Labour Party reportedly using ' gagging orders.

And Labour has managed it in 4 years

My goodness, fancy having to trawl through through 185 years of anti-semitism in the Conservative party to find as many examples of it as Labour has had in the last 2 years.

Antisemitism in the UK Conservative Party

From its beginning to now Antisemitism rife in Tory party now islamaphobia don't hear about that or anything being done about it.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Conservative_Party

We take, as can be expected, a totally different view in this Grandad. It doesn’t surprise either of us.
GMP is Greater Manchester Police. They have excellent procedures and staff support systems in place. In fact Ms Oliver attempted to use them, to no avail. No doubt you question her motives as well.

Grievence procedure in the Labour Party ?

Iam64, in regard to your post @18:18 today (12/07/19), I have stated in my previous post that ALL employees of any organisation have a laid out grievance procedure (supported by legislation) available to them in all cases of dispute with their employers.

Should they undertake to go through that procedure and the hearing and appeal finds against their grievance, then they are then open to take that grievance outside the company/organisation and place it in the hands of an industrial court (better known as Industrial Tribunals)

In the above, their case will be heard and adjudicated on by persons completely independent of anyone connected with any person's employers.

I am not familiar with the case of the GMP officer (whatever that abbreviation is). However, it is being reported that in the case of the Labour p
Party former employees, none of them engaged the above procedure prior to leaving their employment.

Thousands undertake the above with their employers or former employers in Britain each year, and in that many prove that they are the victims of harassment, bullying or constructed dismissal. However, if you do not choose to take up procedures that are freely available to all employees in the UK, you cannot within reason claim to be a victim, and therefore should not be surprised when people question your motives in bringing your unexamined case to the attention of the BBC.

Given the bullying going on in the Labour Party who could they trust to turn to?

Obeying orders and procedures isn't always possible, or indeed the right way to go.

The obvious example in todays news is Maggie Oliver, the GMP officer who helped get victims to trust her with the result men were charged and sentenced in the Rochdale CSE cases. She went off sick after her work was criticised as 'over emotional'. It then became clear to her that the children she'd encouraged to make statements were being misused by the system she had led them to trust. She resigned and became a whistle blower. She wrote a book about her experiences, in which she severely criticises GMP.

Grandad, are you going to dismiss her as someone who didn't follow the correct procedures because she clearly didn't. She's also probably also breaching the official secrets act by writing this book.

I'm not suggesting that public officials should disregard the boundaries in their work. I'm suggesting that the 7 or 8 former employees at the Labour Complaints section shouldn't be rubbished as being ill prepared for their work, going off sick rather than "follow correct procedures" and for speaking out about their experiences.

It should not be expected for some far left Momentum supporters to discuss what the ex employees said .

Who support kicking out MP’s who do not suck up to Corbyn ,

Laughable ? No,

We again see the on the forum members prepared to ignore procedures even when they are written into legislation. Those "former Labour Party employees had laid out procedures available to them, backed by legislation.

However, unlike many thousands throughout various UK industries each year they chose not to make use of those facilities in their grievance with there employers.

The above should and does bring into question the reality and motives of those former employees in bringing their unexamined cases to the attention of the BBC.

It should not be unexpected for some right-wing leaning members of this forum to wish to see laid out procedures ignored. After all the right wing are, it would seem, prepared to see the dismantling of our whole Parliamentary democracy to obtain their warped wishes.

And some preach about a broad church.

Laughable.

They are so sure of winning the next election because of their high membership, many are young people who admire Corbyn for being a rebel, they need votes across the country, all ages not just youngsters, Marxist and middle aged hippies

Well said, Anniebach and Iam64

And, if the Labour Party was still a broad church, representative of the centre left as well, it could stand a chance of winning a GE.

See the back of the remaining Blairites ? This means getting rid of the centre left. There are more centre left MP’s than
far left Marxist MP’s

If Blair had got rid of the far left Marxists we would still have
a Labour Party to be proud of and led by a leader not a
puppet with McClusky and Seusmas Milne pulling his
strings
And it would still be a broad Church

You’re doing it again, blaming the victim, grandad. Your suggestion that proper procedures weren’t followed is exactly what was said to the Health worker who tried to get action taken to protect children in the Rochdale cse scandal.

Processes, procedures are essential but blaming people who are suffering work related health problems is a cop out. I’m familiar with the long description you give of duty of care/equalities act.
I find your comment about “seeing the back of the remaining Blairites.....” chilling. The Labour Party once prided itself on being a Broad Church. Now it seems is Jeremy’s way or get out.

Iam64, an Employers Duty of Care is encompassed under the Equalities Act 2010. Under that act, an employer must have available to all employees a grievance procedure that includes an investigation into an employees grievance, a formal hearing if it is found that the employee has a case to be answered, and an appeal process hearing should the previous steps have ruled against the employee. All the foregoing stages of ant grievance procedure must be overseen and ruled on by a person who is not part of the employee's direct line management.

As stated in an earlier posting in this thread I have not seen the BBC Panorama program on anti-semitism in the Labour Party, but from online media reports it would seem that none of the "former employees" had taken up the above grievance procedure in regard to the stress and interference they alleged to have been placed under.

Perhaps greater respect and credence could be placed in what those former employees stated had they enacted the above grievance procedure prior to ending their employment.

