The Time’s Up campaign has been described as a “unified call for change from women in entertainment for women everywhere”. The catalyst for the campaign was the string of sexual abuse allegations by high-profile women actors against film producer Harvey Weinstein. But, it is now a global movement whose fight to end sexual harassment is resonating loudly with women from every industry.
The strength of the campaign is not its message – as brilliant and powerful as that is – but the fact that it represents a collective fight. There have always been those brave individual women who are prepared to bring the fight on their own, taking on their harassers through employment tribunal litigation. But even with the support of a lawyer, family and friends, it can still feel like a solitary fight.
We may be witnessing the beginning of a seismic shift when it comes to the fight against sexual harassment and abuse. Rather than having to rely on the brave few to put their heads above the parapet and express the truth (in one form or another) for the rest of us, the truth now has a collective voice and it is growing louder and louder.
In the meantime we continue to applaud those women that have the courage and determination to bring their cases to the employment tribunal.
That includes actor Helen Haines, whose case was reported in various national newspapers this week. Ms Hains brought complaints of sexual harassment and sex discrimination against various employees, including the Director of the touring theatre company that had engaged her in 2016.
The complaints included being called a ‘slut’, comments on her breasts and repeatedly being asked if she wanted to have “a threesome”. She was awarded £10,500 in compensation.
Emily Bradshaw from Pattinson & Brewer’s Employment & Discrimination Department represented Ms Hains. The judgment is available here.
Commenting on her case Ms Hains said:
“I was forced to resign from my acting job due to sustained sexual harassment and discrimination. I made a formal complaint to my union, Equity. They fully supported my case and set me up with legal support from Pattinson & Brewer.
The perpetrators made me feel humiliated and intimidated. When I informed the company manager of what was happening he showed no sympathy. I was even accused of setting out to manipulate events so that I could sue them! Hearing my harassers admit their behaviour and winning the case felt like justice.”
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has upheld Chief Inspector Denby’s claims that he was subjected to sex discrimination and victimisation by the Metropolitan Police Service (the Met).
The case attracted media attention because of the seniority of the officers involved and because there are relatively few successful male claimants in a case of this type.
Backed throughout by the Police Federation, and represented by Sarah Bains, a specialist employment solicitor in Pattinson & Brewer’s employment team, Chief Inspector Denby won his claims of direct sex discrimination and victimisation at Central London Employment Tribunal in 2016. The Met appealed the decision on multiple grounds. All those grounds failed.
In a culture perceived as hostile to women, illustrated by such matters as men clad only in towels, under-representation of women and alcohol at work, very senior Met officers had taken the view that Chief Inspector Denby was not the right person to confront the issues. He was subsequently removed from his command. He was also placed under an investigation, put on restricted duties and suffered a downgrading of a performance review that effectively prevented his promotion to Superintendent.
The EAT upheld the tribunal findings that senior officers had been the relevant decision makers and that their decisions were taken on the unlawful ground of sex.
The Met was criticized by the tribunal for its “opaque decision making”. The EAT rightly held that employers should not be allowed to use a deliberate lack of transparency to hide the true identity of decision makers and so escape liability for discrimination.
Prospect has secured compensation for a retired member who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in July 2016 and died in May 2017.
Mesothelioma is a form of cancer that takes many years to develop following the inhalation of asbestos fibres, but is usually rapidly fatal following disease onset.
John Pedder, known as Sam to his friends, worked for what was the London Electricity Board for nearly 48 years.
Sam joined the LEB as an apprentice in September 1968 when he was 16 years old.
He was diagnosed with mesothelioma in July 2016 and asked Prospect for support and advice.
Unfortunately, Sam died before his claim reached court, but with the support of Prospect and her legal team, Sam’s widow Gillian was able to bring the claim to trial and achieve a settlement that goes some way to achieving Sam’s aims.
These were to provide for his family’s future, to recognise the services that he had provided and to hold the defendant to account.
Gillian said: “I felt that I had to finish what Sam had started and carry on as best I could. With the support of Prospect and my expert team I was able to do this.”
First job
Sam’s first job away from the training centre was at the Cape Asbestos Factory in Barking. He was tasked with taking down and exchanging the light fittings in the main milling room, all of which were covered in a thick layer of asbestos dust.
As Sam was slightly small for his age, he had no option but to tip the fittings, and the dust, all over his body. One of Sam’s colleagues recalled that Sam and many of the other electricians who left the factory were so covered in dust that they reminded him of snowmen.
