Carole Simmons's newest comments

I absolutely agree Lorraine which is why I suggested right from the beginning that a medical and OAH report was obtained so that a clearer picture could be sought. From there decisions will naturally follow.

When making comments and giving advise on this forum I do so in my humble opinion. That is given on the basis of the knowledge I have accumulated and is open to interpretation by others which I think you will agree is the same for all no matter if it is here or in a court of law.

Martin what on earth are you talking about? "My own personal beliefs". Who said anything about that? I was giving advice which funnily enough sounded very similar to those expressed by others since.

Perhaps you need to take your own advice....what was it....."you some times have to know when you are out of your depth and hand over the reins to someone more skilled in handling these types of challenging situation".

There seems to be a few old threads appearing with entries saying that posts have been removed. This is since the change in the website. One or two people have been caught out by making comments and not noticing the dates so the threads have continued!!

I also don't like the fact that the latest post is at the top of the page but the comment box at the bottom! I wonder whose brilliant idea that was?

My personal opinion would be that despite the fact that this person has obviously been taking the P---, you must be seen to follow the properer procedure. Has this person been supplying sick notes? Can he prove he has been sick for this period? You need to ask for this evidence and a report from his Doctor not only to prove he has actually been sick but also that he now does not have a disability.

I would also get a report immediately from an OAH to see what the situation is. Only then will you know if he can return or if you have grounds to dismiss for medical incapacity. I would get that sorted first before you worry about what if anything you have to pay him because if the OAH report says he is actually FTR then you have a different situation and that together with the findings from the previous questions will determine what route you take.

I don't know about a legal time limit but surely the clue is in the name! The whole point of doing these interviews is on the day they rtw and preferably before they start work.
If its been a return from a long term sickness absence you need to establish what the needs of the employee are, if there are adjustments that need to be made etc. Without this interview you really cannot hope to mange this employee appropriately for which you have a duty of care.

Well Done David!! I know that has taken a great deal of courage so I think you are being very brave. I am sure once they have received your letter and really thought about the implications they will be sensible about it.

I am glad the EHRC are helping you too. I wish there was somewhere locally you could go to receive some moral support. I don't know where your based so its difficult to suggest some disability communities that may offer support which would help with the isolation. I think it would help you to be able to actually talk to somebody in person rather than online! If you would like to message me I can perhaps give you some organisations depending upon where you are that may be helpful in that regard.

Unfortunately there are some very ignorant people around but they are greatly out numbered by those that are very knowledgable, kind and helpful. Please try and remember that because there are always people that will help you.

Agree with Lorraine. Also if they bamboozle you to not taking action and then do nothing that constitutes breaching or adhering to their public equality duty, they will feel they can just continue to act in the same way to every disabled student in their care. Clearly not only would this be victimisation but they are clearly bullying you which is totally unacceptable.

Bullying is a criminal offence. My advice would be to document all the attempts you are making to resolve this matter and the requests you have made. Back any verbal requests up in writing giving a time frame in which you want to see a response. If the behaviour still continues or/and your requests are ignored you should seek legal help. Again the EHRC or find a Law Centre near you for free advice http://www.lawcentres.org.uk/
Don't give up if you can possibly help it I know that can easily be said than done!

Dave I would go to the closest Citizens Advise Bureau. They will have somebody there who will be able to advise you on practical matters.
You could also call the EHRC (Equality and Human Rights Commission) Helpline on 0845 604 6610. They will also give you practical help.
Do not give up because you have people around you who are ignorant of the facts. There is no excuse if the security guards have already been through this with you once before and seen your BB.
Do you not have a senior lecturer or somebody who is responsible for you that you can go to about this? They have a duty of care to make sure that there are reasonable adjustments made for you to be able to go about your business at the university in a way that is not discriminatory at all times no matter what you are doing. Clearly that is not the case at the moment. I cannot believe that they have never had or do not have now any other disabled students and do not know what their responsibilities are regarding them.
If all else fails go into the Deans office and insist on talking to somebody about this matter!! If they get slapped with a case the Dean is going to find out about it sooner or later anyway!

I agree with Jim Its not in the Universities interest to get into a legal situation about this, they would clearly be discriminating against you.

I think we all get where leather comes from it would be interesting to know the answer to wether or not it is worn. Getting a lecture on where different skins originate was not what Ernie asked for. A neat little dodge.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment Carol and would normally perhaps play that same game I learnt to my cost that it does not always work.
I was being redeployed in my last company due to my medical situation. I was being forced to "apply" for alternative positions even though they were supposed to give me first crack of the whip. On one application I did not disclose my disability because it was a late application and did not follow the usual pathway. The company obviously knew about my disability because they supplied me with equipment and a disabled parking bay. However i did not even get an interview. I also did not get any of the other positions that I applied for after that due to reasons to do with me not being suitable because of my disability. (I can hear you all shouting at the computer at this point).
Long story short I was sacked for medical incapacity and went to tribunal. I lost because they said I should have told the owning manager of that job about my disability!! We all know it would not have made a blind bit of difference or the fact that I told my owning manager the day after the application went in to tell the jobs manager about my disability but he decided to ask HR instead and they told him to ignore my request!! That came out at the tribunal but I still lost. So perhaps you should tell all on your applications as it certainly did not help me. Personally I think you are damed if you do and damed if you don't!!

