A judge has called for NHS leaders to face disciplinary action for the way they handled a director’s redundancy, and accused the HR business partner who ran it of lying to protect the organisation.
Judge Robin Postle described a director at Norfolk and Waveney NHS Clinical Commissioning Group as “disingenuous and unconvincing” and said he should face “further investigation and those responsible [should] face disciplinary action”.
A 12-day hearing in 2023 was held to investigate a claim by manager Clive Rennie that he had been constructively dismissed during an NHS restructuring process. He also filed claims for age discrimination and unlawful deduction of wages. The judgment has only just been published.
Rennie was assistant director of integrated commissioning (mental health and learning disabilities) when the CCG was replaced by NHS Norfolk and Waveney Integrated Care Board (ICB). He and a colleague, Ann-Louise Schofield, head of mental health transformation, both filed claims for constructive dismissal from their posts.
Latest tribunals
They had both been earmarked for a single post as head of mental health transformation at the new organisation. Rennie submitted that he had reached an agreement with John Webster, director of strategic commissioning, that he would receive redundancy and his colleague would take the role.
However, following interviews (that he agreed to take part in), he was offered the job and Schofield was selected for redundancy. Rennie tendered his resignation just before her redundancy period was up.
Rennie filed a grievance and an investigation was carried out by Steve Stavrinou, head of HR business partners at NHS Arden and Gem Support Unit, which provides HR services to Norfolk and Waveney.
The tribunal asked for investigation reports to be submitted to the tribunal, but were told they did not exist. Drafts were eventually made available five days into the hearing.
Judge Postle accused Stavrinou of being “a man who finds the truth an alien concept”. He added that the final report had been altered to suit the employer as it did not reflect the agreement between Webster and Rennie about the latter’s redundancy.
“The tribunal were quite frankly staggered that Mr Stavrinou would sit at the back of the tribunal for a number of days knowing that there were draft investigation reports he had prepared in relation to the investigation into the grievance raised by Mr Rennie and remain silent whilst he watched the solicitors for the respondent repeat on a number of occasions there simply was no draft investigation reports into the grievance,” the judgment said.
Norfolk and Waveney at one point sought to have the judge removed from proceedings, accusing him of “inappropriate conduct, tone and disparaging comments towards the respondent and its representatives”. The application was rejected.
Judge Postle wrote that this was “perhaps a cynical attempt to hijack proceedings”.
Rennie’s lawyer Neil Ashley described the case as a “car crash” and the attempt to remove the judge as being “because the case is a train wreck”.
Norfolk and Waveney conceded liability for Schofield’s unfair dismissal prior to the hearing, but Rennie won his claim for constructive dismissal at the tribunal. The claim of age discrimination failed because the selection for redundancy was based on cost, rather than age.
The judgment added: “In relation to both Mr Rennie and Miss Schofield, the tribunal found them consistent, reliable and honest in their evidence throughout.
“Quite frankly, the behaviour of the respondents being a public body should be further investigated and those responsible face disciplinary action.”
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Employee relations opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more Employee Relations jobs