Sam was continually exposed to substantial quantities of asbestos throughout his apprenticeship, in particular when working with storage heaters and repairing electrical appliances.
When he qualified as an electrician, Sam did emergency electrical work. He recalled going into old burnt out buildings, that would have contained a significant amount of asbestos, to disconnect the electrical system with little more than a donkey jacket as protection.
Sam also worked on intake cupboards and meter boards that had been constructed out of, or mounted onto, asbestos.
Sam obtained a full technological certificate in electrical power engineering while working in old transformer buildings in power stations.
Despite working with air circuit breakers, low voltage boards and asbestos mounting boards, which often contained asbestos up to an inch thick, Sam’s employer never provided him with protective equipment.
In 1983, Sam moved into marketing before taking on a role as a trainer. He stayed with his employer for almost 48 years before retiring.
Life after retirement
Sam always carried out DIY and gardening tasks to an exceptionally high standard both in his own home and for his daughter. He was also a keen gardener and always willing to help his family and friends.
Unfortunately, Sam became very ill in 2016. He developed a cough in April 2016 and, following a CT scan and a biopsy, he was diagnosed with mesothelioma in July 2016.
As Prospect provides legal support and assistance to its retired members, Sam was able to turn to his union for support and advice.
Legal support from Prospect
In July 2016, Prospect referred Sam to Colette Payne, who is a member of Pattinson and Brewer solicitors’ specialist industrial disease team.
Colette quickly identified the insurer for the London Electricity Board who confirmed that they provided cover for the company during the relevant period, so she was able to pursue a claim.
She obtained a supportive medical report and a number of Sam’s past colleagues and friends provided statements in support of Sam’s exposure to asbestos.
Unfortunately, the insurer repeatedly refused to respond to the claim. So Colette issued proceedings and the claim was quickly listed for a “Show Cause Hearing” to decide whether judgement could be entered on Sam’s behalf.
The defendant admitted liability the day before the hearing and a trial date was set for five months later.
Sam continued to receive treatment throughout the claim, including chemotherapy and radiotherapy and, as a result of the claim, he was also able to consider immunotherapy treatment, which would not have otherwise been available.
Sadly, Sam passed away on 27 May 2017.
The claim was carried on by Sam’s widow, Gillian, who was determined to hold the defendant to account. The claim for the loss of Sam’s services was significantly higher than usual because he was a man who always helped others.
Asbestos register
Prospect pursues compensation claims for asbestos-related illness every year. It is one of many ways that Prospect stands up for its members at work, and helps make workplaces safer.
We sometimes need help from members’ former colleagues to help prove that asbestos is involved. But many sufferers have lost touch with former colleagues by the time their condition comes to light.
We have set up a register to record details of members’ workplace exposure to asbestos.
If you have worked with asbestos, please add your details to the register. The register will be used if you ever need to make a claim on your own behalf, or to help pursue claims on behalf of your colleagues or former colleagues.
In April last year London Central Employment Tribunal unanimously decided that senior Met officers had directly discriminated against, and victimised one of their Chief Inspectors, Mr Denby on grounds of his sex.
This week all concerned, including Pattinson & Brewer employment lawyer, Sarah Bains who successfully represented Mr Denby in round 1, go back to ‘court’ for round 2, as the Met try to overturn the decision.
The case, supported by the Police Federation, attracted widespread media attention, in part because claims of sex discrimination are, largely, brought by women. Mr Denby falls into a small group of male police officers who have brought and won such claims (only seven). The fact that the case also involved an incident with a policeman in nothing but a towel (not Mr Denby I hasten to add), no doubt gave it added press attraction.
However, the case is not about towels. It is about the important principle that gender discrimination laws are for everyone.
Without question, it is women rather than men who are more likely to be on the receiving end of gender discrimination but when it does happen to men, they have just as much right to fight their corner.
Assuming Mr Denby holds on to his hard fought victory, and we are confident in his case, the Met may want to consider throwing in the towel.
Jennie Henderson has recently joined following six years spent in private practice and with the NHS Litigation Authority.
Jennie has worked in the personal injury & clinical negligence field since 2010, and was part of the team that secured over £15 million in the leading cerebral palsy case of Robshaw v United Lincolnshire NHS Trust.
Jennie will be assisting two of the partners in the Clinical Negligence team – Linda Levison and Marcus Weatherby – as well as acting for the firms clients across a range of complex clinical negligence matters.
Marcus Weatherby welcomed the news:
“Jennie is an excellent young lawyer and she is totally committed to helping us fight for justice for our clients who have suffered injury as a result of clinical negligence. She is a very strong addition to our team and is already demonstrating real drive and enthusiasm for getting the best results for our clients.”
