Has she been "mis-sold" this job?

need_some_help1

I'm new to this forum but feel it will be a safe place to ask for some advice.

Four years ago, my daughter qualified as a Physician Associate (PA) after a 2 year Masters course and started working in a hospital. She loves her job.
I was pleased because a few years earlier, while I was working as a careers adviser, I found out about this job role which was being heavily promoted by the NHS with glossy A4 booklets etc.

We could not pay our daughters post-grad fees so she took our another loan on top of the undergrad loan she already had.

About a year ago, the working environment for PAs started to become increasingly toxic, to such as extent that the Secretary of State for Health has commissioned the Leng review. This might result in a change of job title, approved tasks that PAs can do and recommendations for their numbers in the future NHS workforce.

The Royal College of GPs have already said there is "no role" in GP practices for PAs. One of my daughter's friends, who was employed as a PA in a GP practice, had her job role changed so significantly that she has already successfully sued the practice for constructive dismissal.

I have no issue with the review taking place - it is vital for patient safety and might help to defuse the toxic environment.
However, if the result is that the PA role either disappears altogether or is reduced to such an extent as to be almost unrecognisable, could my daughter (and other PAs) take out a class action against the NHS or Department of Health for having been "mis-sold" this job role and potentially have their student loans cancelled or receive grants to re-train for another role?

I don't have any legal training or knowledge so would welcome advice/opinions from those who do.
Thank you in advance.

Clive_Woody

I am not a lawyer, but I've never come across the idea of a job being miss-sold, I think there is an inherent risk of completing any training that at some point it could become obsolete and the role no longer required. A lawyer may think differently, but starting an action against the NHS may be a long and potentially thankless process.

DullGreyGuy

First of all you'd need to know how the changes will be made... does the secretary of state just make the change or is legislation passed to affect the change? 

It is highly unlikely that such action would be successful, the job role was accurate at the time of publication and no one can predict what our elected representatives may do in four, six or 10 years time.  

I fear this thread however may get distracted by the backlash on Physician Associates, I'm afraid Im one that thinks significant change is required having more than once pointed out wrong information that they are stating and massive gaps in their basic knowledge.

need_some_help1

Thank you, folks, for your advice.
I did think it was a long shot but worth asking anyway.

Just a polite request - can the people who are telling PAs on social media to kill themselves, just calm down. There might be issues with the PA role, but please remember these are human beings who went into this role in good faith and are continuing to do their best. Some of the posts on social media have been truly vile and I don't see the need for them.
Thank you.

Undervalued

need_some_help1 said:

I'm new to this forum but feel it will be a safe place to ask for some advice.

Four years ago, my daughter qualified as a Physician Associate (PA) after a 2 year Masters course and started working in a hospital. She loves her job.
I was pleased because a few years earlier, while I was working as a careers adviser, I found out about this job role which was being heavily promoted by the NHS with glossy A4 booklets etc.

We could not pay our daughters post-grad fees so she took our another loan on top of the undergrad loan she already had.

About a year ago, the working environment for PAs started to become increasingly toxic, to such as extent that the Secretary of State for Health has commissioned the Leng review. This might result in a change of job title, approved tasks that PAs can do and recommendations for their numbers in the future NHS workforce.

The Royal College of GPs have already said there is "no role" in GP practices for PAs. One of my daughter's friends, who was employed as a PA in a GP practice, had her job role changed so significantly that she has already successfully sued the practice for constructive dismissal.

I have no issue with the review taking place - it is vital for patient safety and might help to defuse the toxic environment.
However, if the result is that the PA role either disappears altogether or is reduced to such an extent as to be almost unrecognisable, could my daughter (and other PAs) take out a class action against the NHS or Department of Health for having been "mis-sold" this job role and potentially have their student loans cancelled or receive grants to re-train for another role?

I don't have any legal training or knowledge so would welcome advice/opinions from those who do.
Thank you in advance.

Whilst I sympathise to some extent I think the answer to your question is no.

I can think of other examples where "goalposts" move and higher qualifications than would have been expected are now required. Conversely, it can sometimes move the other way where the level of qualification that was once required reduces.

Also, there are few if any situations where having the required qualification guarantees a job.

You mention a colleague successfully claiming constructive dismissal. Less than 3% of such cases are won at tribunal. Did her case get that far or was it settled? Even if won, we don't know the individual circumstances so it may (well) not be any useful precedent.

