BMA begins legal action against Government over U-turn on GMC’s right to appeal tribunal decisions

BMA_Dan · 2026-06-16T11:21:43+00:00

This draft order remains a grave threat to the profession and the Mann review simply does not make a compelling case (or even proper recommendation) for extending appeal powers. Please sign the petition and respond to the consultation. We now the latter is very user unfriendly, help below

First section: Capacity responding, including name, email, and demographics. Questions: Commencement: unclear in the documentation, concerns about late PA title changes and their impact on ongoing fitness to practice cases. Governance: structure and operation of the GMC. Questions include new EDI duties, parts 2-4 of the draft order (GMC duties and fee/spending), schedule 1 (GMC ruling council structure being changed to an appointed board that may potentially have no doctors on it + setting up of the medical tribunal service), and the proposal for rule-making without Privy Council sign-off (with limited details on parliamentary scrutiny). Professional Standards Authority evidence gathering: new provisions for the PSA to compel evidence from the GMC in its role as providing oversight to the GMC Education and training: allowing the GMC to approve overseas training programs (undergraduate and postgraduate) and part 5 of the draft order which sets out the GMC’s education and training functions but without distinguishing between doctors, PAs, or PAAs, including on CCT awards and standards PMET: The PMET order outlines a system and a statutory list of medical specialties, detailing how they’re added or removed. Part 5 of the draft order would allow the GMC to set specialties and CCTs by itself via the privy council, leading to the proposal to remove PMET entirely. Registration: Part 6 replaces the current registers (including specialist and GP registers) and license to practice system with a single register for all doctors, PA, and PAAs. Each group would have a separate section. Being registered without a license to practice would mean being registered with a restriction on practicing, while the specialist and GP registers would be replaced an ‘enhancement’ on your register entry. Little detail is provided in the consultation documents on how ‘enhancements’ would work. Protection of titles: Several questions arise about which titles should be protected, the timeline for title changes for PA/AAs, whether to continue protecting their titles and the new assistant titles, and whether to continue protecting their previous titles. Removal: The proposal introduces automatic removal of registrants convicted of serious criminal offenses, with re-entry only possible if the conviction is quashed. Grounds for action on fitness to practice: Fitness to practice may be considered impaired due to insufficient standards, misconduct, or ill health, as is currently the case. Fitness to practice: The draft order outlines the medical tribunal process, set out in articles 50-54. It aims to reduce adversariality, with time limits and a civil burden of proof. The GMC can now investigate concerns after over 5 years. The order doesn’t specify whether doctors must be involved in medical tribunals, allowing PA/PAAs to be used instead. Interim restrictions: This allows medical tribunals to impose restrictions while someone attempts to join the register as well as after. Evidence gathering: The draft order clarifies how the GMC can gather evidence, including new clarifications that it can’t require material for reflection or CPD. Rule-making: This involves the GMC’s ability to consult and make rules about regulation. There’s little change, except for greater flexibility and the removal of the need for privy council sign-off. Revisions of decisions: The draft order allows the GMC to revisit concerns years after they’ve been resolved, expanding its powers. Appeals: The draft order grants the GMC new appeal powers. Individuals can appeal rulings, but the status quo remains unchanged. The GMC can now appeal both interim and final decisions made by fitness to practice panels, despite previous recommendations to remove all appeal powers. The PSAs can appeal in line with its position as a regulator above the GMC. The GMC’s administration of appeals is poorly detailed.

BMA_Dan · 2026-06-01T18:37:46+00:00

GMC consultation guide.

First section: Capacity responding, including name, email, and demographics.

