TPE USE A SOLICITOR
The following section will cover 4 emails:
The first email is from Employee Relations Manager Charlotte Pears to Steve Trumm and myself, it is dated 29th July 2009.
Forwarded by Charlotte Pears/FKTPE/FirstGroup on 29/07/2009 15:57 -----
Charlotte Pears/FKTPE/FirstGroup
29/07/2009 14:57
To a.******@*****.net
cc [email protected], Paul Watson/FKTPE/FirstGroup@FIRSTGROUP
Subject Re: Perry Webb
Dear Steve
I write further to your emails of 26th July 2009 in which you have requested additional information.
You state that you have not been provided with a recording of the meeting, but you have acknowledged that Perry did receive a copy of the minutes at the start of last week, these minutes are in effect the actual record of the meeting and were produced from the Dictaphone, so it is my understanding that a record of this meeting has been provided. As requested and previously advised to your head office, due to the size of the voice files, these have had to be burnt to a CD and a copy was posted to Perry Webb, with a second copy posted to ACTU Head office on Friday 24th July.
In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes.
In respect to the interview notes of both Driver Lee and Driver Standards Manager G Higgins, I have previously advised Perry that these would not be available until the beginning of this week. However this has been further delayed due to Driver Lee being off work sick and the notes having to be resent to his home address.
You also ask for confirmation that arrangements have been made for Driver Lee to attend the hearing as a witness. This is the first request I have had for Driver Lee to attend as a witness. In any event I am unclear what the purpose of Driver Lee attending as a witness is as he has already been interviewed and provided a statement to this effect. The purpose of witnesses is to add clarification and not to be cross examined. If you have questions that you wish to put to Driver Lee, please let me know the questions and the relevance of these so that I can make arrangements for them to be put to him. this also applies to Steve Bridge.
In relation to your request for "all minutes relating to his discipline" I'm unsure what other minutes you are referring to, can I ask you to please clarify which other minutes you require.
In respect to the downloaded graphs and data, these graphs were sent to Perry together with a copy of the BUPA medical report on Friday 24th July. As I previously advised Perry, to be able to analysis the download data the appropriate software is required. The software is provided by Arrowvale, and I am unable to provide you with a copy of this software due to licence requirements.
You have also asked for copies of all safety briefs and safety encounter documents, Perry attended safety briefs on 9th Nov 06. In 2007 FTPE introduced a new format of Safety briefs and Perry attended Cycle 1 of these briefs on 11th Oct 2007. I can find no record of Perry attending Cycle 2 or Cycle 3, although Cycle 3 commenced after Perry had been suspended in relation to the investigation of the near miss. Face to face briefings were also conducted with Perry 22nd Feb 05, 14th Sep 09, 22nd Feb 07, 11 Sept 07, 15th Oct 07, 18th Feb 08, 30th May 08, 30th June 08 and 31st Oct 08. Copies of the records of attendance are attached.
You also mentioned that the investigating officer brought up the issue that Perry has a history of reporting defects on units and request copies of these reports, together with Perry's disciplinary record, I will arrange for Perry to be handed a copy of these reports tomorrow as it is my understanding that Perry will be attending a meeting in Bridgewater House.
In respect to the near miss reporting procedure this would be as per the rulebook. With reference to your request for a copy of the investigation into the non reported near miss, a copy of this investigation was sent to Perry in January with a second copy sent to Perry in June, within the investigation was a copy of the control log which you have also requested. This documentation is therefore with you already. You have also requested the train diagram for unit 185119 which is also attached.
Taking into consideration of all the above together with the fact that Perry has already confirmed his attendance we believe the appeal hearing should go ahead as planned on Thursday 30th July, however on this occasion we are prepared to reschedule the hearing as per your request. Due to my involvement in this difficult case and my role as advisor and procedural expert, I am unable to reschedule this hearing to take place before Tuesday 25th August. As you have requested I provide you with a series of suitable dates I can offer you the following: Tuesday 25th August, Thursday 27th August or Wednesday 3rd September 2009. Please let me know which you'd prefer.
Kind regards,
Charlotte
_______________________________
EMAIL ABOVE DATED 29TH JULY 2009
"In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes".
I will cover this paragraph below the next relevant emails.
"However this has been further delayed due to Driver Lee being off work sick and the notes having to be resent to his home address".
