Tag Archives: employment tribunal

A whistleblower consultant’s victory that exposes scandals at the Care Quality Commission and a hospital trust

Posted on by

Whistleblower Dr Shyam Kumar; Pic Credit: BBC

The victory by whistleblower Dr Shyam Kumar, an orthopaedic surgeon, against his unfair dismissal as an part time inspector for the Care Quality Commission is just the tip of an iceberg scandal at both the CQC and the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust.

His victory – I am glad to say reported by the BBC, the Guardian and the medical press- was only possible by his persistence in the face of obstruction by the body that is supposed to hold up standards of medical care to protect patients and the collusion of a trust to protect its own reputation.

He told the BBC: “”The whole energy of a few individuals in the CQC was spent on gunning me down, rather than focusing on improvement to patient safety and exerting the regulatory duties,”

“I was perceived as a troublemaker within the CQC, or as a thorn in their side. That’s what I believe. And they just ignored it. And finally, people got involved.” 

The ruling at Manchester Employment Tribunal by Employment judge Mark Butler said he had received detriment for speaking out and awarded him £23,000 for injury to this feelings. Dr Kumar had not sought any other compensation.

The judge said:” There is evidence throughout this case….that the decision to disengage the claimant in this case (and the placing him on hold) has had a serious impact on the claimant’s reputation causing him injury to feelings. There were suggestions of misconduct by the claimant … where no evidence of this existed, and vague assertions of a breach of undefined values of the respondent … used in an attempt to justify the decisions made in this case, after the event” Instead the judge described Mr Kumar as a man with an untarnished reputation and expertise.

Dr X left a hip replacement patient never able to use her limbs

The detail of the concerns Dr Kumar found are deeply disturbing for patients. One involved Dr X whose two hip replacements on an elderly lady which overlooked the dislocation of her pelvis and she had to come back to accident and emergency unable to walk and his colleagues thought she would never be able to use her limbs again. When he raised this with the CQC and said a back review of Dr X’s cases should take place he was told the trust did not want to do this for reputational reasons.

When the Royal College of Surgeons did their own review much later into Dr X they found 26 out of 46 operations were matters of concern.

The judgement said:

a. some surgeries undertaken by Dr X were not completed to an acceptable
standard
b. some of the surgery and quality of care provided by Dr X was unacceptable.
c. some clinical decision making to undertake surgery by Dr X was
inappropriate.
d. in some cases there was either no or a lack of evidence of a “Duty of
Candour”

Dr Kumar was thanked by the associate medical director of the trust , Mr Damian Riley in 2021 for his work.

But at the time of the CQC inspection Dr Kumar faced a barrage of criticism from CQC officials, was effectively suspended from his job, and subject to racist attacks including being accused of being ” a traitor to his community ” for raising issues about Dr X’s competence by another trust doctor, Dr Sinha.

At a CQC focus meeting Dr Kumar was even falsely accused of deliberately creating NHS waiting lists so people would have to go privately – making extra money for doctors.

The CQC’s response was to side more with the trust than the whistleblower. This led Dr Kumar to write to the Chief Inspector of Hospitals, Professor Sir Mike Richards. complaining that “patient safety is being
significantly compromised by the behaviour of some CQC staff.” He also complained he had been bullied and obstructed by CQC officials, his professional independence had been undermined and his whistleblowing concerns ignored.

The court upheld his protective disclosures. The judge also took a strong line in allowing the press access to all the documents in the case and also restricted an attempt by the CQC lawyers to restrict reporting of the Royal College of Surgeons report on the grounds that families had to be told first. The judge granted a very short restricted reporting period and was never challenged again.

The CQC in a statement said: “We accept the tribunal findings and have learnt from this case. We have already improved many of our processes and will continue to review these based on the findings to ensure we make any further necessary changes.”

Much wider issues than just this case

But there seems to me a much wider issue here about the behaviour of this particular trust and the role of regulation. This is not the first time this trust has been found wanting. There is the case of Peter Duffy, a consultant surgeon, working for the Morecambe Bay Foundation Trust. Faced with failures at the trust in the emergencies department he expressed concern for two patients who subsequently died from kidney sepsis.

One would have expected the Trust to have remedied the situation. Instead they turned on him rather than admit any failings. As he told Matthew Syed on Dispatches: ” I was on the receiving end of allegations of bullying, abuse and racism. And so what I hoped would be an attempt to raise standards became an investigation of myself”.

He was eventually proved right after an investigation disclosed multiple problems but not until after a five year toxic battle and now practices in the Isle of Man.

Inquiry chair Dr Bill Kirkup Pic credit: gov.uk

There is also the 2015 inquiry report by Dr Bill Kirkup into Furness Hospital, run by the trust over the deaths of babies and appalling maternity care.

As he says in his introduction: “The result was avoidable harm to mothers and babies, including tragic and unnecessary deaths. What followed was a pattern of failure to recognise the nature and severity of the problem, with, in some cases, denial that any problem existed, and a series of missed opportunities to intervene that involved almost every level of the NHS.”

There is a disturbing pattern that repeats itself. Whistleblowers, whether doctors or families, raise serious life and death issues, are ignored, denied justice, bullied and attacked, using the power of the state to buy expensive lawyers to try and crush them -only for them to be proved right in the end. With the Dr Chris Day case due to report this month following an extraordinary employment tribunal hearing where evidence was destroyed, it remains to see whether this pattern can start to be broken .

Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my forensic reporting.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Please donate to Westminster Confidential

£10.00

Chris Day whistleblowing tribunal: His wife says family faced £500,000 costs if judge took a dim view of him using covert audio

Posted on by
Dr Chris Day

Melissa Day , a registered nurse, gave evidence on behalf of her husband yesterday describing the dramatic moment when they were told by his lawyers that he could face £500,000 costs unless he settled the case with Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust and Health Education England in 2018.

” I understood if Chris were to lose the case, the respondents would as the conference note states claim for “the costs between now and the end of the hearing (£120,000 or more)” This was a significant amount of money which would have caused severe financial stress for our family.

She went on: “A further cost threat was linked to potential credibility findings relating to Chris’s use of covert audio. ln these circumstances, the potential total cost liability could be closer to £500,000 which was more than the value of our house and clearly would have put it at risk.

“At no point were any of the cost threats linked to the truthfulness of Chris’ evidence and I certainly had no concerns about this. I did have concerns about a potential reaction from the judge on the use of covert audio. This is despite what the audio showed about the way the patient safety issues were investigated and the validation it gave Chris’ claims that the Respondents’ made false accounts of his dialogue.”

“In the conference, when Mr Milsom [Chris Day’s lawyer at the time]was asked by Chris what the potential liability would be associated with the cost threats Mr Milsom listed wasted costs in relation to covert recordings with Chris’ potential cost threat liabilities as the conference note confirm”.