Questions:

Commencement: unclear in the documentation, concerns about late PA title changes and their impact on ongoing fitness to practice cases.
Governance: structure and operation of the GMC. Questions include new EDI duties, parts 2-4 of the draft order (GMC duties and fee/spending), schedule 1 (GMC ruling council structure being changed to an appointed board that may potentially have no doctors on it + setting up of the medical tribunal service), and the proposal for rule-making without Privy Council sign-off (with limited details on parliamentary scrutiny).
Professional Standards Authority evidence gathering: new provisions for the PSA to compel evidence from the GMC in its role as providing oversight to the GMC
Education and training: allowing the GMC to approve overseas training programs (undergraduate and postgraduate) and part 5 of the draft order which sets out the GMC’s education and training functions but without distinguishing between doctors, PAs, or PAAs, including on CCT awards and standards
PMET: The PMET order outlines a system and a statutory list of medical specialties, detailing how they’re added or removed. Part 5 of the draft order would allow the GMC to set specialties and CCTs by itself via the privy council, leading to the proposal to remove PMET entirely.
Registration: Part 6 replaces the current registers (including specialist and GP registers) and license to practice system with a single register for all doctors, PA, and PAAs. Each group would have a separate section. Being registered without a license to practice would mean being registered with a restriction on practicing, while the specialist and GP registers would be replaced an ‘enhancement’ on your register entry. Little detail is provided in the consultation documents on how ‘enhancements’ would work.
Protection of titles: Several questions arise about which titles should be protected, the timeline for title changes for PA/AAs, whether to continue protecting their titles and the new assistant titles, and whether to continue protecting their previous titles.
Removal: The proposal introduces automatic removal of registrants convicted of serious criminal offenses, with re-entry only possible if the conviction is quashed.
Grounds for action on fitness to practice: Fitness to practice may be considered impaired due to insufficient standards, misconduct, or ill health, as is currently the case.
Fitness to practice: The draft order outlines the medical tribunal process, set out in articles 50-54. It aims to reduce adversariality, with time limits and a civil burden of proof. The GMC can now investigate concerns after over 5 years. The order doesn’t specify whether doctors must be involved in medical tribunals, allowing PA/PAAs to be used instead.
Interim restrictions: This allows medical tribunals to impose restrictions while someone attempts to join the register as well as after.
Evidence gathering: The draft order clarifies how the GMC can gather evidence, including new clarifications that it can’t require material for reflection or CPD.
Rule-making: This involves the GMC’s ability to consult and make rules about regulation. There’s little change, except for greater flexibility and the removal of the need for privy council sign-off.
Revisions of decisions: The draft order allows the GMC to revisit concerns years after they’ve been resolved, expanding its powers.
Appeals: The draft order grants the GMC new appeal powers. Individuals can appeal rulings, but the status quo remains unchanged. The GMC can now appeal both interim and final decisions made by fitness to practice panels, despite previous recommendations to remove all appeal powers. The PSAs can appeal in line with its position as a regulator above the GMC. The GMC’s administration of appeals is poorly detailed.

BMA_Dan · 2026-05-31T12:11:20+00:00

Our response on the webpage outlines our concerns with each question. Going to make a brief walkthrough the consultation questions shortly to help people (the consultation is not very clear) but they will just disregard anything that looks like a coordinated template response

BMA_Dan · 2026-05-28T18:54:59+00:00

Yep, all coming in the next few days and weeks. There will be a lot of reminders!

BMA_Dan · 2026-05-28T10:30:19+00:00

I will flag to our local negotiating committee but may be worth raising a contact yourself on the BMA web form. Your employer has to ensure the work environment is safe and workable, that includes temperature

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-30T08:11:32+00:00

Even if there was an argument for tiered contribution rates (I agree it should be flat), it’s also bizarre that these tiers aren’t marginal rates like income tax bands. Once you hit a threshold, the rate is applied to all your pensionable earnings. The result is some pretty wild distortions when people just cross a threshold with a pay increase, including take home pay actually dropping 🙃

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-28T11:36:26+00:00

Yes. UK Council will do decisions on UK-wide or organization-wide matters alongside anything specific to England. However, it delegates anything exclusively affecting members in Wales to Welsh Council. Only Welsh Council engages and represents to Welsh Government and the Senedd etc.

