Big payout for Cumbrian rail worker sacked for telling the truth
Last updated at 15:25, Thursday, 15 January 2009
A rail worker who was sacked for telling the truth about an accident at work has been awarded more than £200,000 in compensation.
Jim Glencross, 58, who said he was determined to bring his former bosses to account for the way they treated him, won his case despite having to take on a qualified barrister during his four day tribunal.
A tribunal already ruled that he was unfairly dismissed because he insisted on revealing the truth about an accident linked to unsafe working practices on the railways.
Network Rail yesterday issued a statement refuting the tribunal’s ruling.
Speaking after the tribunal ruled on his compensation, Mr Glencross, of Anthorn, near Carlisle, spoke of his relief.
“Justice has been done here today,” said the former railways team leader.
“I hope my success will encourage others who find themselves in similar situations to have a go.”
The case centred on an accident on the West Coast Main Line near Shap in 2004, witnessed by Mr Glencross, when a colleague fell from an unstable metal structure while working on overhead lines.
The structure should have been clamped in place but Mr Glencross and the injured man were using an unauthorised wooden ladder to support it - a practice encouraged by managers because it saved time, they told the tribunal.
But the ladder slipped, the structure jolted, and the worker fell, breaking his leg.
Mr Glencross and his colleague said they were put under pressure to make false statements, covering up how they cut corners.
Bosses told them they would “let sleeping dogs” lie if they left the false statements unchanged, but they made fresh and truthful statements for the injured man’s lawyer, the tribunal heard.
It was that course of action which led to Mr Glencross facing disciplinary action and finally being dismissed, the tribunal ruled.
An Appeal Tribunal in London upheld the ruling - despite Network Rail bosses insisting that Mr Glencross was sacked for failing to properly handle safety related paperwork.
Mr Glencross said that bosses encouraged workers to avoid using the proper safety equipment so they could finish work more quickly.
He said managers got bonus payments if they reached certain targets.
Before the accident, the unsafe working method allowed workers to replace 130 electrical circuit insulators a week but when using the proper equipment that figure was slashed by 100.
He said: “In my view, this case was all about making managers accountable for their actions.”
His employment consultant representative at yesterday’s hearing, Adrian Melia said the award - totalling just under £203,000 - had brought an end to a challenging chapter in Mr Glencross’s life.
He said: “While some might think the monetary award is high, it is simply a reflection of the financial damage Mr Glencross is suffering because of the way his employer reacted when he told the truth about a contentious issue.
“The size of the award should serve as a deterrent to any employer thinking of doing as this one did.”
A Network Rail spokesman said: “We maintain that Mr Glencross' dismissal was as a result of misconduct with regard to safety on the railway, something we take extremely seriously. We remain disappointed that the court did not share this view.
“Today's hearing was about compensation for loss of earnings - it was not punitive. We will now consider this decision with our legal team."
Mr Glencross thanked his wife Anne, his sons Richard and Simon, witnesses Steve Bond and Tony Taylor, the injured colleague, Burnetts solicitors and Mr Melia.
First published at 08:38, Thursday, 15 January 2009
Published by http://www.newsandstar.co.uk
Terry did the right thing, and in the end became a whistle blower. His ex-employer did the predictable thing and shot the messenger, but suspending Terry and blaming him for something Terry had not done. This formula is normal practice by bad employers, many of whom get rid of good staff to cover-up their failures. May we suggest to your readers to look closer to some of the educational institutions in and around Carlisle. You will find many people such as Terry who were victimised for no good reason.
View all 3 comments on this article
Have your say
Good to see a court case like this have a better end punishment for the accussed, they'll obviously have to come under scrutiny by the people above them now. The thing I wonder though, is that under the health and safety at work act, it states that every person is responsible for their own safety and the safety of others around them in the workplace. Why did it have to continue for so long, as it was Lawfully within Mr Glencross' rights to refuse to work in those conditions (correct PPE not being supplied).
Posted by Jordan Ramsay on 16 January 2009 at 08:05