Point 30

Back to the complaint that was withheld from me:
At Point 30 of Judge Parker's reasons, with reference to the 'number of complaints' he states : 'Whether the numbers of settings involved were greater or smaller, these persons and bodies were clients of the respondent.' and that these 'had a significant impact upon the respondent.'
No 'significant' or detrimental impact was ever specified. I was the only one who considered a detrimental impact and looked at this from the perspective of the manager of the setting. My protest was that the one complaint that was in writing had not been investigated and that there had been no attempt to resolve it. The complaint was not specific, so there was nothing to be addressed. The client (service user) claimed that she had had better advice from my colleagues. It is in writing that I was 'itching to know' what this advice was and the recommendation from the grievance was that this should be 'explored.' I think anyone would agree that that would be fair.
 I did not ever find out where I was deemed to be lacking because I was suspended shortly after being given this information. It is important to read this letter of complaint. It starts by saying that she had only written because she was assured that it would be used in a positive way to improve the service, and that it was not a formal complaint. It seems clear that someone was urging her to write a complaint. In addition she asked for confidentiality. I am the only one who has respected this and I have not named the person.
My perspective was not considered by my ex employers or by the tribunal. In my witness statement I have sympathised with the manager and acknowledged that this had left us both in a difficult situation. It was not a fair solution to dismiss me. I have made these points clear, and cited the evidence in points 39, 40 and 60 of my witness statement. This evidence has not been considered in the judgment. The only 'siginificant' detrimental impact was in leaving this unresolved.

It is perverse that Judge Parker has chosen to escalate this complaint to such a serious allegation by repeating the Respondent's unsubstantiated claims that 'settings were saying they had lost confidence' in me. This was the only one recorded. He states that 'these were having a detrimental impact on the respondent.' There is no evidence that any other settings made such complaints, and this one had not been investigated. How do we know that there was not a complete misunderstanding? - or that she did not like the colour of my hair?
Why wasn't the 100% positive feedback I had from training and conferences taken into account, the 99% + positive feedback from all of my other visits? The positive feedback that Mrs Barton recorded in her notes in the three months she was acting as my line manager? This is all in my witness statement and the evidence is in the bundle presented to the tribunal.
I do not believe that a reasonably minded observer would see this as a fair, balanced judgment.
I have now read that it is also a 'point of law' if evidence is disregarded, but the judge refusing my appeal has not responded to this. I have had another blank refusal - no reasons given. As my astonished observers have concluded 'because he can.' That is not giving the transparency that anyone is entitled to. If these are not 'points of law' or examples of a perverse decision we have a right to have this explained. Justice should not just be done, but must be seen to be done. If a judge is going to make these decisions he has an explanatory duty.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.
It seems that my main problem is that I keep forgetting that I am a pleb and should accept being downtrodden.