” At the time I did not properly understand how wasted costs differed from what I now know are ordinary costs. I had no previous experience of employment tribunals or the different types of cost threats. As they were listed together and reference was made to covert audio, I assumed that Chris would be liable for the costs Mr Milsom had listed.”

No choice but to settle

The couple went home and decided they had no choice but to settle the case even if Chris Day thought he had a chance of winning.

“Chris consulted me and wanted to discuss our options over dinner, I replied that there was no discussion to be had and I was not prepared to risk our family’s security. Chris decided very quickly in the conference that based on the costs threats and my opinion that he was not prepared to accept the risk to our family home and security that proceeding with the case would involve. Chris withdrew the case as a direct result of the costs threats.

“My stated reluctance for him to continue came also as a direct result of the cost threats. There was no doubt in my mind that proceeding with the case was not an option after hearing about the cost consequences despite the serious safety issues at the centre of the case, the unacceptable NHS response to them and the toll that getting this case heard had taken on Chris and our family over the preceding four years.”

She also described the day long negotiations that followed about an agreed statement to be made by the trust and Health Education England that was to follow settlement of the case.

Both HEE and the trust insisted that it had to say that they and their external investigators, Roddis Associates had acted in good faith – despite Roddis ignoring the two deaths at the Intensive Care Unit and that it was adequately staffed – contradicting Dr Day’s case. Both the trust and HEE diverted the issue on to the employment status of their advisers.

Trust insisted it must say it acted in good faith

She said: “Mr Milsom spent a large proportion of the morning walking up and down Croydon precinct outside Costa on the phone to counsel about the agreed statement. It is clear all these discussions about the agreed statement would not have happened without the cost threats as Chris would not have agreed to the wording that everyone acted in good faith or any similar wording.”

“This statement was particularly damaging to Chris because it gave the impression Chris’ protected disclosures were not about the intensive care unit, focusing only on one situation where there was a problem with medical ward cover on one night and claimed they had decided not to pursue Chris for costs.”

Melissa Day was cross-examined by Dan Tatton Brown, for the trust, over the statement and whether Dr Day’s real reason for settling was because he was going to lose. She completely denied this.

Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my reporting.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Please donate to Westminster Confidential

£10.00

Employment Tribunal open justice campaign : Sir Keith Lindblom’s office replies to lack of fairness and transparency in hearings

Posted on by
Sir Keith Lindblom, Senior President of Tribunals Pic credit : gov.uk

Last month over 320 people signed a letter to Sir Keith Lindblom, Senior President of Tribunals and the heads of the the employment tribunals in England, Wales and Scotland protesting that tribunals do not keep records or transcripts of their hearings.

The letter signed by senior NHS consultants, doctors, nurses, journalists, whistleblowers and wide range of members of the public sought reforms to the system because of the one sided nature of the hearings particularly in whistleblowing cases – where a litigant in person does not have the resources as a well funded employer.

Transcripts are not available unless the judge gives permission to the parties to take full notes and the only official document is the judge’s decision which can miss out facts given in the case.

Cases involve patient safety, bullying and discrimination

Many of the cases involve issues like hospital and patient safety, bullying, harassment, racial and sex discrimination where a claimant is sacked for suggesting anything has gone wrong rather than the issue being sorted.

Now the official reply from his office acknowledges a number of key facts that people have suspected but have not had confirmation.

First it admits no guidance exists on the use of transcripts and judges don’t have to use them. “There is no provision in the Rules or the Employment Tribunal Regulations that requires hearings to be recorded or transcripts to be produced.”

Second it admits that it is now possible to record hearings as many hearings are held on-line following both a courts modernisation programme and the Covid 19 pandemic.

Judge Barry Clarke, president of the employment tribunal service for England and Wales

And the most positive point in the reply suggests the most senior people are considering changes to the the system.

“The Presidents of the Employment Tribunals are giving consideration to recordings and transcripts in the context of video hearings, where there is a facility to make a recording and which are now used to a greater extent as a result of the HMCTS reform programme and the experience of the pandemic. This is in contrast to most in-person hearings. In most venues where Employment Tribunal hearings take place, recording equipment is not installed, and so no recording can be made. In a few locations in England and Wales, the Employment Tribunal is co-located with a court jurisdiction where such equipment is installed, and where that is so, its use is encouraged.”

The rest of the letter is unsurprisingly a defence of the present system.

“The overriding objective of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure is to deal with cases fairly and justly. That includes, so far as practicable: ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing; dealing with cases in ways which are proportionate to the complexity and importance of the issues; avoiding unnecessary formality and seeking flexibility in the proceedings; avoiding delay, so far as compatible with proper consideration of the issues; and saving expense. Most Employment Tribunal hearings are held in public. Any consideration of an order to prevent or restrict the public disclosure of any aspect of the proceedings must give full weight to the principle of open justice, and, like any judicial decision on a matter of case management, would be amenable to appeal.”

Litigant in person may bring a friend or relative to take notes

“It is also possible to take a note of the proceedings, and a litigant in person may bring a friend or relative with them to the, tribunal to act as a notetaker. Judges invariably allow this, and indeed encourage it.
Litigants in person are also regularly signposted to services such as Support Through Court which can assist with notetaking. “

It goes on: “”The Employment Tribunals provide detailed written reasons explaining the factual and
legal basis of their decisions. Any appeal is based on the judgment and supporting reasons, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal will not accept a transcript in place of written reasons. If at appeal the parties cannot agree what was said in evidence, the Employment Appeal Tribunal may ask the judge who heard the case to answer questions in writing about the evidence on a particular issue or issues. When that happens, both parties will be provided with the document the judge sends in response. In accordance with its Practice Direction, the Employment Appeal Tribunal may also, if it wishes, obtain the judge’s notes of evidence on any disputed matter, which will then feature in the appeal bundle.”

Whistleblowers are at a disadvantage

The problem with this defence is that it doesn’t seem to be reflected on the ground. Many whistleblowers say they feel at a disadvantage particularly if they wish to appeal a decision and they haven’t got a transcript to raise points that are not mentioned in the judgement. And most whistleblowing hearings are far from informal occasions – employers use forensic barristers whose questioning of whistleblowers would not be out of place at an Old Bailey trial.

It also raises some interesting questions. If recording facilities are available at on-line and hybrid hearings why are they not used? Or while obviously judges only use notes, do other court officials use them unofficially to check facts for judges? There has to be change in the employment tribunal system to bring it up to the 21st century and the HM Tribunal and Court Service need to explain how they intend to bring this about.

After publication of this blog a circuit judge publicly backed the recording of all hearings.

Kaly Kaul QC said: “As a Judge in a Crown Court where proceedings have been recorded ever since it replaced shorthand writers, it is unfortunate that every Court is not recorded. Teams and Cloud Video platform have recording facilities. In addition we have recording onto micro SD cards so that any material played in court is automatically recorded so that the Jury can retire with it. It is imperative that proceedings are recorded. It cannot be that difficult to put in place.”

Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my forensic investigations and campaigns for justice.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

please donate to westminster Confidential

£10.00

New campaign: Time to change a prejudicial and unfair employment tribunal system

Posted on by
Sir Keith Lindblom Senior President of the Tribunals Pic credit: gov.uk

This week sees the launch of a campaign by doctors, whistleblowers, journalists and members of the public to seek a big change in the way the employment tribunal system works.

It follows a series of judgements against whistleblowers – some have been carried on this blog- where the judgement itself ignores or twists facts and where the whistleblower – often but not always a litigant in person – has to defend himself or herself against big battalion lawyers brought in by employers.

Many of the cases involve issues like hospital and patient safety, bullying, harassment, racial and sex discrimination where a claimant is sacked for suggesting anything has gone wrong rather than the issue being sorted.

Worse some of most egregious offenders are in the public sector. They are the hospital and trust bosses, the management of Sellafield and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and Greater Manchester Police to name a few current examples. They spend millions of pounds on expensive barristers and solicitors fees all funded with your money – the taxpayer – rather than using your money to correct the problem.

They then go and try and bankrupt whistleblowers or drive them into abandoning their case by putting in six figure cost claims against them. Or use taxpayer’s money to give them six figure pay offs in return for a non disclosure agreement.

Judge Barry Clarke, President of the Employment Tribunals of England and Wales

All this is presided over by the judges who have a whip hand – they don’t record the proceedings or keep transcripts. They keep notes but they are for their private use and you cannot get them -even through a subject access request.

The only public record is their judgement – and if it misses out some of the evidence – there is no record that the evidence was ever given to the tribunal. And you cannot make a recording of the hearing – that is a criminal offence. Employers with more resources can employ their own note-takers – very useful if it goes to appeal and their lawyers won’t share their transcripts with the claimant.

The only safeguard is mainstream media which might report the hearing – though even then some employers try to get some of their evidence held in camera. But with the parlous state of the media , especially local media, journalists are rarely there.

Judge Shona Simon; President of the Scottish Employment Service

That is why the campaign has begun with a letter to the three top employment judges in the UK – Sir Keith Lindblom; Judge Barry Clarke and Judge Shona Simon, seeking a fundamental change to facilitate open justice- that transcripts of the proceedings of employment tribunals should be kept. The letter argues that the principle of a fair trial – enshrined by the European Court of Human Rights – cannot take place if only one side can afford to keep a record. It gives the employer a permanent advantage.

The decision to write the letter was taken at a meeting of Justice for Patients and Doctors – but supported by other whistleblowers who are not in the NHS.

With the help of my journalist colleague Philip Whiteley, Sellafield whistleblower Alison McDermott, cardiologist whistleblower Usha Prasad and junior doctor whistleblower Dr Chris Day,, the letter was circulated on social media.

Within just seven days we had backing from well over 300 people – from a former economic adviser to No Ten Downing Street, Sir Adam Ridley, 80 medical consultants, numerous GPs, nurses, teachers, to a former deputy groundsman at the Chelsea Pensioners hospital, a lorry driver, an actor, writer and a poet. This seems to suggest there is a wide ranging feeling that there is something wrong in the justice system.

This is the roll call of honour:

  1. Sir Adam Ridley former Downing Street adviser and economics adviser to Nigel Lawson and Sir Geoffrey Howe
  2. Jane Somerville, Emeritus Professor of Cardiology, Imperial College
  3. David E Ward, former cardiology consultant, St George’s Hospital, London
  4. Michael Byram Professor Emeritus University of Durham
  5. Dr Philip Howard MA G Dip Law LLM MA MD FRCP Consultant Physician and Gastroenterologist
  6. Prof Brendan T Barrett Dip Optom Bsc Psychol PhD MCOptom FAOI FHEA
  7. Gautam Appa Emeritus Professor of OR Dept of Management, LSE
  8. Dr Chris Day, Emergency Medicine Doctor A&E Agency
  9. Dr Usha Prasad MBChB FRCP FESC Former Consultant Cardiologist and Lead Clinician for Heart Failure Epsom & St Helier University Hospital; Currently Locum Consultant Cardiologist at Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust
  10. Dr Arun Baksi, Emeritus consultant physician
  11. Dr Michael Eden, consultant pathologist
  12. Susan Burell, consultant sonographer/ radiographer
  13. Dr Louella Vaughan, Consultant Physician in Acute Medicine
  14. Dr Kit Byatt, retired consultant geriatrician now working in human rights medicine
  15. Dr Ravi M Kare Consultant Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals
  16. Dr Paul Garrud Hon. Associate Professor, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham
  17. Dr Margaret Beedie Retired consultant psychiatrist
  18. Dr Susan Read MBE, FRCN. Retired Professor of Nursing Research at Sheffield University.
  19. Craig Jerwood MBBS, FRCA, FFICM Consultant in Intensive Care Medicine
  20. Dr Chantal Meystre MB ChB MA FRCP UKCP Palliative Medicine Consultant and Integrative Psychotherapist
  21. Thomas R. Lee, MB, BChir, FRCP, MRCPC retired Paediatrician
  22. Dr Jenefer Sargent Consultant Paediatrician
  23. Dr Catriona Connolly MBBS FRCA Consultant Anaesthetist
  24. Julia Bodle Consultant obstetrician
  25. Lesley Pavincich Consultant Psychotherapist
  26. Dr Rakesh Aga FRCP, Consultant Gastroenterologist, Nobles Hospital Isle of Man
  27. Shona M Hamilton Consultant Obstetrician (Retd) BSc, MB ChB, LLB, PGCert, MPhil FRCOG
  28. Dr Nancy Redfern Consultant Anaesthetist.
  29. Dr Katharine McDevitt, MBBS, MRCPCH, FRACP, Consultant Paediatrician Peterborough City Hospital
  30. John A Hamilton FRCS Edinburgh & Glasgow Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon (Retd.)
  31. Dr D S Wijayatilake Consultant Intensive Care Medicine Queens Hospital Romford
  32. Milap Rughani Consultant Plastic Surgeon
  33. Dr Hugo Farne Respiratory Consultant, Imperial College London
  34. Eleni Gounari Paediatric consultant
  35. Therese Walsh Anaesthesia Fellow
  36. Mr Ismail Hassan Consultant Obs. & Gynae Birmingham Women & Children Hospital
  37. Dr Sarwat Shah Locum Consultant Dermatologist
  38. Mark J Curtis MBBS FRCS (Ed) FRCS (Eng) MFSEM (UK), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
  39. Jacqueline Anne Henshall Head of Private Patients (recently retired) Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust
  40. Matthew Welberry Smith Consultant Renal Transplant Physician
  41. Dr M Senaratne Consultant Psychiatrist
  42. Nasser Kurdy Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
  43. Edwin Jesudason, Consultant in Rehabilitation Medicine Scotland
  44. Dr Arshad Siddique Consultant Psychiatrist
  45. Francis Sheehy Skeffington Retired Consultant Paediatrician
  46. Val Kyle, retired Consultant Rheumatologist
  47. Dr Neil Finer, Consultant Ophthalmologist
  48. Salam Alsam NHS Consultant
  49. Dr Kim E Isaacs FRACS Consultant Surgeon | Surgical Oncology General Surgery | St Vincent’s Hospital, Australia
  50. Mr John Davies Consultant surgeon Whipps Cross Hospital
  51. David Church, Locum GP, Wales, and currently also Consultant Support to North Wales Regional Hub of Test, Trace, Protect
  52. Keith Baxby Retired consultant surgeon. Dundee
  53. Dr Sean Whyte Consultant Psychiatrist & Deputy Medical Director
  54. Dr John Cøoper Consultant cardiologist
  55. Aprajit Bhalla Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
  56.  Dilshad Marikar Paediatric Consultant West Suffolk Hospital
  57. Dr Carolyn Ruth Broadbent, recently-retired Consultant Anaesthetist, Royal Derby Hospital
  58. Dr Philip Timms Consultant Psychiatrist, South London and Maudsley NHS Trust
  59. Dr Katherine Pendry Consultant Haematologist (retired)
  60. Dr Jenny Jenkins Retired Consultant Anaesthetist
  61. Mr Basavaraj Sreeshyla, consultant ENT surgeon
  62. Dr Jonathan Taylor, consultant in emergency medicine 
  63. Dr Subramanian Narayanan, consultant radiologist
  64. Dr Deb Lee, consultant paediatrician
  65. Dr Peter Sheppard.  Consultant radiologist
  66. Dr Sheena Pinion, former consultant obstetrician Kirkcaldy Scotland
  67.  Iain Muir Consultant Surgeon Dumfries & Galloway Royal Infirmary
  68. Dr John Baksi, consultant cardiologist
  69. Dr Bettina Harms, consultant paediatrician
  70. Professor Parag Singhal, consultant endocrinologist
  71.  Dr Christopher Moulton, Consultant in emergency medicine
  72. Dr Colin Hutchinson. Consultant Ophthalmologist
  73. Mr Amit Sinha, consultant Orthopaedic surgeon
  74. Dr Chriam George, consultant radiologist
  75. Dr Venugopal Poothirikovil, consultant paediatrician
  76. Miss Helen Fernandes, consultant neurosurgeon
  77. Mr Radhakrishna Shanbhag, Consultant in Trauma
  78. Dr Anil Jain, consultant radiologist
  79. Mr Omer Karim MB BS, MS, FRCSUrol, Locum Consultant Urological Surgeon, Royal Marsden and Charing Cross Hospitals
  80. Dr Azhar Ansari MBChB DM PhD FRCP
  81. Dr Tariq Choudhry.  Locum Consultant Psychiatrist Barnet Enfield and Haringey NHS Trust
  82. Dr Amit Mukherjee, Consultant Psychiatrist, London
  83. Roger Gartland actor
  84. Dr Ana Martinez Nahorro, Consultant cardiologist
  85. Kevin Donovan, secretary, Defend Our NHS
  86.  Brian Howard Thompson Retired BT Divisional Director
  87. Dr Malila Noone, Microbiologist
  88. DR Sunil Saxena, Anaesthetist
  89. Dr Naila Aslam, medical advisor.
  90. Dr Suma Basavaraj, general practitioner
  91. Dr Nishant Joshi, GP
  92. Mr Alexander Phillips, Research Director
  93. Dr David Mark Thornton, Senior partner, Richmond Medical Centre, Lincoln
  94. Dr James Wilson Haematology SpR
  95. Dr Katie Brooks, Principal Medical Writer
  96. Colin Padgett, Teacher, tutor and examiner
  97. Brian Morris Retired
  98. Dr Yasar Sabir Anatomy Fellow, University of Birmingham
  99. Ingrid Broad, Retired, previously MCSP, AACP
  100. Gordon Drummond Honorary Clinical Senior Lecturer Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh
  101. Dr Rebekah Cutler General Practitioner
  102. Jonathan Mackay MB ChB retired GP
  103. Keith Baker retired GP Trainer
  104. Moya Duffy retired GP
  105. Stephen Taylor IT Engineer retired
  106. Dr Heechan Kang Locum Senior Clinical Fellow/Specialist Registrar in Paediatric Cardiology
  107. John Bugler, retired
  108. Jan Marriott Registered General Nurse retired
  109. Judith Joy Member of the public
  110. Ian Talbot Process Operator
  111. Alan Ribot-Smith Retired Crypto Security Consultant
  112. Leonard Rouse, retired high school teacher
  113. Denise Cheetham  local authority employee
  114. David Mousley
  115. Dr C C Hulbert Retired
  116. Nigel Morris Civil Servant NI – Electricity Network Policy
  117. Rosalyn Anderson Retired senior pharmacist NHS
  118. Dr Michael Trowbridge GP
  119. Dr Fionnuala Kelly Orthopaedics Registrar Gold Coast University Hospital, Australia.
  120. Eamonn Rafferty
  121. Dr Cate Bulmer, GP trainee, NHS Education Scotland
  122. Patricia Lawlor, Lawyer and Vice-Chair of Whitestone Patient Participation Group
  123. Sinead Summers nurse at Shooting Star Children’s Hospices, Guildford
  124. Dr Ian Cocks GP retired
  125. David Buglass Translater
  126. Cllr Dr Hannah Charlotte Copley Clinical Research Training Fellow, University of Cambridge and Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge
  127. Charles Bockett-Pugh retired engineer
  128. Glanville Neale Retired
  129.  Tracy Nelms Registered General Nurse (Community/General Practice
  130.  Brian Smart, retired Chartered Surveyor
  131. Robert Knowles, Retired maintenance engineer
  132. Catherine Hills Retired
  133. Emma Tyson ST4 Anaesthetics St Georges Hospital
  134. Dr Ibironke Tayo ST4 O&G  RCOG EOE ePortfolio champion
  135. Denise Wentworth Retired Nurse Practitioner
  136. Brian Wedge Retired
  137. John Harwood Ex telecommunications fitter
  138. Gerard Murphy MB BCh FRCP(Edin) MRCGP MICGP DPD(UWCM),Retired General Practitioner, Lisburn, Co. Antrim.
  139. Dr Nigel Speight Paediatrician (and Guardian reader) DurhamNeil Purcell – Lighting Cameraman
  140. Ravinder Passi whistleblower
