Whistleblowing nurses launch appeal

23 August, 2010

Three nurses who claimed they were victimised after blowing the whistle at an NHS trust have appealed against a ruling that their employers acted fairly.

Jennie Fecitt, Annie Woodcock and Felicity Hughes claimed NHS Manchester failed to protect them after they reported a male nurse to managers for exaggerating his qualifications.

Ms Fecitt said she became the victim of a “witch hunt” and was threatened with having her house burned down after they accused Daniel Swift, a fellow nurse, of only having the qualifications needed to treat children and not adults.

She said she suffered a “character assassination” while her daughter took an anonymous phone call warning their house would be set alight unless the complaint was dropped.

Ms Fecitt and Ms Woodcock were eventually transferred, despite their objections, from the walk-in centre in Wythenshawe, south Manchester, while Ms Hughes saw her “hours were reduced to zero”.

The nurses took NHS Manchester to an employment tribunal last September, claiming the trust acted unfairly and they were justified in making their complaint.

The panel, sitting in Manchester, said it was “entirely satisfied that it was appropriate” for the women to raise concerns about Mr Swift since he stated “untruths” about his qualifications and experience.

But it also found bosses acted because of a “dysfunctional environment” at the walk-in centre and not because they had blown the whistle on Mr Swift.

On Friday, at the Employment Appeal Tribunal in London, the nurses appealed against this aspect of the tribunal’s ruling.

Their barrister, Daniel Barnett, claimed the original ruling was incorrect and they were victims of discrimination as a result of deciding to break cover about their colleague’s alleged lack of qualifications.

The appeal panel’s decision is expected in the next three to four months.

Whatever the outcome of the appeal, the case is expected to set a legal precedent on the lengths that bosses can go to when an employee blows the whistle.

The nurses said they hope it will “set a line in the sand” about employers’ “duty of care” to whistleblowers.

Readers' comments (25)

Anonymous | 23-Aug-2010 12:22 pm
Whistle-blowing is the hardest thing to do and is not done lightly. Why? Because the whistle-blower is almost always seen as the villian of the piece.
I wish these nurses well.
Having blown the whistle once I will never do it again because of the ensuing harrassment and unfair treatment. Organizations do not want to hear the truth because they then have to deal with it and so examples like this put people off and allow bad practice to continue.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 23-Aug-2010 2:13 pm
I agree with the comment above. I just wish that managers and directors would wake up, face the music and deal with these sort of issues with some integrity. Sadly,from my experience within the NHS most managers I have come across have a 'bullying'mentality, which has a detrimental effect on staff. It just seems absurd that no one has any 'balls' to do their jobs properly, and they are still in management positions? where's the sense in that???
I wish the girls good luck, it takes some courage to do what they have done.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 23-Aug-2010 2:33 pm
I totalLy agree with above comments and would like to congratulate these nurses as their managers failed to do so. We have duty to public and will do anything to expose people who cheat our patients. Managers need to not only support these staff but take this opportunity to set live example for others.

This a typical example of frud in NHS

STOP MIND GAMES NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unsuitable or offensive?
Magdalene Porteous | 23-Aug-2010 6:18 pm
It is very noble act to become a Whistleblower, but unfortunately, as the three nurses found out to their cost it is rarely without repercussions for those of us who feel very strongly that we have a "duty of care" to the public and take our position as public servants seriously.

After following the correct procedure and reporting the manager and senior nurse [seconded from the NHS]for alleged abuse of a vulnerable service user, I and the others involved in the disclosure were completely shocked to told by the Director of the private company who funded/run the unit, that we were nothing but troublemakers and that if we did not like the way the unit was run then we should GET OUT. From that moment on we were vicitmised, followed in the workplace, our conversations listened into and reported back to the Director. Eventually we were hounded out. I was left with no option but to resign and then started proceedings against the company for Constructive Dismissal. While continuing to accuse me of lying and troublemaking, they eventually settled out of court. I was fortunate that my case was settled without a need for a tribunal -and that was nerve -racking enough. Therefore, I have nothing but admiration for the three nurses who are appealing against certain aspects of their tribunal's ruling - Good on you all and good luck! At the very least you will be setting a legal precedent on the lengths that employers can go to avoid the employee being discriminated against when they blow the whistle, and hopefully remind employers that they must have a "duty of care" to whistleblowers.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 23-Aug-2010 7:30 pm
Kudos to these three brave people who are not only standing up for THEIR rights but the rights of ALL nurses in the UK. Even if the eventual outcome is not in their favour they have sent a loud message to management - “so far but no further!”

We all, as front-line nurses, are bound by a duty of care to our patients – including reporting cases of institutional abuse and malpractice (aka whistle blowing.) