BDA and BMA call for reform of pay review body

BDA and BMA call for reform of pay review body

The BDA and BMA have issued a joint call for fundamental reform of the Review Body (DDRB). They state that  the DDRB’s role to guarantee the independence of pay awards has been eroded over time, and the current process is no longer acceptable to their professions. GDPs in England still do not have clarity on whether the anticipated 2% uplift will be delivered from 1 October. 

In a joint statement both associations have set out key principles that need to underpin the reform process, and raised these issues directly to government in open letters to Health Secretary Matt Hancock MP.

The joint statement on reform of the DDRB

The DDRB was established following the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration in 1960. The Commission stated that such a body was necessary in order to give the medical and dental professions “some assurance that their standards of living will not be depressed by arbitrary Government action”, as well as achieving “the settlement of remuneration without public dispute”. The view expressed by the Royal Commission was that this “procedure will in fact, therefore, give the professions a valuable safeguard. Their remuneration will be determined, in practice, by a group of independent persons of standing and authority not committed to the Government’s point of view.”

Each year both the BDA and BMA provide evidence to the DDRB as part of the process for determining the annual pay uplift for dentists and doctors. However, the view of the BMA and BDA is that the DDRB process has been modified beyond recognition from its original purpose. This has been developing over a number of years, but is now clearly no longer acceptable to the medical and dental professions. The BMA and BDA believe it is now time for fundamental reform of the pay review process for doctors and dentists, on the basis of the following principles:

  1. Restitution of the DDRB’s independence and return to its original purpose.
  2. Revision of its terms of reference to narrow the DDRB’s focus purely on pay uplifts rather than making recommendations on wider contractual matters.
  3. Clear timetables for submission of evidence and publications of the report, and an undertaking that government(s) must not fetter the parameters of the DDRB’s recommendations.
  4. Re-establishment of the undertaking that government(s) will respect and implement the DDRB’s recommendations.
Anthony Kilcoyne
Last edited on 08.10.2018 19:05 by Anthony Kilcoyne
DDRB and other 'independent' bodies.
It is crucial that bodies such as the DDRB who are supposed to be independent, are actually seen to be so, both in terms of fairness and justice and the public interest overall.

If they are perceived to be just going through the motions of independence and not standing up to wrongs or dilution of pay, professionalism or other important safeguards for the public interest ultimately, then it is in effect a sham and a waste of time.

A reset is required and it may well be that the DDRB isn't the only 'body' that needs to be seen to be brave enough to speak independently too!

Yours observationally ,



You need to be logged in to leave comments.

Please do not re-register if you have forgotten your details,
follow the links above to recover your password &/or username.
If you cannot access your email account, please contact us.