Salaried GPs must receive a pay award of 20% plus inflation next year, the BMA has recommended in its submission to the independent review body.
The union recommended an uplift ‘that will restore doctors’ pay’ to 2008/2009 levels, accounting for RPI inflation.
It did not recommend a specific percentage uplift for GP partners, but said that the DDRB must ensure its recommendation means GP contractors and salaried GPs ‘get the full pay uplift’, instead of ‘what is left over’ after other practice running costs have been covered.
The Government’s own suggestion of 2.8% ‘would fall far beneath that’, demonstrating ‘a poor grasp of unresolved pay issues’ in the NHS, the BMA added.
It pointed out that last year, GP partners ‘had to choose’ which of their staff members would get a full pay uplift and that this year they have had to choose whether to give their staff a pay uplift, leaving nothing for themselves, or split the increase in income amongst themselves and their staff.
‘This must be urgently resolved by ensuring a sufficient funding uplift to guarantee all contractors and practice-employed staff get the intended annual pay uplift, to prevent further disruption and help end the national dispute in England,’ the document added.
Global sum payments per weighted patient need to see ‘real-terms growth every year’, the union told the DDRB, as past real terms increases have not been enough to meet rising need, and the erosion seen in recent years means real-terms growth ‘has stagnated’.
The BMA added: ‘The independent contractor model is not broken, but is being broken; it is still well placed to deliver the most cost-effective patient continuity of care via the family doctor, but it has been under-resourced for too long.
‘Where contractor income before tax is dropping so sharply, this affects practices’ ability to pass on
pay uplifts to other staff. GP practices are unable to run at a deficit, unlike the situation in secondary care.’
The submission recommended a pay award for salaried GPs for 2025/26 of 20% plus inflation, which would be ‘fully funded’ by the respective Governments of the UK.
Longer term, the DDRB should also commit to recommending a pay award of 8.1% in 2026/27 and 2027/28 to ‘reverse the effects of pay erosion’.
The BMA added: ‘The argument has been made that salaried GPs have reduced their hours since 2015, and therefore are earning more for fewer hours.
‘NHS Workforce data have shown that in 2015, on average salaried GPs were working the equivalent 66% of FTE.
‘By 2023, on average salaried GPs working were working the equivalent 63% of FTE. This demonstrates that since workforce data started, there has only been a 3% reduction in FTE working. Salaried GPs may be contracted for fewer hours, but on average are working full time hours.’
The BMA stressed that GP pay ‘needs to be enhanced’ and increased to attract resident doctors to train in general practice over the consultant pathway.
It also recommended that that the starting minimum salaried GP pay range is uplifted by 20%, and that the starting salary for GPs in the ARRS is uplifted in parallel to the salaried GP pay range.
‘Without reversing pay erosion, the salaried GPs already working in general practice will be looking elsewhere to other countries and private practice where they will find better salaries and an improved work/life balance,’ it added.
‘If salaried GPs leave the NHS, the Government’s aim of improving continuity of care and bringing back the family doctor cannot be achieved.’
It comes after last week NHS England said that making an unaffordable pay recommendation for GPs will ‘significantly’ impact patient care and make the job ‘even harder’.
The DDRB is currently taking evidence ahead of its recommendation, but the timing of submissions suggests it will come earlier than in recent years, as health secretary Wes Streeting has instructed.
According to the DHSC’s submission document, arrangements for the 2025/26 GP contract are currently ‘subject to consultation’ with the BMA’s GP Committee, with final details to be published in spring 2025.
In July this year, the DDRB recommended a 6% pay rise for all UK GPs, which included partners for the first time in five years, and the Government accepted this recommendation in full.
However, the DDRB only advises on pay increases and not the total funding uplift received by practices, which was later set by the Government at a 7.4% uplift to the global sum for 2024/25.
