Latest news with #employmentTribunal
BBC News
09-07-2025
- Health
- BBC News
Sacked Bath hospital surgeon loses unfair dismissal claim
A surgeon from Bath has lost an employment tribunal after claiming he was unfairly dismissed for whistleblowing about patient safety concerns. The tribunal panel found Seryth Colbert, a consultant in oral and maxillofacial surgery, was sacked from the Royal United Hospital in Bath due to his behaviour, not the content of his surgeon argued he had been subjected to detriment for exercising his rights under the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA).The Bristol Employment Tribunal panel dismissed his claim and concluded his behaviour with some colleagues was unacceptable, with judgement issued on 30 May. Mr Colbert is planning to appeal against the decision. The surgeon claimed his dismissal in October 2023 was due to retaliatory victimisation, leading to the tribunal. This came after he raised concerns, which included allegations that cancer patients were not being treated and that a patient had been blinded during surgery. In October 2023, a disciplinary panel upheld 11 out of 14 allegations against Mr Colbert, leading to his included: bullying and aggressive behaviour, unwanted physical contact, undermining management, inappropriate use of trust processes and rude and dismissive employment tribunal panel found: "Some of this conduct is more serious than others. An isolated rude email is clearly insufficient to warrant summary dismissal. "Low level unwanted physical contact might also be regarded as somewhat innocuous." Plans for appeal The panel added: "Similarly, the fact that the claimant raised issues brought to him by junior doctors with someone other than the clinical lead in the department, may seem a long way from repudiatory conduct."However, once the context, intention and impact are considered, the conduct, taken collectively, does, we conclude, amount to repudiatory breach. "The claimant acted in a way which was coercive to junior colleagues, undermined a senior colleague and was intimidating."Although, there is no doubt at all, that his treatment of other colleagues was exemplary, beneficial and inspiring, that does not detract from our findings."
Daily Mail
09-07-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE REVEALED: NHS Fife finally admits it has spent £220,500 of taxpayer money on transgender battle
NHS Fife's transgender legal battle has cost the taxpayer £220,500, The Mail can reveal. The embattled health board has admitted it has so far forked out hundreds of thousands of pounds public money defending itself and a trans doctor during a landmark employment tribunal. The true legal bill is likely to sky-rocket when the case continues next week. The revelation follows a protracted transparency battle between The Mail and the health board, as NHS bosses initially refused to share how much they were spending. The tribunal relates to A&E nurse Sandie Peggie, 50, who was suspended after she challenged the presence of Dr Beth Upton, born a biological male, in the female changing rooms at Kirkcaldy's Victoria Hospital. The Mail has worked tirelessly to force NHS Fife to reveal how much taxpayer money it is spending to defend itself and Dr Upton. In May, the Scottish Information Commissioner was forced to intervene and ordered NHS Fife to review what information it held about its legal bill. Now, we can reveal the health board quietly slipped out its spend so far on Monday. It wrote: 'NHS Fife can confirm that, as of 31 May 2025, a total of £220,465.93 has been incurred in legal costs relating to an ongoing Employment Tribunal case brought against the board. 'This figure includes Counsel fees and services provided by NHS Scotland's Central Legal Office.' It added: 'These costs will be reclaimed through the national Clinical Negligence and Other Risks Indemnity Scheme (CNORIS). Under CNORIS, NHS Fife's financial liability is limited to £25,000, which ensures that the legal proceedings do not impact frontline clinical or patient services. 'NHS Fife is not in a position to estimate the full cost of proceedings while the Tribunal remains ongoing.' Last night Scottish Tories equalities minister Tess White said: 'This sleekit decision from NHS Fife only adds insult to injury. 'They have spent months rejecting legitimate requests to reveal how much taxpayers' money they are squandering on this case, only to try and slip it out in the hope nobody will see it. 'The sum spent so far taking Sandie Peggie to a tribunal could have gone to frontline healthcare services which are overwhelmed due to 18 years of SNP mismanagement. 'Senior figures within the health board must come clean about why this figure was not revealed sooner and how much more money from the public purse they expect to waste when the case resumes.' After The Mail contacted the health board about the spend on Wednesday afternoon, NHS Fife finally responded to our information request with the same information.
