Chereads / Where is Justice for Blessed? / Chapter 5 - Allegations

Chapter 5 - Allegations

This is a letter dated November 2014 which had more 

allegations.

1.To establish whether BK has been working full time 

for another employer in addition to her full-time 

contract with the Trust.

2. To establish whether any such employment represents 

a breach of the Working Time Regulations or the Trust 

Code of Conduct (policy reference Corp 13) or the Trust 

Contract of Employment.

3. To clarify the circumstances of the complaint against 

BK recently raised with NMC, and in particular, to 

establish whether these complaints indicate clinical 

practice that may present a risk to patients care.

4. To investigate the veracity and authenticity of any 

reference apparently originating from the Trust enabling 

BK to obtain employment with another employer.

5. To establish whether any of these allegations are 

compatible to BK's employment as a Staff Nurse 

working with vulnerable adults.

6. To establish whether any of these allegations may 

represent a breach of MNC Code.

I was suspended on hearsay as evidence of this 

horrible suspension, the MD informed the Trust I was 

working for them on a full-time contract; referring to 

two days hearsay evidence means whatever a person is 

heard to say, includes: a statement made by a person, not 

called as witness; a statement contained or recorded in

any book, document or record which is not admissible.

The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not 

admissible in a court of law

https://postimg.cc/gnbpRFqt

Section 60 of the Evidence Act states that oral 

evidence must be direct. R v Horncastle was an English 

legal case concerning the rules on Hearsay Evidence. 

The appellants claimed that English law on hearsay 

evidence violated Article 6 of the European Convention 

on Human Rights (ECHR) according to decisions of the 

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The UK's 

Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

The House of Lords had said that UK courts should 

follow 'clear and constant' decisions of the ECtHR, yet 

the Lords also agreed that the HRA did not change the 

rules of precedent in the UK. Therefore, how far UK 

courts should follow the ECtHR was a 'hot topic'.

How can one hold full-time contract for two 

employers, was above me? I did not have a contract with 

either of them. A contract is offered for permanent 

positions, and usually set out the employee's salary or 

hourly wage. Other details included within a full-time 

contract include holiday entitlements, pension benefits, 

parental leave allowances, and details on Statutory Sick 

Pay. This is the document that binds you for taking any 

employment somewhere else, then I was suspended for

a document which was not even given to me in the 

beginning, and not only that I had been working there 

for an exceptionally long time.

During these meetings I was supported by a lady 

from Unison, who I will always be grateful for. There 

was no evidence to support their allegations that I was 

working full time for the Trust and there was no contract 

of employment between me and the S/H. I had worked 

for two days and then I was on annual leave during that 

time. 

This was not full-time work, it was merely work on 

a casual basis.

I was aware that other staff members within the 

Trust who had contracts of employment with other 

employers had not been put through a disciplinary 

process like me. 

With this I was put though a disciplinary process 

unfairly. He commented that it appears to be the almost 

automatic response of employers to allegations of this 

kind to suspend the employees concerned, and to forbid 

them from contacting anyone, as soon as a complaint is 

made; irrespective of the likelihood of the complaint 

being established. He said that a suspension should "not 

be a knee jerk reaction, and it will be a breach of the 

duty of trust and confidence towards the employee if it 

is". An employee will frequently feel belittled and 

demoralised by the total exclusion from work and the enforced removal from their work colleagues, many of 

whom will be friends. This can be psychologically very 

damaging and raise the prospect of guilt before a full 

investigation has been undertaken. Therefore, a decision 

to suspend an employee should not be taken lightly and 

should be for no longer than is reasonably necessary 

giving consideration to all the facts surrounding the 

matter. I was stressed, and I could not sleep.