Perhaps I can highlight the problem that our Staff Grades are going to face
over the next few years. Although they do not do as much on call, they are
doing their fair share of anti-social shifts on the shop-floor.

The junior doctors are getting an increase in pay from this month. The
increase is based on the number of hours worked plus the anti-social hours
worked. They then get a percentage of their basic wage. In Band 2A (most A&E
SHOs) this year it is 50%. So their total salary will be 150% of the basic
one. My own SHOs are now effectively getting double time for working over 40
hours (and about time too!)

This percentage of the basic wage increases over the next 2 years. From
December 2001 a 1st year SHO on Band 2A will be on the same wage as a Staff
Grade (new Contract) on 10 sessions. In December 2002 the first year SHO
will be on an additional 80% of their basic salary and will be paid more
than the Staff Grade! I'm sure that Andrew Hobart will tell me if I have the
figures wrong.

Who is putting the case for Staff Grades forward?

Regards

Ray McGlone
A&E Consultant
Lancaster
UK

Lost Tribe 1980

I wonder if I can claim back pay?





----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Fogarty <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: Intensity supplements


> Andres Martin wrote:
>
> >The trend is for consultants to deliver the service from the front line
and
> this should be the way forward for the specialty.
> >I know is not much money, but is the principle what counts and the
feeling
> of being undervalued at every corner.
> >This suppose to be an "intensity supplement"
>
> Yes Andres, the deal will not encourage consultants to carry out resident
> work, quite the opposite in fact. And I agree about the principle; the
£750
> differential we are talking about matters little, but it's the lack of
> recognition that really peeves me. And that £750 differential between
Bands
> 2 and 3 could become £7500 in the whole contract negotiations!! Well, it's
> early for me, so I'll stop dreaming soon...
>
> >The other interesting point is the exclusion of newly appointed
consultants
> for the first two years of the daytime intensity payment.
> >I did not know that for the first two years the workload was  less
> "intensive".
> > I am looking forward to enjoy these two years of "light work" in the
near
> future .
>
> Actually Andres, there has always been a slightly bigger increment on the
> 4th anniversary of appointment, namely 4K versus 3.5K, and this deal will
> produce a 4K increment on the 2nd anniversary and again on the 3rd
> anniversary of appointment, effectively therefore "stretching" the
> increments. I suppose the logic is that all consultants have increasing
> administrative work as the years progress and "traditional" consultants
also
> have increasing clinical work over the first few years - the latter won't
> apply to A&E I realise.
>
> Rowley wrote:
>
> > I don't see the lost tribe as SHOs, but as a cohort of doctors who
> qualified between 1974
> > (or thereabouts) and 1990.
>
> Funny Rowley, I'm beginning to feel the same way; we just missed out on
the
> new deal for hours, then we missed out on Calman training, and later still
> we missed out on the new pay deal! So we worked onerous rotas for little
> money for many years to get where we are today...which is more onerous
rotas
> for little money for many years to come! But look on the bright side, I
> suppose we also missed out on FFAEM!
>
> > But it's a pretty piss-poor recompense anyway; £3k equates to about
£1800
> after deductions. So on a 1:2 you are doing 100 hours a week on call, and
> being paid £34.61. That's 34p an hour. That's what you are worth in Band
3.
>
> Actually on a 1 in 2 rota you cover 64 hours overtime per week, so Band 3
> (£2250 for the overtime) amounts to 67 pence per hour gross! So, it's not
as
> bad as you make out Rowley...
>
> No seriously, I get your point and it's a very compelling one!
>
> Cheers
>
> Adrian Fogarty (lost tribe of 1984)
>