  141. Dr Nick Mann, GP in LondonDr Derek Jones Associate Senior Researcher Italian National Research Council (CNR)Bologna, Italy
  142. Dr John Calvert, retired NHS General Practitioner
  143. Dr Krishnaveni padala Gpst3
  144. Thomas Clother Lorry Driver
  145. Christine Joachim Retired Social Worker
  146. Una-Jane Winfield Researcher and campaigner
  147. Joanne Rossouw – Barclays Bank whistleblower
  148. Bob McClenning   Retired, Liberal Democrat activist
  149. Oliver Darlington retired lecturer in MIcrobial Genetics
  150. Dr Sara MacDermott, GP
  151.  Roger Bilham retired metallurgist
  152. Dr Mary O’Gorman
  153. Patricia Browne, Retired  Care Manager
  154. Dr Anya Gopfert Public Health Registrar
  155. Russell Dunkeld Retired Registered General Nurse
  156. Judith King Retired GP
  157. Naomi R. Bowen, Retired Parish Clerk.
  158. Roger Lallemant, retired construction worker
  159. Ms S Murgraff Member of the Public
  160. Dr Kerry Orchard Specialty Doctor in Palliative Care
  161. Patrick Kirkby Retired
  162. Ian Leonard Owner – Leonard Projects Consultancy (Telecommunications) 
  163. Penelope Burton Retired GP
  164. Sally Hart
  165. Jessica Harris GP Partner
  166. Marian Davies Retired civil servant
  167. Wendy Horler Retired NHS worker
  168. Jamal Siddiqi member of the public
  169. Dr Yok Fun Chang Retired GP
  170. Andrew Pearce Learning & Teaching Quality Manager
  171. Siobhan Coleman Retired.
  172. Revd Judith Palmer- GP before ordination
  173. Dr Jason Holdcroft-Long  Specialist registrar in old age psychiatry
  174. Abelardo Clariana-Piga -member of the public
  175. Michael Young – retired broadcast media journalist.
  176.  Alison McDermott, BSc Hons, FCIPD. HR Consultant
  177. Ashley Borkett IT Systems Engineer
  178. KJ Swainson Retired Registered Nurse
  179. Nina Basey-Fisher, Sales Consultant
  180.  Gillian Kirk member of the public
  181. Dr Nisha Bhudia  ST7 in anaesthesia.
  182. Dr Mary-Clare Parker, GP
  183. Dr Gurdave Gill General Practitioner
  184. Dr Charles McEvoy, GP partner, Ripon
  185. Dr Alison Barnes Locum GP St Richard’s Hospital Chichester
  186. Stuart Dixon Retired NHS worker Author of Toxic Lives
  187. Christine Aram Retired Midwife
  188. Mike Darbyshire Trustee of the Bowles Rocks Trust
  189. Chris Cowsley Retired Professional
  190. Sheila Hedges  Retired
  191. Irene Leonard
  192. Dr Winifred Stack 
  193. General Practitioner Newcastle upon Tyne.
  194. Michael J Tynen Retired College Lecturer
  195. Angus Bearn Company director
  196. Harry McAulay Retired Schoolmaster
  197. Dr Andrew Muirhead-Smith ST6 Intensive Care & Anaesthesia
  198. Shuna Watkinson Retired nurse
  199. Joanna Lane CEO of  the charity Christopher Lane Trust.
  200. Martin Heaps, Data Security Analyst.
  201. David Collett, retired
  202. Dr Alexander Stockdale NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer in Infectious Diseases University of Liverpool
  203. Rev Dr Judith Gretton-Dann Church of England priest
  204. Dr Tiago Ivo General Practitioner
  205. Derek Medhurst retired coach and assessor on organisations
  206. Harry Smart, writer and poet
  207. Maureen A Vilar retired teacher at Portsmouth City Council.
  208. Jackie Morgan retired union official
  209. Mary Lester RGN, BA(Hons) Specialist Community Nursing, wound care nurse
  210. Garry Dring – Registered Nurse Senior Clinical Advisor, North East Ambulance Service
  211. Julia Mountain Retired
  212. Sunil Kapur Teaching Assistant
  213. Carol Lindsay Smith. www.Patients4NHS.org.uk
  214. Ms Mary Morrison retired Uni SL in Language in Education
  215. Karen Clark mother to two hospital doctors
  216. Sandra Ash retired art tutor
  217. Justin Dennis Deputy grounds and gardens manager Royal Hospital Chelsea
  218. Carolyn Hupton retired
  219. Dr Peter Sinclair Whitehead GP Harrogate District Hospital Foundation Trust
  220. Margaret E. Johnson member of the public
  221. Dr Jennifer Adams Mb ChB MRCGP retired
  222. Philip Tucker Retired
  223. Jennifer Hall Health Visitor
  224. Mrs Sue Fuller retired social worker
  225. Dr Tom McNaughton, specialist registrar
  226. Dr Philip Delbridge Doctor (Middle Grade) – Emergency Medicine
  227. Nicholas Ellam  Project Manager (retired)
  228. Linda Walker NHS employee
  229. Janet Thompson Retired State Registered Nurse
  230. Ruth Barker Retired GP
  231. Rosemary Clarke Retired Solicitor
  232. Jo Reynolds Member of the public
  233. Dr Naomi Beer GP East London
  234. Graham Pearson – Engineer retired
  235. Carin Parker – Solicitor retired
  236. Mary-Louise Stewart Member of the Public
  237. Dr Ankush Dhariwal Doctor in Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
  238. Dr David Sillince Retired GP
  239. Marc Woodman Junior Doctor
  240. Dr Andrew McArdle MRCPCH MSc MA Clinical Research Training Fellow, Imperial College London
  241. Naomi Adelson, GP
  242. Saad Chowdhury  GP VTS Registrar (junior doctor)
  243. Dr David Miles GP with a Special Interest in Addictions SE & NE Recovery Hubs
  244. Saleha Jamali Member of the Public
  245. Rebecca Winsor D.O. Registered Osteopath
  246. Jonathan Gurr Retired General Practitioner
  247. Matt Sheehy GP Derby
  248. Tracy Mason Court reporter
  249. Nigel Midgley – Operations Manager
  250. Ilkay Cetin  Tranlator
  251. Hilary Beavan Company director
  252. Rachel Nicolle, FwSS, self-employed Shiatsu practitioner
  253. Jill Stevens Retired Journalist
  254. Dr Mark N. Upton GP Tutor, Hull York Medical School
  255. John Thain Ex-Nurse and Retired Nurse Lecturer
  256. Dr Venetia Fawcett Retired GP
  257. Ashley Borkett IT system engineer
  258. Robert Wyatt Retired head teacher
  259. Dr Peter Tyerman Board member Autism Plus
  260. Dr Cara Hughes BM MSc FRCA Anaesthetic Trainee ST6 West of Scotland Deanery
  261. Karl Connor Head of Communications and Community Engagement,
  262. Dr Manuela Perry Specialty doctor in Psychiatry
  263. Pamela Cross GP
  264. Dr Marion Judd PhD
  265. Rob Wheatley CTO – Watson Wheatley Financial System
  266. Clio Bellenis Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist
  267. Andrew Fitchett Locum GP
  268. Dr Lucy Dobson MRCOG Clinical Research Fellow in Gynaecological Oncology
  269. Julie O’Neil Libraries Services Manager
  270. John Graveling – Retired.
  271. Gillian Tennent Retired teacher
  272.  Susan Brown Retired Librarian
  273. Dr William Loveday ST5 Psychiatric Registrar
  274. Dr Jennifer Burgess (she/her) General Adult Psychiatry ST4 BA(Oxon), MBBS, MRCPsych
  275. Anthony Scratchley Counsellor
  276. Mark Pearse , retired farmer
  277. Dr Anna Passmore, locum GP Bedfordshire
  278. Rev Jeffrey I Smith Methodist Minister (retired)
  279. Jennifer McIntyre-McClure Retired Occupational Therapist
  280. Alexander McClure Retired nurse
  281. Dr Helen Parkinson GP
  282. Karen Blakey:  Researcher/Whistleblower in the Academic domain
  283. Kevin Ferguson IT Service Manager
  284. Hugh Wilkins Clinical Scientist
  285. Andrew Burd,
  286. MB ChB, FRCS(Ed), MD, PhD Director: Second Opinion (Medico/Legal) HK International Limited
  287. Janet Marks member of the Public
  288. Debby Monkhouse CBT Therapist
  289. Richard Slaughter   Retired Librarian
  290. Mrs. Carolyn Munro retired Medical Education Manager
  291.  Dr Peter Mercer PhD not medical doctor retired university lecturer
  292. David Squires, Definitive Map Review Officer, Nottinghamshire County Council
  293. Ms Shirley Murgraff member of the public
  294. Kathleen White, Retired Nurse
  295. Judith Lea Retired
  296. Julia Herod retired Social Worker
  297.  Philip Whiteley, freelance journalist
  298. David Hencke, freelance journalist
  299. Amrit Wilson, Writer and Journalist
  300. Dr Esha Sarkar Junior Doctor Whistleblower
  301.  Jenny Vaughan vice chair Doctors’ Association UK
  302. Neesha Hall member of the public
  303. Niccola Swan, retired Barclays regional director and former magistrate
  304. Dr Frances E Atkins MB ChB MRCGP
  305. Dr Ian McDermott MB ChB Leeds Community Health NHS Trust
  306. Staffordshire GP
  307. Terje Vangen Schea Fundraising Director
  308. Jill Church Managing Director Angels Healthcare Ltd
  309. Jill Hodsman, Children’s Nurse Specialist
  310. Sheena Reid – Talent Dynamics Ltd ICF Master Certified Coach
  311. Frank Reid FCA chartered accountant
  312. Name Denise Chisholm Paediatric Specialist Nurse
  313. Roger A Coleman, Radiological Safety Technician, Sellafield Ltd
  314. Oliver New Secretary, Ealing Trades Union Council
  315.  Sylvia Chandler (retired GP)
  316. Ann Barrett  MSc, MCOptom, DipGlauc, DipTP (IP)
  317. Andrew Burd, MB ChB, FRCS(Ed), MD, PhD Director: Second Opinion (Medico/Legal) HK International Limited

