RCVS Fees, what for?

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Glen McIntosh — Fri, 07 Mar 2014 03:33:27 GMT

For comparison purposes, here are the costs of registration with veterinary surgeon's boards (the equivalent of the RCVS) in other countries:

Australia: the equivalent of 100 - 150 GBP per annum depending on the state you are registering in.

Hong Kong: the equivalent of 110 GBP for initial registration, then 50 GBP for annual renewal thereafter.

Veterinary surgeons boards in these countries perform pretty much identical functions as the RCVS in terms of statutory regulation of the profession, but not the educational aspects such as awarding certificates, diplomas etc.

Unlike the RCVS, these regulatory bodies will also investigate and prosecute complaints about negligent veterinary practice, in addition to most of the issues that the RCVS polices, all for the same low price.

They are not, however, remotely interested in whether or not you perform house visits.

Their websites are a bit rubbish though, they don't issue nice glossy newsletters and annual reports (they do issue newsletters but they are very basic and nowhere near the quality the the RCVS produces), the don't have PR officers or even a CEO and the number of support staff probably number in the single digits, their IT systems are probably limited to a few pcs and laptops and shared use of government servers, they operate out of few almost anonymous offices in government buildings, they have no published ambitions of becoming first rate regulators, you don't get bonus postnomials just for paying the fees and they certainly couldn't be referred to as prestigious, unlike the RCVS.

Yet the veterinary professions in these countries are held at least as high in the public esteem as that of the UK veterinary profession, which would suggest that these boards are performing their statutory functions adequately, if not perfectly and certainly not without room for improvement.

But if you want the really quite excellent website, PR officers, the glossy and professional newsletters and press releases, the state of the art IT systems, to be located in an historic central London building, to be a first rate regulator and to maintain the prestige associated with RCVS and MRCVS then maybe the RCVS membership fee is actually excellent value?

Depends what you want to pay for, I guess.

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

mariette asselbergs — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:30:56 GMT

" tax and insure my car, if I only drive 30 miles in the next year should I get my road tax, MOT and insurance for less?"

You can actually get greatly reduced tax and insurance if you only use yopur car a very limited amount of the time/miles.

And of course you get reduced tax and insurance if you only work part of the year. Not so with the RCVS.

Mariette

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Michael Woodhouse — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:39:28 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]it'll be HMRC who want a quiet word out back![/quote]

HMRC don't care how many days I work, just how much I earn.

The problem with paying based on your income - its only at the year end when you know what you have made over the year. Especially true of locums and anyone owning a business. By the time you have written the cost against tax you can earn the money back in a single full day locuming.

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Robin Grimmer — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:21:44 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]Interesting question. Is having children a choice?[/quote]

Yes, unless of course the woman was raped.

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 16:09:11 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]If you did non-locum work, by the time you pay for child care, you'd end up working those 300 days for about a pound a day! So a false comparison there.[/quote]

Anyone's personal financial situation is none of my business. If they can't afford to have a child then use contraception. If you want to practice as a veterinary surgeon pay your full fee, if you want to move onto non-practising then do that, you can still call yourself MRCVS.

I'm not in support of a 'part time' rate and it becomes almost impossible to prove how many days you have worked. If you are working you need to be on the practising list. Quite simple and straightforward.

[/quote]

If it's impossible to prove how many days you've worked, you'll have bigger problems than the RCVS, it'll be HMRC who want a quiet word out back!

It could be linked to days of work, it could be linked to gross income - there are many ways to set a boundary for fees. If you can afford to be a vet and have a child, but couldn't afford to have a child if not an mrcvs - what's that answer then? What about when you're no longer able to work full time in vet med and the money gets tight? (I know a few male vets with this problem, health issues, not pregnancy. They can't work full time. Full stop. But that part time MRCVS work pays better than shelf stocking at a supermarket, which would be an arguably greater waste of a vet education!

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Michael Woodhouse — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:21:19 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]If you did non-locum work, by the time you pay for child care, you'd end up working those 300 days for about a pound a day! So a false comparison there.[/quote]

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Rob Loxley — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:53:52 GMT

[quote user="Mark Hedberg"]if there can be a category for an overseas vet and a non practicing vet, why not a part time vet category? [/quote]

The former two are rather easier to define than the latter?

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 12:45:26 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

[quote user="salome2001"]

In the last 12 months I have worked 29 days, I work part time and have a baby under 2. Most of those "days" have been Saturday mornings, for which I have been paid only £120.

On other words, for every day I worked, £10 went direct to the RCVS, and on most days, that £10 represented nearly 10% of my pre-tax income.

[/quote]

So? Your chose to work part time. That's not the RCVS's fault. There is no reason you couldn't have gone out and done 300 days work at £1/day. It's not RCVS's fault you chose to have a baby.

I tax and insure my car, if I only drive 30 miles in the next year should I get my road tax, MOT and insurance for less?

I'm sure I'd read somewhere about VDS being reluctant to offer reduced premiums for part time vets (as they have recently brought in) due to part time vets being more likely to have a claim. Can anyone confirm or refute that?

[/quote]

1. If you did non-locum work, by the time you pay for child care, you'd end up working those 300 days for about a pound a day! So a false comparison there.

2. Actually while road tax doesn't change, it's true that the less you drive, the lower your premiums are. Check it out on comparison websites if you don't believe me!

3. Personally, if there can be a category for an overseas vet and a non practicing vet, why not a part time vet category? Men as well as women! (just curious - apologies if there's something in the VSA that doesn't allow this.)

