GP leaders to vote on using undated contract resignations as part of collective action
GP leaders will vote on using undated contract resignations as part of ‘collective or industrial action’ due to the Government’s delay in negotiating a new substantive GMS contract.
At their conference in Manchester next month, LMC leaders from across England will vote on a motion calling the BMA’s GP committee to collect undated resignations from GP contract holders, ‘to be used as part of collective or industrial action that could be recommended by GPCE’.
The conference agenda also includes a motion mandating GPCE to ‘prepare options for action’, including ‘non-compliance with access requirements’ which came into force at the beginning of this month.
It also demands the ‘immediate removal’ of these access mandates, which ‘reduce care to box-ticking targets and put patients at risk’.
It comes as the BMA is currently in formal dispute with the Government over the online consultation requirements, data access and the 10-year plan, including a lack ‘any meaningful progress’ to deliver the promise of a new GMS contract.
GPs are now contractually required to keep online systems open for patient requests between 8am and 6.30pm for routine enquiries regardless of capacity – but the GPCE has previously warned that GPs would struggle to implement the requirements safely, and that practices would be accused of breaching their contractual obligations should they reach capacity.
As revealed by Pulse, contingent on internal advice from senior BMA leaders, the GPCE would consider balloting the profession on industrial action as the next step in the dispute – and practices could be urged to actively breach their contracts by diverting or switching off online access.
LMC leaders will also vote on a motion calling on the GPCE to advise practices to ‘disengage’ from participation in neighbourhood provider structures, as designed in the 10-year plan, ‘unless they are demonstrably led by general practice, with equitable representation and control’.
GP leaders and experts have raised concerns that the 10-year plan could threaten the independent contractor model, introducing new contracts for neighbourhood services which ICBs can award to different providers, including NHS trusts.
The motion said: ‘Conference asserts that the three core aims of the 10 year health plan cannot be delivered without GP leadership, alongside full and transparent assurance on funding streams, and calls on GPCE to insist that implementation of the plan must not be imposed by trusts or ICBs, but instead be co-designed and led by GPs and general practice–led organisations, with oversight and review by LMCs, rejecting any proposals which marginalise GP leadership.’
Other motions to be debated include securing protection for GP partners by ensuring state backed indemnity is extended to cover claims associated with failures in AI triage, assessment, documentation and management ‘leading to delay in treatment or direct patient harm’.
The conference is taking place on 7 November at the Royal Northern College of Music in Manchester.
The motions in full
LIVERPOOL: That conference, in view of there being little or no progress on having a substantive new GMS Contract that will help to ensure the survival of general practice in England, calls upon GPCE to collect undated resignations from GP contract holders, to be used as part of collective or industrial action that could be recommended by GPCE.
AGENDA COMMITTEE TO BE PROPOSED BY NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE: That conference is deeply concerned that the 2025 / 26 contract variation requires practices to maintain continuous online, telephone and physical access throughout core hours (08:00–18:30). Conference:
(i) rejects the government’s contractual requirement for GP practices to guarantee universal patient access throughout all core hours, condemning it as a cynical political stunt that is unfunded, unsafe, and knowingly undeliverable in the context of current workforce collapse
(ii) insists that practices must retain flexibility to deliver access in ways that reflect the needs and demographics of their patient population
(iii) insists that online consultations may be curtailed when safe working limits have been reached
(iv) demands the immediate removal of these access mandates, which reduce care to box-ticking targets and put patients at risk
(v) mandates GPCE to prepare options for action, including non-compliance with access requirements, should government refuse to revise the 2025 / 26 contract variation.
AGENDA COMMITTEE TO BE PROPOSED BY KINGSTON AND RICHMOND: That conference asserts that the three core aims of the 10 Year Health Plan cannot be delivered without GP leadership, alongside full and transparent assurance on funding streams, and calls on GPCE to:
(i) insist that implementation of the Plan must not be imposed by trusts or ICBs, but instead be co-designed and led by GPs and general practice–led organisations, with oversight and review by LMCs, rejecting any proposals which marginalise GP leadership
(ii) not accept the development of Single Neighbourhood Provider or Multi Neighbourhood Provider contracts as fulfilling the Secretary of State’s commitment to renegotiate the GMS contract
(iii) demand adequate funding to back up the plan, rejecting any attempt by ICBs to shift unfunded workload to general practice under the guise of integration or transformation
(iv) advise practices to disengage from participation in neighbourhood provider structures unless they are demonstrably led by general practice, with equitable representation and control
(v) issue guidance to support practices in resisting contractual or structural involvement in neighbourhood models that undermine independent contractor status or partnership led care.
