Thursday, 4 August 2022

Adjournment

Healthcare worker winter retention and surge payment

Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (17:08): (6466) My adjournment matter tonight is to the Minister for Health, and it concerns the healthcare worker winter retention and surge payment scheme that the government has brought in. I ask the minister to look at some of the anomalies in that payment process whereby people who are very deserving of payments under that scheme are missing out. There will be a number, but particularly general practitioners—most of them do not qualify for that particular payment. I have had a letter from a constituent who is a rural generalist and a general practitioner who works at the Echuca hospital. She has explained to me that there are two staff doctors at that hospital but there are 10 general practitioners who work there on contract. They do not qualify for the payment even though they are doing exactly the same work, and that is setting up a real anomaly in that system. She goes on to say:

Due to the combination of a COVID outbreak on our rehabilitation ward, unfillable junior and senior doctor leave, locum staff not fulfilling contracts, and our hospital having to keep severely unwell patients because either there have been no beds available at other hospitals or no ambulances available to transfer them there …

This particular doctor has worked for 19 days straight. Along with the rest of her colleagues she goes on to describe how she is absolutely exhausted.

On the Victorian Department of Health website the aim of the healthcare worker winter retention and surge payment is:

To recognise public healthcare workers …

and to:

… join other programs designed to fill gaps and improve the working environment for all staff …

It says:

All staff employed in public health services …

are eligible, but if you actually look at what happens, the Victorian government has not accounted for the fact that many of the GPs working in public hospitals are actually contractors, not employees, so they are not eligible for the payment. As I said, at Echuca there are two part-time employed general practitioners but there are 10 contracted GPs who do not actually qualify for that particular payment. She believes that it creates an inequity between the contracted doctors and the two part-time staff ones. But, more importantly, she is quite concerned that with that disparity there are something like 30 doctors in training that are being taught at that particular hospital and that they will know that perhaps they should not go on and become general practitioners and rural generalists because they know they are not going to be rewarded suitably when they work in a hospital under this particular scheme. She believes it is sending the wrong signal at this point in time when they are doing their training and they are choosing what path they go down in the future. So I ask the minister to have a look at that particular anomaly that is in that program and ask her to make sure that these doctors get that payment.