In our negotiations with RACGP, ACRRM and the Department of Health, the basic principle of GPSA has been that;
Supervisor payments have barely increased in the last 20 years and supervision comes at a cost to both the supervisor and the practice. Practice payments are only a part subsidy, haven’t kept up with inflation nor reflect the true cost of hosting a registrar in the practice.
Supervisors want equal pay for equal work.
A nationally consistent model should pay all supervisors and practices the same. We have recommended loadings for rurality and complexity.
What concerns me is that;
For example this is a $30 p/h drop for South Australian supervisors. This is not acceptable.
So, what is the trade off for reduced value and less pay? – workforce
This lever is being used because it is thought that training practices and supervisors will take less money in exchange for having a registrar at a time of workforce shortage. With the supply of overseas trained doctors reduced and a maldistribution of registrars, many practices in regional and rural areas depend on registrars to ensure that their community has continued access to a GP and for business continuity.
Click this link for GPSA’s submission to the Department of Health.
So, will you continue to supervise registrars if you are not valued and paid less?
I value your thoughts about your future as a supervisor. I can be emailed at email@example.com
Yours in training,
Dr Nicole Higgins
Date reviewed: 07 September 2021
Please note that while reasonable care is taken to provide accurate information at the time of creation, we frequently update content and links as needed. If you identify any inconsistencies or broken links, please let us know by email.