Marchesman, there is still a problem.
Despite earlier accusations I tend to rely on anecdote. I have enough economics and policy background to know that the standard answer to any statistics "proof" is "it depends". There are often a lot of variables going on. Perhaps a bit like a doctor seeing symptoms and then ordering tests. The tests may or not be conclusive or confirm that there is a problem without giving the definite cause.
Anecdote strongly suggests that there is a problem. Time now for the GMC or whoever to run "tests" to find out what the problem is and whether we should be worried and what the most effective solution might be. For example I understand that the NHS do not collect data on many applicants there are for staff posts, and that until recently they assumed that young UK doctors left for Australia because they wanted to, and that this was an increasing trend. Their solution therefore was to redouble efforts to recruit from overseas, working with groups Like Bapio to set up career pathways in India for senior jobs in the UK. (The 2+2). Like giving sugar to a diabetic.
I recognise that not everyone on this thread agrees that there is a problem but everyone I have spoken to in the past six months is convinced there is.
On Saturday I bumped into a fairly new neighbour. It turned out that she is a Consultant in a London teaching hospital. Cambridge University followed by London clinical though co-incidentally from the area DD is working in.
She confirmed there is a huge problem. She and her colleagues are both worried and frustrated. They now have not F3s, but F4s and F5s who are not getting onto training. Really competent dedicated doctors that they would love to be able to appoint to one of their training places, but they can't. The trust is well known internationally so they don't have problems recruiting, but they see plenty at interview who are weak, unable to talk convincingly about the research on their CV etc, or unable to demonstrate softer skills including the multi cultural sensitivity that is needed in her speciality. She says they are lucky as they can interview. Apparently GPs are just appointed without interview.
The issue is how to get the good young doctors they know, the F3s/F4s/F5s to the point where they can be interviewed. They have now started to provide targeted support to help them get through the speciality training selection process. This is a top London trust, which will have attracted F1s leaving medical school with the top 10% of points, and then been able to recruit keen and ambitious F3s. She agreed that even those who got the most competitive rotations in DDs Deanery would struggle to get through, given the more demanding old NHS contract and the challenges the Deanery faced.
She said she had not noticed much difference between graduates of the various medical schools, but then she had not come across any from the newer medical schools, and in the past you needed to have done well to land a London F1. She agreed that the new approach of random allocation would be interesting. DDs Deanery, which was often the least popular has hospitals and rotations which were accepted as being less demanding/busy and more able to support those that needed it.
She also confirmed that open recruitment was a nightmare, with several hundred applications within a few hours, very few of which were suitable. However if F3s are becoming F4s and F5s I guess they don't have as many vacancies.
DD is still unemployed. A lovely consultant had said that if she signed up to NHS Bank she could tell him which shifts she wanted and he would ask for her. (There are a lot of vacancies as doctors recruited from overseas, either on a training path or in a general staff job will often leave as soon as they can land a position in England.) A month later and NHS Bank has still not processed her application. A pity as it was an area she had not worked in before and one where experience would be useful. As the Bank were impossible to get hold of she approached a private agency mid last week. The Head of the agency phoned her as soon as she had completed the application/on line training. Her references were excellent and he was very confident he could get her a job. She has been put forward for a short term position which sounds like cover for an F3 no-show, and he has warned her to expect confirmation today and to start tomorrow. As with London, senior doctors seem to want to hire staff who have a proven performance demonstrated by either direct observation or references. Merit matters.
(Sadly) she is really enthused by the first job in Australia that she applied to and was interviewed for. A large hospital in a state capital in her chosen speciality with two years of rotations to ensure she gets good rounded experience as well as the chance to get involved in research. In terms of career development far more than she is likely to get in the UK. Or at least without dedicating months of free time applying to jobs that are attracting hundreds of applicants. Australian residents will get priority so it will depend in part on who she is up against, but still encouraging to get an interview on her first application. There seems to be a system whereby you make a first application to the state with references and details of your experience and then apply to specific jobs. She has now applied to a second state and to several other jobs.
The attitude of several of the doctors and medical experts on this thread speaks volumes and suggests why the NHS is in the state it is. They are right so everyone else is wrong, and debate is based on insult. Young UK trained or resident doctors cannot get jobs because they don't know enough, or are lazy. A 60 hour week is not enough. They should be spending their remaining working hours applying for hundreds of jobs in the hope that they will eventually land something, and that being a normal human being who chooses to have interests and friendships outside medicine suggests insufficient dedication. The old "we had it tough so you should as well" clearly persists. However as my neighbour said, when she was starting training if you were bright, educated and dedicated, it was pretty straightforward to get a training place. This is not true now.
MN could be a great place for an open and constructive discussion, but the unpleasantness of the debate is putting people off. (I was also warned by PM that a poster on a previous thread was involved with a leading agency/training academy/lobby group promoting overseas recruitment and was deliberately disrupting. It seems that an attempt by a group of mums to raise awareness of a problem was not popular.) I am grateful for Marchesman's contributions. Different experiences means different perspectives. The point is not to be right or wrong, but to identifying the problem, potential causes and to find a cure.
Anyway I got this, again by PM from another of the original medic mums who realised a few months ago that despite different backgrounds, geographical locations, and ethnic backgrounds, our DC were facing unemployment. Anyway she tells me:
"Quick update from dc - of the 9 year group friends they just spent the weekend with, 3 have an 'F3' type job (a teaching fellow, a hospice doctor and Dc's short term job starting in 3 months); 1 is continuing her F2 as she missed time due to illness, 1 is intending to locum and the other 4 are going to Australia. So only a third have jobs in the UK and not a training job between them. Fairly average by the sounds of it :("
Her DC only landed a short term job a couple of weeks ago. It appears that opening F3 jobs to worldwide competition is not working for employers either. Lots of no shows, so last minute jobs coming up at a point when too many have already started making other plans. And a growing tendency, apparently, to request experience of F1/F2 experience in the UK.
FWIW my neighbour had no problems believing DDs concerns about a former colleague who seemed to lack even basic medical knowledge and who was having to rely on F2s to support him. People here suggest that some UK medical schools are now producing some very weak graduates, using this as an argument for more international recruitment. She suggested that the quality of medical graduates could vary significantly depending on the country they had studied in. She also agreed recruiting from overseas at Consultant level would be problematic. She was not surprised that some took a while to find their feet.)