Agenda and minutes

(Head of Research and Democratic Services)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted there were no substitute members present at this meeting.

(Head of Research and Democratic Services) To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were made pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Panel held on 14 November 2001 (attached).

            RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 14 November 2001 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To note the procedure for the conduct in determining staff appeals (attached).

The Panel noted the agreed procedure for its conduct in determination of staff appeals.

Exclusion: To consider whether, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press should be excluded from the meeting for the items of business set out below on grounds that they will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following paragraph(s) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act (as amended) or are confidential under Section 100(A)(2):

The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, which came into effect on 1 March 2006, requires the Council to consider whether maintaining the exemption listed above outweighs the potential public interest in disclosing the information. Any member who considers that this test should be applied to any currently exempted matter on this agenda should contact the proper officer at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Confidential Items Commencement: Paragraph 9 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require:

(1)        All business of the Council requiring to be transacted in the presence of the press and public to be completed by 10.00 p.m. at the latest.

(2)        At the time appointed under (1) above, the Chairman shall permit the completion of debate on any item still under consideration, and at his or her discretion, any other remaining business whereupon the Council shall proceed to exclude the public and press.

(3)        Any public business remaining to be dealt with shall be deferred until after the completion of the private part of the meeting, including items submitted for report rather than decision.

Background Papers:  Paragraph 8 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules of the Constitution define background papers as being documents relating to the subject matter of the report which in the Proper Officer's opinion:

(a)            disclose any facts or matters on which the report or an important part of the report is based;  and

(b)        have been relied on to a material extent in preparing the report and does not include published works or those which disclose exempt or confidential information (as defined in Rule 10) and in respect of executive reports, the advice of any political advisor.

Inspection of background papers may be arranged by contacting the officer responsible for the item.

RESOLVED:

            That, in accordance with Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the item of business set out below as it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12(A) of the Act indicated and the exemption is considered to outweigh the potential public interest in disclosing the information:

            Agenda            Subject            Exempt Information

            Item No            Paragraph Number

            7            Staff Appeal No 02 - 2006/07            1 and 2

Restricted report attached. Case papers from the appellant and the Council have been circulated separately to Panel members.

The Panel considered an appeal by an employee of Leisure Services against a decision of the Head of Housing Services acting under delegated authority to dismiss him.

The appellant’s father was in attendance at the meeting to present his son’s case.  The Council’s case was presented by James Burton, Counsel who called D Macnab (Head of Leisure Services), T Tidey (Head of Human Resources and Performance Management) and A Hall (Head of Housing Services) as witnesses.  Ms C O’Boyle (Head of Legal, Administration and Estates and Solicitor to the Council) advised the Panel as required, on details of employment law and policies relevant to the appeal.

Following consideration of submissions from both parties and appropriate cross-examination, the Panel determined the appeal in private session.

            RESOLVED:

            That it is the unanimous decision of the Panel that, on the basis of the evidence presented on behalf of the appellant and by Counsel on behalf of the Council in writing and orally, the appeal against dismissal from service without notice or payment in lieu of notice be not upheld for the following reasons:

            (a)            the allegations of fact that the appellant:

            (i)            defaced personal photographs of the son and dog of one of his supervisors, which were displayed on her computer;

            (ii)            wrote offensive comments about one of his supervisors on the Staff Duty Sheet in his own blood;

            (iii)            deliberately caused damage to the Therapy Room at Waltham Abbey Sports Centre by hitting a door and breaking glass fittings;

            were proven and admitted by the appellant;

            (b)            as a consequence of the appellant’s actions described in (a)(iii) above, the appellant endangered any or all of the following:  other staff, members of the public, himself, contrary to his responsibilities under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974;

            (c)            as a consequence of the appellant’s actions described in (a)(i)-(iii) above, he caused a fundamental breach in the relationship of mutual trust and confidence between himself as a employee and the Council as an employer;

            (d)            the proven allegations amounted to Gross Misconduct under the Council’s Disciplinary/Capability Procedure;

            (e)            consideration has been given to the relevant provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the DDA Code of Good Practice and whether the Council had complied with its duty to make reasonable adjustments in relation to the appellant; it is considered that the Council took steps in excess of what is required as it made adjustments both before and after it knew or could reasonably be expected to have known about the appellant’s disability; accordingly, it is considered there has been no discrimination for a reason related to disability that is not justified; in particular:

            (i)            the Council moved the appellant’s place of employment twice and with the latter move, it made considerable adjustments to help the appellant by requiring him to undertake less demanding duties;

            (ii)            the Council arranged for the appellant to receive counselling, referred him to Harlow Occupational Health Service Ltd and arranged for him to see a consultant clinical  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.