Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland
From Mmc
7 March 07
Dear Colleague
MMC/MTAS APPLICATIONS FOR ST1 , ST2 AND ST3 POSITIONS
Seven days ago , MMC/MTAS published their shortlists and interview schedule. Many of our trainees are disappointed that they have not been selected for interview. Many have expressed reservations about the application process , the speed of its introduction and the lack of consultation or validity. These criticisms have become more widespread over the past week as the deficiencies of this flawed system have become more apparent. Many of you have tried to embrace the idiosyncrasies of the new interview rules in the absence of timely and accurate information from the Deaneries. As you will have seen from today’s press , the clamour for a halt in the interview process has reached a crescendo. Belatedly the Colleges and the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges are starting to voice their concerns about the harm being done to the careers of young doctors who , through no fault of their own , have been forced to compete for training positions using methodology which is untested and is probably inappropriate for selecting future surgical trainees.
Many of you will have been involved in the selection process: long-listing , short-listing , interviewing , attending equal opportunities and fair employment tutorials and writing references after completing training packages produced by the Deaneries. Many of the Deaneries have experienced intolerable pressure and unrealistic timetables to embrace the changes and try to make them work. Some have seen a flood of applications whilst anticipating only a trickle. The reasons for failure to deliver are multifactorial. Most emanate from MMC and MTAS failing to heed repeated warnings that the process is flawed , not fit for purpose and unrealistic. They have let our trainees down badly!
My own experiences as a Programme Director selector and interviewer have made me increasingly angry as the full folly was revealed. I recorded my concerns to a colleague on Friday evening as follows:
‘If you want a blow-by-blow account of my thoughts on the ST3 process , here it is. We interviewed "old style" for 3 places from 8 candidates. It is a deeply flawed process that has severely disadvantaged this group of trainees. I am angry on their behalf and cannot understand why some of our colleagues continue to support a rotten system. Today was the first occasion in 20 years that I was asked to make important decisions on the careers of our future colleagues with no CV or application form to review in preparation for the face-to-face. The only information I received was a list of candidates - in no particular order - and a start time and venue. Each candidate arrived armed with a brief one-page summary , hand-written immediately prior to interview and a portfolio the size of one or two telephone directories. Three colleagues and I were supposed to review these in 30 minutes flat , at the same time as we conducted a structured interview , marked each domain individually , and finally came to an agreed score for each domain that will be forwarded to MTAS. I have no definite idea who won or lost , I never saw any references and there was no opportunity to review our decisions. This process is the antithesis of fair employment and equal opportunities. It should allow candidates an opportunity to present themselves in the best possible light. All the candidates turned up in their best suits clearly expecting a "professional interview". Most left feeling cheated after participating in a "professional examination" for which there was no syllabus. No one asked them if they had any questions , or if they had other things they wished to say. We were told not to ask questions about outside interests , hobbies or significant achievements outside medicine as they were "unfair" and "irrelevant". I am happy to share this information with others if it helps to rid us of the sanctimonious rhetoric that emanates from MMC/MTAS. It has nothing to do with honesty , integrity and professionalism ….. values to which most of our trainees aspire , but sadly lacking in some of the leaders of this sorry mess. It’s time to stand up and be counted. I am with the trainees!!! We need to see some action and a few heads roll. We need to keep our future medical and surgical heritage safe in UK ’.
Over the past three days , the traffic in my email in-box has reached new heights of volume and anger. There is a growing realisation from the Colleges and Specialty Associations that all is not well and urgent action is required. I join this groundswell of concern and believe the ASGBI should voice its dissatisfaction. At the same time , we need to be proactive in making suggestions for improvement. I invite you to send to ASGBI examples of how the system has failed to work locally , regionally or nationally. using my email link president@asgbi.org.uk
The Association will collate this information for onward transmission to MMC/MTAS , the Department of Health , the Colleges and the other Specialty Associations. Armed with this information it should be possible to formulate realistic solutions that will ensure fair and reproducible selection processes that reward those whose personal and professional achievements deserve recognition and career advancement.
Yours faithfully
Brian J Rowlands
Professor Brian J Rowlands
President
Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland
The Royal College of Surgeons of England
35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields
London
WC2A 3PE
