Beyond Belief Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Do you think the IoM Government, and local agencies (Police, FSA, ect; ect) take whistleblowing seriously and protect those who make legitimate disclosures? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Just now, Beyond Belief said: Do you think the IoM Government, and local agencies (Police, FSA, ect; ect) take whistleblowing seriously and protect those who make legitimate disclosures? You really need to ask? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Unfortunately the whistleblower is probably tainted in the eyes of several people, colleagues, supervisors/managers etc. It usually doesn't take much for everyone to work out who has been involved and despite all the promises of anonymity and security, things always leak out. It's whether you are able to cope with this and crack on, or think it's better to keep your head down and say nothing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buncha wankas Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 2 hours ago, Beyond Belief said: Do you think the IoM Government, and local agencies (Police, FSA, ect; ect) take whistleblowing seriously and protect those who make legitimate disclosures? Ransons case shows what gov workers are up against if the speak. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 17 minutes ago, buncha wankas said: Ransons case shows what gov workers are up against if the speak. But Ranson won. ( And may end up with a handsome pay out). Doesn't that seem to indicate the system is working? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 The government are paying me to close this thread. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 16 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: But Ranson won. ( And may end up with a handsome pay out). Doesn't that seem to indicate the system is working? Not without trying to discredit all and sundry! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Ranson only got justice because she had the firepower of her Union behind her (and an excellent job they did too). If you're just Joe Bloggs with no real backup they IOMG machine would crush your case, close ranks and make you out to be the problem. 8 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Plausible deniability covers it almost everytime. Who on the IOM is going to challenge it or take the case ? Until you rock up with a Q.C. and the BMA union... 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craggy_steve Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said: But Ranson won. ( And may end up with a handsome pay out). Doesn't that seem to indicate the system is working? If you're not trolling then you are the problem. Yours is one of the most seriously disturbing posts I've ever seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Not a chance you are going to be dealt with fairly or even listened to. Have first hand experience with a issue and it was dealt with very badly. Also I spoke to a still practising lawyer and they said forget it as you wont find anyone to take the case. It was covered up , the deficit in funds was allowed to be made up by the perpetrator and the Minister and others closed ranks and that was the end of that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english zloty Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 49 minutes ago, 0bserver said: Ranson only got justice because she had the firepower of her Union behind her (and an excellent job they did too). If you're just Joe Bloggs with no real backup they IOMG machine would crush your case, close ranks and make you out to be the problem. Her husband is a solicitor and she's done this at least once before, so they're very experienced at how to win. Nowt to do with the Union 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buncha wankas Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 3 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said: But Ranson won. ( And may end up with a handsome pay out). Doesn't that seem to indicate the system is working? She had access to support that others don’t have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hampsterkahn Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Dr Ranson’s case was always very sound. Despite that, it could have been choked by the heavy, smothering hands of the system in the “usual way”. The “Usual way “ is asphyxiation and attrition- to smother and wear people down, and “make smoke “- just look at that appalling, devious, rambling drivel of a denial letter from Ashford to PAC. The catastrophic failure of this system was laid bare by this tribunal. It shook ‘ “The Department” to the core. Good. Dr Ranson obviously did have great personal resolve and also access to excellent legal representation. it was not just down to these strengths that this case was won, it was more to the dreadful and serious weaknesses of the system that were exposed as being seriously flawed and humiliatingly idefensible. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 2 hours ago, english zloty said: Her husband is a solicitor and she's done this at least once before, so they're very experienced at how to win. Nowt to do with the Union What do you know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.