The Federation of Medical Women of Canada (FMWC) recognizes gender pay inequity as a persistent systemic issue within Canadian medicine. This inequity extends beyond physician compensation to reflect how medical work and, more broadly, women’s health is undervalued within our healthcare system.
Canadian evidence demonstrates persistent gender differences in physician compensation that cannot be fully explained by specialty, geography, practice patterns, or time worked. Women physicians are also more likely to provide care that is less highly remunerated, including proportionately more consultations versus higher paying procedural work, longitudinal care, and the management of complex and chronic conditions. At the same time, evidence suggests that comparable medical services provided for women patients are valued less than those provided for men.
FMWC believes that gender pay equity must therefore extend beyond equal payment for identical work. It requires examination of whether comparable work is valued comparably, whether fee schedules and funding models appropriately recognize the time and complexity of care, and whether the healthcare system systematically undervalues conditions that predominantly or uniquely affect women.
This is not solely a workforce issue. How we value women’s health directly affects safe patient care. Conditions affecting women across the life course—including reproductive health, autoimmune disease, perimenopause, menopause, endometriosis and abnormal uterine bleeding—can substantially affect health, participation in the workforce, and economic security. Underinvestment in research and accessible care for these conditions has consequences for patients, families, healthcare systems, and the broader economy.
FMWC also recognizes that women physicians frequently provide care requiring additional time, including complex chronic disease management, trauma-informed care, and care for patients affected by gender-based violence. Compensation models that prioritize procedures and volume are skewed to make these contributions invisible, despite data supporting the positive impact of patient-centered communication on rapport, continuity, and patient engagement to quality care.
Call to Action
FMWC calls for:
1. Transparent measurement of gender differences in physician compensation, including analysis by specialty, geography, practice type, procedure, and income distribution.
2. Regular review of physician compensation and fee schedules through a sex- and gender-equity lens, including assessment of whether comparable work and care provided to women are valued equitably.
3. Allocation of a funding model that takes into account additional time required for communication, continuity, and relational work required to provide high-quality care for populations with higher health care needs, rather than relying predominantly on procedure- and volume-based measures of value.
4. Equitable access to professional opportunities, especially leadership positions, and other opportunities that influence physician income and career advancement.
5. Meaningful representation of women in compensation and healthcare decision-making, with a view to strengthen negotiation equity.
Conclusion
FMWC challenges a healthcare system that too often assigns lower value to work performed by women and to health conditions that predominantly affect women. Gender pay equity in medicine is therefore not simply about closing an income gap, it is about ensuring that women’s health, women physicians, and the work required to care for women are valued equitably.
Closing the gender pay gap requires us to look critically at how healthcare services are valued, how opportunities are distributed, and whether our systems support equitable, high-quality patient care. Women’s health should not be worth less. Neither should the work of those who care for women.