Please donate to Westminster Confidential to allow me to continue my campaigning and forensic reporting

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Please donate to Westminster Confidential

£10.00

Judge covers up “avoidable death” of heart patient and General Medical Council revalidation of Dr Usha Prasad to dismiss her whistleblowing case

Posted on by
Employment Judge Tony Hyams-Parish Pic credit: dmhstallard.com

Publication of avoidable death scandal at Epsom and St Helier University Health Trust leads to another relative coming forward and queries about a former senior staff member in Jersey

An employment judge has thrown out Dr Usha Prasad’s whistleblowing case and all her allegations of victimisation, sex harassment, and sex and race discrimination.

She is also facing a costs claim of an astounding £150,000 plus VAT via the law firm Capsticks from the Epsom and St Helier University Health Trust.

A letter from Capsticks says: ” The Respondent has incurred very substantial costs indeed in defending the unmeritorious proceedings, of in excess of £150,000 plus VAT. The costs incurred correlate to the Claimant’s unreasonable conduct and the unmeritorious nature of her complaints.”

Judge Tony Hyams-Parish’s judgement is long on the detail of all the various top management’s moves against Dr Prasad which led to an unprecedented 28 month suspension from clinical duties and remarkably short on any evidence given by her and her witnesses. He exonerates the actions of the senior management and ignores claims by any of her witnesses. And given he goes into such detail it is rather surprising he doesn’t mention that Daniel Elkeles, the former chief executive of the trust, offered to abandon the internal disciplinary proceedings against her if she dropped the tribunal case against the trust.

Indeed the most twisted part of his judgement is what he leaves out. Take the issue of the GMC revalidation of Dr Prasad. This is his purple passage:

“The Tribunal was invited to consider was the outcome of the claimant’s hearing before the GMC. The GMC began an investigation into the claimant which concluded in March 2021 with no further action to be taken. The claimant continued to state throughout this hearing that she had been exonerated by the GMC, suggesting that their conclusion must cast doubt on the actions and motivations of the respondent. However, the Tribunal found it difficult to draw any such conclusions from the GMC outcome. The Tribunal was not shown the content of the GMC referral or the case examiner’s report. Whilst the GMC and the respondent were looking at the same cases, their remits were likely to be quite different. In any event, the Tribunal was not shown sufficient evidence to decide either way.”

Really? The GMC judgement was entirely based on a list of 43 complaints submitted by the trust and obviously the trust expected it to be endorsed by the GMC. Instead it was sent to very experienced cardiologist in Middlesbrough who had worked at Papworth Hospital and he could not find anything wrong. And not only was this finding approved by the GMC, they revalidated her – taking away the power of the trust to do this. Given many doctors feel they are not well treated by the GMC, this was a remarkable outcome. The GMC was telling the trust to get stuffed.

Dr Usha Prasad with the former chief executive of the trust, Daniel Elkeles

The second area is the glossing over of the main whistleblowing claim. It centred around the avoidable death of a 76 year old man, Mr P, from heart failure, partly caused by negligence, muddle and poor communication at the trust. Dr Usha Prasad, who had no part in the care of the patient, was asked to review the case as an independent person. Evidence was given that an attempt was made to get Dr Prasad to rewrite her findings which included that the death should have been reported to the coroner and the Care Quality Commission. At the hearing Dr Richard Bogle, former head of the cardiology department, admitted that this should have been done – basically saying Usha Prasad’s judgement was right.

But this has been airbrushed from the judgement. If I hadn’t been there to report the case, no one would be the wiser that this happened.

Judge Tony Hyams-Parish disrespectful to dead man’s family

Not only to do I find this a gross omission but in my view the judge is being disrespectful to the man’s family by removing the details of the whistleblowing case. It is though he is thinking so what, a 76 year old dies, who cares?