LightFlare

NHS has committed to increasing the number of PAs

They have gotten a lot of bad press recently and a lot of push back from the BMA 

I think it very much depends on the region of the country as they seem to be used in totally different ways depending on the region and often beyond their scope of practice. Hopefully things will improve as I believe they have just been validated for registration via the GMC

sadly, I think the doctors especially trainee/junior variety are exhibiting their god complex much more strongly and earlier than in the past and have been pretty nasty in some of their comments and untruths

DullGreyGuy said:

First of all you'd need to know how the changes will be made... does the secretary of state just make the change or is legislation passed to affect the change? 

It is highly unlikely that such action would be successful, the job role was accurate at the time of publication and no one can predict what our elected representatives may do in four, six or 10 years time.  

I fear this thread however may get distracted by the backlash on Physician Associates, I'm afraid Im one that thinks significant change is required having more than once pointed out wrong information that they are stating and massive gaps in their basic knowledge.

 You would be staggered at how bad this is amongst junior/trainee doctors as well - just no-one mentions it

Undervalued

DullGreyGuy said:

First of all you'd need to know how the changes will be made... does the secretary of state just make the change or is legislation passed to affect the change? 

It is highly unlikely that such action would be successful, the job role was accurate at the time of publication and no one can predict what our elected representatives may do in four, six or 10 years time.  

I fear this thread however may get distracted by the backlash on Physician Associates, I'm afraid Im one that thinks significant change is required having more than once pointed out wrong information that they are stating and massive gaps in their basic knowledge.

Most GP practices are private businesses (partnerships) and they have a contract to provide services to the NHS. Providing partners and staff meet the legally required qualifications for the medical service they are providing it is up to the practice whether the senior partner prescribes an asprin of the most junior person legally allowed to do so.

Whilst changes to legislation may allow a less qualified person to do certain things that previously needed somebody more senior, it doesn't force the practice to do so.

LightFlare

PAs MUST work under direct supervision on GP practices / however this is not undertaken do to organisational reasons in a lot of surgeries - thus leaving the PA working outside their scope of practice. 

The GPs need to have some personal accountability 

Brie

In one way your daughter's situation isn't that different to the promotion of personal pensions by the government in the late 80s early 90s.  Because of the government encouraging personal pension many hundreds of thousands people left excellent defined benefit schemes to join a personal pension scheme that wasn't anywhere near as good.  Net result was that there was a review of what had happened and people were compensated for the miss-selling of these personal pensions. 

The difference though is that the blame could be put on sales people for the pension firms and the firms themselves picked up the tab for the compensation.  All the government did basically was say "oops".  

Your daughter appears to be caught between 2 different bits of the government (aka the NHS) so there's really no one to pay any compensation for any potential "miss-selling".  

I hope she manages to get through this and find a happy solution for herself.  

TELLIT01

Not 'mis-sold' the requirements and function of the job have changed over time, and that can and does happen to many jobs.  I can't think of a single job I did in nearly 50 years of work which didn't change to a greater or lesser degree.

Grumpy_chap

I suspect there is nothing individually (or even collectively) that can be done by way of legal action, but is your Daughter in a Union?

Some of the comments you have referenced are not wholly surprising:

need_some_help1 said:

The Royal College of GPs have already said there is "no role" in GP practices for PAs. 

So the Union (or Professional Body) representing GPs has made a statement protecting the sanctity of GPs to not have the (presumably cheaper) PAs risking the incomes and status of GPs.  If that is not a simple statement of self-preservation, then I don't know what is.

What comments are the Union (or Professional Body) for PAs making?  That is probably the way your Daughter can gain maximum leverage, along with her fellow PAs.

Although this is concerning for her, there is a shortage of medical professionals across the country (and worldwide) so concerns about employability (or not) should be low.  What may happen is the role of a PA may be better defined, which is a good thing as it will give PAs the strength to push back if asked to do something beyond their competency level.  Or, the NHS may decide to phase-out the PA position in which case the option would be to reduce them to a lower level (waste of training to date) or upskill to a higher level.  IMO, the latter is more likely.  I think I would be looking for the opportunities that the current review might lead to rather than the constraints it might impose.


As a comparator, two other similar scenarios that have occurred in our lifetimes:
 - Police Officers objected to PCSOs
 - Teachers objected to Teaching Assistants
There remains a shortage of all four...