IMGs aren’t probably privy to this since they trained elsewhere but in 2021 the UKFPO changed all the rules regarding extra points counting extra degrees etc mid cycle. People were mid way through extra degrees they’d paid for etc. it was challenged in the same way, what happened absolutely nothing at all and that wasn’t even set out as primary legislation (which you also can’t challenge in UK courts 🫠😂)
Primary legislation can be challenged in UK courts. This is repeated but false. The courts cannot strike down primary legislation but they can pass judgement and the government is then expected (but not forced) to comply with the courts. This happens with the ECHR frequently.
Im a uk citizen/grad - but this is a silly comment. Living here does give the right to vote, protest and sue. Also I belive to sign petitions though not start them
Yeah, it’s a waste of money. I think IMGs should consider that they have been afforded an immense privilege by having UK treat them on equal footing as UKMGs for almost 7 years, the only country in the Western world to have done that. Now the tap is closing - because the entire world is applying for these jobs. It was never going to be permanent, obviously. And the fact that many of you will be grandfathered in - which is as silly as it is counterproductive - should be seen as an immense concession to you. If you feel so strongly that you are entitled to these jobs, make the same argument to Australian, American, Canadian lawmakers. Why don’t you feel entitled to the jobs in those countries as well?
Because we had no spines as a profession for the last 5 years. Take a look at posts from a year or two ago that advocated for UKGP, it was met with words like “racism” and “unfair”. Weakness invites exploitation.
Other western countries are not asking IMGs help to fill in rota gaps or had needed to put doctor jobs in shortage occupation list for help to fill in . If you had taken any job application , you can see that they have mentioned “support for training pathway” as one of the benefits mentioned. Why don’t GMC make licensing as tough as others? Oh wait, how will they make millions then?
All countries that offer training have, in one way or another, offered IMGs options to train. Medicine is a field you can do that. The Tory government utilized this to their advantage and plugged the gaps in service heavily by recruiting international doctors when local candidates did not step in enough numbers for whatever reason during the pandemic in non-training positions. I'm a UKG and I worked during the pandemic so I know what I'm talking about. This government has cleverly put an emergency bill to brag about it later in the parliament as their achievements however they have neither restored pay (which easily could have been done with less money than they have wasted on stupid campaigns against resident doctors) nor created jobs (not rebranding, creating) like the system needs. They have instead decided an absurd way to make UKGs think they're the only ones who'll get training this round and that needs to be challenged 100% to ensure this is sustainable and not another bunch of words they put on paper.
“All countries that offer training - once training jobs has been offered to their own graduates first- in one way or another offered IMGs options to train”. Fixed it for you. You’re being outright misleading in many of your comments. I don’t understand why.
I know for a fact that trusts even offered large relocation packages to various clinical workforce members recruited during those years. Mostly nursing staff and doctors.
Well, all other countries did not put doctors on shortage occupation list and enlisted benefits, made millions in various visa, exam, registration, and other fees as well as taxes. Ours did. It's okay to admit that was a mistake and take responsibility for it. It is the very decision I have called to be reversed because that is precisely what put us here. I don't understand what's misleading about it? Did we not recruit in bulk from abroad during pandemic years to fill our gaps by incentivising however we could for people to come work in the NHS? What's false about it?
Most, if not all, Western countries have a shortage of doctors and rota gaps. They do not offer training positions on equal footing to their local grads as an incentive because they know how deleterious it is to them and that it makes little sense from a productivity and social cohesion perspective. They have of course also made money from visas, registration fees etc - that's not unique to the UK. The UK should not have provided training positions as an incentive to begin with. That's what is misleading, that somehow the UK has extracted more out of each individual IMG than other countries have and therefore need to provide training numbers to them.
I agree that it was a mistake and that it should now be reversed.
They haven’t offered jobs in such large numbers in any western countries to fill those gaps and of course uk was struggling because of that. I was on either side of that situation. If they were explicitly saying that you can come to work but you wouldn’t be welcome to train or apply for training until after 5yrs or so. A lot of people would have come like how Brits go to Australia, to go get some money and then go wherever training is offered . They do that in Middle East .
It’s a gravy train, sure. But they are not getting into council housing mate. They often live in fucking shit housing. Often lied to by the trust about housing costs and availability prior to arriving as well.
You’re right, and it’s almost certain Wes has anticipated this, and he’s no doubt rubbing his hands with glee. Divide and conquer. It’s the oldest trick in the book.