Molly dear! Animal Activists are criminals who will stop at nothing. If you think it is ok to attempt murder and all the other crimes they commit in the name of their so called cause then I feel sorry for you. There are ways and means of going about things.
As for your comment about wearing fur, you really should learn the facts before following the crowd. Are you one of those that would shove paint on somebody just because they may be wearing a coat that belonged to their grandmother who may have got a coat from somewhere where the animals where actually killed not for their fur?
Do you have any idea of the damage that mink are doing to the environment because of the stupidity of your so called "always in the right" animal rights friends who let a whole load of them free and they are now endangering the water vole. No I expect not dear!

Activists will ALWAYS have something to protest about thats why they are activists Molly! Killing for clothes - reading too many newspapers.
None of us need to become vegetarians to be animal lovers, its about whats ethical, moral, humane and safe for everyone including the animals.

Cor......wish I had a decision like this, not so much from the monitory point of view but just knowing that the Directors were personaly culpable!

Margaret if your own HR department wont contact her while she is in Hospital I think you have your answer.
My suggestion is that you talk to your senior management about handling the resource situation as it seems that it is either got to be one thing or the other - they deal with the cause of the stress on your department or they patch it up as a temporary solution to stop anyone else going off sick!

So its all gang up on Carole time?
Unlike Mark who does spout off as others recognise, I am simply going to state the facts. Mark asked me to make my point, I made it with HIS figures not mine HIS! These are NOT entrenched opinions they are facts from a DfT document. Frankly the figures mean nothing to me one way or another but they speak for themselves.
If you want evidential material Mark Shuttleworth (too many Marks) go back and read what I posted on the 19th Oct and then compare with the DfT doc that Mark posted on 14th Oct. You also seem to be jumping around with your opinions as one minute you agree with me 100% then you are berating me.
Mark is a manipulator - he asks you to do something and when you do it and he does not like the outcome he twists it around. I can imagine him feeling very smug at the moment with these comments as he's the sort of person that thinks he's one better than everyone else.
Diarmuid... I have not backed up my posts with facts have I? Perhaps you need to read the posts again too?
If I express an opinion that someone does not like that is one thing but to be accused of the load of tosh that the three of you have written is pathetic. Learn to read and assimilate all three of you before expressing an opinion.
I hope I have given you all a migraine. I like my mobile phone and use it appropriately.
I dont agree with mobiles being used in cars (I have said that already) I do not think it is necessary to legislate more for handsfree in a car when it is clear that there are also other distractions which cause more accidents as per those DfT figures courtesy of Mark. Present legislation could be made more robust to cater for all those distractions including handsfree.
Only yesterday I had somebody driving at me down the centre of the road with his phone pressed firmly to his ear with one hand. THAT is what legislation should be concentrating on, stiffer penalties, ban on driving, something that will really make people stop and think before they pick the thing up in the first place.
That part was an opinion like it or not.

I think we have all had enough of you Mark. We are all reaching for the sick bag due to the fact that you have given us migraines with your dazzling witty comments.......

Mark....(said with a sigh), I would have thought that most intelligent people would have been able to understand quite well what the stats in the DfT document pointed out but if you need it spelled out.......

There were two thirds as many more deaths caused by distractions inside a car then there was by using a mobile phone. I do not belittle any death from any accident for any reason but the stats speak for themselves. As I have already said but will repeat again, I dont agree with mobile phone use either but to have a law specifically just for that when it is clear that far more lives are lost and accidents causing injuries are being caused by other distractions in cars seems to me to be somewhat hypercritical.

Mark you do not have to be quite so rude and condescending. Forums are for opinions, so if you cant stand somebody not agreeing with yours, stay away!

It seems to me that you just dont like being rumbled. You post a link thinking its going to make a huge point and then when somebody points out that actually it proved nothing at all but quite the opposite you are so embarrassed you have to start throwing insults around.

Stop mumbling or were you trying to be funny..... it just made you look like your picture!

I dont think anyone is arguing with you on the use of mobile phone use Mark. It was the handsfree bit that was causing the controversy.

The DfT publication that you speak of makes interesting reading and perhaps explains why there is not more being done to ban mobile phone use in cars. If you look at the numbers it illustrates the point I was making very well. Of the total number of reported accidents caused by mobile phone use there was 349. But for accidents caused by distractions in a vehicle (I assume the ones you want to forget) there were a total number of accidents of 2,972 of which 60 people died against 26 who died on a mobile phone. Of the total number of casualties in those reported accidents, 551 were from mobile phone use against 5,018 from distractions inside the car.

None of it makes pleasant reading but you cant just pin point phones when clearly the stats show that the other distractions in a car are more deadly.