Exclusive The first female chair of GPs in England is taking legal action against the BMA for discrimination over her removal during maternity leave.
Pulse can reveal a preliminary hearing was held last week to determine whether Dr Farah Jameel could be classed as an ’employee’ ahead of a potential employment tribunal.
Dr Jameel is arguing that her removal from the position in 2023 was discriminatory since she was on maternity leave at the time.
Last summer, GPCE passed a vote of no confidence in Dr Jameel, who was elected as the first ever female chair of GPs in England in 2021. She was put on temporary suspension in November 2022 following complaints made by the BMA’s staff.
The committee voted in favour of a motion which said they are ‘deeply concerned at the lack of clarity surrounding the status of the alleged suspension’ of Dr Jameel.
Dr Jameel’s lawyers are arguing that the union treated her as an employee in her role as chair of the GPCE, and she therefore comes under the relevant employment and equality legislation.
A document describing Dr Jameel’s claims said the BMA is accused of ‘direct discrimination (on the grounds of pregnancy and maternity); victimisation (sex); unfair dismissal; and wrongful dismissal’.
Her lawyers have argued that the vote of no confidence ‘refers to the Claimant’s absence’ which resulted from maternity leave, and that if this original vote was ‘discriminatory or otherwise flawed’, the BMA CEO’s subsequent decision to dismiss Dr Jameel was ‘tainted in the same way’.
The BMA ‘did not have a fair reason for the dismissal’, and Dr Jameel was therefore ‘wrongfully dismissed’, her claim stated.
At the time of her removal, the BMA told Pulse that it was ‘satisfied’ that no legal obligations were breached, despite the vote of no confidence being an ‘exceptional situation’ for the GPCE.
The union has maintained this position, telling Pulse this week that they ‘do not accept’ that her termination ‘was a discriminatory act’.
In a tribunal document setting out their ‘grounds for resistance’, the BMA said it ‘denies’ all claims.
It said: ‘While the Respondent accepts the Claimant’s consultancy was terminated, this was not because of the Claimant’s pregnancy and/or maternity.
‘The Claimant had been removed from her role as Chair of GPCE by the Vote of No-Confidence, so could no longer carry out the role referred to in the contract.’
Last week, a preliminary employment tribunal hearing, attended by Pulse, sought to clarify Dr Jameel’s status, with the BMA’s barrister arguing that she was not an employee and was instead a contractor with a consultancy agreement.
Simon Cheetham KC claimed that she was appointed to the GPC executive, elected to the position of chair, and then voted out by members – a process in which ‘there’s no BMA involvement or influence’.
‘So how she gets into the role and how she gets out of it is something independent of them,’ he added.
However, Dr Jameel’s counsel, Simon Gorton KC, argued that her contract with the BMA was equal to employment status.
‘It looks like one, it walks like one, and it quacks like one – it’s an employment contract,’ he told employment Judge Joffe.
The judge has not yet made a decision, but if Dr Jameel is found to have been treated as an employee under the relevant legislation, the full discrimination claim can go ahead with potential hearings to decide on this at a later date.
Responding to Dr Jameel’s legal proceedings, a BMA spokesperson said: ‘This tribunal arises out of the decision, in 2023, by the BMA’s GP Committee in England to pass a Vote of No Confidence in its elected chair, Dr Farah Jameel – and the consequential termination of the consultancy agreement she held with the BMA as a result of being chair of GPCE.
‘We do not accept that a motion of no confidence passed by a committee, nor the consequential termination of the consultancy agreement, was a discriminatory act. We will not be providing a running commentary of proceedings but we would direct people to the comments made at the time of the vote.’
At the time of the no confidence vote, Dr Jameel’s suspension hearings had not yet taken place due to her ongoing maternity leave, which began at around the same time as her suspension towards the end of 2022.
GPC equalities lead and proposer of the motion Dr Rachel Ali said it was not ‘brought on by the actions of any individual’, but rather ‘to give the committee a chance to offer a clear democratic mandate to the leadership of the profession and end the uncertainty of the last few months’.
She sought to assure members as an equalities lead that this was the ‘only fair way forward’.
While the vote passed, many criticised the committee’s move, with hundreds signing a petition calling for the withdrawal of the vote based on ‘unfair’ treatment of Dr Jameel.
However, elections went ahead for a new chair, with Dr Katie Bramall-Stainer taking up the position in August.
Pulse contacted Dr Jameel for comment.
How interesting. The proposer of the motion to unseat Dr Jameel was Dr Rachel Ali – equalities lead and close friend and confidante of Katie Bramall-Steiner.
Dr Ali will have known that as a woman and equalities lead she could get away with proposing the motion more than a male counterpart. They say that some women pull eachother down and this seems very much the case here. I wish Dr Jameel success in her proceedings.