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

KMurphy — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:22:28 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]Interesting question. Is having children a choice?[/quote]

Thread drift alert, but of course it is. How would it not be?

*Edit - I'm thinking now you were just joking and I've been a bit hasty in my response!!

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 09:30:29 GMT

Yes. Those of us who chose not to are already robbed through general taxation in order to subsidise parents - medical care of pregnant women and children, child benefit,education costs, without RCVS also expecting us to further subsidise them.

Wynne

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Mark Holmes — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 06:26:42 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

[quote user="salome2001"]

In the last 12 months I have worked 29 days, I work part time and have a baby under 2. Most of those "days" have been Saturday mornings, for which I have been paid only £120.

On other words, for every day I worked, £10 went direct to the RCVS, and on most days, that £10 represented nearly 10% of my pre-tax income.

[/quote]

So? Your chose to work part time. That's not the RCVS's fault. There is no reason you couldn't have gone out and done 300 days work at £1/day. It's not RCVS's fault you chose to have a baby.

I tax and insure my car, if I only drive 30 miles in the next year should I get my road tax, MOT and insurance for less?

[/quote] Interesting question. Is having children a choice?

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Michael Woodhouse — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:52:29 GMT

[quote user="salome2001"]

In the last 12 months I have worked 29 days, I work part time and have a baby under 2. Most of those "days" have been Saturday mornings, for which I have been paid only £120.

On other words, for every day I worked, £10 went direct to the RCVS, and on most days, that £10 represented nearly 10% of my pre-tax income.

[/quote]

So? Your chose to work part time. That's not the RCVS's fault. There is no reason you couldn't have gone out and done 300 days work at £1/day. It's not RCVS's fault you chose to have a baby.

I tax and insure my car, if I only drive 30 miles in the next year should I get my road tax, MOT and insurance for less?

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

salome2001 — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:31:59 GMT

and by the way, my husband is a teacher and pays only £32 a year for his GTC (or whatever its called these days)

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

salome2001 — Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:26:00 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

What you get is a professional body and the ability to practice as a veterinary surgeon. If that alone is not worth less than £1/day I don't know what is!

[/quote]

In the last 12 months I have worked 29 days, I work part time and have a baby under 2. Most of those "days" have been Saturday mornings, for which I have been paid only £120.

On other words, for every day I worked, £10 went direct to the RCVS, and on most days, that £10 represented nearly 10% of my pre-tax income.

Considering the fact that the RCVS seems hell-bent on promoting its own warm-fuzziness to the public at the expense of the livelihoods of those who fund its existence, then no, I don't consider that "good value".

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Bob Russell — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 14:10:55 GMT

Apparently a debit card charge in excess of 50p can be challenged!

2% for credit cards

http://www.which.co.uk/campaigns/card-charges/

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 12:55:53 GMT

[quote user="Will McMullan"]

They do accept debit cards, I paid mine online this year, using my debit card. They just charge you for it.

[/quote]

Demand your money back?

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Anthony Todd — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 10:18:36 GMT

[quote user="Will McMullan"] but it's a bit strange it allows you to use a debit card and doesn't reject it there and then...[/quote]

Geez, don't query it!! They'll get in some IT consultant in and the whole thing will crash and they'll have to start again at another £300,000 plus...............

As someone said a year or two ago, any of our PMSs would have done the job and cost a comparative peanut.

"No debit cards" but you can, doesn't anyone there oversee anything except lunches and the wine cellar??

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Will McMullan — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:46:36 GMT

Oops - my bad - it does say they only accept credit cards. However, it allowed me to process the whole payment with my debit card and when I just logged in to check there now, it says I have paid my dues. It will probably be rejected in the next day or two though, but it's a bit strange it allows you to use a debit card and doesn't reject it there and then...

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Will McMullan — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:35:36 GMT

They do accept debit cards, I paid mine online this year, using my debit card. They just charge you for it.

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:29:15 GMT

Not accepting debit cards is seriously crazy.

Wynne

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Bob Russell — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 09:14:29 GMT

At least it is sort of functioning now. When the letter arrived I tried to confirm my details and it was not up and running!

Debit cards bit is crazy. It is the cheapest way of taking payment as the charge is not based on a % of the amount paid.

Sounds a bit 'only worked at the last minute' to me. What a surprise!

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Mark Hedberg — Wed, 05 Mar 2014 08:52:34 GMT

[quote user="Robin Grimmer"]

I agree Anthony. I know you can pay by banking transfer Mark, but my point is how much money have RCVS wasted on setting up this online payment that only lets you pay by credit card and I wonder how many members have paid this way?

[/quote]

I couldn't say - the other reason I didn't pay online is because for some reason no 'pay' button showed up on the page! (makes completing the transaction a bit difficult, to say the least.)

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 04 Mar 2014 23:32:13 GMT

[quote user="Robin Grimmer"]Debit cards not accepted.[/quote]

Yes, that is inexplicable.

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Robin Grimmer — Tue, 04 Mar 2014 23:29:56 GMT

Re: RCVS Fees, what for?

Anthony Todd — Tue, 04 Mar 2014 23:11:00 GMT

[quote user="Robin Grimmer"]

Anyone else think it's crap that you can only pay online on the rcvs website by credit card, for which they slap a surcharge on. Debit cards not accepted.

[/quote]

+1, just think of the admin when someone's card is blocked etc. Debit cards are certain, instantaneous and should be without surcharge!

Bad as budget airlines, not what one expects from a respected professional body!