But Judge Hyams-Parish knows he is on solid ground to ignore all this. He has already told Usha Prasad there is no recording or transcript of the proceedings, and his judges’ notes will never be released. So his judgement is the only record. And it is criminal offence if anyone has a recording.

Judgement a stain on British justice

My view is that this judgement is a stain on British justice which is supposed to be the epitome of ” fair play” and full transparency.

Instead it appears to me to more akin to Russian and Chinese justice .Here there is a semblance of justice but the result is a foregone conclusion. What appears in this case is the forces of the Establishment have been marshalled to intimidate and destroy an individual for the benefit of state power.

One good result of the publicity is that a relative of another person who died at St Helier hospital has come forward to me to investigate their case. And what happened at St Helier seems to have been picked up in Jersey, where this blog has a small circulation, and queries are being raised about a former senior manager at St Helier.

Please donate to my blog to continue my forensic investigations

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Please donate to Westminster Confidential

£10.00

A right wing aristocrat to fight ground breaking £180,000 tribunal ruling against him for “arrogant and misogynistic” treatment of two pregnant staff

Posted on by
Sir Benjamin Slade

The Court of Appeal is expected to hear an extraordinary case soon involving a wealthy aristocrat who says he is descended from Charles II and his treatment of two of his employees who were sacked from his upmarket wedding business at his stately homes after they became pregnant.

Since the case the wedding business has been closed down after Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service issued two prohibition notices on one of the venues, Maunsel House, because of “inadequate means of escape from first and second floors due to lack of escape signage, lack of emergency lighting and lack of fire separation.” He has been ordered to install fire escapes.

Surcharge of 25 per cent imposed on compensation package

Sir Benjamin Slade is now appealing a ruling from an Employment Appeal Tribunal which not only ordered him to pay compensation for unfair and constructive dismissal , injury to feelings of the two women and aggravated damages, but imposed a 25 per cent surcharge on the awards for breaching the employers’ code of practice by ACAS. The total compensation for both women came to just short of £180,000. The surcharge ruling is particularly significant as it lays down rules for similar surcharges in other cases.

Maunsel House Pic credit: BBC

The two women, Melissa Biggs and Roxanne Stewart worked on his wedding business where people could hire Maunsel House and Woodlands Castle near Bridgewater and Taunton in Somerset. Roxanne Stewart, was a deputy manager and Melissa Briggs, an admin assistant. Both became pregnant at about the same time.

What followed was that both of them found themselves dismissed without full statutory maternity and holiday pay and wages after first being transferred to a new company – without their knowledge- which only employed both of them and had no money to pay them. Their pregnancies were said to be ” highly inconvenient” for Sir Benjamin .

The tribunal used unusually strong language against Sir Benjamin including accusing him of refusing to hear Melissa Biggs grievances and subjecting Roxanne Stewart to a ” spurious and vindictive disciplinary process” on ” trumped up ” charges. Sir Benjamin was said to have made ” entirely fanciful” allegations against her. They were also critical of his agent, Andrew Hamilton.

” one of the most egregious acts of discrimination possible”- tribunal

The first employment tribunal hearing described the process involving Roxanne Stewart as “one of the most egregious acts of discrimination possible”. The timing of the suspension, in the advanced states of her pregnancy, was “designed… with her then vulnerability in mind, to have maximum effect on her” The suspension and dismissal were then pursued with the “motivation… of driving her out of employment”.

She gave birth prematurely and within the weeks following that birth ,her baby was in intensive care”.

When giving evidence to the ET, Sir Benjamin “made wide-ranging and lurid allegations about the claimants and their relatives, without any substantiation whatsoever, in respect of their character, financial position and other matters”. The ET found that these allegations were “entirely fanciful and prompted by a desire on his part… to ‘throw some dirt’ at the Claimants.

The appeal tribunal held in London and president over by a High court judge, Mr Justice Martin Griffiths, threw out a case from Sir Benjamin to say he should not pay the surcharge. He said he would appeal.

He told me: ” The sum I am being asked to pay is totally disproportionate given the staff were paid about £20,000 a year. I am not against people getting pregnant, indeed I have been helpful to other staff who became pregnant. I think the judge was left wing.”

The Sun ran a flattering article on him after he ” auditioned” for a ” breeder” to get him a son and heir

Sir Benjamin has a controversial back story. He is 75, a hereditary baronet, but has no heir. He recently advertised for a young wife as a” breeder” as he wanted two sons – an heir and spare – to succeed him.

He listed his requirements for the perfect ‘breeder’. She should be taller than 5ft 6in – ‘preferably 6ft 1ins or 6ft’ – aged between 30 and 40, and possess a gun licence. ‘Scorpios, drug users, lesbians, communists and Scots need not apply,’ he told the Daily Mail.

His quest for a wife led to a big sympathetic feature in The Sun by reporter Georgette Culley who ” auditioned” to be his wife and stayed overnight in Maunsel House. The feature is here.

He let out his other property Woodlands Castle only to find it then became the centre of a massive police investigation when a huge cannabis farm was found in the roof. Questioned by the police he denied any knowledge about it.

A Vietnamese man, Trung Nam Pham, 39, of no fixed address, was arrested after the drug bust. He appeared before Taunton Magistrates’ Court last June and was remanded in custody pending a crown court hearing.

Sir Benjamin with Daniel Hannan, then an MEP. at Woodlands Castle. From his old website

Sir Benjamin is on the right of the Conservative Party. During the Brexit campaign he hosted a lunch for Daniel Hannan, then a Tory MEP for 84 people in Woodlands Castle to promote Vote Leave.

Now he is waiting his appeal – has not paid the two women any of the compensation – though he says he has made up their wages and the statutory maternity pay. His wedding business – at £3000 a time -has collapsed – first hit by Covid 19 and then by the prohibition order from Devon and Somerset fire services.

Please donate to Westminster Confidential so I can continue my wide ranging reporting

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

£5.00
£10.00
£20.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00
£3.00
£9.00
£60.00

Or enter a custom amount

£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

please donate to Westminster Confidential

£10.00

Sellafield bullying cover up: Important three week whistleblowing tribunal case opens

Posted on by
Alison McDermott – whistleblower Pic credit: BBC News

A potentially ground breaking case bought by whistleblower Alison McDermott, a former consultant to the nuclear reprocessing plant at Sellafield, began a three week hearing at Leeds Employment Tribunal this week.

The case of McDermott versus Sellafield, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and former Sellafield HR director Heather Roberts has been brought under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 – also known as the Whistleblowers’ Act.

Alison McDermott, an HR professional and diversity specialist, claims that the sudden termination of her freelance contract in October 2018 by Sellafield was linked to her protected disclosures containing evidence of systemic bullying, and racist and sexist incidents at the Sellafield site in Cumbria. The original story was reported in Byline Times

Since the report came out the BBC did an investigation into what it called toxic bullying, homophobia, sexual harassment and racism at the nuclear plant.

