Calis Beach and Fethiye Turkey Discussion Forum
General Topics => The Debating Chamber => Topic started by: Highlander on May 27, 2011, 13:01:31 PM
-
Is how her lawyers described Sharon Shoesmith's dismissal from Haringey Council[:(!][:(!][:(!]
What about Peter Connelly's natural justice:(
-
I agree H but the people or person who sacked her should have done it correctly and none of this would have come back uo bite them on the bum!
-
quote:
Originally posted by stoop
I agree H but the people or person who sacked her should have done it correctly and none of this would have come back uo bite them on the bum!
Your not wrong Stoop, another example unfortunately of the poor quality of management operating in local government.
-
Actually it was a Government Minister, Ed Balls-up, announcing publicly that she'd been sacked that gave her good grounds for the appeal.
"The court was severely critical of Balls's handling of the case, and sent out a clear message that politicians could not ignore "elementary fairness" when dealing with public servants at the centre of controversy"........
-
And now, She could be entitled to a 1 million pound payout.
http://news.aol.co.uk/main-news/story/shoesmith-wins-baby-p-sacking-case/1825458/
Where is the justice?.....BL**DY MADNESS!!
-
Why should she get 1 million pounds ???
Ron
-
Although I did not like the ruling I think it is right. It is not acceptable that due process is put aside and that ministers can tell a person that you are sacked by TV. The employee is entitled to have the right to state their case. If Ed Balls up had just waited a week and let the process take its course then we would not be in this position. Natural justice is irrelevant as it is the law of the land that prevails.
The thing that annoys me most about this woman is that she has never shown any remorse and she has never apologized for the death of an innocent baby.
-
Spot on Gerry.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Ovacikpeedoff
The thing that annoys me most about this woman is that she has never shown any remorse and she has never apologized for the death of an innocent baby.
Me too - her latest utterance is that she is not to blame, but accepts reaponsibility. That's taking the liquid as far as I'm concerned.
And I'm sick to the back teeth with people in such cases coming out andsaying that questions will be learned.
-
Lessons might also be learnt. ;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by KKOB
Lessons might also be learnt. ;)
:D:D:DBet you enjoyed that my learned friend (I would have :))
-
quote:
Originally posted by KKOB
Actually it was a Government Minister, Ed Balls-up, announcing publicly that she'd been sacked that gave her good grounds for the appeal.
"The court was severely critical of Balls's handling of the case, and sent out a clear message that politicians could not ignore "elementary fairness" when dealing with public servants at the centre of controversy"........
Yes but it was the local council, as her employer, who sacked her. They did not have to take any notice of a statement from Balls. They had every chance of following their own own employment policies, but they did not do so and so all the problems we now have fall at the feet of the local council. This sacking is just another example of their own managerial weaknesses that have been self-evident right throughout this sad case.
What I would say is that I do not support ministers interferring in day to day 'operational' matters. It is not suppossed to happen, and generally when it does - particularly in police and military matters - it usually ends up a mess.