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 firstname.lastname@example.org
Yours in training,
Dr Nicole Higgins