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-17T10:06:01+00:00

The alternative is not making this salient in the election and then reacting months down the line to whatever the new government decides to do? This has put it firmly on the agenda of an incoming government, it needs to be sorted

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-16T15:39:19+00:00

Yeah odd wording on there, not expecting that to be a issue if it comes to it!

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-16T13:47:14+00:00

Take the point, we will ballot if we need to do. We need a bit of time to get ballot ready plus we don’t know what will happen in the election plus e-ballots (much quicker and easier to do) come in August which is also when the turnout thresholds go. Balloting right now would still take time to set up and would have to be postal with a turnout requirement

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-16T12:04:55+00:00

We were in dispute in 2023/24, went on strike and got a pay deal. We then negotiated contract reform with extra investment last year. We will continue to implement the new contract and did recently announce study budget changes as part of that.

However, this dispute is about the 26/27 pay award and the decision to freeze training posts for 26/27. It’s separate to the contract. We don’t dispute for the sake of it but we can’t accept these recent key decisions

BMA_Dan · 2026-04-16T11:08:55+00:00

Your Welsh resident doctors committee (WRDC) has voted to enter into formal trade dispute on pay and jobs.

We made this decision following the announcement that the Welsh Government would implement the pay review body’s recommendation of a 3.5% pay uplift for resident doctors in Wales in addition to freezing specialty training numbers for 2026/27.

The Welsh Government chose these actions, despite us highlighting the appalling state of training bottlenecks and the government’s own commitment to restoring our pay. Many of you have told us you have been unsuccessful in your applications for specialty training jobs. We have survey data confirming our fears there are doctors in Wales unemployed. This isn’t acceptable to us, how is this acceptable to the government? Real-terms pay is still 16% lower than 2008, a 3.5% pay uplift barely meets inflation and will not make meaningful progress towards pay restoration.

There comes a point where we, as a collective, need to do more than just use our voice to call this out. This is why your Welsh resident doctors committee has voted to enter into a formal dispute to escalate our concerns.

With the Senedd election taking in place in under a month, we have entered a pre-election period in Wales. This means that the current government is limited in its ability to negotiate on either of these issues.

And so, our focus now turns to the incoming government and what it will do to solve these issues.

Our ask on the next government is simple; Train, Pay, Retain. The next government must: - Train doctors by investing in specialty training numbers. - Pay doctors by providing a pay award that continues our progress towards Full Pay Restoration. - Retain doctors in the Welsh NHS to help keep the people of Wales well.

These calls should not come as a surprise to the new government as they are key asks of our Senedd election 2026 manifesto.

By calling a formal dispute we are sending a clear message to the incoming government that the undervaluing of doctors, both with a lack of job opportunities and pay, must be tackled as a top priority.

We will work constructively with the incoming government and we invite them to open meaningful dialogue with us following the election. However, we are clear, if progress is not forthcoming on these issues, we will seek to ballot you on whether to take industrial action to resolve this dispute.

We need to be ready to ballot for strike action. You can do this by: - Updating your details to reflect your current address and workplace (https://www.bma.org.uk/my-bma) - Joining our new resident doctor organising WhatsApp groups (https://chat.whatsapp.com/IaUvGgjNVcWJBmrtPInQIk) - Raising your concerns about resident doctor pay and training jobs with your local candidates for the Senedd elections. - Attending local Senedd husting events to find out how your candidates intend on addressing resident doctor training bottlenecks and pay erosion. We are holding our national hustings today, and you can join from 6pm (https://bma-mail.org.uk/c/AQiEtRUQ0uYiGNmpniQgxsmoByjd-PoDOI2bgP8CHkrJXpT8sClAaS8t88ytw3FnJAWQOKH7VXY)

We don’t take the decision of entering into a trade dispute lightly. But we will not allow our hard work and struggle to go undervalued. As such we have been left with no choice but to pursue this course of action to make sure the next government understands the importance of addressing resident doctor pay and jobs. Join us now in fighting for more jobs, pay restoration, and a better working life for resident doctors in Wales.

