Tuesday, 19 May 2015

Visiting London Ambulance Service HQ (Part Three): Executive Views on the Case of Edmund Daly


My visit to London Ambulance Service on 5th May 2015 was a mission to learn more about the organisation's approach to supporting its workforce as its operational staff toil to provide a service in increasingly demanding conditions. With front line staff routinely facing relentless 12-hour shifts without respite, delivering emergency care to the best of their abilities despite skill-sapping fatigue and health-eroding stress, it seemed clear to me that whatever measures were currently in place were insufficient.

An audience with Chief Executive Dr Fionna Moore and Director of Operations Jason Killens gave me the opportunity to learn more about their understanding of the conditions and the measures they were taking to provide relief for their beleaguered ambulance crews. You can read more about their general thoughts and their approach to the challenges in the previous installment of this series, but at the core of the issue was one particular incident which initially alerted me to the LAS dilemma.

News of 30-year veteran LAS paramedic Edmund Daly's dismissal and subsequent suspension of HCPC licence hit the headlines of various media outlets earlier this year and the focus of the coverage was broadly on the fact that he had 'refused to attend a 999 call because he was "tired".'

As I read the reports, it became evident to me that there were more to these circumstances than was featured in the coverage. I read the documentation arising from the HCPC hearing with growing concern. Edmund Daly's case seemed to be a glaring example of the institutional disregard for crew welfare which has become more critical as demand continues to rise and resources become increasingly thin on the ground. At every turn, front line staff are expected to make up for the shortfalls and the inadequacies of the emergency ambulance system and here was a man who had stood up to say 'enough was enough' and had been destroyed for it.

I met with Mr Daly - Eddie - and learned everything he had to tell about his case. His account only compounded my fears, he was every inch the trustworthy professional, a mild-mannered, gentle man who was a credit to his employer and to the paramedic profession, certainly not deserving of such an ignominious end. Furthermore, his reasons for refusing the 999 call seemed justifiable - he was fatigued and unwell with ample evidence to prove it after the fact. Following our meeting, I continued with my research, building a thorough understanding of the entirety of his experience; his career, the night of the 'refusal' incident and the subsequent investigation and multiple hearings.

It just didn't make sense to me that London Ambulance Service would opt to end the career of a loyal, positive and - according to both Dr Fionna Moore and Jason Killens - brilliant clinician in such a way. It was Jason Killens himself who had brought the axe down, so during my interview with him, I resolved to gain an understanding of his part in Eddie's downfall in the hope that it would make more sense.

Seeking An Explanation

'...caring for the people who visit, live and work in the capital.'
In the earlier part of the interview about the general challenges LAS faced, the flow of the discussion had been conversational and positive. But the moment the topic turned toward staff perception of the executive management team and whether the Edmund Daly case set a precedent which fed a culture of fear, things got decidedly more tense.

My initial question, 'It does come down to the precedent set by the Edmund Daly case. What message do you think that that has sent to the people on the front line?' was countered by Jason with another, guarded, question.

'So you tell me what you think about the Edmund Daly case,' he riposted.

There was a long pause as I considered how hard I could push. 'I asked you first,' I chanced.

There was a peel of nervous laughter. The atmosphere remained tense. Jason had the face of a poker player who wasn't going to budge. It looked like I was going to have to lay a card first.

I set about describing Eddie Daly as the 30-year veteran who was highly-regarded by his peers and those in higher stations (a reference to the fact that Fionna Moore herself had provided a character reference in Eddie's defence at his hearing). Every few words I spoke were interrupted by Jason proclaiming his agreement with my statements. An attempt to set me off balance? A knee-jerk need to defend his decision? Or an overbearing attempt to be agreeable? I couldn't be sure.

I then described Eddie’s experiences at the Lakanal House fire in Camberwell in 2009, which left him with some deep-seated issues which permanently undermined his physical and mental well-being, and his ongoing struggles up until the night of his 'misconduct' on 29th May 2013. Killens' interruptions became less frequent and less audible. Dr Moore listened silently throughout.

I highlighted the erosion of his coping mechanisms, the heightened state of fatigue that afflicts PTSD sufferers, and how this would have contributed to his decision on the night of his refusal, finishing with, 'So there you have a man who has done his best for 30 years and to spin forward a year, he's now been sacked for gross misconduct. So how does that come about? What am I missing? What don't I know?'

Jason's response was, 'So, there's probably a whole bunch of things that you don't know that you'll appreciate that I can't talk to you about.'

'A Very Stupid Decision'

Jason Killens, LAS Director of Operations
I explained that Eddie had given me full permission to discuss his case, but Jason had this covered with, 'But he hasn't given me, so I can't breach that confidentiality to you.' Inwardly I was frustrated, I should have got something in writing. He continued:

So what you know is what you know. What I would say, what I would say - and of course you know I'm the bloke who dismissed him - so it was my decision and my decision alone. A dismissal decision is the most difficult thing I have to do in this place. Thankfully, they're rare. Very rare. But it's life-changing for the individual. I recognise that. It's life-changing for them because they lose the job that they love. In most cases. In most cases when people get dismissed it's because they do something so serious, in the spur of the moment, that you can't step back from it. And that's the case, that's what happened here. Eddie... I've known Eddie for a long time, he's a nice bloke as you described at the top. He was a good paramedic, he was well-respected by staff, he was a good team leader, he had a good rapport with patients, he was brilliant clinically. But he made a stupid decision. A very, very stupid or bad decision, whatever you want to call it.'

'Which you're prone to do when you're tired,' I replied. 'Better to make it on the radio rather than when he's trying to administer drugs.'

'As I say, there are some things that I probably know that you might not, which informed my decision at the time. He went through... it was a 12-hour hearing that we had in the end, so it wasn't a quick thing by any stretch. That is very unusual. Very unusual for a dismissal hearing, they would normally go three, four hours. Very unusual to go that long. We went that long because there were a number of things we needed to consider, not least Eddie's career and what happened leading up to the day and what happened on the day and what happened subsequently to the day. But in the end, having considered everything that came forward, the nub of it was that there was a refusal to respond to a call. That's the nub of it, yeah? He refused to go to a job when he should have gone to a job. He was in his shift time, yes? And he refused to go to that call, and on that basis, having struck right at the heart of what we're all here to do: respond to patients, help people.'

Are Patients more Valuable than Staff?

How many unwell people are in this picture?
I asked whether that mandate to help people extends to staff who are unwell as a result of the job, as in Eddie's case.

