See Background and Summary

07 05 1997
Joined Stirling University as Programmer Analyst.

Kathy McCabe promoted to Team Manager

December 1998
Became Part Time Database Administrator and Part Time Programmer Analyst

April 1999
Became Full Time Database Administrator

September 2000
Regraded from ALC2 to ALC3

18 12 2006
Asked Kathy McCabe to stop ill treating me. Also advised her of ill treatment from colleagues. Made her aware that it was causing me to suffer from stress. KM said she wan't interested.

22 02 2008
Asked Kathy McCabe again to stop ill treating me. Explained that if it continued, I would raise grievance.

01 04 2008
On sick leave due to stress caused by Kathy McCabe's long term bullying. Wrote letter to Peter Kemp while off sick.

06 05 2008
Returned to work, but sent home by Kathy McCabe saying that I needed doctor's approval to return, although medical certificate had expired, and doctor had urged me to return to work as soon as I felt able. Karen Stark asked for proof from doctor that he did indeed say that.

08 May 2008
Obtained doctor's approval to return to work. Doctor said Kathy was "nitpicking" to have sent me home. Returned to work. Very stressful meeting with Kathy McCabe. Raised informal grievance against Kathy McCabe. Karen Stark said she no longer wanted proof that she had asked for, and which the doctor had agreed to provide her with on request.

06 06 2008
External mediation meeting with Kathy McCabe. Kathy said she'd walk out if I followed the mediation process by asking her questions. Kathy agreed that if she received a complaint about me, she would allow me to respond and then meet with me and the complainant.

24 06 2008
Kathy McCabe forwarded email to me from Eileen MacDonald in which she is offensive and makes complaint relating to database security procedures for which I am responsible. Eileen's email demonstrates a very poor understanding of database procedures as well as databases generally. Kathy asked me to respond, and arranged meeting for the three of us.

26 06 2008
I responded to Eileen's email with full evidence showing that Eileen was at fault and that her email is very misleading. I provide emails that I have sent to Eileen explaining the correct procedures and offering help if required, including an email from February 2007. It is obvious that Eileen has simply ignored my emails to her, as well as oral instructions I'd provided to herself and the team. She had also been encouraging others to ignore my instructions.

27 06 2008
Kathy replied saying my email is too long. She cancelled the meeting, and said she will raise grievance against me. Kathy was happy to hold meeting when she thought I was at fault, but cancelled it when she found out that it was her friend who was at fault. I submitted a formal grievance against Kathy and an informal grievance against Eileen. Kathy refused to deal with grievance against Eileen. Both grievances were to be handled by Peter Kemp.

Kathy sends email to the team to undermine me on the issue of database security procedures. This relates to Eileen's stupid attack on me. Kathy can't do the proper thing and MANAGE Eileen. What a farce!

30 06 2008
I write to Peter Kemp to complain about Kathy undermining me.

01 07 2008
Peter replies claiming that he told Kathy to do it. I reply confirming that there is no need, and that everybody, including Eileen, has sufficient privileges to carry out their work on the databases. He says he wants the team to discuss database security procedures. Later, we do so, and no team member thinks the security procedures should be changed. Eileen heckles me throughout the meeting claiming "You're inconsistent! You're inconsistent!" Again she discovers that she is talking through her arse.

08 2008
I was offered Voluntary Severance. This meant I would receive a year's salary if I gave up my job. I don't accept.

10 2008
Peter Kemp has not dealt with either grievance. He retires and is replaced by Mark Toole. Mark asked me if I wished to continue with grievance against Eileen. I confirmed that I did. He asked me to revert to informal grievance against Kathy to allow him an opportunity to deal with it informally. I agreed to his request.

10 12 2008
First informal mediation meeting with Mark Toole, Kathy McCabe and witnesses. Bullied by Kathy with unjust criticism. Kathy agreed to abide by Mark Toole's instruction that criticism is to be delivered privately and be evidence based.

19 01 2009
While on maternity leave, Eileen MacDonald writes to Kathy and Karen Stark saying how stressed she is about returning to work. She knows that I lodged a grievance against her in June 2008. Kathy rushes out to visit her at home because she is so distressed.

