It is a complicated issue and this article explains in some detail what the dispute is about and why doctors feel aggrieved. Personally I think the doctors have a case and I wish them well in their battle with the government.
I think this strikes at the heart of when is a contract of employment legally binding or when is it not. If contracts can be torn up or varied at the whim of an employer what is the point of them at all?
When an employer and an employee enter into a contract, commitments are made on both sides, if the employee is found in breach of their contract they can be dismissed. But it would seem that this doesn't apply the other way around, If an employer wants to vary or change a contract which they have entered into freely with the employee it would seem that they can do this arbitrarily or on a whim and the employee is expected to just role over and accept that this is the new reality!
How is this fair or legal?