Samira Ahmed and the BBC have reached a financial settlement after she won her landmark sex discrimination case against them.
Ms Ahmed, 51, was paid £465 to present episodes of Newswatch, while her male colleague Jeremy Vine, 54, pocketed £3,000 a go for Points of View.
Last month at her employment tribunal in east London a judge ruled in her favour.
The tribunal agreed that the work carried out by both Ms Ahmed and Mr Vine were largely similar, with both programmes lasting for 15 minutes and offering viewers the chance to air their opinions.
The BBC argued they were ‘not doing similar work’, but the corporation has today agreed on a settlement in the case.
It is not clear how much Ms Ahmed will be compensated, but she previously claimed she had been underpaid by £700,000. The BBC refused to comment.
Samira Ahmed (pictured in November last year) and the BBC have reached a financial settlement after she won her landmark sex discrimination case against them
Ms Ahmed, 51, was paid £465 to present episodes of Newswatch, while her male colleague Jeremy Vine, 54, (pictured) pocketed £3,000 for Points of View
A BBC spokesman said in a statement: ‘Samira Ahmed and the BBC are pleased to have reached a settlement following the recent tribunal.
‘Samira is a highly valued BBC presenter and now these matters have been concluded we all want to focus on the future.
‘We look forward to continuing to work together to make great programmes for audiences. Neither the BBC, Samira or the NUJ will be commenting further on this case.’
The corporation had argued that Newswatch was a ‘relatively niche’ programme which aired on the BBC News channel, while describing Points Of View as ‘extremely well-known’.
Ms Ahmed said in a statement after winning her claim that ‘no woman wants to have to take action against their own employer.
She added: ‘I love working for the BBC. I’m glad it’s been resolved. I’m now looking forward to continuing to do my job, to report on stories and not being one.’
Ms Ahmed is pictured arm in arm with family, friends and supporters ahead of her tribunal in November last year
The 51-year-old tweeted after the ruling on January 11: ‘Bit overwhelmed. Thank you for all the kind words.
‘Could not have brought this case without support of my union @NUJofficial my brilliant lawyers @claire_darwin and Caroline Underhill and all those who showed they understand equal pay is about fairness and men and women as allies.’
She has been among several female talents at the BBC to voice their concerns over pay equality following an outcry over former China editor Carrie Gracie’s salary compared to male colleagues in similar roles.
Ms Gracie became a figurehead for other women at the BBC when she resigned from her position in January 2018 in protest at pay inequalities at the broadcaster.
Her move came after the BBC published the salaries of its highest earners in July 2017 under the terms of its new royal charter, which revealed that only one third of the list of talent earning more than £150,000 were women, with all the top names being men.
Ms Gracie also praised the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and ‘the great legal team who helped SamiraAhmedUK to victory’ in the landmark case.
The BBC (Broadcasting House in London pictured) argued they were ‘not doing similar work’, but the corporation has today agreed on a settlement in the case
Jane Garvey, who has openly supported Ms Ahmed throughout proceedings, tweeted: ‘Just brilliant @SamiraAhmedUK – it took real courage and she has it. #equalpay.’
Labour MP David Lammy tweeted at the time: ‘Congrats @SamiraAhmedUK. Equal work deserves equal pay.’
NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet said the BBC was currently looking at roughly 20 other cases like Ms Ahmed’s but ‘there are many more that remain unresolved, possibly as many as 70 at the time of the hearing’.
A statement from the BBC said: ‘Samira Ahmed is an excellent journalist and presenter and we regret that this case ever had to go to tribunal.
‘We’re committed to equality and equal pay. 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.
‘We have always believed that the pay of Samira and Jeremy Vine was not determined by their gender. Presenters – female as well as male – had always been paid more on Points Of View than Newswatch.
‘We’re sorry the tribunal didn’t think the BBC provided enough evidence about specific decisions – we weren’t able to call people who made decisions as far back as 2008 and have long since left the BBC.
‘In the past our pay framework was not transparent and fair enough, and we have made significant changes to address that. We’re glad this satisfied the tribunal that there was sufficient evidence to explain her pay now.
‘We’ll need to consider this judgment carefully. We know tribunals are never a pleasant experience for anyone involved. We want to work together with Samira to move on in a positive way.’
Ms Ahmed (left) has been among several female talents at the BBC to voice their concerns over pay equality following an outcry over former China editor Carrie Gracie’s (right) salary compared to male colleagues in similar roles