The Royal College of Surgeons has today published a variety of online resources and advice for patients considering cosmetic surgery.
The new webpage includes a handy printable checklist of questions that patients should ask their surgeon before consenting to a procedure. Patients are encouraged to take the checklist to the first consultation and discuss each topic with the treating surgeon. Such questions include the surgeon’s specialism, their insurance position and the potential costs of any future treatment. Crucially, patients are also being encouraged to consider all of the treatment options available to them as well as the potential risks and benefits of each procedure. Patients are cautioned against feeling rushed or pressured into giving their consent and are warned to be wary of surgeons and staff trying to convince them to go ahead.
The Department of Health asked the Royal College of Surgeons to produce the patient focused resources and the website follows hot on the heels of the April 2016 guidelines published by the General Medical Counsel for doctors offering cosmetic interventions.
In the coming months, the website should be supplemented by a new register of certified surgeons who have provided evidence of their training, experience and insurance.
It is hoped that the new online resources will help to provide independent, trustworthy information to patients and better protect them from unscrupulous companies and untrained surgeons.
By Alicia Cannon.
I was intrigued by recent reports that a new blood test can detect serious brain injuries. Brain injury is the leading cause of death and disability in young people. To diagnose brain injuries, scans are performed but this can cause delay and lead to patients’ conditions deteriorating and in the worst case scenario fatalities.
There are several different causes of brain injuries which can include:
- stroke
- tumour
- infection
- impact injury to the head such as in a traffic accident, a workplace accident, an assault, a fall or a sports injury; and
- lack of oxygen (hypoxia)
Current diagnosis of brain injuries
Often people who suffer brain injuries might appear to be fine; they can be acting normally despite being seriously injured. A brain injury is not blatantly obvious in the same way as a physical injury, such as a broken arm or leg.
Brain injuries can be diagnosed by computerised tomography (‘CT’) scans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (‘MRI’) scans and through detecting clinical symptoms.
Symptoms of a brain injury vary from person to person and they might include:
Physical symptoms
- Loss of consciousness from several minutes to hours
- Persistent headache or headache that worsens
- Repeated vomiting or nausea
- Convulsions or seizures
- Weakness or numbness in fingers and toes
- Loss of coordination
Cognitive or mental symptoms
- Profound confusion
- Agitation, combativeness or other unusual behavior
- Slurred speech
These symptoms can sometimes be missed by doctors. Symptoms of brain injury are also hard to pick up in toddlers and babies, who are unable to articulate their symptoms in the same way as adults.
It can be years before symptoms of a brain injury are diagnosed. Sometimes brain injuries are not obvious until children start school and a learning disability is suspected and diagnosed, such as attention deficit hyper disorder (ADHD) or attention deficit disorder (ADD).[1]
CT scans reveal whether a head injury has caused bleeding in the brain but do not indicate whether the brain cells themselves have been injured. Damage to the brain cells can happen without bleeding.
What the test could achieve
This blood test for brain injury developed by researchers in Birmingham could:
- save lives by detecting whether someone needs neurosurgery;
- minimise the number of CT scans being done, which is particularly beneficial to children who are especially sensitive to radiation;
- improve lives by implementing treatment and rehabilitation faster, perhaps by advising whether someone needs to take time off school and deciding whether they need to follow up with a neurologist; and
- save money by avoiding carrying out expensive scans on people who do not have brain injuries
How does the test work?
A small drop of blood is placed on a silicon and gold chip and then it is placed in a special detector for analysis. The test looks for tiny amounts of chemicals that are produced when the brain is injured.
Discovered by the University of Birmingham and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, researchers have carried out the tests using blood from real patients. They confirm that the test accurately detects those patients with injury to their brain and those who are not injured.
The researchers aim to reduce its size by half so in the future it could be carried by an ambulance crew and used at the scene of an accident. At the moment there is no equipment for paramedics thatcan determine whether someone has had a serious brain injury so this is a huge advancement for emergency services and I look forward to seeing it develop and be implemented.
Following further development it is hoped that the detector can be reduced to the size of a briefcase. It would therefore be easy to keep at sports grounds or in army vehicles in combat.
A team from the University of Birmingham and the city’s Queen Elizabeth Hospital hope the detector could be on the market within three years.
By Alicia Cannon.
The research, part-funded by the British Heart Foundation and the National Institute of Health Research, showed the increase of heart attack treatment gives nine in ten patients fighting chance of survival.
