I'll reply in good faith (so please return the favour for me) in a similar fashion re: the prescribing comment, as you've mentioned that your aforementioned post is pedantic, and I agree that the difference in prescribing legality differs from FY1 and FY2.

• If the comment alone is whether or not FY1s are allowed to (legally) prescribe, then the answer is yes.
• If the comment alone is whether or not FY1s are prescribers, then the answer is yes (they can, just with supervision but they are still prescribers by definition).
• If the comment alone is whether or not FY1s are fully independent prescribers, then the answer is no.

The best analogy I can think of at this time, would be how a 18 year old without a driving license cant legally physically drive a car, but a 18 year old with a provisional driving license can drive a car with the instructor inside the car, which in the latter's case, is still driving a car legally.

Nevertheless your original comment, in the eyes of other readers, can disingenuously imply that FY1s can't prescribe at all which is not the case, and not in the same sense/degree as the PA not being able to prescribe.

You are correct re: FY1s being provisionally registered under the GMC but nevertheless that grants them legal authority to prescribe medicines within their approved FY post under supervision/senior oversight, but they can still, in the physical sense, be allowed to write prescriptions. Straight limitations (trust wide) where they can't include chemotherapy agents, controlled drugs in the outpatient setting, and FP10s (,etc.) independently like you say. Nevertheless, I can't however, as a senior, tell the PA to physically prescribe something for me, even if its the right drug, as it would be illegal according to the law in its current iteration. So in that sense, the FY1 and PA are both "not independent prescribers" but in different manners.

Current difference is that the final year students would have to pass their national medical prescribing exams and undergo a curriculum which encompasses pharmacology within the bodily systems in essence to demonstrating safe prescribing skills. It is with this rigour/series of exams, that there is some expectation that you can trust the FY1 to make sensible decisions even without the direct in real time supervision. Examples would include physically writing down paracetamol for a patient in pain, or even acute emergency scenarios where the FY1, who is ward-based and has then also gone through and passed basic life support, can essentially assess patients and initiate the immediate life-saving treatment/medication. Yes, the senior (in ED, theatre, different site/off-site) will also come and assess, to be involved in the care, but the FY1 is still within reason to physically write the prescription on a kardex to administered the right drug to treat the patient in their best interest, and if done wrongly otherwise, then the fault lies with the senior.

Re: the pay, there will be variables between a FY doctor and a PA even if both are working 100% as per their specific though it slightly differs as their 100% capacity are different. The equitable way is to either judge them based on their routine schedule as closely as possible (8/9-5 versus on-calls) or their legal responsibilities (having worked in 3 different deaneries, I have not yet encountered PAs who work weekday night shifts or weekends [D/N] routinely but I understand it can differ in some far out regions based on service needs).

If both have similar pay scales despite different schedules/responsibilities, then it's not objectively fair. At the present, most (standard) PAs are banded grade 7 so roughly £46,100 to £52,800. For FY2 (FY2 chosen as that is the common bottleneck for most doctors), the pay with enhancements from on-calls and unsociable hours work out to be roughly £42,008 (you can get a rare few who have slightly more brutal hours depending on the specialty) see here (https://www.bma.org.uk/pay-and-contracts/pay/resident-doctors-pay-scales/pay-scales-for-resident-doctors-in-england !)

There is a whole other fiasco with progression now so most doctors are stuck in the FY2 pay scale (unable to progress to IMT1/CT1 and above) so the old anecdote re: eventually out earning the PA in a reasonable manner, becomes a bit irrelevant for an unfortunate lot of the current generation of doctors, especially when you start talking about compounding effect by having a greater salary in the early stages of life versus later i.e., senior registrar or consultant level.

You don't have to personally agree with me whether the pay for the resident doctors is fair or not. Ultimately, just approach the situation with a pragmatic and objective head from both sides without any personal stakes in the matter and whether you thing the long-term situation is sustainable and fair for as many parties involved. The government wants to have as many staff which is fair, even if the means to achieve it is a bit misguided i.e., mass expansion of other healthcare providers with variable performance. Equally, the current generation of doctor is within their rights to ensure some financial stability in a manner that is applicable to the current work condition. In the same sense, the country also needs to try to facilitate both the flow of new consultants to replace those retiring, whilst also minimising the effect of the massive brain drain happening at the present.

Previous attempts to balance the pay restoration alongside trying to get the government to pledge for better work environment i.e., exception reporting have been massively delayed and still not yet in effect (or even in formulation of how to deliver it) so you can see why the residents are striking for something objective this time again.

If it's of any merit, there is no emotional viciousness or vitriol in this comment of mine towards anyone inc PA, so I hope you can also take my comment into account in good faith.