Daily Mail
09-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Jewellery worker, 60, sues for age discrimination claiming his boss called him an 'old git' at work
A jewellery shop worker has sued his boss for age discrimination, claiming he called him an 'old git' at work. Ashok Ahir, 60, who began working for F Hinds as an internal audit assistant in September 2022, told an employment tribunal the comment was made by retail director Jeremy Hinds. He was receiving 'on the job training' for his new role and would travel to branches of the large chain and carry out stock takes with others. Mr Ahir alleged he and Mr Hinds were having dinner with two others in March 2023 whilst carrying out a series of stock takes in Shropshire when they began discussing cars. After he discussed his ex-girlfriend owning a convertible Mazda MX5, Mr Hinds, in his thirties at the time, replied: 'Ash, you old git'. The audit assistant told the tribunal, held in Watford, he was 'shocked, offended, and humiliated' by the 'belittling' comment. He added that he did not feel he could speak up about the alleged incident at the time because Mr Hinds was a director and he feared putting his job' in 'jeopardy'. Mr Ahir also claimed another colleague at the high street jewellery chain F Hinds once told him 'you're old, you're old, you're old' after doing a stock take together. However, the tribunal found Mr Ahir couldn't prove the remarks had been made and dismissed his claims entirely. Mr Hinds denied making a comment like that at any time and said Mr Ahir had not raised it during an internal grievance process. Mr Ahir's line manager also told the hearing that the incident had not been reported to him, despite the assistant auditor claiming he had raised it. Having heard both sides of the allegation, Judge Monica Daley found she 'could not be satisfied' that the remark had been made and dismissed Mr Ahir's claim. She said: 'The tribunal carefully considered the evidence as set out in Jeremy Hinds' notes; it noted that there was no record of this having been reported at the time. 'The remark was not included in the original grievance, and [Mr Ahir's line manager] denies that the remark had been reported to him. 'Having considered all the evidence, the tribunal could not be satisfied that the remark had been made on a balance of probabilities. 'The tribunal found that claimant failed to establish facts from which, in the absence of any other explanation, point to a contravention of the Equality Act having occurred. 'Accordingly, the claim for direct discrimination fails.' Mr Ahir also told the tribunal that concerns about his performance were part of a 'pattern of harassment' because of his age. In July 2023, managing director Paul Hinds, Mr Hinds' brother, said he was 'quite worried' about Mr Ahir's performance having observed him on a stock take. Paul Hinds added he should have been operating at a 'much higher level' given he had been in the role for nearly a year. Mr Ahir tried to tell the tribunal these concerns were influenced by him raising the allegation about Mr Hinds calling him an 'old git'. However, there was 'no evidence' anyone other than him knew about the supposed remark and therefore it could not have impacted Mr Hinds' view. The main concerns about Mr Ahir's performance were that others could not rely on him for 'relatively simple tasks' and he 'lacked understanding' of what the role entailed. The tribunal found that the performance worries came from 'genuine concern' and had no link to Mr Ahir's age. In September 2023, Mr Ahir claimed a similar incident to the 'old git' one took place when a colleague kept saying 'you're old, you're old' on the way back from a stock take. However, Judge Daley once again found there was not enough evidence for Mr Ahir to prove that this comment was made. Finally, Mr Ahir claimed as a result of his grievance, F Hinds gave him an ultimatum of either ending his employment or demoting him. However, the tribunal concluded the offer was made because of the 'genuine concerns' over his performance which meant he could not stay in his current role. Instead of taking either option, Mr Ahir went on sick leave before resigning in May 2024.