Jason replied, 'So, he was in his shift time. He was in his shift time and he had not said he was unwell and not able to continue and he refused to go to that call. And being in a position of responsibility, which he was - he was a role model for people, he was a team leader, yeah? That made it worse. And having got to that point, because of what he did on that day, not what happened in the previous thirty years, what he did on that day was so serious that we had no choice but to do what we did. What is easy? No. Was it something that was a split second decision? No. Did I reflect on it and decide whether this was the right thing to do? Yeah, long and hard.'

He went on to use the HCPC decision to suspend Eddie's paramedic licence as further vindication of his decision. The HCPC hearing was unopposed, Eddie had not attended to defend himself, and the evidence and witnesses used were provided by LAS, the same as those used by Jason in the hearing. Jason also pointed out that Eddie had chosen not to dispute the decision at industrial tribunal, apparently unaware that the £40,000 cost of doing so had been an insurmountable barrier for Eddie.

Jason was unrepentant. 'He chose not to represent himself at the HCPC hearing. They're Eddie's choices, not mine, yes? All I'm saying to you is it was not an easy decision. It was not an easy decision. They never are, but in this case it was particularly difficult because of who it was and what he was like as a person here. One of our people. But, because of what he did, I believe it was the right thing to do and I stand by that decision now and I'd do it again.'

What is 'Fitness to Practise?'

I asked, 'Is this indicative of a general management failure to understand what impact ambulance work at the present level of demand has on their operational staff?'

'No. It's not! I can't have...', Jason began, but tailed off as I laboured my point.

Does 'lack of competence' include fatigue or ill health?
'...If a paramedic who is responsible for his own abilities - fitness to practise - considers himself to be unfit to practise...'

At this juncture, Anna Macarthur tried to reign in the increasingly combative nature of our discussion, but Jason had a point to make, stating firmly, 'But that's not what he said!'

There was a brief exchange about the words Eddie used on the night. Eddie maintains that he said 'I don't feel right', Jason disputed this. In the final dismissal documentation issued by Jason (which I checked after the interview), the most similar phrase taken from recordings of the conversation on the night quote Eddie as saying 'I don't feel this is right'. This gives weight to Jason's assertions that Eddie was standing for a principle rather than claiming he was ill. As inconsequential as those two words may sound, it seems that this more than any other single fact was the final nail in the coffin for Eddie's career.

The Weight of Responsibility

Andrew Lansley visits the LAS control room in 2012
I moved on to my next question, 'The Daly case focused on the refusal of a single 999 call, yet no other resources were available for 90 minutes. Surely this indicates a far greater failure of service with responsibility far higher up the food chain? Did anyone answer for that?'

Jason claimed he couldn't recall the nature of the 999 call in question. I reminded him that it was to a 43-year-old female with nausea and vomiting. He also couldn't remember how long the call was held for. I pointed out that HCPC records indicated that it was 90 minutes.

His response, 'So, you heard me say earlier, you know we've got a real pressure of work problem here. We accept that. We've got the highest standard of utilisation in the country. We accept that, we know that. Our commissioners know that and the HSE know that. That's why we've come together this year to tackle it. With a big investment chunk again, we'll bring utilisation down. So it is understood that there is... there are calls which wait longer than we would want. We understand that, we know that.'

Fionna Moore backed him up, 'That's gone on over the last year. Even worse than it was back in 2009. So in the last year, we believe that we have continued to deliver a safe service on the basis of our response to Red 1s and Red 2s. We haven't hit our targets, but we believe we've still provided a safe response and we can evidence that by an internal review and indeed an external clinical review, but the quality of our service that we have provided has been poorer than we would have aspired to and that means that inevitably that C1s and C2s are waiting for a long time.'

Fionna repeated her claim that they were focused on providing a 'safe service' despite the extraordinary demand and lack of resources which sees LAS routinely in a state of 'surge red' with frequent escalations to 'surge purple' (usually reserved for major incidents).

'But safe for who[m] though?' I asked, 'Because in Eddie Daly's case, had he towed the line and gone and done the job, if he was as unwell as I believe he was, then would that have been safe for him to go and respond to a call?'

Her explanation saw her reinforce Jason's position, 'So if Eddie was unwell then he would have told us he was unwell. The evidence that we heard and that the HCPC heard was that if he had said that he was unwell and not able to continue his shift or respond to the call because he was unwell, then the conversation and the outcome would have been entirely different.'

'An Element of Control'

I pushed again for recognition that the moment-to-moment stressors of brutally overworked and under-supported staff wasn't being taken into consideration, but there was a united response of denial from the two executives. My suggestion that at the end of a difficult shift, an employee might not have the wherewithal to convey his condition, let alone treat a patient or operate a vehicle, was shut down.

Fionna stated, 'But then Eddie is not inarticulate. I'm sure, had he said 'I'm sorry, I'm not well' he'd still be here.'

Jason said, 'What I can't do... so, what I'm desperately trying to do through the restructure of management and put the right leadership across the organisation is empower everyone at the lowest possible level to make decisions and be autonomous in what they do, within boundaries. So everyone has to get paid the same, everyone has to wear the same uniform, that kind of stuff. But around that, I want people locally, the local teams to decide how they go about delivering service, within the rules that we have to set and are given to us through the regulations, statutes and so on. What I can't have people doing, is picking and choosing what they do. And the Eddie Daly example is a good one here. I can't have people deciding when they will and won't go to calls. There has to be doesn't there - you surely must see this - there has to be an element of control.'

Jason went on to suggest that there were other elements to the Eddie Daly case of which I wasn't aware but which 'informed' his decision. I was less than convinced, especially after having read through outcome documentation he referenced which I hadn't seen at the time of this interview, but that he insisted was vital and might change my understanding. It didn't. If anything it underlined to me that his decision was made entirely on the basis of Jason's inflexible belief that a rule had been broken and that the details were of no real consequence. As Jason himself had said earlier, ‘It was my decision and my decision alone’. This was apparent.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that the investigations and the disciplinary hearings were a charade, but there is certainly plenty of evidence to suggest that the process was deeply flawed, from a weak investigation to witheld evidence, suspect reports and precedents which were dismissed (the paramedic officer who refused a 999 call but kept his job and got a 'reflective practise' verdict from the HCPC). Most worryingly, it suggested an absolute disregard for Eddie’s welfare and the clear systemic collusion to disprove that as a factor relevant to the case.

Faith in the Process

'...improving the working lives of staff.'
Jason defended the process, 'Because it was messy, what we were trying to do was brick it all into a sensible place where Eddie and his representative can take the panel considering the decisions through what had gone on so that an informed decision could be made. One of the reasons, that I said earlier, that we had a 12-hour hearing was to tackle all of those issues. To get everything lined up and dealt with on the day. That was Eddie's choice, that's what he wanted to do.'