The BMA’s recommendations on GP pay
Contractor GPs
The BMA recommends that the DDRB:
− Ensures its recommendation on pay means GP contractors and salaried GPs get the full pay uplift, i.e. not what is left over after other practice running costs have been covered, as the DDRB noted in its 2024 report;
− Uplifts GP and practice staff pay in tandem with increases to cover all other practice expenses / running costs to avoid variable or no pay uplifts each year;
− Uses CPI for its non-staffing expenses (running costs) uplift recommendation
− non-staffing expenses uplifts cannot be based on the GDP deflators as they are not an appropriate measure for the GP contract’s Global Sum uplifts (which have historically been based on CPI), as highlighted by the DDRB in its 2024 report;
− Recommends on staff pay and practice running expenses for 2025/26, as it did pre-2015, once again;
− Further adjusts the GP trainers’ grant for 2025/26 to recognise the impact of significant inflation in recent years;
− Increases the GP appraiser fee at least in line with RPI inflation since April 2008;
− Considers the impact of rising dispensing practice expenses in the context of its 2025-26 award, and recommends a correction on the current discrepancy in the fee scale; and
− Annually reviews employment contracts, pay and protected learning time for fellowships to ensure fair remuneration in line with inflation.
Salaried GPs
The BMA recommends that the DDRB:
− Recommends that the starting minimum salaried GP pay range is uplifted by 20%;
− Recommends a pay award for salaried GPs for 2025/26 of 20% + inflation, which is fully funded by the respective Governments of the UK;
− Commits to recommending a pay award of 8.1% in 2026/27 and 2027/28 to reverse the effects of pay erosion; and
− Recommends the starting salary for GPs in the ARRS is uplifted in parallel to the salaried GP pay range.
Source: BMA
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [10]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles
Whilst admirable and fair, it’s naive ideological nonsense from the BMA. Where do they actually think the money for a 20% uplift plus the knock on effect on NIC and employer pension contributions come from.
Some practices have no salaried GPs, others have a dozen. How much global sum increase ensures this and ensures partners aren’t decimated in the process. Impossible to recommend or implement as salaried GPs are not employed centrally.
OR are the BMA not trying themselves also to destroy the partnership model?
I’m a salaried GP and 20% would be a very nice Christmas present.
However it seems an astonishing thing to suggest at a time when NI problems are threatening to reduce partner income below salaried income at a number of practices.
That sounds perfect. I can then stop being a Partner – withdraw my estates equity, take a part time salaried job (for more money than i get in partnership), not have to worry about all the sh1t that successive governments throw at me, and live out the next couple of years until I retire (very early). Go for it!
Land, cloud and cuckoo
rearrange these words to form a well known phrase.
Lost for reasons as to why need to pay this organisation.
Completely agree. Not in the UK in this lifetime
Come to Canada.
Situation normal here and money way better than that
@Fedup GP: Who are you selling your estate to though if you are either last GP standing or all your partners plan to do the same? NHS isn’t going to buy it, investors aren’t going to buy it if you don’t sign up to a lengthy lease agreement, and you won’t get planning permission to turn it into anything other than a healthcare setting if you intend to sell it on the open market…
When DHSC wants us all to be under their controlling wing as employed GPs the last thing they’d want is to inherit an enhanced salary bill as the baseline. But then no doubt they’d move the goal posts and impose a salary scale, bearing no resemblance to current salaried GP rates.
If DHSC are waving maximum 2.8% at the ‘independent’ DDRB ahead of their recommendation, then 20% is just pie in the sky.
You can only applaud the BMA rhetoric – trouble is we don’t believe it, and the Govt won’t do it. It’s just making a noise but not actually doing anything.
An interesting exercise might be to see how much the salary possible with the ARRS GP funding would need uplifting to match that of a newly qualified consultant. Perhaps this is something Pulse could do?
There is about a £40k difference between the best and worst paid salaried GPs, so how does recommending a % uplift make sense? You’re just perpetuating that inequality. Surely the focus should be on ensuring those on lower incomes – salaried and partners – are better paid?