pass a bill to improve water supply quality or reduce industrial accidents and both would have more impact that a single GP.
I think you are confusing the PM for the government. The PM is a the leader of part of the parliament.
Yeah but the same can be said of a GP without the team of nurses, hospital support, pharmacists, dieticians etc. how many people would they really save?
I honestly can't believe that people are belittling the role of a GP and suggesting they don't deserve 100k.
Actually, it's STW so I can. 😐
and nobody has managed to name a figure they think they are worth either. It's not just STW it's the usual how dare people earn money crap.
Oh lordy, I'm agreeing with Darcy and junkyard on the same thread.
Nurse! The screens......
[quote="dragon]Engineers aren't on the whole employed by the government...
Not directly employed perhaps but there's a s**t-load of contract engineers (and project managers etc.) working here, in an organisation that is funded by the government, and I know for a fact that most don't make £36/hour. The general range is more like £50-£80 for anyone worth their salt. Or more if there's some management responsibility.
These are contract staff. They can't recruit permies because they can't offer market rates, because they're hampered by civil service style pay scales, union nonsense and fear of news stories saying "OMG the government pays someone £36/hour" ! Somehow contract rates don't get scrutinised and plastered across the news like salaries do.
Paying 36 pounds an hour from the contract budget doesn't necessarily mean the recipient receives 36 pounds.
It's just an accounting tool used to cost the project.
Actual hard cash might be closer to 25.
Souns like somewhere I used to work Sundayjumper... not long term projects on a NW coastline is it?
Then again, if you plumb in a sink wrong people don't generally die
..is that true of gas boilers as well, do you think?
3 years GP training to become a plumber.
it does take 5 years of plumbing training to be gynecologist though
You can't compare contract staff to full time government employees based on salary alone. If it is specific defined project then use of contract staff even on high-ish rates probably makes perfect sense. At then end of the project you let them go with no cost to the organisation and no pension liabilities. Bit different from a DR who's been working from 27-63 with a final salary pension, with almost 100% job security.
BigButSlimmerBloke - Member
Then again, if you plumb in a sink wrong people don't generally die..is that true of gas boilers as well, do you think?
Good point, GP's should not earn more than gas fitters, or is that gas fitters should earn what GP's do. What about librarians?
http://www.nhscareers.nhs.uk/explore-by-career/doctors/faqs/How long is the training to become a doctor?It partly depends on the qualifications you have before going to medical school, and the type of doctor you want to be. For example as a guide, it'll take around 10 years to train as a GP (including medical school) and 14 years to train as a surgeon.
Anyone willing to train for 10 years and deal with the actual public deserves it.
GPs are so well paid that I know of a practice where not a single one works full time.
Perhaps because they find trying to be a GP full time to be an impossible strain? Whom would you rather have treat you, someone who is half dead or someone who is alert?
I know quite a few GP's. None, and I mean None, are on six figure salaries, mostly because they are not in dispensing practices- that can boost salaries considerably admittedly.
A typical full day for a GP I know starts at 7.30 am, they are at the surgery or out on visits till 8-8.30 many days and then have another 1-2 hours of paperwork to do. They may get about 1/2 hour break in that time This is not hearsay, this actually happens.
A typical Half day starts at 7.30 am finishes at 3-3.30 and again another couple of hours of paperwork.
There is a real crisis in trying to recruit new GP's. If it were such a great money-spinning job, why are so few taking it up? Because they see people working till they drop, getting shedloads of crap aimed at them in the media from people who don't know what is really happening, and there are other, less stressful avenues in medicine ( not in A&E, but that's for similar reasons)
Edit: an example of the recruitment problem. There is a rural practice in Worcestershire, in a beautiful part of the country who got no applicants at all for a partnership vacancy.
well from the above mrs tts best mates must be in a very small minority.. all gps all mid/late 40s. all work fixed 3 or 4 day weeks. none of thier partners work all have school age kids all live in big houses south, south west manchester, cheshire. all do the ladies that lunch bit with mrs tts who although only a pharmacist works only 3 days a week fixed shifts etc.. all 4 definately lifestyle choice and one that they seem to be able to easily afford.
Which means? Are you their accountant?
well from the above mrs tts best mates must be in a very small minority.. all gps all mid/late 40s. all work fixed 3 or 4 day weeks. none of thier partners work
Are they lunching on their days off? Isn't that what days off are for? How long do they work on a working day? Are they salaried GP's rather than partners? Depending on the setup at the practice, this can make a substantial difference to hours worked and also income round here at present.
As the OP I have said I know two GPs very well and as totalshell points out they have very good lifestyles way beyond a £50k income - the older GP I know has just retired at 55 with a pension north £50k and all four of his kids went to private school and his Mrs never had a job. I think they are very well paid and anyone who compares contractor/consultancy rates to a salary is plain stupid - £35 an hour garage labour does not mean the mechanic gets paid £72k a year - I run a consultancy business and a £36k salary needs the best part of £80k of paid work to cover holidays, NI, prof indemnity, pub liability, office, heat, laptops, phones, internet, travel, training, sick leave, accountants not to mention cash flow or pensions or paternity/maternity leave 🙁
my point is don't chuck houly rates around when 25% of the workforce is on minimum wage and most can use a calculator - however it is supposed to be puiblic service
What? So as it's a public service they should be paid less?
The BBC has done the norm of the media and provided very little details. How many days does this person work on 12 hours, it won't include nights as a GP unless they work under an Out of Hours provider which will pay more than £36 per hour.
I get £17.65 per hour for 12 hours shifts, I work nights and days, I do 14 shifts a month average, I work 7 days at week. I do get an enhancement for the working shifts, I get £17.65 as I'm at the top of my scale and a line manager of currently almost 20 staff, as well as working as a Paramedic I'm responsible for those staff and the running of the station.
Yes the GP is on good money but they get paid that much for a good reason, one of those is ringing for us to come and do the treatment in emergency cases. 😆
most partners earn more like £150k
This is simply not the case, I would be very interested in where you got that figure-a reliable source or hearsay? most partners at present if full time in an average sized practice would get a figure that is nearer half that unless in a dispensing practice, which many are not. Income to practices has dropped considerably over the past year or so, especially for those who were on PMS contracts.
£36k salary needs the best part of £80k of paid work to cover holidays, NI, prof indemnity, pub liability, office, heat, laptops, phones, internet, travel, training, sick leave, accountants not to mention cash flow or pensions or paternity/maternity leave
Do you think Partnered GP's don't have to pay NI, public Liability, medical defence insurance, training, sick leave, maternity leave etc. out of their income from the practice?
I am not saying that GP's are not in the higher income brackets, and I am sure that there are many that have a very comfortable lifestyle ( but in my opinion, as you have probably gathered, have earned it), it is just that the sums quoted here and in the press are not realistic. Like most things, if you actually know something about an issue, what is in the media is more often than not poorly researched, poorly written, half baked bollocks.
Edit:
I am also sure that there are a few GP's on £150k, but they are the exception rather than the rule.