PROCEDURAL failures in former Le Rondin head Jane Stephens’ removal made it impossible for Education to defend her claim for unfair dismissal. Tribunal panel chairman Peter Woodward said the process in autumn 2005 and January 2006 had been flawed.
‘After the critical meeting between Mrs Stephens and ‘Education director’ Derek Neale in late September 2005 any possibility of following a fair process was seemingly very remote,’ he said.
‘And it became impossible due to the continuing failure of senior Education management and the Education board to adopt the rules of natural justice that are so evidently missing in this dismissal.’
The tribunal concluded that Education, given its size and the resources available to it, might consider it a natural and just process to provide for an appeal mechanism for any dismissal, regardless of the grounds.
‘The tribunal considers the position of the Education Department, in stating to Mrs Stephens that she had recourse to this tribunal for an appeal process, was disingenuous.’
Normally accepted convention was that an appeal, if successful, would return the individual to the situation they enjoyed prior to any proceedings, but the tribunal did not have the power to do that.
The tribunal said that as a major employer with ample recourse to professional and legal advice, Education would have known that that was the position.
When proposing that Mrs Stephens was sacked for ’some other substantial reason’ and not misconduct or capability issues, the department had sought to portray the staff requests made by her as unreasonable.
But in her testimony, human resources officer Jocelyn Dorey had used both the expressions ‘incredibly generous’ and ‘bare minimum’ in relation to the various staffing needs at Le Rondin.
She also spoke of ‘the moving of goalposts’ when it came to getting Treasury & Resources and human resource approvals which led to delays in advertising for posts and more reliance on supply staff to fill the gaps.
Despite further enquiries by the tribunal, that had left the question as to what weight it should give to Mrs Dorey’s testimony and that of other Education staff.
It also noted that two deputy head teachers, extra teaching assistants and two contract cleaners were still employed at Le Rondin.
‘If the need for these roles was so questionable and Mrs Stephens was so ﾓout of orderﾔ in requesting them, then how come they are still in post,’ said Mr Woodward.
From Mrs Stephens’ perspective, she might well have been justified in her concerns as to which of her staffing proposals would have the support of the project team, senior management, the Education board and the Treasury, said the tribunal.
Article posted on 18th April, 2007 - 12.00am
Loading ...
Most Commented: