‘Talent is going to be lost’, sessional GPs have warned politicians after the 2025/26 GP contract was announced last week.
In particular, GPs voiced concern and cynicism over the continuation of the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS), and the impact this may have on the wider profession.
Only GPs who have qualified within the last two years, and have never held a substantive post, are eligible to apply to vacancies funded through ARRS.
Many GPs warned that ARRS was becoming a tool of ‘divide and rule’ between experienced and newly-qualified GPs.
“I will thankfully leave general practice when I am finally stripped off the one shift I’m doing as a GP locum in extended access,” one GP said. “ARRS is a joke for us experienced GPs. It means we’re completely excluded but even on its own it’s a horrible deal, working for £550-£600 which in real terms has seen a 30% cut in pay pre-ARRS.”
“There is a risk of experienced salaried GPs being made to reduce sessions as surgeries can get ARRS NQGP sessions at no cost,” another wrote. “Without core funding to employ and retain salaried GPs there is a risk of them being replaced by ARRS staff.” The same GP warned that he knew of a GP retainer who was dropped from four sessions to two when they became a salaried GP, with a GP brought on in an ARRS-funded role for three.
Another GP pointed out that pay for ARRS roles was not competitive.
“ARRS is discriminatory and short-sighted in general to ALL GPs, either returning after maternity, ill health, trying to keep in the GP speciality, those trying to start their GP career, and especially those reducing hours towards end of career,” one warned. “Either way, precious talent is going to be lost. Also the pay being offered is poor in comparison to other medical non-GP roles given the breadth and adaptability that GPs usually possess – and what the pay WAS per session 15 years ago.”
Last year GPs were in uproar following the news that ARRS funding would be open to GPs, but only those qualified for two years or less. Only six months previous, the British Medical Association had backed a GP-led petition for Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme (ARRS) funding to cover GP roles.
Dr Richard Fieldhouse, NASGP chair, said: “I’m a firm believer that, in light of a blatant error, it’s usually a cock-up rather than a conspiracy. But in this case I’m struggling to be so generous.
“Adding restrictions in this way is reductive, and introduces a brand new tier of ‘junior GP’ to the role of general practitioner. The ARRS GP role needs to be opened up to all GPs, and be competitively paid in line with BMA salaried GP minimums.”