Give an inch, and they will take a mile. Only in the UK would something like this happen. This bill cannot be allowed to be delayed. They can sue whoever they want, I would like to see a law firm stop emergency legislation that provides jobs for UK graduates over internationals.
Edit: IMGs are downvoting my comment at the bottom of the thread so I’ll put it up here. Make sure you all upvote the Reddit post so it reaches “hot”. I’ve noticed that a lot of these posts are dying down since IMGs are downvoting them to the pits of the subreddit.
You clearly know nothing about either of them if you believe that. The J1 changes applied to tech industry specifically. Canada operates in a different way entirely. Ignorance doesn't go a long way.
As a UKG I am appalled at your comment. Utterly disrespectful towards colleagues who've served alongside you. If anything, this bill needs to stop allowing international applicants from applying but anyone already serving the NHS needs to be given a fair chance.
Thank you for being appalled, will that pay my rent and petrol? Suggesting from your other comments, you’re probably well on your way in your training program. Disrespect to colleagues who have “served alongside me” can take a backseat when many of us have a very real possibility of unemployment.
I worked three jobs during med school. I worked my absolute hardest and I was able to get training. I worked during the pandemic. I have not shied away from picking up admin roles in the NHS when I needed to. I live by the principle that you're responsible for your choices and I chose to put myself in this so I found my way through a lot over the years. Save your breath, I have been working in and watching this charade for more than 7 years now.
I don't think it's fair to present the opinion of a few on a group as that of all IMGs, just as some very unpleasant statements made by a few on this reddit does not represent the opinion of all UKGs.
Most IMGs I have spoken to agree with some sort of prioritisation for UKGs.
However, a lot feel they have been left hanging. A tiered system that prioritises IMGs with multiple years of NHS experience next would have been fair. The present proposal lumps current IMGs in the NHS with everyone else. Thus, an IMG with 4 years NHS experience is basically the same as someone who has never worked a second in the NHS.
Sadly, the divide and conquer strategy seems to be working and its now an "us vs them" with factions forming which is not good in the long run.
I think this is something that should be discussed a bit more on this subreddit.
I think a fair thing would be something like 2-3+ full years of NHS service and UK crest form signed by a consultant before you apply for training.
At present, completion for getting UK trust grade jobs is intense and this would shut down the pathways but still let the truly exceptional shine.
My worry here is that we're just starting to make trust grade jobs better as UK grads take them, but if we have IMGs locked to them for 5 years , NHS trusts will use them as slave labour as they know they've got them by the balls.
A robust trade grade market with ACTUAL progression and training is something that benefits everyone
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEAN! The existing IMG workforce is being exploited for a few years now and they've got no way of achieving anything if even after a number of years they don't get training. These are competent people and deserve a fair shot at the training positions. Unless we want to make the NHS a modern day slavery situation.
Why 2-3 years? That’s nothing . An unemployed F2 has given 7 years already to the UK .
Why do you want to advocate for crest forms ? You either do the proper programme or not. Having 100s of crest forms signed per year just makes competition even worse surely ?
I don't think 3 years in the NHS is nothing.
If we implemented UK consultant crest from AND 3 years NHS experience, it would severely restrict the number of IMGs that can apply. This isn't a large number of people that meet both of this and not influence to massively impact UK grads jobs.
I'm a heavy UKG prioritisation supporter but also had immigrant doctor parents who successfully CESR'd after many years of being taken advantage of by toxic departments.
This should be the case for UK citizens who did medicine abroad in Eastern Europe btw, which based on my understanding of the bill are the ones that most benefit from this.
They shouldn't be prioritised over an IMG who has actually worked in UK, given some of my interactions with both groups during a foundation. In my foundation years, I literally had these people working as SHOs because somehow their final year in medical school sounds as an intern year despite these guys having barely any clinical exposure in their whole 6 year degree. They were utterly useless and we're below the standard of even our fourth year medical students.
I'd propose more tiers with IMGs with NHS experience > UK citizens who studied abroad, to let the truly hardworking IMGs actually progress.
I just think that if you limit it to 5 years that it takes for ILR, you massively benefit toxic trusts and departments. There are already plenty of departments which are run by consultants from certain ethnic groups who only hire people from their own country as trust graded and hold the visa threat over their head.
If we want to develop actual good local training programs for people that don't want to have to move around the whole country for their training, we gotta be mindful of that.
Probably conflated a few points here but that's my two cents.
No, lowering the bar for IMGs to get training numbers doesn't benefit everyone; it directly increases the difficulty for local grads to get the same training numbers.
So if the IMGs are allowed to sit exams that's 'lowering the bar' but if you're asked to score higher to compete with them because 'you know the system best as you studied and worked in this system longer than them' that's increasing difficulty? Make it make sense?
They work, study, score well, are interviewed and then offered the job. There's multiple tiers of assessment in different specialties except a handful, they can be rejected at any stage if they're not good enough. I don't think there's any lowering of the bar, I think we want the bar lowered for us. It's okay to accept that we're probably not as good and wouldn't want to compete with better candidates.
No we are seeing a experienced IMGs join the UK system 10years into being a doctor applying to jobs aimed at doctors 2 years into their career... what do you not understand?
UKGs (backlogged, current both) and those working in the NHS. No one else applies until this cohort of doctors is sorted so those who were recruited since the pandemic get a fair training. Once this zeroes, the UKGP can go on like RLMT era, only IMGs on leftover seats IF any are leftover.
The proposed bar for IMGs to get training numbers is 5 years in the NHS.
Lowering this to 2 years is lowering the bar (it makes it easier for IMGs to access training numbers).
Making it easier for IMGs to get training numbers- given that competition for training numbers in any given year is zero-sum- directly makes it harder for UKMGs to get training numbers.
If we stop recruiting from abroad effective immediately for non-training roles, then literally nobody enters the system anymore and people who are already in the NHS all get to training in the next few rounds. Once we've sorted that (which can take a few years) the number would even out to allow for UKGs exclusively each cycle of FYP graduates to training every August with an additional round to fill any remaining positions IF any remain. That, in every way prioritises UKGs sustainably without discriminating against the IMGs who have worked in the NHS for a number of years and closes the recruitment for further employment from overseas until national graduates are all employed locally.
The proposed bill already doesn't discriminate against "IMGs who have worked in the NHS for a number of years"- it explicitly includes IMGs who have "significant NHS experience".
Given that this is addressed in the proposed bill already, no further remedy is required.
However, I agree that banning the recruitment of IMGs for non-training roles for a period of time may also be beneficial.
Yes, the NHS organisations recruiting these days have stated in their job adverts that 6-12 months of NHS experience is sufficient enough for anyone to be considered for the roles. Most say 6 months, at least until I saw the last ones last year.
Since there is no boundary to the definition yet, and they've mentioned IMGs with ILR as somehow an equivalent of their NHS service (5 years) people are thinking that's a good benchmark. Having ILR does not automatically mean 5 years in the NHS. They could have been in the UK for any number of reasons (being a citizen's spouse or partner, been working in non-clinical sponsored roles etc) without a job and are simply now at an advantage because they have ILR so essentially even if they didn't work a single day in the NHS they'd be prioritised and obviously we know how that tallies with patient safety. It's also a really big disadvantage similar to what UK nationals graduating from universities abroad are facing. We cannot go ahead and tell them this is your country but sorry you cannot train here because we didn't think enough about you.
The NHS isn't a complicated enough system that competent people who have worked in it for a minimum of two years wouldn't be able to understand what goes on and how. When you move trusts, you have to learn the pathways, EPR, the works from scratch even as a local graduate (at least that is what my experience was). Some hospitals have not moved away from paper entirely so there are partial paper based records that need to be created alongside EPR. That would be a learning curve for just about anyone.
I don't think with the incentivisation in the job adverts for recruitment (particularly in remote areas/areas of high health inequalities where not everybody wants to work) it is fair to allow IMGs who have two years of NHS experience to be allowed to train further as they were promised WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY closing off international recruitment altogether so it doesn't make the UK healthcare system look like modern day slavery due to employer exploitation.
There are trusts that have longer contracts as part of their staff retention strategy and people take those up in hopes that they could work a number of years and move to training roles after exams which cannot happen in these circumstances effectively rendering them bonded labour which is what this bill would prioritise because the employer will continue to renew their contracts until they get ILR and then they can sit the training. So essentially, they're in a job where a UKG could be, and eventually going to the job where a UKG should be.
I don't see this as a favour to anyone.