AGENDA COMMITTEE TO BE PROPOSED BY GLOUCESTERSHIRE: That conference believes the current exposure of GP partners to a wide range of personal liabilities is unsustainable, and calls on GPCE to secure protection for GP partners by ensuring state backed indemnity is extended to cover claims associated with:
(i) vicarious liability, where GP partners may otherwise be personally exposed for the actions of their staff or associates
(ii) data sharing and information governance
(iii) failures in AI triage, assessment, documentation and management leading to delay in treatment or direct patient harm
(iv) the Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act 1998
(v) patients seeking compensation from general practice having paid for private medical assessment due to excessive secondary care waiting lists.
Source: BMA
Related Articles
Oviva’s fully remote Tier 3 Weight Management programmeREADERS' COMMENTS [8]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles
Oh dear.undated resignation letters.Deja Vu
We had this fiasco in Northern Ireland many years ago. An undated anything is pointless and means nothing. Yet we still couldn’t get our lot to agree to them. Too many GPs with too many financial commitments. Our Health Board realised that these letters were hollow threats and basically ignored the threat. Don’t threaten action unless it’s real and make sure that the troops are with you. Nothing worse than marching them to the top of the hill and then march them down again
Proceed if you must—– there’s no shortage of capable, underemployed GPs ready to step in and fill the gaps.
Inclined to agree with JS
there aren’t many GPs still working fortunate enough to be able to carry this through financially
I think there’s a prevailing view held by Mr Streeting Lord Darzi and Alan Milburn that there isn’t any need to invest any more money in the NHS -Change will come through productivity efficiency change simple necessity and they will continue to tough this position out.
Undated resignations can be a powerful lever, but only if it comes with a credible plan to walk away from the NHS. Multiple private providers are already providing private general practices service to ordinarily folk (not just the mega rich).
If a payment plan for pay-as-you go services could be worked up and the threat of having to pay market rates was real, the Government wouldn’t be able to downplay what we do.
Some have previously claimed there aren’t enough punters in the uk who could pay for a £50 to 80 consultation. You would be surprised what people will spend on things that are important to them.
Existing private providers don’t have the staff and infrastructure to take over NHS primary at a stroke and A&E and walk in centres couldn’t do all that we do.
Just the prospect of prescriptions going unfilled without a charge (let alone all the other jobs we do) would be enough to force ministers to really sort out our contract.
If the BMA could work up a ‘use of premises’ solution, walking away from the NHS could be a real option. Paradoxically, that’s the one thing that might actually save it.
To threaten undated resignations with no follow-through plan is simply foolish. I doubt anyone at the BMA will think it through all the options. They never do.
Undated resignations can be a powerful lever, but only if it comes with a credible plan to walk away from the NHS. Multiple private providers are already providing private general practices service to ordinarily folk (not just the mega rich).
If a payment plan for pay-as-you go services could be worked up and the threat of having to pay market rates was real, the Government wouldn’t be able to downplay what we do.
Some have previously claimed there aren’t enough punters in the uk who could pay for a £50 to 80 consultation. You would be surprised what people will spend on things that are important to them.
Existing private providers don’t have the staff and infrastructure to take over NHS primary at a stroke and A&E and walk in centres couldn’t do all that we do.
Just the prospect of prescriptions going unfilled without a charge (let alone all the other jobs we do) would be enough to force ministers to really sort out our contract.
If the BMA could work up a ‘use of premises’ solution, walking away from the NHS could be a real option. Paradoxically, that’s the one thing that might actually save it.
To threaten undated resignations with no follow-through plan is simply foolish. I doubt anyone at the BMA will think it through all the options. They never do.
There’s no plan B, and they know we need the money, so it holds no water.
In 2016 we were marched up the hill of undated resignations by bma ( ni), we dutifully submitted our letters and 9 years later, we are still waiting and our resignation letters remain in bma house Belfast, unused and gathering dust all these years: a pointless exercise is gesture politics, the only action remaining to us is to quit our toxic gms contracts completely and explore the opportunities of private primary care!
Agree with the above: a) Government attitude is won’t be held to ransom by junior Dr b) Previous Governments have imposed contracts c) A threat is only a threat if there is the confidence/spirit/unity & “balls” to carry it through to the bitter (and it will be) end.