20 01 2009
Second informal mediation meeting with Mark Toole, Kathy McCabe and witnesses. Kathy ignored Mark's instruction, and continued to make the most outrageous criticism of me relating to events during short period (20 working days) since first meeting. She was clearly out of control and desperate. My union rep confirmed this to be serious bullying behaviour.

28 01 2009
Gave Mark Toole written explanation of Kathy's bizarre criticism. Asked by Mark to withdraw grievance against Kathy in the hope that this would improve relationships. I reluctantly agreed to this in the hope that Mark will finally lay down the law to Kathy.

09 2009
Mark Toole offered me Voluntary Severance which meant I would receive a year's salary if I gave up my job. This was the second successive year I had been offered this, even though it made no business sense. It is definitely because I have blown the whistle on Kathy's bullying. Mark had already told Karen Eccleson that nobody in our team would be offered VS, but he changed his mind after I registered my interest in it. I don't accept VS.

18 11 2009
Kathy sent a bizarre email to entire team of 16, in which she publicly humiliated me by implying that I am stupid and that I am a liar, despite there being evidence that it is she who is lying. She claims that I've never asked to attend a conference, and that she would have to be a mind reader to know. I reply stating that I still have copies of emails I sent her asking.

30 11 2009
Kathy invites me to a meeting to discuss conference attendance. Her email is worded to make it sound as though I don't know the correct procedure for requesting conference attendance. Her email is publicly visible on her outlook calendar. It's clearly an attempt to justify her previous email.

I reply requesting that she remove the email from public view. I include an excerpt from the university's bullying policy which I bring to her attention.

02 12 2009
We have meeting. I ask Kathy to provide breakdown of how she uses the staff development fund as I don't seem to receive any of it while others receive more than an equal share. Kathy calls a halt to meeting.

03 12 2009
Kathy wrote to Karen Stark and Mark Toole. She was concerned that her behaviour would be regarded as bullying. She expected that I would raise formal grievance. She thanks them for their support and understanding.

04 12 2009
I wrote to Kathy listing all of the occasions when I had generously allowed her an opportunity to stop bullying me. I also offered her an opportunity to apologise. Kathy doesn't do apologies.

11 12 2009
Mark Toole invited me to meeting to discuss recent incidents. Mark could see that I was very likely to raise formal grievance. I reminded Mark that my grievance against Eileen MacDonald was still outstanding. Mark said he thought I'd withdrawn it. I confirmed that I had not. Due to stress following that meeting, I gambled and lost £9,200 that night.

17 12 2009
Mark Toole wrote to me to request meeting to attempt to avoid me raising formal grievance. I rejected Mark's offer as it was clear that Kathy couldn't change her behaviour. She sees no reason to change her behaviour. I also felt that Mark wasn't taking the matter seriously enough, and that he was unable to control Kathy. I referred him to the university's Bullying policy which states bullying will be taken extremely seriously, and told him I saw no evidence of this.

09 02 2010
Principal Christine Hallett writes to all staff saying that the university is strongly committed to equality. and that it aims to ensure that we can work free from discrimination, harassment, victimisation and unfair treatment. I think she was having a laugh!

09 02 2010
Submitted Formal Grievance against Kathy McCabe. Also wrote to Principal Christine Hallett (LINK) stating my concerns that my grievance was not being taken seriously by senior management and HR. LINK to my post on the Grievance Procedure.

16 02 2010 at 4:45pm
Karen Stark writes to me saying that Kathy McCabe had submitted a grievance claiming that I bully her. Her grievance is dated 05 02 2010. No explanation is offered for the delay in informing me of this grievance which pre-dates my own by four days.

23 02 2010
Karen Stark writes to confirm that I will be given an opportunity at hearing to state my concerns.

26 02 2010
Separate Grievance Hearings for me and Kathy take place with Eileen Schofield and Karen Stark. Kathy states that she "feels her gender is an issue with AG." Karen Stark asks her "Does AG criticise everyone in the team, female or male."

Kathy states that my grievance documents "were riddled with factual inaccuracies, for example AG has received a merit award and a promotion which AG appeared to have forgotten about." She states "AG was promoted to trainee DBA." Kathy is not asked to respond to the very large number of allegations I made that include bullying and sex discrimination.

I was only asked for brief summary of my case. A joint hearing is held in the afternoon, but lasts only a few minutes.

