BRUM “RACISM” ROW - SIR ALBERT'S LETTER

27-03-2007

As we reported yesterday, Sir Albert Bore has written to all Labour councillors in Birmingham asking them not to comment on the recent Employment Tribunal at which the City Council was ruled to have racially discriminated against a black employee Paul Samuels, who itjudged was victimised and unfairly dismissed. By popular demand, here's Sir Albert's letter in full.

“The Chief Legal Officer has informed me of a recent Employment Tribunal judgement in terms of the race discrimination (& related) allegations - 31 in total - brought by a former employee of Legal Services, which was received on the 8 February 2007, and that the Employment Tribunal has dismissed all but 3 of Paul Samuels' allegations against the City Council.

TheChief Legal Officer and his staff are currently considering whether to appeal or not against the three findings.

In summary, the three findings against the Council were as follows:-

Firstly: There was a finding of victimisation of Paul Samuels by one of the Assistant Directors of Legal Services, David Tatlow, with regard to the suspension from work of Paul Samuels, but this finding of victimisation was not on the grounds of race. Legal Services, BCC believe this finding of the Tribunal is harsh and are considering an appeal

Secondly: The decision by the Chief Legal Officer to dismiss Paul Samuels, as his Chief Officer in 2005, for gross misconduct - which included victimisation by Paul Samuels of a female member of staff and totally unacceptable language / behaviour by him towards other staff/managers within Legal Services - was held by the Tribunal to amount to unfair dismissal, as there had been some investigative and technical/ procedural irregularities, but that these were, again, not on the grounds of race.

Inother words, the Tribunal held that, even after 4 adjournments, over a number of months, the Chief Legal Officer should have allowed even more adjournments and that he should have obtained further medical evidence of Paul Samuels mental health before deciding on whether or not to proceed in his absence.

This was despite the fact that he had a Union representing him,he was left in no doubt that further adjournments would not be entertained and he was strongly encouraged to attend or to be represented. In addition, the Tribunal held that the Chief Legal Officer should have reconsidered all his previous grievance documents even though the same had been dismissed in an earlier preliminary hearing by the Chief Legal Officer as being out of time and irrelevant for the dismissal hearing.

Legal Services, BCC, find the Tribunal's finding on this point harsh as it sends out a strong negative message to all staff facing dismissal that they can frustrate management action by staying off work on indefinite sick leave. This case will not, therefore, strengthen the Council's managerial position over dismissal cases.

Thirdly: The Tribunal found that the Personnel Appeals Committee - Chaired by Councillor Mike Ward and which included Councillors Carl Rice and Penny Holbrook -did not have a clear record of decisions or thought processes of the members evidenced and, as such, the Tribunal inferred that the Committee did not give Paul Samuels a fair hearing on the grounds of his race. Again, Legal Services, BCC, find this decision harshand are considering an appeal on this aspect in order to protect the integrity and reputation oftheMembers involved and the City Council's Appeal processes.

There will be further Employment Tribunal hearings on this case to resolve the remaining issues, including any compensation / costs to be awarded against the Council. Suffice it to say, BCC lawyers will, so far as is possible, ensure these are minimised. Clearly, once the full judgement has been discussed with Counsel, the Chief Legal Officer will advise further in terms of any Appeal / lessons to be learnt from the case.

In the meantime, a summary of the Employment judgement is attached and I request that members are careful to consider the facts before coming to any inappropriate conclusions of racial (or other) discrimination in the Council. Members should certainly not, for example, act on or spread any erroneous or misleading information before first checking out the same with the Chief Legal Officer or myself.