How much do you think junior doctors should be paid per hour

[Jill688]

you are being unreasonable - they should be paid £14/hr

you are not being unreasonable - they should be paid more

WaitingForEgg - Do you know where the stats are for doctors leaving for other professions or work abroad? I can only find stats on those planning to leave or those leaving, without sorting out those retiring from those leaving the NHS/profession. The boomer generation are at retirement age now so lots of retirees should be expected over then next ten years or so.

I think it's a good salary. I work in academia and the vast majority of my contacts at work have a degree, masters (around the same cost as a doctor) and PhD, postgrad work experience. So with around 4 years to get to the end of a masters, 4-5 years of a tiny stipend (12k a year) for a PhD and then maybe 5 years of working they are on about 33-43k pa. These are the scientists developing vaccines etc. lecturers are about 33-43k pa. senior lecturers (probably reach here around 40 years old) 52-55k. Reader about 60 and then professor around 75-95k.

To get more than this they do contracting work - which is also available to medic btw. I know a doctor - who does extra work on the side in an unrelated field - who is fine with his standard NHS pay as a hospital doctor as a comparable job (ie. one that follows his interests and values that he enjoys) would not pay so well.

I support the strikes because I support any worker withdrawing their labour for better conditions.

I will get flamed for this...

DH is a junior doctor (one year away from completing his specialty training) and he reckons that people don't realise a) how much junior doctors are on, which is pretty decent for a first post-uni job, and b) the fact that their wage rises fast, annually, for quite a long while. So even though the pay right out of uni is almost 30k, it doesn't stay there for long. That's a respectable salary.

The whole pret thing is a bit disingenuous. One coffee shop, pret, is offering a better wage, but the vast majority of people who work in coffee shops are on minimum wage. Same with the nurses complaining they'd get more stacking shelves. It's utter nonsense and very clearly evidences that they've never worked a NMW job in their lives, which makes them seem out of touch but makes a good soundbite.

Okay, if stacking shelves is the same cash for less stress, why aren't you leaving nursing to do it?

Back to doctors, you can see what they earn here: www.bma.org.uk/media/5504/bma-junior-doctors-contracts-pay-tables-apr-2022-2023.pdf

I think part of the issue is that medicine has for a long time been very much a profession for the wealthy/privately educated. So these people have never had to live on the breadline or work NMW jobs. They therefore have a distorted idea of money and think a salary of 30k is paltry.

Anyone who grew up working class or who has lived in poverty would feel very insulted at the idea that earning 30k for a year and then getting a pay rise each year thereafter is insufficient.

Strike for better conditions and safe hours, by all means.

That's just not true. A pre-reg pharmacist is band 5 so on 27k. An FY1 is provisionally registered, so roughly the same stage. A qualified pharmacist is band 6, so starting salary 33k. Pharmacists can get paid more in e.g. Boots, but you're not comparing like for like there, you need to compare to NHS pay scales.

Junior doctors are not equal. Your life is not in an FY1's hands, any more than it's in a staff nurse's hands. Very responsible job but there's a mechanism for escalation so they need to identify and escalate concerns. ST3+ yes, generally very experienced and good doctors, but by then the pay has increased.

@CarmenBizet

I grew up working class

I don't think the wage is paltry

I think it's shit for what they are expected to do.

It's not working in a lab or in academia.

It's actual life and death

The workload and responsibilities are horrendous

They can't get better conditions and more staff without better pay.

Im not sure why people can't grasp that

I think this ultimately come down to whether we sustain publically funded health care. At the end of the day the public are paying the salaries of the majority of healthcare workers and therefore through the operation of government have a right to say in salary allocation. If we do not like this system we move to a private on or more of a hybrid model.

Medicine is very well paid over a lifetime but the junior grades are paid less due to the cost of training and sustainably of the NHS economically. I think one thing that is missing from these arguments is that ultimately the NHS too priority theoretically is the patient not the staff and therefore if relatively low salaries (though not poverty levels) means more staff and more investment in drugs and equipment for patients from a patient/taxpayer perspective what is not to like?

One could argue it is not in the taxpayers interests to find expensive medical training and specialist experience for doctors to them work in the private sector. Why should those working in a factory pay tax to find health workers who will then leave or migrate?

I think we have opened a conversation about whether we can run healthcare on an altruistic basis with the idea of vocation or do we have to be hard headed about healthcare and ultimately make access to healthcare a choice depending on market conditions i.e. the ability to pay and what the market feels fit to pay medics.

I don't think striking juniou r doctors elicit a lot of sympathy amongst the general public especially in deprived areas like mine. People are a lot more likely to support nursing strikes simply because people can identify with nurses and health care assistants and know that their salaries are at least around or below the UK average. Middle class professionals taking strike action (potentially delaying procedures for the vunerable) is not a good look in many communities in the UK unfortunatly.

