IOM DHSC & MANX CARE

[The Voice of Reason]

6 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That is the first time I have seen 'balls' and 'David Ashford in the same sentence without 'has no'. 

More seriously, may there be a bit of a chicken and egg issue, possibly?

From the Manx Radio report  - when asked if she had ever been vindictive towards the then Health Minister David Ashford, Dr Glover told the tribunal “not at all”.

Anyone who has followed the history of the relationship between the two will know this is a crock of shit.

 

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

From the Manx Radio report  - when asked if she had ever been vindictive towards the then Health Minister David Ashford, Dr Glover told the tribunal “not at all”.

Anyone who has followed the history of the relationship between the two will know this is a crock of shit.

 

Actually the word was vindicative, according to MR.

We have seen the fallout, but not what led to it.  I have to say, though, RG has not covered herself in glory with the various Tweet shenanigans.  Much better to keep the moral high ground, IMO.  

[2112]

13 hours ago, Manx Bean said:

All I can say is…Jesus…what a fucking snake pit to work in!!

I’m afraid a lot of IOMG must be like that. It’s not a good advertisement to anyone off island, a professional wishing to relocate. 

[Augustus]

10 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

From the Manx Radio report  - when asked if she had ever been vindictive towards the then Health Minister David Ashford, Dr Glover told the tribunal “not at all”.

Anyone who has followed the history of the relationship between the two will know this is a crock of shit.

 

Yes, the West is being vindictive to poor old Putin. All he did was invade Crimea, invade the Donbass, fuel grievances all over Eastern Europe, surround Ukraine with 130 000 troops armed to the teeth, produce videos showing Florida being vaporised with new weapons, poison his own citizens both in his country and in foreign countries, lie through his teeth at every turn. But, aside from that, he's a great guy and it's a disgrace what the West has to say about him.

[buncha wankas]

On 2/5/2022 at 8:30 AM, 2112 said:

I’m afraid a lot of IOMG must be like that. It’s not a good advertisement to anyone off island, a professional wishing to relocate. 

When Medical Director wins her case,I hope they employ her as CEO, all senior managers and toxic would pack it in then.  😆 😆 😝 

[Dr. Grumpy]

7 hours ago, buncha wankas said:

When Medical Director wins her case,I hope they employ her as CEO, all senior managers and toxic would pack it in then.  😆 😆 😝 

That would be the natural outcome expected in a jusrisdiction subject to the rule of law. However...we'll have to wait and see what happens here

[Gladys]

41 minutes ago, Dr. Grumpy said:

That would be the natural outcome expected in a jusrisdiction subject to the rule of law. However...we'll have to wait and see what happens here

To be honest, if the treatment was as described, would you want to return?

[joebean]

37 minutes ago, Dr. Grumpy said:

That would be the natural outcome expected in a jusrisdiction subject to the rule of law. However...we'll have to wait and see what happens here

I don’t think a tribunal has the power to enforce reinstatement and you would have to ask why an employee would want to go back to an environment where relationships had become so toxic. If the claim is successful, I would expect the claimant to be awarded compensation. This will, no doubt, be paid and nobody responsible for this mess will be subject to any further action, in the continuing belief that the responsibility still rests on the employee despite any evidence to the contrary. 
I admit to not being a great fan of David Ashford but his evidence was vague and evasive and did little to elevate his reputation for truthfulness or competence. I hope the CM will, in time, make a assessment of his team and ensure that pretence and BS has no place in the senior ranks of Government. 

[Gladys]

26 minutes ago, joebean said:

I don’t think a tribunal has the power to enforce reinstatement and you would have to ask why an employee would want to go back to an environment where relationships had become so toxic. If the claim is successful, I would expect the claimant to be awarded compensation. This will, no doubt, be paid and nobody responsible for this mess will be subject to any further action, in the continuing belief that the responsibility still rests on the employee despite any evidence to the contrary. 
I admit to not being a great fan of David Ashford but his evidence was vague and evasive and did little to elevate his reputation for truthfulness or competence. I hope the CM will, in time, make a assessment of his team and ensure that pretence and BS has no place in the senior ranks of Government. 

The 2006 Act seems to give the Tribunal power to order re-instatement or re-engagement.  

[Dr. Grumpy]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

To be honest, if the treatment was as described, would you want to return?

Yes, for a set period of time, to try and clear the rot

[Gladys]

46 minutes ago, Dr. Grumpy said:

Yes, for a set period of time, to try and clear the rot

That implies that there is some emotional investment to the IOM health service motivating someone to want to clear out the rot.  That emotional investment may have long gone and the remaining motivation is to have their day in court (or equivalent) take the money and leave us to the stinking pile that is left.

[Kipper99]

2 hours ago, joebean said:

I don’t think a tribunal has the power to enforce reinstatement and you would have to ask why an employee would want to go back to an environment where relationships had become so toxic. If the claim is successful, I would expect the claimant to be awarded compensation. This will, no doubt, be paid and nobody responsible for this mess will be subject to any further action, in the continuing belief that the responsibility still rests on the employee despite any evidence to the contrary. 
I admit to not being a great fan of David Ashford but his evidence was vague and evasive and did little to elevate his reputation for truthfulness or competence. I hope the CM will, in time, make a assessment of his team and ensure that pretence and BS has no place in the senior ranks of Government. 

 

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

The 2006 Act seems to give the Tribunal power to order re-instatement or re-engagement.  

 

1 hour ago, Dr. Grumpy said:

Yes, for a set period of time, to try and clear the rot

 

22 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That implies that there is some emotional investment to the IOM health service motivating someone to want to clear out the rot.  That emotional investment may have long gone and the remaining motivation is to have their day in court (or equivalent) take the money and leave us to the stinking pile that is left.

Isn’t the bizarre thing here that Ranson is still employed by DHSC, in some capacity?

She was taken on as Medical Director, DHSC, (and designate Manx Care), a post that should have transferred substantively to Manx Care. However someone else was appointed, she wasn’t transferred.

DHSC no longer has a role for a Medical Director. She was redeployed, no doubt with preserved rights.

If correct, she can’t be reinstated. She’s lost her MD Manx Care role. She’s stayed on, possibly in a non role, possibly in a botched attempt to avoid tribunal proceedings, in the hope she’d go.

Shes hung on. She’s brought proceedings. But can she be “reinstated”? She’s never been MD ( Manx Care ). Someone else occupies that role.

It appears to be a claim is more about restoring reputation, and an award for hurt feelings, so she can move on without a stain against her reputation.

[Dr. Grumpy]

41 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That implies that there is some emotional investment to the IOM health service motivating someone to want to clear out the rot.  That emotional investment may have long gone and the remaining motivation is to have their day in court (or equivalent) take the money and leave us to the stinking pile that is left.

I sincerely hope not

[Dr. Grumpy]

6 minutes ago, Kipper99 said:

 

 

 

Isn’t the bizarre thing here that Ranson is still employed by DHSC, in some capacity?

She was taken on as Medical Director, DHSC, (and designate Manx Care), a post that should have transferred substantively to Manx Care. However someone else was appointed, she wasn’t transferred.

DHSC no longer has a role for a Medical Director. She was redeployed, no doubt with preserved rights.

If correct, she can’t be reinstated. She’s lost her MD Manx Care role. She’s stayed on, possibly in a non role, possibly in a botched attempt to avoid tribunal proceedings, in the hope she’d go.

Shes hung on. She’s brought proceedings. But can she be “reinstated”? She’s never been MD ( Manx Care ). Someone else occupies that role.

It appears to be a claim is more about restoring reputation, and an award for hurt feelings, so she can move on without a stain against her reputation.

I think it'll all become apparent this week at the tribunal

[Dr. Grumpy]

12 minutes ago, Kipper99 said:

 

 

 

Isn’t the bizarre thing here that Ranson is still employed by DHSC, in some capacity?

She was taken on as Medical Director, DHSC, (and designate Manx Care), a post that should have transferred substantively to Manx Care. However someone else was appointed, she wasn’t transferred.

DHSC no longer has a role for a Medical Director. She was redeployed, no doubt with preserved rights.

If correct, she can’t be reinstated. She’s lost her MD Manx Care role. She’s stayed on, possibly in a non role, possibly in a botched attempt to avoid tribunal proceedings, in the hope she’d go.

Shes hung on. She’s brought proceedings. But can she be “reinstated”? She’s never been MD ( Manx Care ). Someone else occupies that role.

It appears to be a claim is more about restoring reputation, and an award for hurt feelings, so she can move on without a stain against her reputation.

Please read this. Seems to imply that all staff involved in providing patient care were to be transferred from th DHSC to Manxcare.

I guess it'll be for the tribunal to rule on this