At the beginning of hearing Employment judge Philip Lancaster told the tribunal: “This, of course, is not a public inquiry into an alleged toxic culture at Sellafield and it is certainly not a forum to investigate specific allegations of improper behaviour on behalf of named individuals.”

The case has been complicated by one of the organisations fighting her, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, changing its stance and is distancing itself from Sellafield. More will come out later in the case.

Ms McDermott faced aggressive cross questioning of her stance by Deshpal Panesar QC, representing Sellafield and Ms Heather Roberts, the plant’s former human resources director.

” I hope you’re not going to tell me we’re going to start letting women in burkas in here”- HR director

Ms McDermott was paid £1,500 a day – the same sum paid to previous consultants Capita -to monitor equality, diversity and inclusion at the nuclear fuel reprocessing and decommissioning site in September 2018.

Mr Panesar pointed out that she had taken no action when she first met Heather Roberts who is said to have told her “”I hope you’re not going to tell me we’re going to start letting women in burkas in here.” He said this was a reference by Ms Roberts because of security at the plant where people had to have photo passes. She said she was horrified by the reference but did not raise it with her because it was their first meeting.

Yet later after she had investigated other complaints she had pressed for a formal inquiry into a series of complaints and allegations about bullying, homophobia and sexual harassment. He accused her of ” weaponising” the issue at the plant.

Ms McDermott denied this,

She said Ms Roberts then asked her to take part in a covert investigation to “flush out” issues raised in the report, but she refused and advised her there needed to be a formal investigation.

Mr Panesar suggested she had agreed to take part in an undercover investigation, using focus groups to question staff.

The case continues next week.

A bizarre tribunal hearing on the treatment of Epsom’s health trust’s sole woman cardiologist

Posted on by
Dr Usha Prasad.

Dispute could last a decade

Last week by Zoom I attended a tribunal hearing – just one in a long running saga between the Epsom and St Helier University Trust and their former consultant, Dr Usha Prasad.

This dispute which is by no means over – she has already had one employment tribunal, one employment appeal tribunal, a reference back to the original employment tribunal – and has still to go to a General Medical Council hearing and an another tribunal over her unfair dismissal claim.

The hearing took I attended just one day but it felt to me that I had just stepped into an unreal world of interminable hospital politics. The issue goes back to 2012 and won’t be settled until 2022. And all this, by the way, is being funded by the taxpayer using NHS funds.

Dr Usha Prasad is a well qualified cardiologist who has been popular with patients but ran into difficulties with staff at the trust and complained she was subject to gender and racial discrimination, bullying and harassment. There are also whistleblower issues which are yet to come out at another hearing.

Three years ago she featured in the current trust’s chief executive’s report for receiving a Patient First Gold Badge award for giving ” a wonderful extra five years of life” to an 81 year old patient suffering heart disease. She is pictured here with chief executive Daniel Elkeles.

Dr Usha Prasad with the trust’s chief executive Daniel Elkeles at the award ceremony Pic credit: Epsom and St Helier University Trust

Behind these happy scenes however all was not well. Usha felt she was not being treated well by some of her fellow male colleagues and relations between her and her junior doctor Dr Aran Kumar Perikala were strained.

Anonymous letter sent to Jeremy Hunt

The centre of her complaint surrounded an anonymous letter which turned out to have been sent by him in 2015 to Daniel Elkeles, the chief executive, the Care Quality Commission, the General Medical Council, and to Jeremy Hunt, then health secretary and to one of her patients. It was signed as representing the entire cardiology team at St Helier Hospital and made very serious allegations that Dr Prasad was putting patient safely at risk.

Jeremy Hunt.

She saw this attack by a fellow Indian doctor as sex discrimination and also as racist. It went to an employment tribunal headed by employment judge Katherine Andrews (more about her later) and her complaint was rejected. She appealed to an Employment Appeal Tribunal who upheld three of the letters but said that sending an anonymous letter to a patient and to Jeremy Hunt was going too far. The EAT ordered it to be referred back to the employment tribunal which held a hearing last week.

The hearing was unbalanced from the start. The trust was represented both by a barrister and a solicitor at enormous public expense. She appeared as a litigant in person ( funding herself) but was helped by Philip Howard ,a part time consultant at St Helier, who acted as Mackenzie friend, a pro bono role.

The part time judge, Katherine Andrews -a solicitor – was appointed as an employment judge by Chris Grayling when he was Lord Chancellor in 2013. Coincidently Grayling is also the Tory MP for Epsom and Ewell and is familiar with the workings of his local health trust.

Judge rules clinical judgement is irrelevant

From the start the judge brusquely limited the hearing to the contents of the letter and nothing else. Two other consultants at St Helier, Dr Sola Odemuyiwa, and Dr Ranjit Shail, a consultant physician, who wished to testify about Dr Prasad’s abilities were ruled as ” irrelevant” by the judge as they had no detailed knowledge of the letter. She ruled as ” irrelevant” any discussion about the clinical judgement of Dr Prasad. An issue that her brother in law, Dr Anand Kamath, working as a NHS dentist had committed suicide after being bullied by a primary healthcare trust over a complaint about his record keeping ,when this started, was also deemed to be ” irrelevant ” by the judge.

This left Philip Howard a very limited role to help defend her. His description of the circumstances of Dr Perikala writing the letter were illuminating. He told the hearing that he wrote the letter while all the other consultants were on holiday, did not consult them about it and paid a ” rare” home visit to one of her patients without her knowledge. He was only unmasked when the chief executive thought the entire cardiology department were of that view and other consultants objected. He told the tribunal that the patient had received excellent treatment and had no objections.

You would have thought that he would be the key witness that should be cross examined about why he acted alone and what his motive was. But the hospital trust’s lawyers did not call him and the judge ruled that as it was his belief it didn’t matter whether he was right or wrong. In other words the man can say anything he liked to a lot of important people and as long as he believed it, it didn’t matter a jot.

Not a level playing field

The trust has taken the matter to the General Medical Council where his behaviour could be questioned and certainly the issue of clinical judgement will not be brushed aside there.

The judge ruled against her but she has asked for the whole matter to reconsidered because she has received new information. Some of the time was spent arguing that she had missed legal deadlines to present new information. Given one side is using full time professional lawyers – and she is having to bring a case while still working elsewhere for Mid Yorks Health Trust – on loan from Epsom and St Helier University Trust. – it is hardly a level legal playing field.

Since the first tribunal hearing in 2017 she has effectively been suspended by the trust on full pay and faced losing her job. There are still two hearings to go.

One has to ask why the Epsom and St Helier University Health Trust is spending so much time and taxpayers money on this protracted dispute rather than using the cash to treat patients. When I earlier raised this with the trust they said they didn’t discuss issues about individuals working for them. They have also refused to give me details of how much taxpayer’s money they are spending on disputes.

This story is not over and I shall return to it when there are more developments.