These minutes were simply not sent to Driver Geoff Lee to sign off, then or ever. Because Driver Geoff Lee disputed all along what was said by Driver Manager Ged Higgins and also disputed the minutes of the meeting with Ian Humphries and Charlotte Pears to discuss the chain of events.
On the 18th December 2009, I sent the following email to Driver Geoff Lee.
Dear Geoff
Any news on your minutes arriving to sign off?
Did they reinstate that Blackpool driver?
I bet your warning horns are freezing up and not working?
If I don`t see you, have a great xmas and new year.
All the best, thanks for your help.
Perry.
Driver Geoff Lee`s reply the same day,18th Dec 2009
Hi Perry, I haven't heard anything. I'll be working my 1st train for over 6 months next Thurs. I.m out of touch with whats been happening at work, but I know the strikes been called off. All the best to you for Christmas and the New Year.
"In any event I am unclear what the purpose of Driver Lee attending as a witness is as he has already been interviewed and provided a statement to this effect. The purpose of witnesses is to add clarification and not to be cross examined. If you have questions that you wish to put to Driver Lee, please let me know the questions and the relevance of these so that I can make arrangements for them to be put to him. This also applies to Steve Bridge".
As I previously pointed out, Charlotte Pears is putting up barriers, it is not for her to question why we want witnesses or to request we give her the questions that we want answering.
"Perry attended safety briefs on 9th Nov 06. In 2007 FTPE introduced a new format of Safety briefs and Perry attended Cycle 1 of these briefs on 11th Oct 2007".
"Safety is our number one priority"? What a complete joke, 2 safety briefs in 5 years, the Cullen Report recommendation was 2 per year, this came from the Ladbroke Grove crash which claimed
the lives of 31 people and injured more than 400. Health & Safety was a complete shambles, my downfall was because I constantly highlighted this problem.
What did ASLEF do about this? ANSWER:- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
" You also mentioned that the investigating officer brought up the issue that Perry has a history of reporting defects on units and request copies of these reports, together with Perry's disciplinary record, I will arrange for Perry to be handed a copy of these reports tomorrow as it is my understanding that Perry will be attending a meeting in Bridgewater House".
All Charlotte Pears gave me was a pile of my reports, copies of which I already had. The original request was for reports that had supposed derogatory comments in them.
"In respect to the near miss reporting procedure this would be as per the rulebook".
We all know that there is no procedure in the rule book for reporting a near miss, Charlotte Pears after this, said it was in the Driver Competence Standards booklet, which of course it is not. One of my charges is failing to follow the correct procedure for reporting a near miss, (even though there was no near miss to report). Yet here we have the very people who lay these charges without a clue where to find this procedure!
"Due to my involvement in this difficult case and my role as advisor and procedural expert, I am unable to reschedule this hearing to take place before Tuesday 25th August".
The Obvious question is what makes this case difficult? TPE classed it as admitted conduct, how hard can that be to prove? Surely if they have a reasonable belief in their charges then this should not be difficult.
The difficulty is that they know I wont lie down and will fight them all the way, they also know that these charges should not be classed as gross misconduct, that is what makes it difficult for them.
"Procedural Expert"!!!! This is a woman and a company that are clueless as far as procedures go, their idea of procedures are simply, what we say goes, they make everything up as they go along. Do we have a procedure for grievances?
What was Miss Pears advisory role? Especially as Miss Pears was present at my hearing and appeal. Furthermore as we see below, also involved with a solicitor before my appeal hearing!
EMAIL FROM CHARLOTTE PEARS TO SOLICITOR SIMON ROBINSON DATED 24th JULY 2009
The following section will cover 4 emails:
The first email is from Employee Relations Manager Charlotte Pears to Steve Trumm and myself, it is dated 29th July 2009.
Forwarded by Charlotte Pears/FKTPE/FirstGroup on 29/07/2009 15:57 -----
Charlotte Pears/FKTPE/FirstGroup
29/07/2009 14:57
To a.******@*****.net
cc [email protected], Paul Watson/FKTPE/FirstGroup@FIRSTGROUP
Subject Re: Perry Webb
Dear Steve
I write further to your emails of 26th July 2009 in which you have requested additional information.
You state that you have not been provided with a recording of the meeting, but you have acknowledged that Perry did receive a copy of the minutes at the start of last week, these minutes are in effect the actual record of the meeting and were produced from the Dictaphone, so it is my understanding that a record of this meeting has been provided. As requested and previously advised to your head office, due to the size of the voice files, these have had to be burnt to a CD and a copy was posted to Perry Webb, with a second copy posted to ACTU Head office on Friday 24th July.