Immediately following the joint hearing, Una Forsyth and Selina Gibb instigate a conversation with me. Selina jokes about my shoes, and Una laughs. On 21 April 2010, Selina is interviewed and stated that she was nervous and anxious in my presence at the time of this conversation. On 13 April 2010, Una is interviewed and states that I only got on well with two out of the twelve women in the team. On 16 March 2010 for the grievance investigation, she states that she gets on with most team members with the exception of me.

05 03 2010
Karen Stark announces there is to be an investigation for grievances.

09 03 2010
My union rep writes to Karen Stark to request that process be open and transparent, and that I am given opportunity to respond to witness statements.

10 03 2010
Jackie O'Neil shouts at me and slams her hand on desk because she wrongly thinks I've made a mistake. David Black is standing next to me during the incident.

11 03 2010
I write to Karen Stark with concerns that investigation will only cause bad feelings in the team. I remind her that my grievance is against Kathy and not with others. Karen replies saying that allegations must be thoroughly investigated.

12 03 2010
Just two days after the incident with Jackie O'Neil, David Black is interviewed for the grievance investigation. He is asked if he has ever witnessed colleagues being disrespectful to me. He decides not to tell them about the incident with Jackie or any other incidents of me being abused.

Eric Hall is interviewed and states that he feels I have "a problem with women."

16 03 2010
Jackie O'Neil is interviewed for the grievance investigation. She is asked about occasions when she has shouted at me. Even though she had shouted and slammed her hand down on her desk in anger at me just six days earlier, she claims never to have shouted at anyone. She also denies phoning software suppliers and referring to me as "our useless DBA". She also denies spreading rumours about me cheating the time off in lieu procedure.

Una Forsyth is also interviewed. She is asked about the incident in December 2006 when she had assaulted me. She denies assault. She states that she gets on with most team members with the exception of me. She says that she felt uncomfortable in my company. She says she has witnessed me being nasty to Jackie O'Neil and Selina Gibb.

18 02 2010
Complained to Kathy McCabe and Mark Toole about Jackie O'Neil's shouting. David Black is present and infers that Jackie has given a false account of the incident, but does not correct my statement that she shouted and slammed her hand on her desk.

22 03 2010
Mark Toole said he'll arrange meeting with me and Jackie O'Neil.

24 03 2010
Grievance Hearing Report produced by Eileen Schofield. My grievance is dismissed. I've had no opportunity to respond to witness statements, or even to see them. Kathy's grievance is upheld. Mark Toole decides not to have meeting with me and Jackie. He says that Jackie didn't want to attend a meeting with me. Mark tells me there have been complaints made about me, but refuses to tell me what the complaints are, or who has made them. Suspended by Mark Toole.

26 03 2010
Mark Toole decides to instigate Formal Investigation by Graham Millar and Gail Miller into complaints about me, including complaints by:
Eileen MacDonald whom I still have a grievance against.
Jackie O'Neil whom I still have a complaint against.
Una Forsyth who is upset by HR recently asking her about physically assaulting me in December 2006.

13 to 22 04 2010
Interviews for Formal Investigation held. Complainants interviewed first, but I'm not given details of the complaints when I'm interviewed. LINK to my post on Disciplinary Investigation.

13 04 2010
Una Forsyth is interviewed. She states that I only get on with two out of the twelve women in the team. She is accompanied by Karen Eccleson who at the end of the interview states that I make inappropriate comments to female team members.

15 04 2010
Bruce Flockhart informs Karen Stark by email about the "our useless DBA" incident with Jackie O'Neil. His email is referred to in the fraudulent document sent to the employment tribunal on 15 April 2011. It is claimed to have influenced Eileen Schofield's decision on grievances, but it post dates her decision.

21 04 2010
Jackie O'Neil is interviewed and states "My impression is that if AG doesn't rate you and you are female, he is more likely to behave disparagingly."

21 04 2010
Selina Gibb is interviewed, and states "AG may have issues with females."

22 04 2010
I am interviewed, but Millar and Miller refuse to say what the allegations are, and who has made them.

10 05 2010
Payroll Manager, Anne Anderson confirms in writing that I had never received a merit award from Kathy McCabe,and that I was never promoted to trainee DBA.

13 05 2010
Grievance Appeal Hearing. Eileen Schofield claims that she had checked out Kathy's statement, and found it to be correct, ie I had received a merit award from Kathy and been promoted to trainee DBA.

