First group of PA discrimination claims against GPs set to be heard next month

Exclusive The first wave of cases brought by physician associates (PA) against GP practices is set to be heard in February, Pulse can reveal.

And the affected GP practices – which adopted guidance limiting which tasks PAs can carry out – could face £7.5m in damages as a result, Pulse has learnt.

The BMA and RCGP have also both been named as respondents in the claims.

United Medical Associate Professionals (UMAPs), the trade union for PAs, has prepared dozens of indirect discrimination claims as part of a group action, with the first wave of cases set to be presented in preliminary hearings next month. 

Last year, Pulse revealed the overall claims against practices could amount to £30m in damages.

A total of 45 PAs are included in the first group of claims, with claims from a further 10 still being processed. A second wave, which is currently being finalised, has a further 70 disputes, each involving multiple PAs.

Following the February preliminary hearings, the group action cases are expected to be heard at an employment court in Newcastle in July. 

Both the BMA and RCGP published guidance in 2024 limiting the scope of the PA job role, including that they should not see ‘undifferentiated’ patients in a GP setting. 

It comes after the Government accepted the recommendations of the Leng Review in full and instructed NHS England to implement the changes ‘as quickly as possible’.  

Published last July, the Leng review concluded PAs should be renamed ‘assistants’, should not see undifferentiated patients outside of clearly determined protocols and that they should have at least two years’ training in secondary care before being allowed to practise in primary care.   

Speaking at Pulse LIVE, Professor Gillian Leng also said that PAs were introduced into the NHS ‘without clear vision’ and workforce planning.

UMAPs deputy general secretary Sara Blenkinsop told Pulse: ‘The loss of earnings, emotional turmoil, and potentially career-ending harm inflicted on these PAs means that damages in this initial wave of cases could be up to £7.5m.’

Gateshead and South Tyneside LMC chair Dr Paul Evans told Pulse the group action may harm employment chances for PAs and similar newly created roles in the future, as GP practices will decide the risk of litigation is too great. 

He anticipated that practices would be ‘waiting for someone else to be the early adopter’ to ‘take the risk’ that comes with taking on a new staff group that has never previously been employed in general practice en masse.

On the group action, he said: ‘(UMAPs) are doing what I would expect any representative group to do for the group they represent. However, I would suggest that it is optimistic to challenge guidance produced by the BMA and the RCGP. For them to come out against guidance which is explicitly about patient safety is an interesting look.’ 

Responding to the group action, an RCGP spokesperson told Pulse: ‘The College is aware of ongoing legal proceedings relating to employment matters involving physician associates. As these proceedings are active, it would not be appropriate to comment further at this time. The RCGP will engage appropriately through the established legal processes.’  

UMAPs’ lawyers Shakespeare Martineau previously estimated the total value of the discrimination claims could amount to £30m. 

They argued GP practices had ‘rushed’ the implementation of the guidance leading to ‘widespread job losses and redundancies’. 

The BMA declined to comment on the group action.