In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes.
In respect to the interview notes of both Driver Lee and Driver Standards Manager G Higgins, I have previously advised Perry that these would not be available until the beginning of this week. However this has been further delayed due to Driver Lee being off work sick and the notes having to be resent to his home address.
You also ask for confirmation that arrangements have been made for Driver Lee to attend the hearing as a witness. This is the first request I have had for Driver Lee to attend as a witness. In any event I am unclear what the purpose of Driver Lee attending as a witness is as he has already been interviewed and provided a statement to this effect. The purpose of witnesses is to add clarification and not to be cross examined. If you have questions that you wish to put to Driver Lee, please let me know the questions and the relevance of these so that I can make arrangements for them to be put to him. this also applies to Steve Bridge.
In relation to your request for "all minutes relating to his discipline" I'm unsure what other minutes you are referring to, can I ask you to please clarify which other minutes you require.
In respect to the downloaded graphs and data, these graphs were sent to Perry together with a copy of the BUPA medical report on Friday 24th July. As I previously advised Perry, to be able to analysis the download data the appropriate software is required. The software is provided by Arrowvale, and I am unable to provide you with a copy of this software due to licence requirements.
You have also asked for copies of all safety briefs and safety encounter documents, Perry attended safety briefs on 9th Nov 06. In 2007 FTPE introduced a new format of Safety briefs and Perry attended Cycle 1 of these briefs on 11th Oct 2007. I can find no record of Perry attending Cycle 2 or Cycle 3, although Cycle 3 commenced after Perry had been suspended in relation to the investigation of the near miss. Face to face briefings were also conducted with Perry 22nd Feb 05, 14th Sep 09, 22nd Feb 07, 11 Sept 07, 15th Oct 07, 18th Feb 08, 30th May 08, 30th June 08 and 31st Oct 08. Copies of the records of attendance are attached.
You also mentioned that the investigating officer brought up the issue that Perry has a history of reporting defects on units and request copies of these reports, together with Perry's disciplinary record, I will arrange for Perry to be handed a copy of these reports tomorrow as it is my understanding that Perry will be attending a meeting in Bridgewater House.
In respect to the near miss reporting procedure this would be as per the rulebook. With reference to your request for a copy of the investigation into the non reported near miss, a copy of this investigation was sent to Perry in January with a second copy sent to Perry in June, within the investigation was a copy of the control log which you have also requested. This documentation is therefore with you already. You have also requested the train diagram for unit 185119 which is also attached.
Taking into consideration of all the above together with the fact that Perry has already confirmed his attendance we believe the appeal hearing should go ahead as planned on Thursday 30th July, however on this occasion we are prepared to reschedule the hearing as per your request. Due to my involvement in this difficult case and my role as advisor and procedural expert, I am unable to reschedule this hearing to take place before Tuesday 25th August. As you have requested I provide you with a series of suitable dates I can offer you the following: Tuesday 25th August, Thursday 27th August or Wednesday 3rd September 2009. Please let me know which you'd prefer.
Kind regards,
Charlotte
_______________________________
EMAIL ABOVE DATED 29TH JULY 2009
"In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes".
I will cover this paragraph below the next relevant emails.
"However this has been further delayed due to Driver Lee being off work sick and the notes having to be resent to his home address".
These minutes were simply not sent to Driver Geoff Lee to sign off, then or ever. Because Driver Geoff Lee disputed all along what was said by Driver Manager Ged Higgins and also disputed the minutes of the meeting with Ian Humphries and Charlotte Pears to discuss the chain of events.
On the 18th December 2009, I sent the following email to Driver Geoff Lee.
Dear Geoff
Any news on your minutes arriving to sign off?
Did they reinstate that Blackpool driver?
I bet your warning horns are freezing up and not working?
If I don`t see you, have a great xmas and new year.
All the best, thanks for your help.
Perry.
Driver Geoff Lee`s reply the same day,18th Dec 2009
Hi Perry, I haven't heard anything. I'll be working my 1st train for over 6 months next Thurs. I.m out of touch with whats been happening at work, but I know the strikes been called off. All the best to you for Christmas and the New Year.
