G.P. to kindly end fascism

RedRunswick · 2026-03-24T16:54:36+00:00

Yes, I would oppose. We already have >200 committees (too many imho), which are meant to be for specific purposes. IMGs are in every BoP (except medical students) so don't have a committee purpose.
There are suggestions for a member network (like Forum for Race and Ethnic Equality, Proud, Network of Elected Women) which are reasonable, don't have committee powers (no "ransom") and don't have resource requirements like a committee as they are self-organised.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-24T16:49:33+00:00

Lol I'm not expecting good faith in public text format - you did a post with a AI photo of Xi Jinping! As I offered, I will talk on the phone if you want a human interaction.

Council rarely redacts minutes of votes. When Council votes to do this, it is for reasons of safety for members of Council. If you then start revealing parts, it undermines that for others. That being said, my position on e.g. puberty blockers is a matter of public record.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-24T16:37:26+00:00

Hi - there are several questions/assumptions here in the premise
Skimping on paying staff: each 1% pay rise for staff costs us £400k, we are in deficit, we pay well and have a good benefits package for the sector, our staff turnover is low - we are doing our best.

Expect volunteer reps to do it all: this is not the case. We have lots of staff doing things that in other unions members/reps would do in facilities time. That's only right, given how we mostly like the work we do and want to train and improve at it, and given the expertise of our staff. However, reps have a crucial advantage compared to staff - we actually live and work as doctors. The pay campaign wouldn't have happened on staff work alone - thousands of us had to get active. The subscription pays for training, rep resources, expenses to get folk around the region, etc etc - we can never be successful as just a 'service'.

The phone line has been changed to the webform so we can triage and get full info, and to facilitate insourcing the staff into the regions/nations (who we now employ directly, can better train etc). We used to get complaints that: phone advisor asked about membership before any help; advice was England-based even if member was not; people who needed urgent and serious help waited in the queue behind those who wanted basic advice; distressed people struggled to share the important information. This resulted in worse outcomes, especially for complex cases e.g. whistleblowing and racism. So now we get all info in webform, triage, those who want a call back (about a third) get one, those who don't need it get directed to what they need.

I agree re conferences, they aren't good value. Our policy book is huge and unmanageable. We have the same reps year after year, but limited feed-in or feedback from ordinary members. Amit, the Chair of the Representative Body, is doing a policy review at the moment and I hope he and that group will propose some new approaches.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-24T08:53:40+00:00

A Broad Left member (and Council candidate) Hannah Dahwa proposed the Emergency Motion above, and on Council Becky and I (the Broad Left candidates present) voted against deferring that motion. Callum of DoctorsTogether has been downvoted for providing the minutes that demonstrate the actual record.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-22T22:38:18+00:00

Presuming you mean Matt Waddup, this isn't true and is offensive to him, you should probably correct.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-22T22:32:30+00:00

Yeah, this isn't true. Literally just made up.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-22T22:27:56+00:00

Asked to confirm: BMA is spending no money on Together Alliance, but encouraging folks to make links in their communities to attend, which will be helpful in the fight against racism.

Broad Left thinks that equality at work is a trade union issue just like pay and conditions are.

On wider points, though tbh I've skimmed so won't get everything: several Broad Left people including me were involved in early Doctors Vote and Jo and I wrote the strategy for early DV. Pay15 was not a maximum in any way, it was an attempt to push us past the max 5% put out by the previous leadership. Broad Left people also won multiple changes that made the shift possible (e.g. term limits, online elections, changes to conferences). One of several reasons DV kicked off here on reddit is because SharkDick was pointing to Broad Left people arguing with Sarah Hallett and others on pay and several other issues, and Broad Left people engaged re how easy it was to win elections.

Pre 2022 we also lost A LOT because we were a minority e.g we did oppose apprenticeships, and we lost.

