Ex fire boss fights sacking
(CNS): The former acting chief fire officer who was removed from the post following a UK review of the local fire service says he was kicked off the job without an explanation and without an opportunity to contest his removal. Rosworth McLaughlin has turned to the courts and is seeking a judicial review of the decision by his former boss, Home Affairs Chief Officer Eric Bush, and the Civil Service Appeals Commission's refusal to hear his case. According to an application filed in the Grand Court by his lawyers last month, McLaughlin says there was an implication that he was booted out of the fire service as a result of poor performance. McLaughlin states that he was told he was placed on early retirement to improve the efficiencyof the service but without being told what he was doing that was undermining that aim.
In the court documents, McLaughlin says that the chief officer acted unfairly and unlawfully as he failed to state either orally or in writing the factual basis on which the decision was made. McLaughlin calls on the courts to overturn that decision and ask the chief officer to review his position or compensate him financially for his enforced retirement. McLaughlin claims that while his bosses have pointed to a review conducted by visiting UK fire service experts called in to help improve the local service, McLaughlin said he has not seen that report or been told of its content.
The ex-fire boss indicates that the decisions about his position were made behind closed doors and did not "ensure an open and fair employment process" as required by law. McLaughlin's claim states that "implicit in the decision" of the chief officer "is an adverse finding" with respect to his performance but he claims that he has not been told where his performance fell down nor was he given any opportunity to respond to the allegations.
McLaughlin, who had been acting as the chief fire officer, also states that by failing to hear his appeal, the commission's decision amounted to "wrongful inaction" and a refusal to carry out its statutory duty.
The former acting chief fire officer is looking for the decision to be overturned and also cash compensation to repair the "smear" on his character as well as the damage it has done to his future employment prospects.
Category: Local News
dead weight crying for justice!! what a percky
"Decisions made behind closed door". Where should they be made? At a public meeting?
Go Rossworth Go………Civil servants need to start standing up for their rights!!!
But I am saddened by his probability of gettign nothing out of Grand Court………It is rare that they do not protect giovernment- And government knwos that…………HIs prospects of success is near zero unless it can be proven in an extremently strong case/arguments….
But I am proud of him…
"wrongful inaction" – is that in the law?
There does seem to be a lot of activity that seems contary to the requiements of the labour law. Mario?
And to think we use to race about with these coco sacks. Rosworth you have to use your sack and jump high as you can. You're not out of the race!
And I gather he is receiving legal aid to pursue his case-even though he is still being paid by Government. Only in Cayman.
Da wah he get for what he done dixon and conolly
Isn't this the "historial" results for most hard working born Caymanians. Booted out , without little or no explanation and replaced by a foreign object, in most some cases on the eve of retirement. We Caymanians are "NOT" suppose to exceed in our own country. Check history , many Caymanians are sent packing as they reach a certain position, The Laws and Regulations are put in place by our "righteous elected" to protect any Tom, Dick or Harry but if you happen to be born here, dog eat your breakfast, lunch, dinner and supper. My guess is that the same set who sat in the UK and say we are not to eat out turtle meat, something that we ate from creation, something we were eating long before the war in the Fauklands when Caymanians sent so much funds to support that cause, are the same set that pronounce to "lay you off". The experts!. will lay more off, once you try to exceed, No Caymanians are "Not" suppose to raise in their own country, and who do we go to to complain of our treatment, who? Well Ros. old boy, they never had to give you Status or Permenant Residency, you did born here, so just go join the line at Social Services, unless if you don't have the two mentioned entities S and PR you stay at the far back of the line. Good luck!
Isn't this the "historial" results for most hard working born Caymanians. Booted out , without little or no explanation and replaced by a foreign object, in most some cases on the eve of retirement. We Caymanians are "NOT" suppose to exceed in our own country. Check history , many Caymanians are sent packing as they reach a certain position, The Laws and Regulations are put in place by our "righteous elected" to protect any Tom, Dick or Harry but if you happen to be born here, dog eat your breakfast, lunch, dinner and supper. My guess is that the same set who sat in the UK and say we are not to eat out turtle meat, something that we ate from creation, something we were eating long before the war in the Fauklands when Caymanians sent so much funds to support that cause, are the same set that pronounce to "lay you off". The experts!. will lay more off, once you try to exceed, NoCaymanians are "Not" suppose to raise in their own country, and who do we go to to complain of our treatment, who? Well Ros. old boy, they never had to give you Status or Permenant Residency, you did born here, so just go join the line at Social Services, unless if you don't have the two mentioned entities S and PR you stay at the far back of the line. Good luck!
This is a common thing with Government. Kicking out Caymanians is one of the things they do best, and worse of all it is our own Caymanians who are used to do the dirty work.. I say get legal aid and sue them whether you win or not. Let them spend money on lawyers.
What is PPM doing didn't they learn anything from last time? Is this case different from the matter with the three women placed on leave by UDP that got big settlements?
How old was he and what is the age of retirement?