This seemed unfair on Eddie, he was very much a stunned passenger in the whole process. I said, 'I spoke to him about that particular point yesterday and he said that it was a... he opted for the lesser of two evils. He just wanted it over. It had been a torturous experience for him up until then. So he was presented with a choice of prolonging the agony further, or proceeding that day when it probably wasn't in the best interests of his case. So he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.'

Jason considered this, arriving at, 'I think that's a fair assessment. This issue wasn't going to go away and it needed to be brought to a conclusion one way or another. And the choice for Eddie on the day was: do you deal with it today or do we put it off and postponed it for another day. Because it was not going to go away. It wasn't going to stop. We had to have the hearing, we had to come to a decision. ... He and his rep chose to carry on.'

We went on to discuss whether there might have been another way to deal with Eddie's 'misconduct', but Jason insisted that due to the grave nature of the allegation, despite Eddie being 'a model employee', the 'material breach of contract' gave Jason no choice in the matter. He said, 'if I had my time again, I'd be saying to Eddie “don't say the things you said. Don't do what you did that night. Do the job.” ... I'm not advocating telling fibs. What I'm saying is that if you're unwell, then the member of staff needs to say that they're unwell. … What I'd say to you is that Eddie Daly was a one-off, isolated case. There are very small numbers of people who were dismissed for circumstances like that. But having done what he did, I had no choice. And I believe that it was the right decision and I would do it again.'

Fionna offered this on Eddie’s traumatic experiences and whether she thought that related to the misconduct incident. ‘It doesn't take anything away from the fact that Eddie was a great bloke with thirty years of great service and in that dreadful incident in Lakanal House, the fire there, that was absolutely dreadful. I've listened to the tape of that, of Eddie on the phone, and I know how awful it was when we talked about it. So none of that [is relevant]... it's just two completely different episodes.’

Sword of Damocles or Executioner's Axe?

LAS execs at the 7/7 bombing inquest in 2011
In conclusion, neither Jason Killens nor Fionna Moore seemed to feel that there was any miscarriage of justice in the case of Edmund Daly. They could not - or would not - see any correlation between LAS putting its staff in intolerable positions and those same staff having an unavoidably human response to those same conditions.

I am sympathetic to the pressures and responsibilities of senior executives dealing with cases like Eddie Daly’s, and I understand that, in a way, Eddie’s brinkmanship left Jason Killens with a ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ decision.

In my opinion, the ultimate problem is one of overworked staff, an unforgivable state of affairs caused by numerous factors, not all of them in Jason and Fionna’s control. It is fair to say that, had Mr. Killens been seen to allow Edmund Daly a pass for refusing a 999 call, it would have set a different precedent and potentially opened the floodgates to an increasing number of similar ‘refusals’.

However, with the Operations Director admitting himself that 'utilisation' is unacceptably high at 95%, staff are pushed far too hard. Dangerously so. Under those conditions, it is inevitable that clinician health, attitude, welfare and ability to function will be impaired. Had those intolerable circumstances been avoided in the first place, then Eddie Daly would never have felt the need to make his stand. It is Jason Killens and Fionna Moore who are ultimately responsible for pushing staff to the brink and that they fail to see their part in that - and its relationship to Eddie Daly's predicament - is worrying.

The hearing outcome which Jason Killens chose still sets a dramatic precedent, one which is deeply damaging to any claims that staff welfare is a priority.

Why should a single paramedic pay the highest price for failing to attend one 999 call when the executive management team who are ultimately responsible for the conditions which lead failures of far greater magnitude remain beyond recrimination?


-----

Please consider supporting this blog by following THIS LINK to become a Patron of The Broken Paramedic.

62 comments:

  1. Everyone with any length of LAS service hates Killens.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jason Killens has admitted that Eddie was sacked merely as an example:

    "I can't have people deciding when they will and won't go to calls."

    yet they can if they SAY they are sorry and unwell?:

    "I'm sure, had he said 'I'm sorry, I'm not well' he'd still be here.' "

    (The man is talking bollocks)

    and:

    " 'So if Eddie was unwell then he would have told us he was unwell. The evidence that we heard and that the HCPC heard was that if he had said that he was unwell and not able to continue his shift or respond to the call because he was unwell, then the conversation and the outcome would have been entirely different.' "

    (note it says "the evidence that we HEARD and that the HCPC HEARD")

    Did he not inform them and have sufficient evidence he was unwell during the disciplinary whitewash and demonstrate it by the fact this was out of character and being off with PTSD following the Lakanal House fire?

    The only accusation against him was that he "refused a red call" after no break 11 hours into a shift. On its own that should not have been sufficient grounds for dismissal. There is more than enough evidence that was not the case.

    I notice Jason Killens chaired the disciplinary hearing, sacked Eddie, agreed to meet you to discuss the case following the outcry on this website, says: " 'So, there's probably a whole bunch of things that you don't know that you'll appreciate that I can't talk to you about.' " and yet "Jason claimed he couldn't recall the nature of the 999 call in question." and "He also couldn't remember how long the call was held for." even though these issues had already been raised on this website. (yes, more bollocks).

    These people have demonstrated no compassion, have they no shame?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He didn't refuse a red call; he pointed out to EOC that he felt he couldn't respond to an amber call.

      Delete
    2. Didn't he spend 12 hours at the hearing TELLING you how UNWELL he had become. He was already being treated for diagnosed PTSD for sometime before the event. PTSD caused by working for YOU.
      Give the man some f%%king credit.
      Christ almighty. You cannot make this stuff up.

      Delete
  3. Nepotism is rife in the LAS and Killens is the worst offender!, obviously Mr Daley was not in the right "club"! Everybody hates him Killens has no respect for him.HIS management restructure has taken three years still isn't finished he's now bored with it everyone is disengaged and he's a very very poor manager let alone senior manager.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Seeing as he knew you were coming and what you were talking about it seems strange that he didn't have the figures and details of the call available, especially as he's at the LAS hq. They must keep call info as they used it to discipline Eddie in the first place and it was documented in the HCPC hearing.
    That, to me, shows someone who isn't an effective manager?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its worse than that, the details of the call had already been raised as an issue on this blog before Mat met Killens including the fact that LAS were "so concerned about the nature of the call that they couldn't be bothered to get an ambulance to the patient for a further 90 minutes" and LAS blamed Eddie for the further delay at the HCPC hearing as it is in the hearing notes. So Killens is also implying that he hasn't read this blog and is not aware of his own evidence that was used to sack his employee and suspend him from the register. I think you will agree that is pretty unlikely.

