Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

No declarations of interest were made.

PRIVATE SESSION

AGENDA

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO NOTE

Under the law, the Committee is entitled to consider certain items in private. Members of the public will be asked to leave the meeting when such items are discussed.

The Committee is recommended to consider the following item in private on the grounds that it contains ‘exempt’ information, as defined by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, and consequently that the Committee makes the following resolution:-

“that the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following item in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, because it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, namely information relating to an individual, and taking all the circumstances into account, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the information as exempt outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information”.

RESOLVED:

            that the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following item in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, because it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in the paragraph detailed below of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information:

Paragraph 1

Information relating to any individual

The Appellant’s Statement of Case and the Management’s Statement of Case are attached for all parties, along with a collection of background and general information.

The Committee considered an appeal against dismissal from employment with the City Council.

Louise Pinnock (HR Team Manager) and Chris Burgin (Director of Housing) were present as advisors to the Committee.

The management representative was Mike Evans, (Service Manager, Placements and Commissioning).  Ruth Barr (HR Advisor) was present as HR advisor to management.

Management called Patrick Kelly as a witness.

The appellant had indicated before the meeting that they would not be present at the meeting and so had been advised that the appeal would be heard in their absence.  However, they were provided with the opportunity to submit additional written representations for consideration at the appeal hearing, which they did.  Therefore, the appeal was heard in the appellant’s absence, on the basis of their written representations.

The Committee carefully considered the representations made, including the evidence put forward by management and the appellant’s written submissions.  The Committee also asked questions of management and their witness and asked questions arising from the appellant’s written submissions. 

RESOLVED:

That the appeal be rejected and the management decision to dismiss the appellant upheld.

Reasons:

Based on the evidence presented, the City Council’s Disciplinary Policy had been fairly applied and the decision to dismiss was reasonable given that the circumstances of the misconduct were of a serious nature.  The Committee therefore unanimously upheld management’s decision to dismiss the appellant.

The meeting closed at 11.30 am