Rob Johnsons typed:

> In article <[log in to unmask]>, Iain L M Hotchkies
> <[log in to unmask]> writes
> >I don't think it matters to the incoming
> >  partner what went on before. They weren't involved and
> >  should not (IMNSVHO) be made to pay for it.
>
> This is the fundamental point of disagreement.

Well, we can agree on that!

> I believe that if you
> want to be part of a successful business, to expect to join and ride on
> the back of the success of other Drs, it should not come free.  

Clearly, as with many things in life, it is a question of
attitude and perspective. You would appear to want some kind
of reimbursement (from the incoming partner) for the work you
have done. Any incoming partner (I would think) would be rather
put out and being expected to pay (indirectly) for something
over which he/she had no control. You can't test the theory
until you advertise for a partner and offer them 30% share.

> We lobby for a pay scale that matches Lawyers and Accountants, yet they
> have even more difficulty getting Partnership status that equates work
> load with reimbursement.

While I may have no idea what I'm talking about (always a distinct
possibility) I think that while many GPs would like to equate
themselves "professionally" with accountants and solicitors, not
many would think that their partnerships, workload, type of work,
career structure, etc can be equated. If I joined a practice as
a 22-year-old solicitor, fresh out of university, then the type of
work I did at the firm would be very different from that done by
a 55-year-old senior partner. OTOH, a 29-year-old doctor entering
a GP practice will have a very similar workload compared with a
55-year-old senior partner. Indeed, in many instances, the junior
doctor may well be working harder than the senior one. Obviously,
practices vary widely, and I would be happy to change practices
and join at 50% (rising to parity in 3 years) if I 50% was
40 grand a year and I was working in a leafy suburb where my
BMW could be safely parked outside the architecturally divine
surgery. In an inner-city hell-hole, practising from rented
premises, where the fixtures and fittings don't amount to more
than a couple of grand, where there's a 10% list turnover a year,
and where we wouldn't have a hope in hell of reaching the average
intended net remuneration without deprivation payments then asking
a partner to join on anything but full parity would be a joke.
hahaha.

> I too am 43, so as for being too old to start a new practice, what a
> load of cobblers.

Well, that wasn't me that said that, and I agree with you.

> The main reason I took on the challenge of creating a
> new practice was so that I could define and control my own work load and
> ensure that I did not run the risk of "burn out".

So, it was positively beneficial for you and you want any
incoming partner to pay for it as well. What flavour of
cake is it?

> If you think that at
> 43 you are too old then it sounds as if burn out has already set in.   

You've not been paying attention to Declan's previous posts,
have you?

> Does anyone know if there are any moves to allow for "Sale of Goodwill"?  

Gawd, I hope not. However, I think we will just have to agree
to disagree. Anyone need any antibiotics for their sore throats?



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%