Jel Coward wrote:
> I am not sure the figures or outcome are really worthy of discussion
> in this situation.

One would expect GPs to assess a potential contract that will affect their
whole working life rather more critically than which packet of breakfast
cereal to put on the table for the next few days. If you believe they don't
then would it really matter how neutral the presentation was?

For better or worse, the vast majority of GPs who could be bothered to
express opted for the new contract. Those who didn't vote presumably either
a) also supported it or b) opposed it but both groups concluded there would
be a sufficient majority in favour that it was not worth voting or c)
opposed it but not sufficiently strongly to vote. To reach any conclusion
other than that the contract was clearly supported by the body of GPs is
perverse.

Assuming the vast majority of one's colleagues are incapable of sufficient
thought to make a rational judgement about a contract offer can give an
impression of a certain arrogance and even anti-democratic sentiment. This
isn't a personal attack, Jel. I enjoy many of your posts and it's
interesting to read about your experiences in another health system but I do
think you and others need to re-think the repeated justification of your own
decisions to opt for another contract/system by denigrating others' choices.

There are good and not-so-good and positively bad aspects of most
contracts/sytems/places to live. The current contract, including its
negative aspects, supports an overall better quality of working and home
life than the one I came into GP on in the 1980s and is consistent with
delivering a better standard of care to patients than existed then. I'm glad
you're happy in Canada. Many are doing fine over here too.

FWIW my own view at the time and since was/is that there are various ways in
which the new contract improved on the previous one but there are also
unwanted aspects. I recognise however that any negotiated settlement
involves compromise from both sides. I fully expect there will be further
modification (as there was after 1990) to amend some of the daftest bits and
I do think, once everyone can see the full effects both financially and in
workload, it will result in improved recruitment and retention though at the
moment people are naturally more aware of the changes having to be managed
than the rewards.

Andy