Agenda and draft minutes

Employment Matters Appeals Panel - Monday, 17 September 2012 9.30am

Venue: Meeting Room 2 - Level 3, Gun Wharf, Dock Road, Chatham, Kent ME4 4TR. View directions

Contact: Ellen Wright, Democratic Services Officer 

No. Item


Election of the Chairman




It was agreed that Councillor Carr be elected Chairman for the meeting. 


Record of the meeting

To agree that the Chairman, in consultation with other members of the Employment Matters Appeals Panel, sign the minutes outside of the meeting.




It was agreed that the Chairman, in consultation with other members of the Employment Matters Appeals Panel sign the minutes outside of the meeting.


Apologies for absence


There were none. 


Declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests

A member need only disclose at any meeting the existence of a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) in a matter to be considered at that meeting if that DPI has not been entered on the disclosable pecuniary interests register maintained by the Monitoring Officer.


A member disclosing a DPI at a meeting must thereafter notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of that interest within 28 days from the date of disclosure at the meeting.


A member may not participate in a discussion of or vote on any matter in which he or she has a DPI (both those already registered and those disclosed at the meeting) and must withdraw from the room during such discussion/vote.


Members may choose to voluntarily disclose a DPI at a meeting even if it is registered on the council’s register of disclosable pecuniary interests but there is no legal requirement to do so.


In line with the training provided to members by the Monitoring Officer members will also need to consider bias and pre-determination in certain circumstances and whether they have a conflict of interest or should otherwise leave the room for Code reasons.


Councillor Maple advised that although he did not have a disclosable pecuniary interest, he wished it to be recorded that he was a member of GMB Union. 


Exclusion of the press and public pdf icon PDF 16 KB

This report summarises the content of agenda item 6, which, in the opinion of the proper officer, contains exempt information within one of the categories in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. It is a matter for the Committee to determine whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of documents.


The Employment Matters Appeals Panel agreed that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the exempt material relating to agenda item 6 (Matter for Decision) because consideration of these matters in public would disclose information falling within Paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, and, in all the circumstances of the case, the Panel considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information. 


Matter of decision

Appeal against dismissal as detailed in the attached schedule. 




The Panel considered an appeal against dismissal and stage 2 grievance.


During the appeal hearing on 17 September 2012, the Panel considered that there were a number of outstanding questions it considered should be answered by a witness relating to both the Stage 2 grievance and the dismissal. However, it was noted that the witness was not available to attend the appeal hearing.


The Panel, with the agreement of the appellant and their representative, agreed to adjourning the appeal hearing to enable questions to be put forward in writing by all parties to the appeal and individual members of the Panel, which would then be sent to the witness for a response.


The Panel agreed that it would reconvene on 8 October at 10am to consider the written responses to questions and determine the appeal.


On 8 October, the Panel very carefully considered all the information presented and decided to uphold the decision to dismiss and not uphold the stage 2 grievance.




The Panel decided to uphold the original decision and confirmed the appellant’s dismissal from Medway Council and not uphold the stage 2 grievance.