@mids2019

'relatively low salaries (though not poverty levels) means more staff and more investment in drugs and equipment for patients'

It doesn't

We have to pay.

1 way or another

Id rather pay hcp decent wages viax a publicly funded system than pay them vastly increased wages through an insurance system where the end goal is not improving pt care but increasing profits

Botw1

Supply and demand? If we have 20 applicants for every medical place there is an excessive demand for people to be medics so if you reduce the pay you reduce the demand and the cost to the tax payer? If we paid consultants 60K but had more of them would that help with workload?

The issue is yes you have completed a lot of education I agree, but you do not work 80 hours per week including night shifts do you? Half the medical force are women. Many have to go 50% in order to manage childcare/see their children. This means earning £20-25k working 30-40 hours per week. You think that is fair or well paid? It’s below the threshold for universal credit!

@mids2019

Do we have 20 people applying for each medical school place?

If all 20 of them were given a place how many would qualify?

How many would remain in the NHS?

You appear to be arguing both that we need more doctors and also that we shouldn't train more doctors?

@Botw1

I think there lies the crux of we have publically funded system the tax payers want value for money i.e. suppression of wages that are far above their own. It is easier to carry the argument that allied HCPs deserve higher pay rises as their salaries (including future salary) is low. Public reserves are limited so for public medi down to exist does that mean those on the large salaries have to accept some belt tightening.

band 8s in the NHS have had 2-3% pay rises far below those at the bottom of the banding system but this is accepted as it is important for staff to avoid the ravages of a cost of living crisis. Should not well paid doctors take the same attitude?

More of the doctors leaving are also women.

training time is 5-15 years FULL TIME
also you get say 2 years in. Have a baby, go back 50%. It will now take a further 6-20 years… of being a “junior” doctor.

for the privilege of working 30-40 hours a week, including nights and weekends and sitting countless exams.

Yeah 80 hours per week is not unheard of in academia. but it is largly flexible, one of the major perks, and very few nights, if at all. The downside is there is no guaranteed job market so most work their socks off just to keep their position, hence the incredibly long hours. Yes I do think 25-30k part time salary in a early stage training position is fair paid, you start at the bottom and work up. It is a fair way of doing things and generally considered so. If doctors with 10 years + experience are earning that it wouldn't be fair of course.

@mids2019

No.

Because junior doctors aren't well paid.

And we need more doctors.

@Botw1

We need to train more doctors but having more doctors in the system while retaining spending levels may mean modest pay reduction at the top of the profession or an acceptance of relatively low wage when juniour. We could have a system of having more consultants at the 50K to 70K level and reduced pressure. I think the large popularity of medicine would mean there would still be applicants willing to train even with modest final career salaries of 70K

@mids2019

Except the actual reality of the situation shows that's not the case

30-40 is not part time hours. It is “part time” for medicine and often the only manageable option for parents. It is completely unsustainable and drives amazing doctors out of the profession because they simply cannot live on it.

The basic pay of doctors is not the problem as we would have literally no one applying for medicine one as the working conditions and salary are so poor. This is not the case. I think it's a little disingenuous very intelligent young people throwing everything into gaining a place at medical school and suddenly discovering the job isn't its all its cracked out to be? Why didn't they find out (salaries are public knowledge)

Despite poor into an conditions we still have more than enough people wanting for train as medics.

The issue is academia recruitment isn’t the same is it. There are few jobs and lots of excellent candidates. Medicine is the opposite. Many jobs and no one willing to do it. Supply and demand is important. We aren’t retaining doctors because the pay and conditions are poor. Simply saying you get enough is not helpful. At this rate we will have hardly any doctors left soon. But it’s ok because you think they were paid enough

Do you know where these stats about doctors leaving come from? I can't find granular data on it. It's just a clump of 'doctors leaving the NHS'. No breakdown of why or where they're going.

They train and leave within 5 years on the whole. There are 2 waves of people leaving. Consultants/GPS who have had enough and “juniors” within 5 years. You can see salaries online of course but nothing can prepare you for the job. The salary seems liveable until you are so tired you can barely function and need to drop to “part time” to cope. Until you work on the front line, on a 50% staffed rota and realise the job isn’t at all what it should be

Immigration needs to be opened up desperately.

I think newly qualifieds should start on about £75K and then scale up to about £150k before the consultant pay scale kicks in.

It's absolutely criminal how little UK doctors are paid; when I compare it to doctors' salaries in other parts of the world I'm amazed the UK has any doctors left.

I certainly wouldn't accept a job with such responsibility at its current meager salary.

@mids2019

I suggest you do some reading around the issue.

The stats on retaining doctors in the NHS are widely available

Bloody hell. Which part of the world is this? The consultant pay scale starts way below 150kpa!