The use of emergency stenting treatment (PPCI), also known as angioplasty, increased from 0.1% in 2003 to 86% in 2013 for patients with STEMI – a heart attack caused by a complete blockage of a coronary artery which accounts for 25-40% of all heart attack cases in Europe.
Despite this, the study found there are vast differences in PPCI use in various hospitals, ranging from a 4-300% increase from 2003 to 2013 showing that opportunities are still being missed due to gross lack of funding. Other factors including the low number of suitably trained cardiologists and an absence of round the clock availability of PPCI in heart attack clinics has helped to explain 50% of the variation between hospitals.
What does PPCI do?
PPCI involves opening a blocked artery to restore blood flow to the oxygen-starved part of the heart and has helped save thousands of lives since becoming available in the early 2000’s and the introduction of PPCI followed a ten-year action plan for heart disease which saw national changes in the way the NHS treats heart attack patients.
This is an exemplar for how proper funding of the NHS can produce life saving results for patients in the UK. Following these disturbing results of the varied PPCI use from hospital to hospital, The Government should now ensure that the NHS has sufficiently resourced heart attack centres providing round the clock care for heart attack patients, to avoid unnecessary loss of life.
The British Heart Foundation continues to fund research to improve heart attack diagnosis and treatment, including a study which could reduce complications from stenting with donations from the public. We can only hope that the Government takes note of the inconsistent use of PPCI across the UK’s hospitals, along with the credible results of this 10 year study, and begin suitably funding clinics to continue treating patients with PPCI and saving lives.
Here at Pattinson & Brewer solicitors, we welcome news of medical advances as we share the aim to improve a patient outcome and ensure safety for everybody during NHS treatment.
There are too many poor quality investigations into babies who die or are severely brain damaged during labour, a review says.
The inquiry, Each Baby Counts, has been set up to ensure lessons are learned when something goes wrong. The aim is by 2020 to halve the number of babies who die or are left severely disabled.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has published its preliminary report into how problems during labour are investigated. For an already beleaguered service it does not make happy reading.
Key points:-
– 27% of investigations were of poor quality.
-Almost 75% simply failed to include parents in any meaningful way.
In large organisation such as the NHS the ability to improve practices when mistakes are made should be fundamental. Yet there is widespread agreement that the NHS lacks the will or the ability to learn lessons from these tragic events.
At Pattinson and Brewer we see this in people who turn to us for help – more often than not in a system which has not been open about what went wrong. Sadly often the true facts come to light only through a Coroners enquiry or litigation.
Louise Silverton, director for midwifery at the Royal College of Midwives, admits that her members “are often working in systems that do not support best practice, and the safest and highest quality care as well as they should.”
The preliminary report of Every Baby counts coincides with the appointment of Keith Conradi’s as head of the new Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch which is intended to make the NHS safer. Mr Conradi was formerly UK’s chief inspector of air accidents .The new healthcare investigation body (HSIB) will begin work soon, with an initial budget of £3.5m.
It is to be hoped that the HSIB might usher in a culture of learning from mistakes within the NHS. There is an old saying that ‘Stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Ignorance is not caring’
Leading industrial relations lawyer and advisor to the Police Federation of England and Wales, Binder Bansel, has criticised the Government for their lack of flexibility on the 1% cap on public sector pay increases.
Bansel, who is a partner at the leading industrial firm Pattinson & Brewer, said:
“The Federation has highlighted that there has been a real-terms cut in police pay of 15% over the last four years once reductions in allowances have been taken into account. They are now arguing for a very modest increase of 2.8% which would still see those who protect us everyday having suffered a significant reduction in their pay. This comes on top of a substantial cut to the number of officers and staff – we are seeing the thin blue line getting thinner and thinner. It will be interesting to hear what the Home Secretary has to say today when she addresses Conference.”
Steve White, the chair of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said a failure to show any flexibility on the 1% cap on public sector pay increases would mean the Federation could withdraw from the discussions and “think about dealing with things in a different way”.
Commenting as the Police Federation Conference gets underway, Mr White said:
“They can’t just say the Government only want to give us 1%. In that case we might as well withdraw from the pay review process in its entirety, because we’ll have no faith in it.
“There will undoubtedly be, as there quite often are, people in the Police Federation who will be saying that we’ve got to start lobbying for industrial rights.
“We’re not there yet – we can’t strike, we’re not allowed to – but we will have to start potentially withdrawing from the process and think about dealing with things in a different way, to show the government of the day the strength of feeling amongst the police service.”