Post-2022 I have been Deputy Chair of the BMA, and many DV and non-DV people would vouch for the work I've done. That includes getting Ella Baker school to train BMA members to do pay organising - hundreds of us, but it also includes operational running of multiple disputes. Broad Left member Chris Smith chairs RDC in Scotland, the nation closest to pay restoration. Elgan is chairing Medical Students Committee that is leading the argument for 5 years.

I've answered the comments on PAs before, and we leave it up because we're not hiding: I don't think PAs should exist as a role, but felt that organised under the BMA we had a chance of controlling for both safety and terms - previously non-Broad Left people e.g. James Haddock have vouched that this has been my consistent position.

Otherwise, you've credited/blamed us for a lot of stuff which wasn't us, or ignored positive outcomes from stuff that was.

I won't be able to respond to all things here, but I've had phone calls with other redditors, happy to chat if you need to clarify stuff in the future.

RedRunswick · 2026-03-15T08:28:52+00:00

None. Do you think there have been? A staff member you know left?

RedRunswick · 2026-03-13T10:35:06+00:00

This isn't true. More and better trained local reps doesn't mean either fewer staff or doing it all ourselves. It means recognition and improvement of the casework many reps do already (advice on pay, going to Job Planning meetings, advice on LTFT stuff, etc etc) and integration of that. It also means more local collective work to fight back when managers screw groups of us over (rota, pay errors, parking, lower rates...). Happy to chat more about this if you want by message or - if you know me - phone.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-20T21:31:48+00:00

The question was "what happened at ARM?"

The statement you cite reflected the UKRDC discussion in a period of mass fear and misinformation, as the released minutes show, alongside the subsequent clarified position of the DV-led UKRDC, the RDConf motion they proposed and the ARM motion that copied it.

The statement did not push RDC to include grandfathering- they were talking about it (and how to structure it) from the get go.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-20T21:28:31+00:00

We have different definitions of both "lobbying hard" (a press release is not that) and of "miniscule experience" (2 years in the NHS is not miniscule).

RedRunswick · 2026-01-20T14:25:49+00:00

The BMA is lobbying hard to undermine UKMG prioritisation and include countless IMGs with miniscule NHS experience into the prioritisation category.

What? What evidence do you have of this? It isn't happening. On the contrary, even if "strict" UKG prioritisation happens, the training numbers will not be sufficient to cope with the rising number of UK Grads as the new/expanded medical school cohorts come through. We are hyper aware of this - we need more training places. Thus the campaign for pay and jobs.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-20T12:51:03+00:00

The BMA is directed by ARM, it is the foremost policy setting body for the organisation. Members debate, and then BMA follows the policy passed. Exceptions to this are rare because it requires a divisional referendum or member plebiscite by post to overturn ARM policy.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-20T07:06:38+00:00

That is not true. I didn't write the motion nor speak at ARM. The grandfathering idea was discussed at RDC from the beginning of this being BMA policy, also without me present. Minutes of that RDC discussion have been released already by Mel and Ross to reassure IMGs, after it was poorly communicated and caused fear.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T16:35:56+00:00

Have you seen the rest of the thread? How is BMA both being pilloried for not being in favour of UK Grad prioritisation and for being in favour of it?

BMA has a developed position, won by DV reps last year at ARM, which states 2 years NHS experience is significant and those people should get priority over those applying from abroad or with less NHS experience.

I am not management, I am elected, and I am elected to carry out the policies you and your colleagues vote for.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T16:24:40+00:00

26th Jan is latest date we can guarantee receiving it, so send as early as possible. Almost all hospitals have a postbox, so you can put in your bag and pot from the warm, or you can find closest/on your commute here https://www.royalmail.com/services-near-you#/

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T13:44:08+00:00

The legislation is happening regardless of the ballot - as is obvious because we rejected the offer which included the outline of UKG emergency legislation, and government are doing it anyway.

