We’re into March already and it won’t be long until we find out what your pay rise is going to be for 2010-2011. Did I say pay rise? Sorry, I meant pay cut.

OK, they can’t actually take money away from you, but when inflation is taken into consideration doctors will be looking at a pay cut.

Back in November the Chancellor said that for the two years from 2011 he would seek to ensure all public sector pay rises were capped at 1%. You can bet doctors won’t do better this year.

Even doctors’ representatives are saying a 1% pay rise for doctors would be “a result”. They’re anticipating less.  

Such is the state of the nation’s economy most doctors appear resigned to a poor deal. They weren’t, however, expecting foundation trusts to plot an assault on their SPAs, clinical excellence awards and progressional pay increments as well.

The irony of it all is that a government that was obsessed with eliminating private practice has, in the end, created an environment that is conducive for it.

Fears over inflation are very real, with rates increasing this year on all measures. The Retail Price Index rose to 3.7% in January, from 2.4% in December.

The OECD found that Britain’s CPI inflation rate of 3.5% in January was two or three times higher than other European nations. It blamed rises in supermarket goods and energy provider charges. Petrol prices and the increase in VAT have also played their part apparently. 

Here’s some Stephanomics on the subject - she’s better qualified than me to comment and suggests inflation could be more of a problem than the Treasury is letting on. 

But it’s not only the rising costs of general items that doctors should be concerned about. How will medical organisations, which charge professional membership fees, respond?

Full registration with the GMC currently costs you £410 a year. This is going up to £420 from April - a 2.4% rise.

If you’re a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians, you paid £485 in 2009. In 2010, you’re paying £495 - a 2.1% rise. 

Consultant membership of the Royal College of Surgeons rose from £375 in 2009/2010 to £380 for 2010/2011 - a 1.3% increase.

A standard membership with the BMA for 2008/2009 was £399. This rose by 2% to £407 for 2009/2010.  

None of these rises are atypical or offensive, and I’m sure they’re justifiable. But - and it is a significant ‘but’ - they are all likely to outstrip this year’s consultant pay deal.

And this is without even considering indemnity fees and other association, society and journal membership and subscription charges. As the expectations surrounding continuous professional development rise, so will the cost to the individual consultant.

Most of these fees are tax deductible, but it doesn’t stop them representing a significant outlay.

It therefore comes as no surprise that other organisations are trying to offer cheaper ways for doctors to access some of these services.

Just as doctors, and the organisations they work for, are coming under pressure to deliver even better value for money, then so must the medical institutions that serve them - particularly the ones doctors are obliged to pay fees to.

One can get blinded by pay particularly when other private sector professions, like bankers, are still doing well. As this commentator points out there is a total reward package within the public sector that others don’t benefit from.

That does of course assume that employers and the government don’t start messing around with your pensions, clinical excellence awards and other terms and conditions, which all contribute to the ‘total reward package’. If that is successfully avoided, a few flat pay rises might end up looking like ‘a win’.