equality


a campaign group made up of hundreds of reporters and producers at the corporation, who asked not to be named, said that as soon as Ahmed’s hearing ended, the group noticed a change in approach by the BBC. “Within a few days, various managers


Nicola Slawson on the implications of Samira Ahmed’s tribunal success


The battle for pay parity


S


amira Ahmed’s employment tribunal success over equal pay at the BBC has been hailed by the NUJ as a


‘resounding victory’. The presenter took her employer to


the tribunal after learning that her colleague Jeremy Vine was being paid £3,000 per episode for BBC 1’s Points of View. In contrast, Ahmed was paid £440 for Newswatch, which is shown on the BBC News Channel and BBC Breakfast and is a similar format. Ahmed told the tribunal, which


concluded in November, that she “could not understand how pay for me, a woman, could be so much lower than Jeremy Vine, a man, for presenting very similar programmes and doing very similar work”. In her judgment, Judge Grewal said it


was clear from the evidence that Ahmed and Vine did work that was “the same or, if not the same, very similar”, and that any differences were ‘minor’. At the time Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ general secretary, said: “It was an incredibly brave decision on Samira’s


part to take forward this case. No one wants to battle their employer in a public tribunal hearing, but the BBC’s failure to meaningfully negotiate made legal proceedings inevitable.” Carrie Gracie, who became the face of the equal pay struggle at the BBC after quitting her role as China editor, said she hoped Ahmed’s victory “gives courage to women everywhere to stand up for the value of their work”. While negotiations around the consequences are ongoing and the BBC has remained tight-lipped about whether it will appeal against the ruling, it’s clear the case could have far-reaching implications for the broadcaster. If the BBC does not appeal, it could


be left with a huge bill for Ahmed’s back pay as well as the cost of potentially large settlements over similar claims by other female staff bringing equal pay cases. A spokeswoman for the NUJ confirmed that about 20 similar cases were in the tribunal system, and as many as 70 cases were unresolved at the time of publication. A founding member of BBC Women,


“ ”


All that money, all that time, all that obfuscation takes place to gaslight women and makes us think we don’t have a claim


and HR managers were approaching women with outstanding claims and asking ‘what would it take in monetary terms to make this go away?’ ” she said. Despite this, the BBC Women founder, who has attended numerous hearings and appeals and fought and won her own equal pay case, criticised the BBC’s decision to continue paying for employment consultants Croner to assist with the deluge of complaints made since it published its gender pay report in 2018. She said: “It is unforgivable that the BBC is spending licence fee money – which it doesn’t have enough of – on independent experts who have absolutely been given a job of finding against women.” Many women have been repeatedly told they do not have a case, only to get to a tribunal and be told they do. “All that money, all that time, all that obfuscation takes place to gaslight women and makes us think we don’t have a claim,” she said. The BBC should carry out an honest reappraisal of the pay process, she said: “I’m hoping the next director-general not only accepts that there are cultural issues that need addressing but will actually do something about it.” A BBC spokesperson said it was “committed to equality and equal pay”. The spokesperson added: “Where we’ve found equal pay cases in the past, we’ve put them right. However, for us, this case was never about one person, but the way different types of programmes across the media industry attract different levels of pay.” The broadcaster added that it was considering the judgment and would have to decide whether to appeal soon as appeals must be lodged within 42 days. Caroline Underhill of Thompsons


Solicitors, who represented Ahmed, as instructed by the NUJ, said the ruling was “a warning shot to the BBC that complacency around pay inequity is unacceptable, and will not go unchallenged. “The ball is now in the BBC’s court: they need to heed the lessons from this judgment and engage in meaningful negotiations with the NUJ to ensure genuine pay transparency, and pay equality, for all employees,” she said.


theJournalist | 07


JESS HURD


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24