17 05 2010
Grievance appeal dismissed by Kevin Clarke. Kevin fails to give full explanation for this decision. Union rep says decision is outrageous. The procedure was not just flawed, it was completely dishonest.

31 05 2010
Following the Investigation, Mark Toole decides to hold Formal Disciplinary Hearing.

02 06 2010
Received Investigators' report. My health deteriorates when I see that the investigation was carried out dishonesly, and that complainants have lied and colluded. It is obvious that Mark has decided he wants rid of me, but he knows the complaints are bogus. I wrote to Mark saying that it is obvious the process is a sham. I copied my email to the Occupational Health doctor. Mark makes no attempt to correct the deficiencies. Malicious complaints have been made by Eileen MacDonald, Una Forsyth, Jackie O'Neil and Selina Gibb. Selina is a close friend of Eileen MacDonald.

05 06 2010
As Mark Toole refuses to have David Black interviewed about the incident with Jackie (because he knew she lied), and I am not permitted to speak with colleagues, my girlfriend Ruth phones David to obtain confirmation that Jackie shouted at me. David confirms this in an 11 minute 44 second recorded phone call, and says he will confirm it by email that same day. His email doesn't come.

06 06 2010
Ruth emails me, and copies to David Black to say that David had confirmed that Jackie O'Neil had shouted at me very angrily, and that he was standing right next to me at the time. She also stated that he had said he was not interviewed for the disciplinary process.

07 06 2010
David Black replies saying that he was tired when speaking with Ruth on the phone, and that Jackie hadn't shouted, but had merely raised her voice, not very angrily, but through frustration. He is obviously lying.

09 06 2010
I write again to Mark pointing out that the investigation has not been carried out in accordance with the university's disciplinary procedure. Again he makes no attempt to ensure that a resonable investigation is carried out.

17 06 2010
Disciplinary Hearing. LINK to my post on Disciplinary Hearing. Mark Toole announces at beginning that under no circumstances will the hearing be carried over to a second day. There is insufficient time for me to give my case.

24 06 2010
I informed Occupational Health Consultant, Dr Andrew Mounstephen that the grievance and disciplinary processes were both a sham, and that I fully expected to be dismissed. I told him that I intended to kill myself. He encouraged me to make a claim to the employment tribunal, but I didn't feel it was worthwhile, as tribunals rarely order reinstatements. I saw no future without my job at the uni and having proper justice. I also informed him that due to the stress, I had gambled and lost £33,000 in the previous two weeks, and that I had lost £9,200 on 11 December 2009 following a stressful meeting with Mark Toole. He asked me to visit my GP, but I saw no point. I also said I saw no point in further consultations with him. He has no powers to interfere with the university's procedures, and must assume that they carry out their procedures fairly. This was our last consultation.

25 06 2010
Dismissed by Mark Toole for gross misconduct.

16 08 2010
Appeal Hearing

25 08 2010
Appeal against dismissal rejected by Martin McCrindle and Karen Plouviez

September 2010
Submitted complaint to Employment Tribunal claiming:
Detriment, including dismissal, in response to making protected disclosures.
Sex discrimination.
Unfair dismissal.

October 2010
Stirling Uni responds to my complaint denying any wrongdoing. They also say that the allegations in my grievance were investigated and rejected.

15 November 2010
Knowing that my allegations had been ignored, I ask the uni for details of the alleged investigation into each of my allegations.

November 2010 to March 2011
Uni refuses to supply details requested, saying it's not relevant to my case.

15 April 2011
Uni eventually provides details, but it is obvious that the information has been created fraudulently after the investigation was alleged to have taken place.

14 June 2011
Tribunal hearing begins. The grievance process is examined. It is unclear why the uni, represented
by a lawyer, could have thought that the grievance process was not relevant to my case. First hearing is to determine the reason for dismissal. Uni was hoping that I would not be allowed to discuss the reasonableness of the disciplinary process and the reasonableness of the grievance process. That would have made it very difficult for me to show that reason was other than the one given by the uni.

15 June 2011
Hearing suspended in order to review the scope. It is decided that all elements of my complaint should be determined, and not just the reason for dismissal.

2 November 2011
Requested additional information from the uni in the form of answers to questions to a number of employees. The Questions