      Delete
  6. If not doing a call and in effect 'depriving the public of an ambulance' is such a heinous crime, no matter the extenuating circumstances, why was the manager treated so differently for exactly the same thing? His reason for refusing the call simply being that he is a manager! Did you ask Killens the reason for that decision?

    At the end of a 12 hour night shift without a break, Eddie was exhausted. He was suffering from PTSD due to a manager's negligence at the fire call (failing to acknowledge and pass on vital information provided by Eddie re people still trapped above the fire who subsequently died) and he had on-going un-diagnosed medical issues. And 30 years unblemished service. Killens should hang his head in shame (or just hang his head perhaps). Incidentally, the manager on that fire call is still working for the LAS in a high managerial position.

    So what about 'depriving the public of an ambulance'? Viewing this phrase from a wider perspective, should all those people guilty of this be treated similarly harshly? It happens all the time due to managerial negligence and incompetence. Bringing in a system whereby a fully equipped vehicle is removed from your station and is replaced by one either illegal to drive or missing vital equipment ('make ready'). Recently, a vehicle had been delivered to station with a flat tyre.This was reported to 'control' at the start of the shift but it wasn't acted upon for over 2 hours. Including the delay for the tyre people, it was over 3 hours before we could respond to an emergency. Does that catalogue of errors constitute 'depriving the public of an ambulance'? Should those responsible be sacked. I have heard of an AOM (station manager) who makes a crew 'vehicle off road' in order for them to drive up to main station to receive a long service certificate: surely that also constitutes the same thing. I could give many examples.

    The LAS is full of bullying managers. Staff are leaving in droves, and not just to other NHS jobs. Often it is to do something that pays a lot less: recently a shop assistant, a train driver, a bus driver, a waitress. Anything to avoid ever increasing night shifts, high stress levels and continual pressure. Something that allows for a more normal family life perhaps. Myself: broken, too many years in and nowhere else to go; disenfranchised, bullied and harassed, threatened, and feeling totally devoid of support even by the union. So a message to Killens and his chums: you are stuck with the likes of me, and there are lots of us, for years to come - until you can find a reason to sack us I suppose. And I reiterate a sentiment on an earlier post, I am proud of the care and treatment I provide to my patients IN SPITE of LAS management. And I will keep soldiering on as long as I can, with all the aches and pains and bitterness, though I can't see me making it to 67!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. That clown says it himself "He" wont have anyone telling him bet he was useless on road ambulance services are not emergency services and thus are not exempt from wtd and driving laws staff all over uk need to collectively take this to european courts

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. they use a legal exemption designed to ensure staff can work through major incidents without a break, think of Kings Cross fire or London bombings where it's impractical to stand staff down for a break, but mis-apply it (as usual when it's convenient to them) to standard operating procedure - daily work

      how this is going on is absurd and it needs legal challenge in employment court by the Unions to prevent the systematic abuse of staff - u cant have 95% utilisation and fail to protect your workers health by ensuring a break every 6 hours as is applied to all workers in the EU

      If Unison were really bothered about their members H&S, they should be funding a proper legal challenge to this malpractice

      Delete
  8. Something that has come out of this:

    Eddies interview said it was an Amber (non life threatening) whereas the HCPC and Killings is saying it was a Red call.

    Which one was it??

    And no one has picked up on the fact it was over 10 miles out of the area Eddie was supposed to be covering. Epic Fail LAS.

    Killers - you just alienated the entire workforce. Congratulations you should be very proud and I'm sure Dr Moore would love to tell you exactly what she really thinks about you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Actually, a little bird told me that Fionna Moore seems to be scared of Killens and subsequently may just end up being his puppet.

    And, yes you hit the nail on the head there - alienated the entire workforce, oh dear!

    I'm starting to hope that 'karma' exists!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why did Kevin Brown even pick up on this call weeks after the event?????

    People need to understand the toxic culture and poisonous ladder you need to climb in order to progress in the LAS management.

    Essentially, the first step is to become an Acting Duty Station Officer (ADSO), you are given a two week course and a document that needs completing and signing off for various activities to prove you are competent and fit to lose the 'acting' moniker. Maria Smith (eddies investigating officer) was still 'acting'.

    One of the 'skills' to be signed off is to satisfactorily complete a disciplinary investigation.

    Disciplinary investigations are instigated on the basis there is a very strong belief of serious wrongdoing, and this quickly becomes the 'Management Case'. From this point on the ADSO will be doing their upmost to appease the senior manager who instigated the investigation. In this case Kevin Brown.

    There is no impartiality, as the ADSO is desperate to form a solid case against the employee and so it goes on. Few, if any, who have investigations started against them will end up with Advice and Guidance or No Further Action outcomes. The precedent is set and by the time they end up finally in a hearing, the outcome is entirely obvious - and in eddies case Mr Killens clearly demonstrates this ethos of ignoring entirely feasible mitigation. If there was so much mitigation, of such serious nature, that it took TWELVE HOURS to hear, it is incomprehensible for that mitigation to bear no influence on the outcome.

    Summary dismissal is reserved for staff with criminal convictions, those that deliberately harm service users or repeat offenders who fail to change unacceptable behaviour. To apply it to someone who finally had the courage to stand up for himself in the face of an unfair request at the end of a night shift, given the existing diagnosed problems is diabolical poor management and Killens cannot continue in his position with any degree of credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yes, many managers were trying to distance themselves from this case because they knew Eddie was such a special person, an extremely well respected paramedic and team leader and a man who had dedicated himself to the ambulance service and its staff for 30 years. It seems that Ms Smith was given the poisoned chalice, possibly because she was a 'new' manager and couldn't say 'no'. Everyone knew that Eddie was being treated very shabbily and wanted nothing to do with it. Ms Smith apparently was 'sick' more than once when hearings/meetings were held. Are the Care Quality Commission interested in the human rights abuses and institutional bullying carried by this odious organisation? Do they condone the tragic treatment of Eddie Daly?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very astute and bang on. Maria Smith wasn't able to do the right thing as she was forced into the pantomime by Kevin Brown.
      She's a lovely woman and couldn't bring herself to appear against Eddie - going 'sick' was the only option.
      Wake up Killens and admit your wrong, again. Never happen as his arrogance knows no limits.