"In any event I am unclear what the purpose of Driver Lee attending as a witness is as he has already been interviewed and provided a statement to this effect. The purpose of witnesses is to add clarification and not to be cross examined. If you have questions that you wish to put to Driver Lee, please let me know the questions and the relevance of these so that I can make arrangements for them to be put to him. This also applies to Steve Bridge".
As I previously pointed out, Charlotte Pears is putting up barriers, it is not for her to question why we want witnesses or to request we give her the questions that we want answering.
"Perry attended safety briefs on 9th Nov 06. In 2007 FTPE introduced a new format of Safety briefs and Perry attended Cycle 1 of these briefs on 11th Oct 2007".
"Safety is our number one priority"? What a complete joke, 2 safety briefs in 5 years, the Cullen Report recommendation was 2 per year, this came from the Ladbroke Grove crash which claimed
the lives of 31 people and injured more than 400. Health & Safety was a complete shambles, my downfall was because I constantly highlighted this problem.
What did ASLEF do about this? ANSWER:- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
" You also mentioned that the investigating officer brought up the issue that Perry has a history of reporting defects on units and request copies of these reports, together with Perry's disciplinary record, I will arrange for Perry to be handed a copy of these reports tomorrow as it is my understanding that Perry will be attending a meeting in Bridgewater House".
All Charlotte Pears gave me was a pile of my reports, copies of which I already had. The original request was for reports that had supposed derogatory comments in them.
"In respect to the near miss reporting procedure this would be as per the rulebook".
We all know that there is no procedure in the rule book for reporting a near miss, Charlotte Pears after this, said it was in the Driver Competence Standards booklet, which of course it is not. One of my charges is failing to follow the correct procedure for reporting a near miss, (even though there was no near miss to report). Yet here we have the very people who lay these charges without a clue where to find this procedure!
"Due to my involvement in this difficult case and my role as advisor and procedural expert, I am unable to reschedule this hearing to take place before Tuesday 25th August".
The Obvious question is what makes this case difficult? TPE classed it as admitted conduct, how hard can that be to prove? Surely if they have a reasonable belief in their charges then this should not be difficult.
The difficulty is that they know I wont lie down and will fight them all the way, they also know that these charges should not be classed as gross misconduct, that is what makes it difficult for them.
"Procedural Expert"!!!! This is a woman and a company that are clueless as far as procedures go, their idea of procedures are simply, what we say goes, they make everything up as they go along. Do we have a procedure for grievances?
What was Miss Pears advisory role? Especially as Miss Pears was present at my hearing and appeal. Furthermore as we see below, also involved with a solicitor before my appeal hearing!
EMAIL FROM CHARLOTTE PEARS TO SOLICITOR SIMON ROBINSON DATED 24th JULY 2009
As we can clearly see, this communication is from TPE Employee Relations Manager Charlotte Pears to Simon Robinson of Ford & Warren Solicitors on the 24th July 2009.
This is well before my appeal date of the 7th September 2009. So how could I possibly have an open and fair appeal hearing if TPE are using this solicitor in order to make their case against me as airtight as possible? Charlotte Pears sent this email at 06.22am, one thing to note is how Charlotte Pears fails to understand the situation that she is in. Even if we were to give TPE any hand written notes made by my represenative Steve Trumm, of what possible use would they be to her? This women was way out of her depth. Then again, for someone who previously only worked in the safety section at TPE to be given a role as Employee Relations Manager says it all.
EMAIL FROM SOLICITOR SIMON ROBINSON TO CHARLOTTE PEARS DATED 24TH JULY 2009
This is well before my appeal date of the 7th September 2009. So how could I possibly have an open and fair appeal hearing if TPE are using this solicitor in order to make their case against me as airtight as possible? Charlotte Pears sent this email at 06.22am, one thing to note is how Charlotte Pears fails to understand the situation that she is in. Even if we were to give TPE any hand written notes made by my represenative Steve Trumm, of what possible use would they be to her? This women was way out of her depth. Then again, for someone who previously only worked in the safety section at TPE to be given a role as Employee Relations Manager says it all.
EMAIL FROM SOLICITOR SIMON ROBINSON TO CHARLOTTE PEARS DATED 24TH JULY 2009
_Going back to the email sent by Charlotte Pears on the 29th July 2009:
"In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes".
Virtually word for word from the above email.
