`Absurd'... `Complete nonsense'...`a travesty'...were just some of the words used at an employment tribunal hearing yesterday, where a former manager of the threatened children's care home The Grange was claiming unfair dismissal from Salford City Council.
The manager at The Grange, who had a thirty year unblemished record while working with children, was sacked for `gross misconduct', with a number of alleged incidents at the centre of the Council's case against her.
The employment lawyer acting for her at the employment tribunal, Yunus Bakhsh, of Lifeline Law Advocacy Services, claimed that she didn't have a fair appeal hearing against the charges.
Bakhsh argued that a document inadvertently sent by the Council to her trade union, Salford City UNISON, appeared to show that the senior officer who dismissed her was also present at a strategy meeting where the incidents were discussed and it was decided that at least two were `substantiated' – months before her appeal was heard.
UNISON and the lawyer asked for the minutes of the meeting but the Council refused to disclose them. At the tribunal, Bakhsh argued that "the hearing officer should not be involved in the investigation...he had already made his mind up; she couldn't have had a fair hearing".
The lawyer told the Salford Star later that, while it was absolutely right for safeguarding issues to be addressed, because of what was possibly in the document sent to UNISON, "decisions are already being taken about what people are alleged to have done, which effectively means that when it comes to a disciplinary they're already guilty and that's a real concern
"It's possible that others members of staff have been sacked for alleged misconduct where the person overhearing the case has been party to decisions made before the hearing" he added "It has to be a fair process because in order to weed out the bad you end up sacking good people for bad reasons."
Meanwhile, the employment tribunal also brought out issues around staffing levels at The Grange. The manager was accused of zipping a vulnerable but challenging child into a tent structure and, in another incident, closing her into an outdoor safe space for a very short while to calm down. It emerged that only two members of staff were on duty on the day looking after five children.
To physically restrain the child would have taken the two members of staff, leaving other children without supervision. The lawyer argued that physical restraint should be used as a `last resort' and that the manager used her professional judgement to diffuse the situation and not to use physical restraint, which was backed up at the hearing by an expert witness.
He added that, in any case, no-one had brought up the tent incident until a year after it had happened... "It wasn't `gross misconduct'" he told the judge "She was doing what any manager would do."
Other Council claims were dismissed as `absurd' and `ludicrous'. It was suggested by the Council's senior officer that the manager might have been `grooming' children as she was buying them gifts – for Christmas.
After the hearing Bakhsh told the Star "I put it to the officer that `You are not seriously suggesting it was grooming?' and he said `No I'm not' – except that is not what he said in his report which alludes to favouritism and grooming. It is scandalous!
"An example would be that the Council has to look after children from refugee areas who have nothing, and in many cases staff bring in warm clothes" he explained "If we are reaching the point where members of staff can be sacked for bringing presents in of equal value, at Christmas time, for young people then we are living in cloud cuckoo land. Her manger said it was ok and that was confirmed by her deputy - and she gets sacked for it."
The Grange manager was also accused of breaching safe care policy with regards to locking a bathroom door when a young person was inside. But it was accepted by the senior officer at the Council that no such policy ever existed... "It's complete nonsense" the lawyer told the judge.
The Council then switched the allegation to one about privacy screens... "The allegations are so amorphous, they shift and change...flip positions and move the goalposts" said the lawyer in his summing up, and later added "The appeal still upheld the decision to sack her but for an entirely different reason, because of privacy care. But that wasn't the original allegation. So she was sacked for a policy that didn't exist and that decision is upheld but on a new allegation. It's absurd."
The barrister for Salford Council said that these incidents, plus another surrounding a mistake in the filling in of medical records, "clearly" amounted to "gross misconduct", that The Grange manager "admits the factual circumstances of events" and that all other factors raised were "irrelevant". She added that the dismissal procedure was "fair in entirety" and that the process was "detailed and reasonable".
Summing up the case for unfair dismissal, Bakhsh, argued that OFSTED reports for The Grange were all positive in the way that unit was run; that conclusions had already been reached before her appeal had been heard - and he suggested that people "within a major city council had pulled together to make sure these things don't come to light"...
He added that the investigation was "unreasonable" and a "sham"; a "complete nonsense and a travesty". That the manger had been treated "abysmally" and was "guilty before the process began"...
"What has come out are issues to do with supervision and staffing levels at that home which should raise concerns irrespective of this woman's case" he told the Salford Star "That is of great concern, particularly for people whose children are there and want to know that this place is safely staffed."
A decision on the claim for unfair dismissal is expected within 28 days
Salford Council is currently in the process of consulting on its proposal to shut The Grange as part of the cuts – for further details see previous Salford Star article – click here
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
(3).jpeg)
.png)
(1).JPG)