      Delete
  12. If Fionna Moore is scared of Killens then it would only be that she is concerned of who to find to fill his role. Which is the basis of his longevity thus far. He's so ingrained in the LAS Ops that any CEO would struggle to find an external applicant able to easily take over, whilst at the same time the new CEO is trying to find their own feet.
    Given the total failure of the LAS, which is now an unsafe service due to Killens mismanagement, his days must be numbered.
    The impending CQC inspection will no doubt see through the bullshit and finally he will be held to account.
    When the Unison branch chair publicly denigrates the Operations Director, the clock is ticking and the leaving do of the decade can't be far off. Of course no one will actually go to Killens party, but they will certainly be drinking to his departure.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kevin Brown just as bad. Remember his brother. Known as "Sly Devious Bastard". Runs in the family.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I checked the HCPC register, and can't find Killens. Anyone know what, if any, professional body he belongs to?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. never did his own bag...

      Delete
  15. Maybe the Health and Safety Executive should be investigating the unsafe working along with the CQC?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Killens is top of list for East England chief exec job i hear.
    Good luck people

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He'll fit in well here then. There's a proper and established bullying culture out this way.
      Unison even referred to them recently as the "Essex Mafia".
      Anthony "put that on my expenses" Marsh started in Essex....

      Delete
  17. Coz that's exactly what they need - someone who managed to turn the best ambo trust in the country into a failing service with the worst NHS staff surveys and a mass exodus.
    If that happened it would help the LAS recruitment crisis - they'd all come back!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'll bet Killens was bullied at school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure if I've ever seen a picture of a more smug and arrogant person.

      Well not since Benito Mussolini. He was a smug dictator as well.

      Didn't end well for him though. It rarely does.

      Delete
  19. JK were you tired when you made a very very stupid or bad decision or whatever you want to call it. Taxi for killens . Fionna you have gone down in my estimation you should have remained quiet at the interview, instead of protecting a fool. you have only succeeded in alienating your best asset. Lions led by Donkeys.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mat you say, "In the final dismissal documentation issued by Jason (which I checked after the interview)" The final dismissal documentation should record all relevant details that led to the dismissal decision. It would be illegal not to record any other reason that the decision was based on, so where Jason Killens says "As I say, there are some things that I probably know that you might not, which informed my decision at the time." he is wrong or has based his decision on other reasons not recorded. We already know he "(claimed) he couldn't recall the nature of the 999 call in question". Or that it took 90 minutes to subsequently respond a vehicle yet he reported these facts to the HCPC in an attempt to blame Eddie for the further delay. Looks like you know far more about the case than he does.

    Jason Killens has told us all exactly what he thinks of Eddie and the rest of his employees by his actions. LAS treatment of Eddie based on the facts of the case is inexcusable. The facts are glaringly obvious no-one reading these facts could possibly come to any other conclusion than that Eddie has been treated appallingly by Jason Killens and others.

    All the spin in the world can't change the facts. You can put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig.

    ReplyDelete
  21. From reading this article and the one prior it would seem that killens is nothing more than a big bully. It is such a shame such people have to lean so heavily on their workforce, I work for NWAS and it isn't great but I feel as though I could trust my managers if I had a serious mental health issue. I feel so sorry for my colleagues at LAS

    ReplyDelete
  22. But the fact remains, he still refused a call and we all know the outcome of a refused call. If he was sick, he should have reported sick

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He never got the chance, he was 'cut down' by the radio operator when trying, badly, to explain why he didn't feel able to respond. Read the HCPC notes:

      EOC: … we are going to cut you down. I will say you are not going to take the call and then that is [sic]
      ED: Yeah, thank you.

      He did well not to lose the plot and scream down the radio that he could take no more pressure, his arse was bleeding and to stick the job. A professional to the end. Snapping once in 30 years. Most people have a brain fart much earlier, don't deserve sacking for that.

      Delete
  23. If the outcome of a refused call is such a foregone conclusion, why did the manager who refused a call keep his job? Was he near the end of a night shift without a break? Was he suffering from PTSD? Was he PR bleeding and waiting for the diagnosis? Was he ashamed of expressing the need to be near a toilet at all times in order to avoid an accident? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe being a manager is enough to act with impunity, including refusing to do emergency calls when they are given to you and also to sack a long-serving and loyal member of staff in order to make an example of them and ensure the remaining frontline workforce do as they are told.

    ReplyDelete
  24. You don't prosecute the victim for being abused; the victim here is Eddie Daley, the abusers or offenders are the managers who abused him further and decided to make an example of him.

    Are we all so institutionally abused that we think "they had no choice" but to discipline Eddie Daley when he didn't do anything wrong?

    Honesty, integrity and abuse are at the heart of this case.
    If it feels wrong and looks wrong then it probably is wrong.

    There is so much wrong here, the stench of bullshit must be causing nausea and vomiting throughout LAS, let alone the patient.

    This case is a miscarriage of justice, I know it, you know it and senior managers know it.

    Eddie Daley had the honesty and integrity to explain his actions to an EOC manager on the night when he informed them he was unable to attend the call, he stayed late to tell the manager so it wasn't anything to do with 'not wanting to be late off'. The EOC manager apparently accepted this explanation at the time. That was the end of any ‘case’ (or should have been).

    He didn’t refuse a red call, he said words to the effect ‘he didn’t feel right’ and was stood down by EOC. It is irrelevant what actual words were used, he was unavailable to attend the amber call that he should not have been allocated to after 11 hours of a relentless shift with no break and should have been stood down. There were no grounds for dismissal.

    It doesn’t matter what he actually said over the radio, his reasons were explained to the manager on the night and they were also explained later during the disciplinary whitewash.

    The ‘case’ was over; it was explained to and dealt with by the EOC manager at the time. Some time later, for egotistical reasons, the ‘old boys network’ managers decided to make an example of Eddie and Kevin Brown investigated. It is likely they decided to discipline Eddie Daley because it WAS Eddie Daley (if you want to create or continue a climate of fear what better example than someone known and respected by others?). It’s called BULLYING.

    From then on the outcome was inevitable. A case was cobbled together; facts were exaggerated, made up, twisted, ignored, withheld or glossed over to suit the outcome. Certainly the HCPC were given inaccurate one-sided details by LAS for their hearing.

    One question that kept bothering me (or ‘didn’t feel right’) about this case was why would Jason Killens falsely claim, “he couldn’t recall the nature of the 999 call in question” and he also "couldn’t remember how long the call was held for”. Then commenters above suggested the call might have been an amber call (it was certainly the quality of an amber call or even ‘hear and treat’) others also point out that the call was over 10 miles out of the area Eddie was supposed to be covering.

    Is that why Killens tried to avoid discussing the nature of the call and the time it took to respond? Also, is that why the phrase ‘999 call’ was used instead of ‘red call’?