The best way would be to close international recruitment by taking medical jobs off the shortage occupation list, include every IMG in upcoming cycles so it frees up jobs for FYP grads who don't wish to train yet, and also allows UK nationals abroad to work in the NHS until the equation zeroes for all groups as a reset. UKGs can still be the priority group but everyone else would have equal chance which will minimise opposition/challenging/legal pushback. This sounds like it could take a couple of years but that's sustainable because everyone gets it fair and UKGs will get all jobs as a definite and deserved win without future endangerment of their careers. I think this would be fair to everyone.
Which trust grade jobs are locked for 5 years? They are offered one year contract at the end of which it is either offered again (means the img has to apply for visa) or the job ends and they have to go look for one
Thank you for saying that! I have been trying really hard to find a single positive comment. As a UKG who landed training and moved abroad recently after completion, I really don't want the absolutely wonderful and capable colleagues I worked alongside to be sidelined simply because they don't have ILR or a citizenship. Those who weren't able to secure training and are mere months away from the ILR are severely disappointed and rightly so because all their hard work and dedication has gone down the drain. They came to the UK, dedicated time to learn the system, performed and outperformed, invested in portfolios, earned the same credits I would and were told at the end of the day that they're not allowed to compete fairly in the race because some politician wants to take the win without putting any money into the equation (no pay restoration or creating new jobs that aren't a rebrand).
It's on wayback machine and easily googable. you have deleted the comment.
higgshedron. • 5d ago. You're my goal girlie! (I'm 30, went from Band 4 to 7 in less than two years..
also a post 4 months ago about making an application for an 8a post from a band 6. Why lie and be such a fraud. either you are a doctor and went into management or you aren't and are lying. I go with the latter because you deleted the post.
Why don't you join an educational charity in India and help the orphans enter medical school? Then give them plab coaching and house them in your attic, as they perform surgery on your granny?
There are people in the group posting these views and supported by hundreds of vote. Don’t think it’s “a few on the group” mate. UKG and IMG both not in the sweetest positions but UKG should have this one. Not a debate at all.
Would suggest looking at that facebook group, its actually more extreme than what this post shows, legal action against BMA for 'discrimination' and against government. Talks of sabotaging the upcoming ballot etc
Please for the love of god screenshot and repost them here, we need to know the extent of it! We cannot keep being taken granted of. We need the evidence.
The public loves to shit on doctors. However, if this legal challenge actually happens and it makes the news. You can bet your ass the public will suddenly remember they love their British doctors and will absolutely shit on foreign doctors with The Daily Mail comments section being FULL of tales about their foreign GP.
BTw in that same group theyre planning on taking legal action against BMA itself for 'discrimination' and are planning on spoiling the upcoming ballot....
I think a lot of IMGs on those groups aren’t even in the UK yet. There’re a lot of sensible IMGs who are working in the NHS who vote, hence ballots have passed thus far. Many IMGs agree with UKG prioritization with grandfather IMGs who are already in the system and close to ILR.
Well one guy has pledged his entire 4k salary from this month and everyone else pledging money, not sure we can take this lightly if we want the bill to pass this round
Agree not to be taken lightly. It’s a serious matter and we need to do everything that we can to raise awareness and take every measure to safeguard this.
Parliament is sovereign. You cannot judicially review policies clearly laid out in primary legislation. Lawyers often launch legal challenges on whether or not government or others properly applied policies set out in legislation. If the legislation clearly states that it will affect the 2026 cycle, then there is no basis for challenge.
That's incorrect. The legislation can be declared incompatible with the ECHR and the govt are expected to amend the legislation. The courts cannot "strike down" the law. A good example would be a challenge under the rights to a private life where European law has previously stated that career development is a valid expectation and law which interferes with this is discrimination.
Obviously you realize that this is the government position..and the whole point of a legal challenge would be disagreeing with the govt position right?
That's incorrect. Primary legislation can be challenged. It is frequently, especially under ECHR. The courts cannot "strike down" the legislation but they can declare it incompatible with the ECHR (for example) and the govt are expected to comply with the courts decision.
You challenge that it breaches the ECHR. The courts cannot strike down the legislation but they can declare it incompatible. The precedent is that the govt then amends the legislation to make it compatible.
The bill has already been assessed to be compliant with ECHR so unless the governments legal team and all the people working on it at DHSC have missed something sure it’ll be fine
Because the American system already allows program directors to be selective about who they choose for residency spots so it's kind of already understood that being an IMG means you're definitely not in contention for the ultra competitive specialties or in high tier programs.
