The Suffolk Fire Experience - Doc 221 Sudbury Fire Station Open Day
Interested in other Suffolk Firefighter tales then check out “The Suffolk Hyde Affair” at http://thesuffolkhydeaffair.blogspot.com/
Interview with Sub O. Wigglesworth Continued
Tuesday 18th August 1998
General Analysis Transcript Omission
It has already been stated that the transcript produced by Divisional Officer Graham Smith was seriously incomplete. It is fortunate then that Wiggy and Mick Hyde had some prepared written questions and answers and that both were also taking their own notes.
One such omission by phuckwit Smith is at the end of Doc 213 in this series.
Below is what was actually said by Wiggy as opposed to what was written by DO Graham Smith at the foot of page 3.
Sub O Wigglesworth
With regard to the leave taken on the 5th and 6th August. That taken on the 5th was in part taken to fulfil my role as an Health and safety representative. I think normal procedures were taken into account in taking that leave. In the wider context if there is a dispute to me taking health and safety leave to fulfil the relevant functions then reference to section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is quite specific. Reducing this to its simplest terms or the minima. Nobody should suffer detriment from carrying out the functions of a health and safety representative. Therefore to impose sanctions upon anyone taking such leave would be a contravention of section 44. As the 5th was for legitimate health and safety purposes that explains the leave fully.
In respect of the 6th this was taken upon reasonable grounds due to two concerns. Firstly I was subject to a malicious telephone call at my home on August 21st from Assistant Chief Fire Officer Seager. As such it was wholly inappropriate that I should come face to face with him. Secondly the leave was required to enable me to attend an important ante – natal clinic with my partner who has been experiencing complications since June. As such it was reasonable and urgent, more so after a home visit from the midwife on Wednesday morning. The latter expressed further concern at my partners condition ( 37 weeks0 and suggested labour might be induced.
Seems Divisional Officer Graham Smith forgot or chose to alter this statement. Maybe it didn’t suit him to record it in full? More likely he was just plain incapable.
Interview with Sub O. Wigglesworth Continued
Tuesday 18th August 1998
General Analysis Transcript Omission
It has already been stated that the transcript produced by Divisional Officer Graham Smith was seriously incomplete. It is fortunate then that Wiggy and Mick Hyde had some prepared written questions and answers and that both were also taking their own notes.
One such omission by phuckwit Smith is at the end of Doc 213 in this series.
Below is what was actually said by Wiggy as opposed to what was written by DO Graham Smith at the foot of page 3.
Sub O Wigglesworth
With regard to the leave taken on the 5th and 6th August. That taken on the 5th was in part taken to fulfil my role as an Health and safety representative. I think normal procedures were taken into account in taking that leave. In the wider context if there is a dispute to me taking health and safety leave to fulfil the relevant functions then reference to section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is quite specific. Reducing this to its simplest terms or the minima. Nobody should suffer detriment from carrying out the functions of a health and safety representative. Therefore to impose sanctions upon anyone taking such leave would be a contravention of section 44. As the 5th was for legitimate health and safety purposes that explains the leave fully.
In respect of the 6th this was taken upon reasonable grounds due to two concerns. Firstly I was subject to a malicious telephone call at my home on August 21st from Assistant Chief Fire Officer Seager. As such it was wholly inappropriate that I should come face to face with him. Secondly the leave was required to enable me to attend an important ante – natal clinic with my partner who has been experiencing complications since June. As such it was reasonable and urgent, more so after a home visit from the midwife on Wednesday morning. The latter expressed further concern at my partners condition ( 37 weeks0 and suggested labour might be induced.
Seems Divisional Officer Graham Smith forgot or chose to alter this statement. Maybe it didn’t suit him to record it in full? More likely he was just plain incapable.
posted by Bert Blythburgh at 12:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home