    At all times Eddie Daley has conducted himself with honesty, integrity and compassion in the care off his patients. It is time for the senior management team and executives to demonstrate the same honesty, integrity and compassion in caring for their employees.

    The managers involved in Eddie Daley’s dismissal do not have the confidence or respect of staff. It is inconceivable they should be allowed to manage LAS staff any longer.

    “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (or women) to do nothing”

    It is time for other managers who were involved in this case who know it 'didn't feel right' to come forward and clear the air.

    Don’t let this embarrassing bullying drag on any longer. It’s time for the chief exec and chair to investigate and prove there is honesty and integrity in LAS management.

    How many more staff do we want to lose due to an unpleasant working environment?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spot on. Killens pretending to 'forget' the details, what a load of crap.
      Embarrassing really.
      And yes, it would only highlight the failings of his own to have needed to even ask that crew to go to Kingston from Westminster. It is 10 miles out of area.
      Says it all when Kevin Brown was going to chair the hearing himself, he should automatically have been excluded from selection due to instigating the whole thing himself. Utter joke.

      Delete
  25. Killens has done the classic hiding behind the Data Protection Act ruse. If he was bound by confidentiality, he would not have discussed any facet of the case. Instead, he chose to wax lyrical about some of the elements that justified his decision, and refused to speak about the other. He lied that he was not able to discuss the matter. As Adolf Hitler said himself "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it" The difference between dictators of Hitler's ilk and this type of ambulance manager is that Hitler had a following, people who liked him, trusted him, treated him with reverence. It would be fair to say that he had more friends within his organisation than Killens. I have no doubt that he will end up with East of England. It is the birthplace of this style of management from the Gron Roberts Days.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anyone know if the GMB union are making any effort to redeem themselves, either through LAS channels or paying for an appeal on the grounds of miscarriage of justice? This isn't exactly good PR for membership. I don't know about you, but I'm not really interested in politics, the only thing I pay my subs for is legal advice and representation if I need it. Or is Unison doing anything?

    What the fuck was Eddie paying his subs for?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As GMB solicitors refused to represent Eddie for appeal or for Employment Tribunal and have done nothing so far, they must have trained at the 'Pontius Pilate Art Of Defence School'.

      What did they have to lose? Only money....oh wait a minute...how much are those subs again? How many ambulance members do they have?

      As for 'miscarriage of justice', 'perverting the course of justice' and 'misconduct in a public office', because the disciplinary process led to dismissal then it is seen as a legal process. These days you have a fairer system at a court martial in the services than you have in the ambulance service but this has yet to be identified by the legal profession. There are a number of facts here suggesting perversion of the legal process;

      Why did Kevin Brown start an investigation several weeks after the incident was over?

      How on earth did they think they could get away with the investigating manager
      chairing the disciplinary? This would be equivalent to the prosecutor judging a trial, even the fact they thought they could is grounds for appeal then, when it was pointed out that the investigator couldn't be the judge, can you then hand over the judging to your bullying mate?

      The whole case was based on the fact that the prosecution bullies said that Eddie had refused a red call. Now if I was the prosecutor I would immediately have produced the tapes proving my case, but that didn't happen did it? Tapes went missing and then tapes were produced at the very last moment, which mysteriously had noise, it wasn't clear or agreed exactly what was said except "I don't feel right" (or words to that effect).

      More perversions than Sodom and Gomorrah!

      Delete
  27. Let's hope Fionna Moore is the only exec taken in by Killen's management 'Newspeak' and 'investigation'.

    As for the Lakanal House fire having nothing to do with this case, I respect her medical skills, but she knows Jack sh*t about PTSD if she really believes that. What do you think made Eddie unwell in the first place, why do you think he finally gave up and didn't turn up for the HCPC hearing? He was YOUR respected employee, he deserves YOUR support, YOU the employer, the trust, LAS caused this, YOU are the ones who should be held to account, not Eddie. Instead you have blamed him for YOUR failings. He should have not been disciplined, the managers who roasted and bullied him in public view in order to enhance their reputation for bullying should be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anyone know if LAS execs are doing anything? Or, as above, have they all trained at the 'Pontius Pilate School of Executive Management'?

      Delete
  28. I have been in a situation where we were just at the gates to station and we were given a job that hadn't been coded and my colleague needed the toilet so he asked if he could just go to the toilet first (as we had signed on early as they had outstanding calls and we were 3 hours into the shift and hadn't even had chance to check our vehicle yet). He was then told the call had gone red so we would have to run on it and he asked again if he could go to the toilet first. He got the immediate response we all dread 'Are you refusing a red call?' Are we expected to wet ourselfs or put our health at risk by not going to the toilet all day? This is why most staff are dehydrated, they're scared to drink in case they need the toilet and aren't allowed to go. I've heard other similar stories.
    Another time I was threatened with being suspended for not attending a red call which they sent through to me when I was still dealing with another job (which in itself was a horrible job which I should have been given support with) and still had said job on my screen. I was then bullied into writing a statement despite them refusing to show me the complaint (?made by control or management?) and threatened with management making my life difficult with my application for another job within the service.
    Most people I know within the ambulance service are forced to drive home dangerously tired and (nearly) falling asleep at the wheel on multiple occasions due to the way the service runs. I would never drive anywhere near that tired on my days off but you have no choice when you are work or need to get home so you can get as much proper sleep as possible before you're back in again. A 20 minute nap and coffee just doesn't cut it to make you safe to drive when you are so exhausted that your legs (or whole body) hurt just from doing what you are expected to do day in day out. It's all so so wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  29. In my experience all the tapes/recordings go missing when they contain something that doesn't suit and I have seen incidents when job notes have been highly inaccurate or changed after the event. I was lucky enough to be able to see when this happened to me and the records were then amended to make them accurate but it seems to be common place and most people can't see them to query the entries which makes any situation that arises dangerously one sided.