I will ask anyone reading this email to make their own judgment, especially on the following solicitors statement, "Alternatively, you can say they are Mark`s notes".
To me, I naturally think, why would a solicitor tell their client to say that notes being sent are from a different person? Also what these 2 emails clearly show is that there has been previous discussion about myself between Charlotte Pears and Simon Robinson, otherwise how would Simon Robinson know who Perry Webb was and Charlotte states in her email, "Perry`s reps", which Simon Robinson evidently knows all about.
The use of a solicitor is not a cheap option, it is evidence that no matter what my representations, I was doomed, by using Simon Robinson before my appeal and as I was informed by the member of TPE staff who gave me these 2 emails, that this man was being used before and on the day of my actual hearing, I never stood any chance of a fair, honest and open hearing or appeal.
EMail from Solicitor Simon Robinson dated 13th April 2010
"In respect to my hand written notes, I am unclear what the benefit would be as the actual record of the meeting, as I've mentioned above is accurately recorded in the transcript from the Dictaphone. However as requested attached are a copy of my handwritten notes".
Virtually word for word from the above email.
I will ask anyone reading this email to make their own judgment, especially on the following solicitors statement, "Alternatively, you can say they are Mark`s notes".
To me, I naturally think, why would a solicitor tell their client to say that notes being sent are from a different person? Also what these 2 emails clearly show is that there has been previous discussion about myself between Charlotte Pears and Simon Robinson, otherwise how would Simon Robinson know who Perry Webb was and Charlotte states in her email, "Perry`s reps", which Simon Robinson evidently knows all about.
The use of a solicitor is not a cheap option, it is evidence that no matter what my representations, I was doomed, by using Simon Robinson before my appeal and as I was informed by the member of TPE staff who gave me these 2 emails, that this man was being used before and on the day of my actual hearing, I never stood any chance of a fair, honest and open hearing or appeal.
EMail from Solicitor Simon Robinson dated 13th April 2010
_I put the emails between Solicitor Simon Robinson and TPE Employee Relations Manager Charlotte Pears into my bundle to be used at my tribunal. However as is evident from the above email, Solicitor Simon Robinson used a loophole called,"legal professional privilege", because the emails between TPE and himself would be damaging, as they are proof that TPE engaged the services of this solicitor to make sure that they dismissed me without leaving themselves open to litigation, therefore that in itself is proof that no matter what my defence, a decision was made before my hearing and appeal that I was to be dismissed.
So you now have to ask yourself, why would TPE go to these extremities to get rid of an employee?
WHAT I SHOW ON THIS WEBSITE IS YOUR PLAIN AND SIMPLE ANSWER, A COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL.
IF ANY OF YOU FROM TRANSPENNINE EXPRESS MANAGEMENT OR DIRECTORS OF FIRST GROUP DISAGREE, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
BUT HOW CAN YOU RESPOND AGAINST SUCH OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE? WHY NOT DO AS YOU ALWAYS DID IN THE PAST, IGNORE IT.
AFTER ALL ESPECIALLY FOR TPE MANAGEMENT, WALLOWING IN YOUR IGNORANCE IS SOMETHING YOU ARE PAST MASTERS OF, YOU SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED AND ONE DAY WILL ALL HOPEFULLY BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, BECAUSE, ONE THING YOU NEED TO REMEMBER, I WILL NEVER GIVE UP OR GO AWAY. 2013, 2014, 2015 TO INFINITY!
So you now have to ask yourself, why would TPE go to these extremities to get rid of an employee?
WHAT I SHOW ON THIS WEBSITE IS YOUR PLAIN AND SIMPLE ANSWER, A COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL.
IF ANY OF YOU FROM TRANSPENNINE EXPRESS MANAGEMENT OR DIRECTORS OF FIRST GROUP DISAGREE, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
BUT HOW CAN YOU RESPOND AGAINST SUCH OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE? WHY NOT DO AS YOU ALWAYS DID IN THE PAST, IGNORE IT.
AFTER ALL ESPECIALLY FOR TPE MANAGEMENT, WALLOWING IN YOUR IGNORANCE IS SOMETHING YOU ARE PAST MASTERS OF, YOU SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED AND ONE DAY WILL ALL HOPEFULLY BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, BECAUSE, ONE THING YOU NEED TO REMEMBER, I WILL NEVER GIVE UP OR GO AWAY. 2013, 2014, 2015 TO INFINITY!