Times
07-07-2025
- Health
- Times
Watchdog branded ‘emotional' after criticising NHS Fife over trans tribunal costs
The Scottish Information Commissioner has been accused of being 'emotional', 'selective' and 'not professional' after he condemned a health board's decision to withhold details of costs associated with a prominent single-sex spaces employment tribunal. David Hamilton, the official who ensures public bodies are complying with Freedom of Information laws, ruled that NHS Fife had acted unlawfully by rejecting requests to reveal its legal bill for a case involving nurse Sandie Peggie who objected to a male transsexual doctor using the same changing room. However, in a data breach, the critical comments of the board's information governance officer were mistakenly sent to a patient, who passed them on to a Sunday newspaper. The officer said that it was 'not professional' of Hamilton to lump information requests made by The Mail on Sunday and two other applicants together. She also complained that although NHS Fife was using public money to fund the defence, legal costs were 'personal' to both doctors involved in the tribunal. • NHS Fife criticised for 'trying to hide' cost of trans row nurse tribunal In response to a line in the judgment which read that the commissioner was 'frustrated' at the health board's poor handling of the information requests, the officer wrote: 'The commissioner should not be bringing an emotional statement into the review.' She added he was 'being selective' and was making assumptions about NHS Fife's conduct. Peggie, an A&E nurse, took NHS Fife and Dr Beth Upton, who is biologically male, to a tribunal after being suspended from work and investigated for bullying after confronting the doctor in the women's changing rooms on Christmas Eve 2023, at Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy. NHS Fife, which is using NHS money to defend itself, Dr Upton and Dr Kate Searle, a third respondent, in court was criticised when it refused to reveal how much public money it was using on the case in response to a freedom of information request. After a protracted battle over the release of the information, the Scottish information commissioner said it had acted unlawfully and Hamilton demanded it issue a new response by July 14. The tribunal is due to resume on July 16. A health board spokesman said at the time: 'NHS Fife notes the report from the commissioner and intends to comply fully with its decision notice.' Hamilton said the board was 'wasting time' compiling the broadside against him rather than fulfilling its legal obligations to review its responses to FOI requests. He told The Scottish Mail on Sunday: 'I'm aware an NHS Fife staff member's personal commentary on the case was mistakenly disclosed into the public domain. I am confident, however, that it is unlikely to reflect the final view of the health board itself.' • SNP threatened with legal action over single-sex toilets policy Tess White, the Scottish Conservative equalities spokeswoman, said: 'The petty and evasive behaviour of NHS Fife demonstrates once again how out of touch they are with mainstream public opinion.' An NHS Fife spokesman said it 'fully respects the role and authority of the Scottish Information Commissioner and continues to accept the Commissioner's decision in this matter'. This article was amended on July 7 2025. An earlier version wrongly attributed a comment criticising 'the SNP's dangerous and unlawful gender self-ID policy' to the Scottish information commissioner. The comment was made by a spokeswoman for the Scottish Conservatives.
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Yahoo
Calling someone a Karen is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist'
Calling someone a 'Karen' could be 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', a tribunal has ruled. An employment tribunal judge has deemed the term which is generally targeted at middle-aged white women to be "pejorative". This ruling came about after the slang term was used in a tribunal taking place at Watford Employment Tribunal. READ MORE: Glastonbury fans say festival is 'robbing them' after seeing price of pints this year READ MORE: Warning as 'tens of millions' of ants set to swarm UK on Flying Ant Day 2025 Sylvia Constance, 74, brought claims forward of unfair dismissal, direct race and age discrimination and victimisation at Watford Employment Tribunal against Harpenden Mencap, a charity which provides support to adults with learning disabilities. Ms Constance, who the tribunal heard is black British, said that she had been targeted because of her race after she had been dismissed from her role on June 13 2023 because of an 'irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap. The dismissal came after bosses had previously suspended Ms Constance over claims of "emotional/psychological abuse of a tenant in your care" and "bullying and intimidation of colleagues", the tribunal heard. The use of the slang term 'Karen' arose when Christine Yates, who represented Ms Constance at the tribunal, used the term in a document. The document read: "The respondents have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen' having weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against the complainant, making up and suspending the complainant for numerous fictitious infringements, and deflecting from their personal misconduct. "As egregiously, they encouraged residents under their care to do same. There is also something very sordid about the way in which white, female management have facilitated racism by colluding with white, male residents to give a misogynistic, racist view of the black complainant." But employment judge George Alliott noted the term 'Karen' to be "pejorative". Employment judge George Alliott said: "We note Christine Yates uses the slang term 'Karen', which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term." The judge did not uphold Ms Constance's claims, saying that the complaints against Ms Constance were "legitimate" and " did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her."