    ReplyDelete
  30. We were on an undisturbable break once. They phoned the red phone on station. We (stupidly) answered it and they asked us to attend a job. My crew mate told them we were on an undisturbable break, they asked if we were refusing to attend a time critical red call. He backed down and we attended only to find there was another crew dealing with the time critical patient and we were just there to do some paperwork on a patient who it had already been ascertained did not need to go to hospital. We obviously didn't get the rest of our break or an apology or a thank you after we finished that job. Just bullied out of our rights again.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This sort of manager ends up eating his or her own. If you look over the border to our colleagues in EEAST, following a staff survey indicating that late finishes and the sickness / disciplinary policy were two of the biggest stressors, Unison were in discussion to try and reduce late finishes by reducing the type of call you could be allocated if it would cause you to be late off. Some of their senior management team weren’t happy with the idea, so to undermine the plan they leaked it to the right wing Tory press. The plans were leaked by one of the executive management team from a board meeting, how could I confidently say this? Because the details they leaked included risk factors from the ‘corporate dashboard’, these details had not yet been released and only board members attend this closed element of the board meeting. How disloyal is that? Not only to your staff, but to your own chief executive.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Very few people have the fire in their belly to fight these corrupt managers. I am very proud to say that a Trust actually called the police on me a few weeks ago - there was no crime, the police did not pursue the matter as I was perfectly within my rights to write to them regarding legal matters, but that was their short sighted answer to getting me off their backs - claiming I was harassing them. An organisation or body corporate cannot be harassed. Only an individual. A PC got a bollocking from his Inspector for sending me an email setting out their collective butthurt, and we are now back to the position we were in before - me on the attack. At a recent Employment Tribunal they shipped in two solicitors from Birmingham each day on 1st class train (I travelled on the same train as them but in cattle class) and brought in the best Employment Law barrister money could buy from Wales and paid his hotel and expenses. They probably spent £70k of public money on a case that would have cost half that to settle. They managed to score one point out of two, but they were that fearful of me that this is the lengths that they went to. The time for describing, narrating, moaning and complaining about how bad things have become should be over. The instructing of corrupt impotent unions should be a thing of the past. Sadly, living on band 3, 4 or 5 wages is like living on a shoestring and 3 wages away from eviction and that is where they have you - and they damned well know it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t think Simon’s confrontational style would be my natural approach, not ‘just’ because I’m a woman, as I’m sure many men wouldn’t have the ‘fire in their belly’ but because if you have to work with these people and come to some sort of agreement it would be intolerable to be constantly confrontational. Doesn’t Simon eventually have to work with his legal adversaries sometimes to come to an agreement and settle out of court? On the other hand you have to consider that the non-confrontational approach didn’t help Eddie, did it?
      As for ‘corrupt impotent unions’ I think there’s a danger of generalising and exaggerating, there may be someone somewhere who is ‘in the pocket of managers’ but I know many union reps who spend every spare hour unpaid representing members and very often end up being targeted for it. On the other hand there are varying degrees of competency within the volunteer rep pool and paying years of subs into the GMB didn’t guarantee legal representation when Eddie required it most, did it? What’s the alternative? Union representation is written into law the same as legal representation and isn’t ‘partnership working’ similar to ‘settling out of court’. I work for EEAST and I think it’s fair to say that in spite of misgivings and suspicion on both sides the mutual co-operative approach has helped, or at least I thought, then I read these comments;
      1. Anonymous6 May 2015 at 14:16
      Don't know if that is the same private occupational health company EEAST uses, but they provide 'telephone' physiotherapy consultations! Can't find anything on the HCPC site about telephone physiotherapy consultations? Also reports staff have been threatened to be booked fit by occy health if their sickness does not fit their funding criteria. There have also been reports of occupational health sending confidential medical details such as letters from consultants to managers and managers making inappropriate comments to staff when no one else is present during bullying sickness reviews.
      2.
      Anonymous6 May 2015 at 16:55
      In reply, someone has pointed out this freedom of information request

      https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/people_asset_management_pam#outgoing-376367

      EEAST uses PAM (People Asset Management). Reading the FOI its worse than we thought!

      Don't know if Simon has seen the whatdotheyknow.com website, but there are some interesting FOI requests, certainly seems to show similar management tactics have been going on for a while.
      3.
      Anonymous22 May 2015 at 18:05
      My experience of PAM is shocking to most but unfortunately not unusual. I had a telephone physio consultation and based on this was given exercises which made me significantly worse. They talk to you as though you are either lying or just stupid and tell you that you can't possibly have the problems that you do eventually get diagnosed with or say that those issues are not the cause of your pain. After dealing with them for a year and a half I had become so depressed as a direct effect of their treatment that I was on the brink of being medicated. If I had not paid hundreds of pounds for treatment by a very good chiropractor who solved the problem I would have lost my job. Considering this was all caused by an injury at work it is disgusting. We shouldn't be treated like this. Some of my colleagues work on in pain as they do not want to risk being referred to them, having seen their treatment of others and many colleagues have had 'treatment' that has made them worse including deep tissue massage on a fracture!

      (continued below)

      Delete
  33. Give it to the bastards both barrels Simon.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I don’t think Simon’s confrontational style would be my natural approach, not ‘just’ because I’m a woman, as I’m sure many men wouldn’t have the ‘fire in their belly’ but because if you have to work with these people and come to some sort of agreement it would be intolerable to be constantly confrontational. Doesn’t Simon eventually have to work with his legal adversaries sometimes to come to an agreement and settle out of court? On the other hand you have to consider that the non-confrontational approach didn’t help Eddie, did it?
    As for ‘corrupt impotent unions’ I think there’s a danger of generalising and exaggerating, there may be someone somewhere who is ‘in the pocket of managers’ but I know many union reps who spend every spare hour unpaid representing members and very often end up being targeted for it. On the other hand there are varying degrees of competency within the volunteer rep pool and paying years of subs into the GMB didn’t guarantee legal representation when Eddie required it most, did it? What’s the alternative? Union representation is written into law the same as legal representation and isn’t ‘partnership working’ similar to ‘settling out of court’? I work for EEAST and I think it’s fair to say that in spite of misgivings and suspicion on both sides the mutual co-operative approach has helped, or at least I thought, then I read these comments;
    1. Anonymous6 May 2015 at 14:16
    Don't know if that is the same private occupational health company EEAST uses, but they provide 'telephone' physiotherapy consultations! Can't find anything on the HCPC site about telephone physiotherapy consultations? Also reports staff have been threatened to be booked fit by occy health if their sickness does not fit their funding criteria. There have also been reports of occupational health sending confidential medical details such as letters from consultants to managers and managers making inappropriate comments to staff when no one else is present during bullying sickness reviews.
    2.
    Anonymous6 May 2015 at 16:55
    In reply, someone has pointed out this freedom of information request

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/people_asset_management_pam#outgoing-376367

    EEAST uses PAM (People Asset Management). Reading the FOI its worse than we thought!

