Female BBC newsreaders say they are paid £36,000 a year less than their male counterparts as they sue Beeb after missing out on top roles and being taken off-air

A group of female BBC news presenters say they are paid £36,000 a year less than their male counterparts as they sue the broadcaster after missing out on top roles and being taken off-air, an employment tribunal has heard. 

The four women, aged 48 to 55, accuse the BBC of age and sex 'discrimination' over the way the broadcaster handled the recruitment process for new chief presenter roles.

Martine Croxall, 55, Karin Giannone, 50, Kasia Madera, 48, and Annita McVeigh, 55, are taking part in the bombshell case in London against the broadcaster.

The tribunal heard that the quartet believed they had not been paid equally compared with their male counterparts since February 2020 and there was a gap of about £36,000 a year in pensionable salary as of February 2023.

The BBC says the application process was 'rigorous and fair', the BBC News website reported. It also denies the four were paid less than an equivalent male colleague. 

A decision has yet to be made on whether the women can make a claim on equal pay. 

One of them said that the BBC 'grinds you down. It breaks you' when it comes to pay claims. The group are also making equal pay claims against the corporation.

Ms Croxall, appearing at the preliminary hearing, has worked at the BBC since October 1991 and revealed she was paid £139,000 and been through three pay disputes. 

The court heard how news presenter Matthew Amroliwala is being used in the case as the male 'comparator' in the equal pay claims. 

The chief presenter jobs were originally taken by two men, Mr Amroliwala and Christian Fraser, as well as three female news hosts Maryam Moshiri, Yalda Hakim and Lucy Hockings. 

It comes after the BBC merged its domestic and international news channels and ran a selection process for the top chief presenter roles on the service. 

In their witness statements, which appear to be similar, the women said: 'I am one of five female chief presenters with BBC News, aged 48 to 55, at the time of the detriments, who have suffered (direct/indirect) discrimination on the grounds of age and sex victimisation for union rep activities, victimisation for carrying out protected acts (bringing equal pay claims), harassment (violation of dignity, creation of a hostile, degrading, intimidating environment in the workplace, causing us to suffer ill-health and reputational damage).' 

Court documents, quoted by the BBC News website said: 'It is denied that [the BBC] has subjected [the presenters] to age or sex discrimination, harassment or victimisation, or has breached the sex equality clause.'

It is understood that they claimed management had already chosen who they wanted before people had even applied. 

But BBC bosses were said to have rejected the claims after an internal review took place.

Following new vacancies at the channel, Ms McVeigh is understood to have both taken chief presenter roles and recently appeared on air.

Like Ms Croxall, neither Ms Giannone nor Ms Madera have appeared on the news channel in over a year.

It is understood Ms Croxall, who has been at the BBC since 1991, has been discussing her future at the BBC with bosses.

In Ms Croxall's original claim form, from 2023, it is alleged that just ahead of the July 2022 announcement on the reorganisation of the news channels, the BBC's channels manager Jess Brammar 'privately assured' four other chief presenters – two men and two 'younger' women- that their jobs were 'safe'. 

In witness statements made available in the court, at London Central Employment Tribunal, the group raise serious concerns that the appointment to the roles was not conducted fairly.

In Ms Croxall's statement, which is similar to those of the three other women, she claimed the women had suffered 'discrimination on the grounds of age and sex'.

She claimed they had suffered 'harassment' with a 'hostile, degrading, intimidating environment in the workplace' which caused 'ill health' and 'reputational damage'.

Ms Croxall said: 'This was because of a sham recruitment exercise where our jobs were closed even though the redundancies were not genuine as the work still exists.'

She added: 'A whistleblower statement will show recruitment in Jan 2023 of BBC News Chief presenters was rigged. This led to the five of us losing our jobs and being kept off air for a year, when we challenged the process.'

Speaking at the hearing, Ms Croxall had claimed 'discrimination' was 'baked in' to the BBC's pay structures. She added that the BBC 'grinds you down and breaks you', adding 'that's why I'm here'.

The case is understood to have also originally included Geeta Guru-Murthy, but she has now appeared to have withdrawn from it.

It was claimed four of the women were demoted and three faced sizeable pay cuts. One was said to have had 'her pay cut for half of her job'.

Ms Croxall's statement claims: 'No men and no women younger than us suffered these detriments.'

She said that the five women, including Ms Murthy, had 'suffered the same or very similar detriments'.

In her witness statement Ms Croxall says reports from the corporation's own clinical psychologists show the 'negative physical and mental health impacts' of the treatment 'meted out to us'.

She also said that pay for its news channel chief presenters had 'again' become 'tainted by sex'.

It was even claimed that the BBC director-general Tim Davie had told one of the presenters, Ms Madera, in October 2022 that 'some people had been at the news channels for too long'.

She accepted a pay revision in July 2020, she said, after it had 'become apparent' the BBC had allowed pay for news channel chief presenters to 'again become tainted by sex'.

The BBC News presenters offered almost the same witness statements to the tribunal.

It comes after the women had taken part in the application process to be chief presenters on the relaunched news channel, which combined domestic and global services. But they claim the process was predetermined, claiming the corporation already knew who it wanted.

When they challenged the process, they claimed they lost jobs and were not on air for a year.

The women in their witness statements claimed there was a statement from a whistleblower that backed up their version of events.

In the hearing today the four BBC news presenters provided evidence to back their claims that they were not given equal pay. The evidence comes ahead of a full hearing that is set to follow.

In Ms Croxall's claim form from 2023, it is written: 'Just ahead of the announcement, Channels manager Jess Brammar privately assured four other chief presenters (two men and two younger women) their jobs were safe, but admitted she couldn't say much 'for legal reasons'.'

In the claim, it was added: 'We were set up to fail in the jobs process.'

The claim form said: 'We have been kept off air for months against our will.'

The document added: 'The stress of the bogus process, a year of uncertainty and publicity about our careers has caused us distress and is affecting our health.'

Ms Brammar's appointment in 2021 to the role of executive news editor at the BBC was controversial after she was accused of sharing 'biased' Left-wing views on social media.

The court heard how news presenter Matthew Amroliwala is being used in the case as the male 'comparator' in the equal pay claims.

The case comes after Mr Davie said he was looking to find a 'fair resolution' to the situation.

Meanwhile, the tribunal also risks reigniting the controversy over the Corporation's treatment of female employees.

Today's case has been billed as the most high-profile employment tribunal action since Samira Ahmed won her gender pay action against the BBC in 2020.

As well as Ms Ahmed's victory, former China editor Carrie Gracie won back pay and an apology from the BBC in 2018 over unequal salary levels.

It led to the formation of a group of female staff at the Corporation, called BBC Women, who took management to task over its record on fair treatment.

Ms Croxall's case, as listed by the employment tribunal, is also believed to include the claim that she suffered detriment from being a member of a trade union.

It has been suggested that the BBC has paid more than £1million in salaries, as well as so-called 'acting-up' pay and freelance cover costs, during the period spent off-air by the five women.

The BBC declined to comment.