Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
A different prospective on MTAS
- Christopher S Flannigan (13 April 2007)
-
Re: A different prospective on MTAS
- Simon J Parker (21 April 2007)
|
|
|||
|
Christopher S Flannigan, F2 Doctor Ulster Hospital Dundonald BT16 1RH
Send response to journal:
|
I’m sick to death of reading complaint letters about MTAS being unfair. I know the questions used for short listing were different to the normal way of applying for jobs, but as doctors we are meant to be among some of the brightest people in the country and as our job often requires we should be able to adapt as the situation changes. Realising the importance of the shortlisting process on the rest of my medical career I spent the 2 weeks we had to complete the form researching the questions, referring to the published personal specifications and writing draft after draft, till after about 15 hours of work I was completely satisfied with my answers. My delight of being shortlisted for my first choice was quickly erased with today’s announcement that everyone will get an interview in every specialty they applied for even if they were unsuccessful in being shortlisted. Not only was my hard work for nothing, but I now feel at a disadvantage compared to people who have been handed an interview on a plate. When I did my interview I had no idea of what to expect. However people who were unsuccessful in the shortlisting process now know the format of the interview and what questions came up. Combining this useful knowledge with the extra preparation time means these people have no excuse for not achieving a better score than I did. I can’t help thinking if these people had applied themselves and put as much time into their application forms as they did marching and complaining that we wouldn’t be in this mess. The BMA recently announced that there are 32,000 junior doctors chasing 18,500 jobs. So what are we going to do when 13,500 doctors end up without specialty training posts, decide the interview process was unfair and scrap it? At these competition ratios there will be good doctors who don’t get a specialist training job. All today’s announcement has done is increase the chances of doctors who worked to get shortlisted becoming one of the unfortunate ones. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Simon J Parker, SHO/FY2 Royal Blackburn Hospital BB2 3HH
Send response to journal:
|
I was very surprised that Dr Flannigan did not declare any competing interests when writing his letter. I think the fact that he was offered an interview (at his first choice UoA) is as big a competing interest as one can imagine. I am sure that the vast majority of applicants, including myself, spent many hours on their application forms (I in fact took took some annual leave days), and did not get shortlisted. Several of my colleagues found themselves in the position of being on nights during the time that applications were to be submitted, leaving very little time to complete the most important (virtual) piece of paper of their lives. Even with the completion of the form, there have been doubts about the validity of the process, the qualifications of the people marking the forms, and even whether or not every form submitted made its way (in whole or in part) to the correct place. It is clear that the system thus far has not been fit for purpose, and, whilst I am sure that offering every applicant one interview is by no means an ideal solution, it appears to be a reasonable compromise, given August's rapid approach. Competing interests: I was not shortlisted for any interviews |
|||