Samira Ahmed hits out at BBC for being paid less than Jeremy Vine

‘I just ask why the BBC thinks I am worth only a sixth of the value of the work of a man for doing a very similar job,’ says presenter

Samira Ahmed has hit out at the BBC for paying Jeremy Vine substantially more than her despite the two presenters carrying out “very similar” work for the broadcaster.

Ms Ahmed, who presents Radio 4 arts programme Front Row and Newswatch on the BBC’s news channel, has taken the BBC to court over claims she was paid less than her male peers at the corporation for equivalent work.

The journalist asked why she was paid £465 per episode of Newswatch – an audience-led critique of coverage by BBC News – while Jeremy Vine, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said, was paid up to £3,000 for each episode of Points of View.

Ms Ahmed, who was cheered as she arrived at the Central London Employment Tribunal on Monday morning for the landmark case, argues the work is comparable.

But the BBC disputes this view and will argue Vine and Ahmed were carrying out different roles because the respective shows have differing audiences.

Both of the programmes are under 15 minutes in length and provide the general public with a chance to provide feedback on BBC coverage. Vine, a BBC Radio 2 and former Crimewatch presenter, left Points of View in July 2018.

Ms Ahmed accuses the publicly funded broadcaster of “failure to provide equal pay for equal value work”, according to court documents.

In a statement on Sunday evening, Ms Ahmed said: “I love my job on Newswatch despite it being difficult and challenging.

“On the back of my BBC ID card are written the BBC values which include ‘we respect each other and celebrate our diversity’ and ‘we take pride in delivering quality and value for money’.

“I just ask why the BBC thinks I am worth only a sixth of the value of the work of a man for doing a very similar job.”

Ms Ahmed has been backed by broadcaster Sandi Toksvig, lawyer Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, and ex-Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger.

Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ general secretary, said: “The scourge of unequal pay has no place in our public service broadcaster and that is why the NUJ is backing Samira’s case and many others.

“Unfortunately, despite Samira going through a lengthy and frustrating internal process in the hope that a sensible solution could be achieved, the BBC has not resolved this case and it will now be for the tribunal to determine whether this monumental pay gap is appropriate and defensible.

“Samira is to be congratulated for her persistence and determination to secure fair and equal treatment by her employer.”

She is a member of BBC Women, a group that consists of hundreds of journalists and producers who have been discussing concerns about unequal pay since 2017.

Ms Ahmed, who arrived at the tribunal alongside co-workers and supporters, previously said she felt “hugely bullied” over her employment status at the BBC.

In a statement, a BBC spokesperson said: “The BBC is committed to equal pay. Points of View is an entertainment programme with a long history and is a household name with the public.

“Newswatch – while an important programme – isn’t. Samira was paid the same as her male predecessor when she began presenting Newswatch.

“Gender has not been a factor in levels of pay for Points of View. News and entertainment are very different markets and pay across the media industry reflects this.”

The NUJ said the presenter has managed to obtain an agreement from the BBC for full backdated pay comparable with her male colleagues for working on Radio 4’s Front Row and Radio 3’s Night Waves/Free Thinking.

Her male colleague was earning 50 per cent more than her on Front Row, while another male colleague was earning 33 per cent more on Night Waves.

Gemma Rosenblatt, of women’s rights charity Fawcett Society, said: “Women at the BBC are having to fight for equal pay as if it is nice to have rather than a legal right.

“We learnt today that Samira Ahmed has been paid a fraction of the amount of her male colleague. Fifty years on from the Equal Pay Act, much more needs to be done to make equal pay a reality. Fawcett is calling for urgent action by the BBC and other employers to ensure women are being paid fairly.”

Last year, the BBC apologised to Carrie Gracie, its former China editor, and agreed a financial settlement with her after acknowledging she had been underpaid for years by comparison with male colleagues.

Ms Gracie resigned from her position last year, and accused the publicly funded broadcaster of discrimination and breach of equality law. She had been offered the job as China editor on the basis she would receive the same pay as her fellow international editors, but later discovered men working in the role received at least 50 per cent more.

Helen Beech, a lawyer who specialises in employment, said: “Equal pay claims can take many years to challenge through the courts, but we are seeing a greater willingness of individuals to take on employers to explain their pay decisions, where years of ingrained bias or a lack of transparency in the pay processes has led to huge differences in pay between the sexes.

“Samira Ahmed’s case will challenge the BBC to explain why Jeremy Vine’s skills and expertise and the programme he presented was not of practical importance in relation to the terms of their work. In the event that she wins her case, the BBC could be faced with a significant number of claims from women who have been underpaid, if the BBC has underplayed their worth by creating artificial distinctions between for example ‘news’ and ‘entertainment’ roles when in fact the skills and demands of the jobs are much the same.”

Ms Beech argued “transparency and benchmarking in pay setting” is imperative in all organisations.

The hearing will be heard over the next seven days.

Additional reporting by Press Association