so why are these UCCs offering £90-£100K for GPs then ?

Or £75 an hour as a locum (or £100 an hour in a prison)

http://careers.bmj.com/careers/view-job.html?id=20...

http://jobs.gponline.com/jobs/greater-london/part-...

It isn't much, and as you can see from the link not actually in effect yet. It very much needs to happen.

I know the doctor haters on here will see it as an excuse but it is an extremely complex thing to arrange. To restest all doctors every year would bring the NHS to it's knees, we don't have the time or money for such things. That ignores all the more subtle issues such as what do you test, who does the testing, what standard do you expect, what do you do if someone fails, who tests the testers, what do you do with sub specialist experts...I could go on.

If you think its simple then you do not even begin to understand the subject. It ain't as black and white as flying a plane, and my specialty loves trying to emulate the air industry.

CPD isn't a bad way of at least implying you are paying attention. Revalidation won't be as ineffectual as you might think. It's an imperfect but pragmatic solution. Despite what you think most of us are well intentioned, reasonably up to date and competent. We don't need to be hauled over the coals every 12 months to prove that. Excess morbidity/mortality/complaints/incidents are investigated constantly anyway.

It's not just about proving how competent or well intentioned you are it's about ongoing training development and learning. Suggesting you mostly don't need to be formally assessed by an examiner at regular intervals because you're already competent sounds a bit worrying really.

We have a subject in aviation called CRM. It started as a result of an increase in accidents and it studies the relationship between people and the environment we work in.

"Crew resource management or cockpit resource management (CRM) is a procedure and training system in systems where human error can have devastating effects. Used primarily for improving air safety, CRM focuses on interpersonal communication, leadership, and decision making in the cockpit. The training originated from a NASA workshop in 1979, which found that the primary cause of most aviation accidents was human error. CRM has since been adopted in different industries and organizations including fire services (to improve situational awareness on the fireground) and the marine industry, where CRM is referred to as BRM (Bridge Resource Management) or MRM (Maritime Resource Management)."

The old adage is that "if you think CRM isn't necessary then you're the one that needs it the most"

Doctors should absolutely be assessed regularly, it's actually shocking to me that you aren't. The medical industry is lagging miles behind others in this regard. It seems that the main obstacle is cost and attitudes of Doctors.

It it is very shocking that your overseeing professional body (I assume you have one) does not require you as, part of your continuing ability to work in medicine, to prove to them that you are keeping up with the latest developments.

Good doctors will do this, of course - but there does not seem to be any formal requirement to do so.

So, no getting fined or chucked out if you failed to meet the targets - because there were none.

Absolutely and totally wrong, wrong and wrong again.

It's correct that they are fixing this situation but the words "about bloody time" spring to mind.

Thanks for the clarification.

Guys, understand where you are coming from but let us stick to the facts and can't resist a chance to "correct" Eric Mc

Prior to 2004 or thereabout, The General Medical Council (GMC) which is the only statutory body governing/regulating doctors practising in the UK changed its entry registration criteria from based on approved medical schools from across the world to a nationality-based criteria which broadly speaking is as follows:

If you hold EU nationality or are married to a EU citizen, come straight in practice in the UK No English test for the simple reason that the GMC is refusing to test EU applicants for English they have been advised that it is illegal to do so under EU law as it may be interpreted as restriction of free movement across the EU.

if you are a non-EU national, you will have to write the PLAB entrance examination (English and Clinical exams, etc) This also applies to doctors qualified in Oz or NZ where English is the main language.


However, since the well publicised deaths of some patients being clinically mismanaged by EU doctors with poor English, the Government has realised that something has to be done but still the GMC refuses to take the responsibility of testing English at point of registration ie before they practice in the UK.

Instead, in April 2012, the Department of Health has opened a consultation process in order to introduce legislation to pass the responsibility for English testing to the Responsible Officer (RO or senior appointed doctor in each Trust, PCT etc who has the responsibility to "sign off" any doctor's annual appraisal for re-licencing to the GMC). This is a very simplistic explanation so lets not argue about the semantics please.

Quite how a local RO would know that doctor X has started work in their area under their responsibility and how much damage doctor X can cause before official notification to the RO has not really been thought through but at least the DOH can now say "something has been done"

I believe the GMC's refusal to test all EU applicants English ability completely undermines its first responsibility to protect patients as I think that as the only statutory body responsible for certifying that doctors’ fitness for practice, the GMC should retain responsbility for assessment of said fitness to practice prior to granting full registration ie at point of entry into the uk.

I have been following this thread and must say, there is an unusual amount of bks spoken and it is quite obvious that most don't really understand doctoring in the same way that I with an expired PPL cannot really possibly begin to understand the requirements and responsibilities of an airline pilot or any other technically demanding trade or profession with direct responsibility for people's lives. It gets even more complicated when you consider that the experts nearly always disagree about the correct course of action.

To those that think that that if only we doctors carried out our medical research and publications based on better rigorous statistical analysis and all will be sorted, sorry but you really have no idea of the medical world. Rant over.

No job is "below" any other. Some pay better, some pay worse, some are fun, sum are unpleasant, but there is no hierarchy, and you certainly can't judge the worth of a person by their choice of employment, in general.

I understand that you feel otherwise, but we'll have to differ on that.

The point was one of moral "worth", not about seniority, responsibility, or pay. No-one should judge the moral value of a person based on one of them having a more prestigious or higher paying job than the other.

A street sweeper can be a far better person than a C.E.O., or vice versa, independent of the day job.

You're right, 90k per annum qualify as well paid.

90k per annum qualifies as very well paid.