LMCs back undated contract resignations as part of collective action
GP leaders have voted in favour of using undated contract resignations as part of ‘collective or industrial action’ due to the Government’s delay in negotiating a new substantive GMS contract.
LMC leaders from across England called on 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’.
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.
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.
Proposing the vote, Dr Rob Barnett, from Liverpool LMC, said: ‘We call upon GPCE to collect undated resignations from GP contract holders to be used as part of collective action or industrial action that could be recommended by GPC.
‘It is not saying do it now. It’s not saying use it now. It is saying: let’s get ourselves into a position to play a trump hand if and when the time comes, and remember we will be holding the cards.
‘We are all unhappy with the recent turn of events. We’ve gone from a situation in which GPs were making decisions on CCGs to being impotent within ICBs.
‘We’re being tied up in knots with ever more demands being foisted upon us through PCNs. Funding for capacity and access has eroded individual practices’ ability to act in an independent manner.
‘Either conference has a backbone and will give GPCE something useful to work with, or we need to shut up and just take what’s thrown at us.’
Dr Annie Farrell, from Liverpool LMC, who spoke in favour of the motion, said this would give negotiators ‘real, tangible power and leverage’.
She said: ‘Government have become our gangmasters and overlords continuing to demand more and more and more with ongoing unreasonable demands.
‘We are risking our careers with burnout and unsafe working, we need to put up or shut up. There is no point banging on about how terrible this is if we aren’t prepared to act.’
LMC representatives who spoke against the motion said that this would be ‘an empty threat’ and could make GPs a ‘laughing stock’ if they threatened to do it and then did not carry it out.
GPC chair Dr Katie Bramall told the conference that undated contract resignations could be included in ‘any future survey or ballot’.
She added: ‘We are dependent on you to guide us so that we execute what you want us to do. But obviously this could be included in any future survey or ballot.
‘Significant work is going to be needed to ensure that everyone is fully informed of a strategy and potential consequences. It gives us optics to go out to the public.’
The motion 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.
CARRIED
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [12]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles
I would be totally disappointed if this didn’t go through. Enough is enough. If you keep letting the bully bully you, you will just lose over and over again
When this is circulated to practices it should be with a viable fully fleshed out guide as to how to switch to a fully private service.
Agree with both these comments. The BMA have always seen themselves as humanitarian saviours of the the NHS instead of representing GP’s.
We need to demonstrate a plan B.
The dentists did it.
My dentist, who had been NHS, went private. He explained that he could not practice good dentistry and make a decent living with all the NHS rules about payments. He seems to be doing well and seems more content.
Perhaps it is time for the BMA to be drafting plans and showing GP’s how to disengage from the NHS and start up private practice.
Updated resignations are meaningless if we don’t have an alternative. My worry is the government may want this, take away our GMS and with no alternative force us into the new neighbourhood contracts.
Daily Mail readers would likely be satisfied, as they perceive little difference between whether surgeries are open or closed. Useless rhetoric by BMA. Jog on …
Despite being a GP (in order to comment here) JS doesn’t understand the difference between the England Conference of LMCs at ‘The BMA’. This is why its so difficult to lead GPs; a significant minority will revel in their own ignorance before they seek to understand collective reality.
The issue is, this isnt the 60’s, when people still remembered paying to see the GP and the staff was the GP’s wife. We now have large amounts of staff on salaries. This is going to have a huge impact on the practice with no guarantee of costs being covered even were there to be a private alternative, especially in deprived areas. To say nothing of rents, etc. not being covered. As total non starters go, this is pretty high on the list. It’s no threat at all
Thanks for the lecture, but that distinction means little to patients who see no improvement in access or outcomes — and even less to underemployed GPs earning under £75k, while partners take home over £300k for doing less and demanding more.
I agree with J S. The so called “collective reality” of the “trade union”/special interest group/Honours-seeking organisation in its Kafkaesque layers of LMCs, GPCE, BMA – is that throughout my 34 years working life they have done a lot of “telling” but not much “showing”. A poor “cry wolf” story indeed.
The blame for the failure of traditional general practice lies with successive Govts, the insufficient BMA and its Byzantine committee workings, but you can now add in “rotten apple” GP principals that unearn £175k+ (?£200k+), supported by the silence of the other two-thirds, their mere existence exposing to ridicule any arguments we can make for increased funding, while they fail to employ under-employed GPs.
As for some of the comments, “ye shall know them by their fruits”
£175k+ GP burghers (yeah burghers not buggers ….although 🤔)
Never owned, run or invested in a business have you?
Never done your job at unlimited liability risk, where a mistake by someone else can cost you not just your job, but also your lifetime’s accrued assets, have you?
Haven’t got a clue that the value of a job role is in large part a reflection of the cost of the alternatives have you? I could save every Premiership football club MILLIONS by replacing their elite players with chippy blabbermouths from down the nearest pub who ‘talk a good game’ whether you’ve asked them about it or not.
You are a prolific ‘commenter’ on this site, seemingly with an opinion about absolutely everything. This is not an obligation, it’s OK to have fewer opinions, just try to have better ones.
Ouch! Better opinions? Meaning those that agree with yours? Thanks, but no thanks, Bob. As my comment shows, I just don’t share the self-serving elite world view of GPs earning £175k+ nor those with vested interests such as LMC Chairs, like yourself. I have been involved in business including being a GP partner but, for me, the basis of a healthy public sector is Not to be making Extraordinary unearned profit out of it.
I worry for your stress level, Bob, so perhaps spend less time down at the Cock and Bull bantering with windbags about your team’s chances? BTW, I’m glad you read all my comments – I hope you’ve learnt something from them 😊 and that they’ve inspired you to widen your perspective outside your confirmation bias.
You’re right, though, I do post a lot now I’m recently retired – do you think Pulse should pay me for this?..