    Don't know if Simon has seen the whatdotheyknow.com website, but there are some interesting FOI requests, certainly seems to show similar management tactics have been going on for a while.
    3.
    Anonymous22 May 2015 at 18:05
    My experience of PAM is shocking to most but unfortunately not unusual. I had a telephone physio consultation and based on this was given exercises which made me significantly worse. They talk to you as though you are either lying or just stupid and tell you that you can't possibly have the problems that you do eventually get diagnosed with or say that those issues are not the cause of your pain. After dealing with them for a year and a half I had become so depressed as a direct effect of their treatment that I was on the brink of being medicated. If I had not paid hundreds of pounds for treatment by a very good chiropractor who solved the problem I would have lost my job. Considering this was all caused by an injury at work it is disgusting. We shouldn't be treated like this. Some of my colleagues work on in pain as they do not want to risk being referred to them, having seen their treatment of others and many colleagues have had 'treatment' that has made them worse including deep tissue massage on a fracture!

    (continued next comment)

    ReplyDelete
  35. I thought that an occupational health service was for the health and wellbeing of its patients, not for the wealth and sickness reduction targets of its shareholders and NHS managers? Clearly, reading these comments and the freedom of information request, I was wrong. EEAST has outsourced its occupational health service to a for profit company the aim of which is to make as much money as possible by achieving some sickness reduction target. To achieve this they bully you back to work by suggesting your sickness isn’t genuine, often based on a telephone ‘consultation’. They then report their ‘findings’ back to your employer; presumably to make you look bad for any capability hearings. As for ‘telephone physiotherapy’, I thought the word physiotherapy meant treatment by physical methods and manual therapy, what next telephone surgery? The freedom of information request was made over a year ago and the answers confirmed that “only 1 in 5 physiotherapy referrals actually saw a physiotherapist”, the vast majority were assessed, diagnosed and treated over the telephone!

    (continued next comment)

    ReplyDelete
  36. What horrified me most from the comments was the suggestion that confidential medical records were being sent to managers and managers were making inappropriate comments during bullying sickness reviews. Isn’t it illegal for your occupational health service, or anyone else for that matter, to give confidential medical information to your managers without your express written authorisation? Do we automatically sign away any expectation of confidentiality when we contact PAM to book sick? Without going into details, following a comment from one of my managers I recently became suspicious that they had somehow accessed my personal medical records. Even though I can be a very confident, “sweet little thing”, on occasion friends have also suggested I can be an “in your face bitch”, but just the thought of one of these smug pigs smirking as they read my confidential medical records or start talking euphemistically about ‘women’s problems’ makes me cringe. As every woman knows, this isn’t an unlikely scenario; we recently had a manager jailed for sexual assault, inappropriate behaviour and harassment against 3 women on his station. Imagine how those victims would feel if they thought the offender had access to their intimate medical records. There’s no reason whatsoever for your managers to see your medical records, even if you break your leg all they need to know is you broke your leg, consultant letters about your broken leg and treatment are irrelevant to your manager and often contain other personal medical history. What would you guys do if your bleeding piles became the ‘butt’ of some manager’s joke? On the same theme, I can fully understand Eddie would struggle to find the right words to avoid blurting out over the radio that he was bleeding from his rectum (sorry) and “didn’t feel right” or “feel it was right” that he should attend an amber call 10 miles away after 11 hours of a busy shift. You guys would even struggle to discuss rectal bleeding with your GP wouldn’t you?

    Is there a professional body or regulator who will investigate if we reported this awful PAMs Company to them? Are they acting legally? Are they releasing confidential information to managers? Is ‘telephone physiotherapy’ accepted by the HCPC? Are the ‘telephone physiotherapists’ registered?

    From the suggestion above about ‘eating their own’ it’s possible that the bullying managers, who Anthony Marsh appointed, may be turning on their own boss in order to get their own way, as far as I know Anthony Marsh also appointed PAM, when he goes where does that leave Unison’s supportive approach, or any agreements achieved? There are limits to supportive partnership working or the ‘mutual co-operative’ approach; if any of the stories regarding PAM are true this is way beyond those limits. It’s time to take an “in your face bitch” approach and get Anthony Marsh to remedy this mistake, before we are left with PAM and the managers they work closely with.
    Maybe we need “both barrels Simon” after all?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Lost part 1 of 3 above as reply to Simon Hoyle, is it retrievable?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, 2 part 1's now!

      Delete
    2. Apologies, the overzealous spambot decided to hide some of your posts. Which one on the duplicates do you want removed?

      Delete
  38. Please remove second post, thank you x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure which you mean. The one attached to Simon Hoyle's comment or the other version?

      Delete
  39. Either really as identical x

    ReplyDelete
  40. Regarding PAM assist and its HCPC registered staff giving telephone advice. That is a registerable activity under the Health and Social Care act of giving medical advice remotely. I have searched for PAM, PAM assist and other variations I can think of and have not found that they are currently registered with the CQC - which is a criminal offence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They are called People Asset Management and based in Warrington

      Delete
  41. But think of the money they can save rather than actually treating you, they can also say they achieved the target of giving you access to a physiotherapist within 5 days.

    Can someone explain what the reasoning is, if we can't recruit and retain sufficient qualified staff what the benefit is of sacking or encouraging to leave qualified staff who happen to be unlucky enough that they are sick more than the average? Surely its better to have them working on the days they aren't sick rather than not working at all. Who else is going to attend the calls?

    ReplyDelete
  42. This case and the little stores people write about here, sums it up. Never heard of such vile treatment in other firms.
    I have left after an above average length of service, and do not regret it at all. The front line staff are some of the best people I have ever met, in lfe or other work. But the turn over rate is a sign of the conditions.
    As for Brown and Killen's, I hope they are disposed of, but it is too late, the public suffer as experienced good staff leave, and are replaced with inexperience or hopeless privates.
    I advise you to leave too! It always gets worse!

    ReplyDelete
  43. I got out of the LAS some time ago with more years service than I care to admit to. The upper-tier in that organisation - and many of the middle-runners too - should have had a much needed shake up years ago. The type of people in those positions - their personalities - and the subsequent behaviours arising from this absolutely stink and it has ever been thus.

    I'm not one to descend into ad-hominem attacks generally, but having read the article and picturing the media-ready Killens, I have to say the man is a flouty bean-pole who carries the sneery guise of a newly elected dictator. In short: they're an 'orrible lot.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Jason Killens and his groupies were all accused of bullying and harrasment, he himself visited Australia to recruit medics, others taking their partners for a holiday, and not surprisingly landed himself a top job, more fool the australians for employing a notorious two faced vindictive gutless incompetant piece of slime. To date none of the named bullies have been suspended, investigated and ultimately sacked! This would no doubt have been the case for the staff who do the real work. Shame on you all.

    ReplyDelete