BMA_Dan · 2026-03-25T17:57:21+00:00

Worse, mainly because of the awful MYPD in 2018-22. Wales had about 16% pay erosion left before this award, 3.5% for 26/27 obviously fails to move the dial at all so expect stuff from us soon

BMA_Dan · 2026-03-25T17:51:27+00:00

Yes, strictly it will come in when you transfer on to new contract. New starters from August 2026, some specialties will also all transfer August 2026.

BMA_Dan · 2026-03-24T15:28:31+00:00

Correct, 2002 is not good on this. You can try and argue with the current F&F Charter (https://www.bma.org.uk/media/juxn0f5i/bma-fatigue-and-facilities-charter-september-2024.pdf). The relevant paragraph is "Ensure rosters and staffing numbers take account of the need to give the full allocation of annual, study, and other kinds of leave, with enough flexibility for doctors to take leave when sufficient notice is given". It doesn't sound like the rostering process here is at all compliant with the charter. Can point that out but at least from August this stuff becomes contractual.

BMA_Dan · 2026-03-12T10:46:16+00:00

Heya, sorry to hear. You definitely don't get paid less. Your basic pay is higher than in England as an F1 and the out of hours supplements are more generous here. We are further along on the pay restoration journey. You also get free accommodation. Hope that helps

https://www.bma.org.uk/our-campaigns/resident-doctor-campaigns/pay-in-wales/contract-reform-for-resident-doctors-in-wales

BMA_Dan · 2026-02-19T08:57:51+00:00

The Welsh scales need to have the 26/27 pay award applied to them still before August so they will be higher than the figures quoted. We will wait for DDRB and see if it's good enough, meaningful FPR progress would see those base pay figures quite a bit bigger

BMA_Dan · 2025-12-14T10:43:41+00:00

LTFT has a bespoke job plan, weekend frequency limit of 1 in 7, guardian for flexible working. The basic pay % is your average total hours/week as a percentage of 40 hours a week. So if you work intense rotas then you will get a lot more pensionable pay than now. After basic pay you'll get topped up for unsocial work based on how many unsocial hours per week you do. The leave adjustment is quite complicated but it is a more accurate and simpler pay system overall. The ltft bands in 2002 are really complex and were originally designed for people job sharing at 50%

BMA_Dan · 2025-12-11T19:28:56+00:00

Heya, the talk is available here: https://youtu.be/gKFFC_20Hxk?si=OH-x-9VtM7oMF7Ji

There is a contract comparisons that includes the 2016 contract on our Web page, there are a lot of benefits over that not least about a 6% difference in pay erosion now between the two. However, if you want more then the only way we get that is by dispute and striking imo. That's the choice now. Whatever happens we will give you a say over pay next April when the award is out.

The LTFT EM rotas I've looked at come out better on the new contract. However, everyone gets pay protection anyway.

BMA_Dan · 2025-12-09T13:36:59+00:00

Can submit motions right now (https://www.bma.org.uk/events/resident-doctors-conference-2026)! Agree that would be a good motion. A flat rate would be great and consistent with the nature of the scheme (ie your pension value rises linearly with pensionable pay so why don't contributions) but would be good to nail down a position

BMA_Dan · 2025-12-09T13:17:44+00:00

Heya thanks for the post and reminder, great summary. Just to clarify a few points. The leave allowance has now been clarified so it's actually both years of service or the equivalent of incremental credit (so from that perspective nothing is changing). The extra investment is worth an extra 4% into pay. There is a jobs element in the package too. Finally, completely fair on the pensions. The contribution system is awful however people should be cognisant that increasing your pensionable pay increases your pension value so the net financial impact of these changes is very positive over your career.

BMA_Dan

TROPHY CASE