It was expressed to me yesterday that as JM wasn’t fully exonerated then WCHP could not be held to account.
(if you’ve not read the previous posts, JM was the former Housing Manager at WCHP who was dismissed for gross misconduct. At tribunal it was decided that the dismissal was unfair).
JM’s award was reduced due to the fact that she admitted to having used foul language in the workplace (something I’m sure no one reading this has ever done). Sally Roff, representing WCHP at the tribunal stated that she read all the statements, and could see no evidence that swearing was widespread with in the organisation, and “the norm”.
The judge also concluded that WCHP could have come to the conclusion that JM could have made derogatory comments about clients.
The below are extracts from statements that specifically look at the issue of the use of “foul” language and derogatory remarks by JM. These are one extract per statement, so represent views expressed in 23 separate statements. (These are some of the same statements ignored by WCHP as merely character references and therefor not relevant to the investigation)
I’ll let you decide whether “foul” language is a culture, and whether JM could have made derogatory remarks, and whether she should have been punished for this while no other action has been taken regarding any other member of staff.