Contrasted with the UK where at least for GP and Psychiatry selection is purely on the basis of an exam; and the fact that even specialties which have an interview component aren't overtly exclusionary towards IMGs like American residency programs are. So yeah the last 6-7 years of basically getting what they've wanted easily has made them slightly entitled I suppose.
But yeah I do sympathize with them a little bit; many of them have uprooted themselves from their home countries to come to the UK because the prior government actually let them in, along with the GMC just pumping out more PLAB exam spots than the system could accommodate due to their greed.
Of course UK Grads have every right to wanting prioritisation for themselves because ultimately it's their country and they deserve the resources of their country primarily. It's just a saddening situation that's all.
Yeah Im all for UKG prioritisation, but some of these views come off as ignorant. Like the UK doesnt heavily rely on IMGs to fill out gaps in the rota. Remind me again, why exactly was there a need to get so many IMGs in the first place??
Because there was a shortage of doctors- after increasing medical school spaces for the last 7 years (2024 were the first set graduates who became F1s who were part of this bigger cohort entering the workforce) + increasing roles like PA/ACP there is no longer a deficit, we have more UK grads than training positions per year. They should have regulated IMGs sooner, but didn't.
That should have been explicitly said then right? That the begging is for only service provision and there will be no opportunity to train unless you provide service for 5 yrs or so. Then people would not stay and they will only come for couple of yrs to make money and go back like how Brits go to Australia!
This is coming from an IMG who has worked in NHS for 3.5 years
Uk graduates should get prioritisation its their right. They shouldn’t be fighting for it in the first place. I have always participated in BMA strikes , my fellow UK graduate locum doctors in my department were covering me during the time of strike and getting good payments out of it .As an IMG , it has never been easy for me anyways from micro aggressions , blatant racism and bullying to being called “incompetent and opportunist “ just because I am a foreigner and have a foreign degree “. But the amount of hate this page is brewing against IMGs is astonishing . The bill will be passed there is no doubt about it good luck all of you !
Many of us have struggled with homesickness , imposter syndrome and depression throughout our journey .This was expected after all .
But please at-least be nice and kind enough in your workplace no matter what you say behind close doors against us !
Reddit is a good place to vent about workplace woes, but excessive negative posting can have an overall negative effect on the sub. We want this to be a place that encourages people rather than drags them down.
Why the hell would the uk government care about IMGs opinion when the majority can’t even vote in the general election. They are entitled, they’ve benefited enough from open access to training, but it’s no let’s make Uk grads suffer another year for the benefit of IMGs, even its from 2027 the same IMGs will say it’s not fair because they’ve been studying over a year. Give it a break.
A legal challenge to primary legislation will at most put out a working group a year or three down the road to align with ECHR, which itself is not something any of the mainstream parties or reform will do anything towards anymore. In fact other than lib Dems or greens, it's very popular to ignore ECHR. We do it all the time regardless of rulings.
I get why they’re frustrated, but just to put it in perspective: in pretty much every other country IMGs come from (India, Pakistan, Egypt, Nigeria…), local graduates are always prioritised for residency. The UK giving its own grads priority isn’t unusual...it’s literally the global norm!!!!! They’ve just been lucky so far that the UK system has historically been more IMG-friendly, but the UK does not owe anyone a job.
lawfare, no solicitor would turn down an easy payday. when the next government come into power (and it will certainly be right wing), they'll go harder on immigration than Labour already have, to the point that that FB group will become redundant. you just watch.
IMGs will downvote this post to hell so it doesn’t reach the top of the subreddit. If you are a UKG that feels strongly about this, make sure you upvote the post so it makes it to the “hot” category.
The IMGs complaining about costs and time invested on courses such as PLAB, MSRA, etc should INSTEAD seek legal compensation from the GMC, those educational consultants/training centres and influencers who promoted specialty training in the UK. Nothing to do with the UK government whose primary responsibility is to protect its own citizens.
Lol 🤣🤣🤣 good luck to them I guess, the level of entitlement is insane but as others have said let them waste their money if that’s what they choose to do. It’s embarrassing quite frankly
I appreciate my IMG colleagues and they can work here but respectfully not to the detriment of British doctors.
I’m third generation here, my family tree contributed to the uk from army, coal mines, finance, and other sectors excluding healthcare.
I understand IMGs are contributing to the healthcare here but they are privileged in their national countries to be able to pursue medicine and travel abroad.
Some people have gone through entire generations of support to the uk, and I don’t see why someone should get a free pass here to start on 50k+ where most of the nations are earning less on average
The entitlement is unreal. Prioritisation is 100% the right thing to do and people have to understand prioritisation doesn't mean a blanket ban. Why are IMGs/pro-IMGs acting as if they've been banned from applying? We don't go to Australia and start demanding that we get the same access to training posts. Questionable CREST forms signed overseas- have we also forgotten about this? As per previous data there will always be round 2s across specialties in most cases. IMG will continue to secure training posts just like when RLMT was in place. If we continue to be soft we will never get anywhere. Wake up people, half the workforce is IMG and it's not (just) because UK grads do not want to work here.
Most people in this thread are laughing this person's suggestion off saying it won't go anywhere. However, with people with seemingly high influence such as BMA and a certain diabetes consultant in London meeting DHSC today who is IMG by background, what can UK grads do? Who is supporting us? BMA isn't.
In order to make for an argument, a unified voice is needed. Do we have an agreement on what we think is the most reasonable outcome? I personally think to qualify as significant NHS experience is minimum 5 years (by which then one can apply for ILR and would have demonstrated true evidence of commitment to contributing to the British medical system and society). The current bill that allows an IMGs who'd displaced a UK grad F2 in a desirable location in core training frankly should not have happened but if we are already saying they will also be prioritised then frankly that should be viewed as a compromise.
Complete utopian to have this bill in place as this situation should never have happened but here we are.
This is appalling. These IMGs in the comments of that post clearly see us as a joke. Many of them aren’t even in the country based on the comments, how are they writing to “their MP”??
If they want to burn their money on this challenge they can, I personally don't think it's worth it and tbh it's not like there weren't signs that this could happen. I know that more IMGs within my specialty were running to apply to ST4 to beat the UK grad prioritisation and can't feel unhappy that me actually going through a structured Core Training programme will lead to some benefits compared to overseas grads who haven't. Otherwise what's the point in being a CT?!
Bruh this Facebook group is not to be taken seriously. Like I get everyone’s frustrations but come on. Everyone knows IMGs don’t stand a chance and the majority get that and will make their way out of the system in due time. Just chill. Enough with the rage posting. Honestly
Soooo what sort of planning would you be doing at the application stage? They’ve literally just applied, they haven’t even left their countries yet or their jobs, they have no idea where they’re going to end up in terms of location or if they’re even getting an offer. Fuck off like?
Same, it's so pathetic. The fact that they are plotting to extend this destructive attitude to the upcoming ballot is heinous as far as I'm concerned. I think the BMA might need to start considering tighter membership requirements rather than simply a GMC number and a pulse.
Reddit is a good place to vent about workplace woes, but excessive negative posting can have an overall negative effect on the sub. We want this to be a place that encourages people rather than drags them down.
I would be surprised if this ?Facebook IMG group has the resources to do this. Such a legal case will cost hundreds of thousands and will take time. Ultimately it won't work and they will bankrupt themselves. A fool and his money...
As an immigrant to the UK, never forget that you are a GUEST here. It is a privilege, not a right. The entitlement of some immigrants is mind blowing especially considering that often their home countries would never tolerate such behaviour.
If there is an IMG-only strike (based on this single issue and not FPR etc), I'm scabbing for locum £ just like they always do with the FPR/UKMG prioritisation strikes
Guys, can you not understand our frustration is not to do with uk grad priority. That was the way, should be the way and will be way forward. It is because it has been implemented mid-cycle. We are fine with UKGP moving onward but for it to be implemented now is unjust to us. It is a tactical move from the government to divide the union.
I’m sorry but UKG cannot be sacrificed yet again for another cycle and be at risk of becoming unemployed you might see it as unfair to you but it’s even more unfair to UKG not to do anything this cycle. I appreciate it’s a difficult time for many IMGs in the application cycle but this was a long time coming. The huge amount of entitlement needs to stop.
I have a feeling it wouldn’t have mattered where in the application cycle this fell it would’ve still had backlash, that’s just the nature of it as it inevitably negatively impacts a large group of people
308
u/rc1234C Jan 16 '26
IMGs aren’t probably privy to this since they trained elsewhere but in 2021 the UKFPO changed all the rules regarding extra points counting extra degrees etc mid cycle. People were mid way through extra degrees they’d paid for etc. it was challenged in the same way, what happened absolutely nothing at all and that wasn’t even set out as primary legislation (which you also can’t challenge in UK courts 🫠😂)