|
|
 |
| |
John Foster |
MYSTERY OVER OFFICIAL’S BIG EXIT PAY-OFF
£100,000 payout as Town Hall is accused of ‘spraying cash at problems’
A TOP Islington Council official has been given a £100,000 pay-off following his suspension last year, the Tribune can reveal.
Former head of equality Vernal Scott returned from holiday in November last year to discover he was suspended from his £56,000-a-year post – on full pay – although the Town Hall refuses to say why.
He was paid for the next six months and this week was given a severance payment of about £60,000.
It is believed that, including tax and benefits, he has collected nearly £100,000 since November, but his case has never had a hearing.
Sources close to Mr Scott say some high-ranking councillors were concerned about what he might reveal about the council’s equalities record so agreed to pay him off.
Labour councillor Paul Convery said: “As far as I understand, Vernal’s case was a puree of toxically sensitive issues.
“The council pride themselves on value for money yet it seems to spray money at personnel problems.”
While the council will not discuss why Mr Scott was suspended, it has been suggested that there is controversy over the ordering of electrical equipment with Town Hall funds.
Council chief executive John Foster, who is unfamiliar with the details of Mr Scott’s case, said: “I would be very conscious that this is a matter of public funds and would want any case where staff are suspended on pay to be resolved at the earliest opportunity. But I also understand some cases can be quite complicated and can involve third parties. I would be happy to investigate the generality of the situation.”
Human resources chief Cllr John Gilbert said: “Many large organisations will occasionally have to suspend staff or make redundancies – we are no different. While we don’t discuss payments to individuals, we will respond to information requests where we can.”
Broadcaster and journalist Alex Pascall believes Mr Scott’s suspension was linked to rumours the council were unhappy that Mr Pascall was asked to speak at a Black History Month event.
Mr Pascall said: “It’s sad that a person who tried to relate to what is needed was discredited by the organisation. The question is, is the cancer that destroyed his work and credibility still there?”
The news comes days after the council lost an employment tribunal brought by registrar Lilian Ladele, who declined to oversee gay weddings because they conflicted with her religious beliefs. Although the Town Hall is appealing the case, if it loses it is likely to be faced with giving Ms Ladele a substantial payoff.
Insiders said Mr Scott was told he was being suspended for gross misconduct but believe the council had no clear case against him and therefore were prepared to pay him a large amount in severance pay and avoid another tribunal.
One insider said: “Vernal’s pleased to be free from working for an organisation where equality is something that’s talked about rather than practised. In a just society people get the opportunity to have a hearing and are not just paid thousands of pounds to walk away.”
He added: “There’s a culture across the public sector that public money is disposable money, council tax goes up and up and the criteria to receive services gets tighter.
“There’s something inherently rotten where you find yourself suspended and fully paid with no right of reply.” |
 |
|
|
| |
Your comments:
What on earth is going on here?
Not only is this article badly written, it's so full of holes it comes across as very suspicious.
Why has there been no hearing?
Simon White
I think there should be a full public enquiry into the suspension of Vernal Scott and all related matters, including the reported payout.
K. Norman
There are many employees in organisations across the country whose jobs involve them in challenging their employers in the drive to ensure accountability, compliance with legislation and standards, value for money etc. I also find myself in such a role. Making those challenges can put us in a vulnerable position. For security, we (and everyone else) rely on our organisation's grievance and discipline policies, and the laws that underpin them. Those policies and laws require that a proper investigation take place, followed by a hearing, where all parties can present their side of the story. Any decisions that follow are subject to appeal, and usually, legal challenge through the Employment Tribunal process. If employers avoid proper investigations and hearings, suspend members of staff, and make ex gratia payments with gagging clauses tacked on (so-called "compromise agreements"), then those same policies and laws have been subverted. In the case of public sector organisations, the ex gracia payments involve the transfer of large sums of public money without any due process, on the authority of senior managers, based on a one-sided version of events, conveniently hidden behind a veil of confidentiality that can then no longer be challenged or scrutinised.
This situation, if allowed to continue, permits not only the exploitation of members of staff, but also the corruption of the principle of accountability of public officials, and their management of public money.
Whatever the details of this case may be, it appears that an incident occurred, a member of staff was suspended on full pay for months, and was eventually allowed to resign with an ex gracia payment, all without any kind of hearing, or process for accountability. It should now fall to the council to hold an inquiry into how it accounts for this loss of public money, and the damage to its reputation and credibility with its local residents and elected members, and for the security and piece of mind of its remaining staff, as well as the individual at the centre of this matter.
Paul Carswell |
| |
| |
|
|
|