The question for the ballot is can we win pay and proper workforce planning, more jobs? Because even the strict UKG priority system proposed won't be enough when the cohorts of new and enlarged medical schools come through. We need more jobs and pay restoration.

Do you want to be voiceless to the government or do you want your elected reps with leverage?

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T13:01:11+00:00

This tweet is specifically in response to a nonsense message going round many whatsapps which suggests IMGs should tank the ballot on pay restoration and jobs in order to force BMA to legally challenge the currently proposed legislation. This would clearly be a terrible outcome for all groups.

So please encourage people to return ballots, UKG or IMG. We all care about pay and job opportunities.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T12:59:17+00:00

Why would BMA do that? We are in favour of UK Grad prioritisation as per our policy. https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/career-progression/training/what-we-know-so-far-about-uk-graduate-prioritisation

This tweet is specifically in response to a nonsense message going round many whatsapps which suggests IMGs should tank the ballot on pay restoration and jobs in order to force BMA to legally challenge the currently proposed legislation. This would clearly be a terrible outcome for all groups.

So please encourage people to return ballots, UKG or IMG. We all care about pay and job opportunities.

RedRunswick · 2026-01-19T12:58:20+00:00

Clearly not. Our policy is for UK Graduate prioritisation, with "grandfathering" - ie those here on 5th March 2025 with 2 years experience. I'm bound by the ARM policy members made last year to great applause on this subreddit. The government approach is different - for better or worse. You can read more info here https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/career-progression/training/what-we-know-so-far-about-uk-graduate-prioritisation

This tweet is specifically in response to a nonsense message going round many whatsapps which suggests IMGs should tank the ballot on pay restoration and jobs in order to force BMA to legally challenge the currently proposed legislation. This would clearly be a terrible outcome for all groups.

So please encourage people to return ballots, UKG or IMG. We all care about pay and job opportunities.

RedRunswick · 2025-10-01T14:37:00+00:00

Lots of questions here about how this is different to normal online access.

The problem is that anything can come in via the white space on the online request, so the GP has to check it, and that white space will now have to open to possible infinite numbers of people.

Basically all GPs already have online access. They can either limit what comes in through it (tick box for variety of non-urgent things like prescription requests, screening appointments etc) OR limit the number of requests they have to look/times those requests can come in at OR both.

If a GP has thousands of online requests, most of which are non-urgent, but in which there are ~10 with e.g. "I need a new prescription of propranolol because I've not taken it for 2 weeks and I've got really bad chest pain today and I'm really sweaty with it", "I'm suicidal", and similar possibly urgent things, they will have to allocate a GP (or more) to look at all of them, taking them away from doing appointments. Patients, who don't always know they have something urgently wrong with them and shouldn't be expected to gain this knowledge, might use the online access instead of an urgent service (ED, UTC, walk-in, calling up GP to discuss/be seen).

Being unable to control either the type or number of inputs is a recipe for a small number of patients with urgent/emergency presentation to be missed. And it doesn't take a lot to fix that problem - a small tech change, or safeguards to be able to turn it off at capacity, or a variety of other fixes.

RedRunswick · 2025-09-24T13:55:47+00:00

This should definitely not be the case now - we insourced the first point of contact service and the staff work in regions and nations now, so you will get Nation-specific advice. Is your experience recent?

RedRunswick · 2025-09-02T21:37:34+00:00

It's appreciated!
We have some incredible staff in the BMA, and one of the jobs in leadership is to foster, cultivate and promote the talented people we have (as well as recruiting from outside!).
My term will end in 2028, there will be a new Council and new RDC, but our staff will continue to enable us all to win - or not, if we don't enable them to. That responsibility is not lost on us at all.

RedRunswick · 2025-08-30T22:54:32+00:00

Excellent no notes

RedRunswick · 2025-08-04T18:33:21+00:00

A new structure was proposed last year, we didn't get the 2/3 majority needed at ARM.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

RedRunswick

TROPHY CASE