u/Omar_Elsobky

The Resident Doctors Conference (RDC) is the annual policy-making conference for resident doctors who are members of the BMA.

Today saw a number of significant developments.

The current Resident Doctors Committee leadership, led by Jack Fletcher, had a vote of censure passed against it. A vote of censure is a formal expression of dissatisfaction by conference delegates.

Support for the censure came from different parts of the profession for different reasons. Many UK graduate delegates cited concerns regarding the handling of industrial action and progress on pay restoration. Many IMG delegates supported the motion because they felt that the current RDC has not adequately represented IMG interests.

Several workforce motions also passed conference and will now proceed for further consideration at the BMA’s Annual Representative Meeting (ARM), including:

• A proposal for a minimum of 2 years’ NHS experience for doctors who entered the NHS before 5 March 2025.
• A proposal for 5 years’ NHS experience before eligibility for specialty training.
• A proposal for guaranteed employment opportunities for UK graduates who do not secure training posts.

The simultaneous passage of both the 2-year and 5-year experience motions has raised questions about implementation. The BMA’s legal advisers are currently examining how these policies could coexist. One possible interpretation discussed by delegates is that transitional arrangements may apply to doctors who entered the NHS before 5 March 2025, while different requirements may apply to those arriving afterwards. However, no final position has yet been confirmed.

The debate throughout the day was highly emotional, and IMG participation was both visible and influential.

Following conference, the planned industrial action was called off.

Further details will emerge as conference outcomes are reviewed and ARM debates these issues in greater detail.

That is a reasonable offer, provided the proposed 4,500 specialty training posts are genuinely additional training posts and not simply existing LED or non-training posts being converted, either partially or in full.

If these 4,500 posts are entirely new, I see little reason to oppose the proposal.

However, if a significant proportion of them are created by converting existing LED posts, this could have serious workforce implications, potentially reducing employment opportunities for many doctors, particularly IMGs who disproportionately rely on non-training roles while pursuing training pathways. Any expansion of training numbers should increase opportunities overall rather than merely redistribute existing posts.

I would advise colleagues to read the offer carefully, consider the details and implications, and vote accordingly. The key question is not simply the headline number of training posts, but whether the proposal genuinely expands opportunities across the workforce.

I will do my best to ensure that IMG voices are heard, while also representing UK graduates in a way that is fair, constructive, and does not exclude IMGs.

I believe that doctors are strongest when we work together rather than against one another.

I am always just a click away, and I welcome your thoughts, concerns, suggestions, and feedback at Oelsobky@bma.org.uk.

I look forward to listening, learning, and representing you to the best of my ability.