In regards to Margret Hodge (her of covert recording fame) she has forwarded those more than two hundred alleged anti-semitism claims in the Labour Party without even checking if they actually were submitted to her by current members of the party or even affiliated members. In that action, I believe that Hodge has demonstrated her interest in causing maximum disruption in Central Office as a way of undermining Jeremy Corbyns leadership, which she among others have never accepted.

Up until this point, I have not believed that the planned " constituency party trigger ballots" would be necessary to bring about comparative unity in the Parliamentary Labour Party. However, I now feel that the foregoing procedure is now inevitable to see the back of the remaining Blairites who will not accept the overwhelming democratic election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader.

I have never trusted Jennie Formby, she shot to position of
General secretary from regional secretary of UNITE and one time lover of McClusky, they have a son .

team - sorry

Grandad
I have not been able to see the Panorama program on the Labour party
I do not think that you will like it as Jenny Formby is mentioned in a negative way.

I did miss the end of it due to a malfunction of the recorder but what I did see was very disturbing.

Anyone in the investigations eam who raised worrying issues about interference has been dismissed as a 'disaffected ex-employee' by McDonnell.

POGS your post on NDA's reflects the one I'd been planning to post. Thanks for that.

The duty of care for staff issue is a real one. It seems undeniable to me that the complaints team were overwhelmed and unsupported, in fact they seem to have been under pressure not to take the allegations seriously. (as suggested by the young woman who was so influenced by her trip to Berlin, to the extent she felt she had to speak out)

The criticism of Margaret Hodge for forwarding 200 unchecked allegations of ant semitism to central office for them to check out and investigate is a stunner. Is the suggestion that an MP should assume responsibility for that, reject allegations a single MP decides don't warrant investigation? I do hope not.

Grandad

' Previous' to the BBC programme there have been several interviews over the use of NDA's by Labour and the issuing of letters by Labour Lawyers Carter-Ruck , some see the letter from Carter Ruck as threatening, a position I am not accusing them of but interested to hear others make the point.

As John McDonnell said to Marr after Marr started the conversation with:-

Am "Is it still your intention to scrap NDA's?

JM " Yes"

Further down the line :-

JM “What we’re trying to do is remind them of their confidentiality agreement.”

“I’ve always campaigned against NDAs where they’re trying to prevent whistleblowing particularly around harassment and victimisation.”

" What’s happened is the Labour party has reminded them of their confidentiality agreement because you can’t have people particularly when you’re dealing with individual cases, individual information about individual members, that can’t be right.

“What we will be saying we’re going to reform the law so that whistleblowers will be protected, NDAs will not be used against them when they are using whistleblowers.”
----

Labour has said in the past :-

Jeremy Corbyn:-

Jeremy Corbyn will commit the next Labour government to:
"Legislating to prevent making any contractual clauses (NDAs) which stop disclosure of future discrimination, harassment or victimisation”

Labour Shadow Equalities Minister Dawn Butler:-

" Labour welcomes the EHRC’s recommendations to protect employees from sexual harassment at work. Its call for the Government to prevent employers from using non-disclosure agreements is essential to ensuring greater transparency and access to justice”
--

Labour Lord Falconer says:-

“You can’t pick and choose. If somebody within your organisation is saying something wrong is going on, you can’t use an NDA to say you can’t say anything except things that we agree with, which is what the Labour Party is saying at the moment.

“No organisation like the Labour Party, which used over years, quite legitimately, whistleblowers to reveal what’s wrong in society, should be using them in this way.”
---

For a party that has railed against the use of NDA's, campaigned to ' do away with NDA' s, says it is a our policy to stop the use of NDA's it is understandable the cry of hypocrisy is shouted.

I suppose this is another case of those who dislike and believe the likes of Margaret Hodge, Ruth Smeeth, Wes Streeting are conspiracy theorists to get rid of Corbyn will hold one view.

Others will take the view there has now been years of anti_semetic related issues and reports since Corbyn became Leader and the intake of ' some' new/returned members who hold his far left opinions , that makes it impossible to believe in anything other than there is an inherant problem.

Should the team set up to investigate claims of anti semetism not be able to cope with the number of complaints?

Iam64, in response to your post @ 10:18 today (11/07/19), can respectfully point out out that I did not place "blame* or "responsibility" on anyone for any situation in the Labour Party as you will see if you read my post @09:45 today thoroughly.

I did in that post outline the employers duty of care in situations of stress on employees and the action my own company undertakes in such matters.

I did also state in regard to Margret Hodge that "It cannot help when people such as her forward over two hundred unchecked anti-semitism allegations to central office for them to check out and investigate."

The above is not to place blame on her for the stress on staff or in connection with any other matter. It is purely a statement of media reports in regard to what she has carried out.

For anyone to forward over two hundred unchecked and unvalidated anti-semitism allegations to Central Office obviously will not help the smooth running of that office.

The leadership are responsible for it

Goodness grandad, your response is reminiscent of those who blame police and social workers investigating child sexual exploitation for being over emotional if they find the work stressful.
It’s also putting responsibility on the complainants, again similar to cse complaints. Employers have a duty of care.

There is something amiss in the LP. We can all speculate about the causes. I’ve said previously, I accept much of MSM is right wing and will exploit any perceived weakness in the left. This is more than a perceived weakness or right wing conspiracy and the leadership seems unable to deal with it.

So the fault lies with Margaret Hodge not those who assure the country they were dealing with the complaints

Blame the abused not the abusers !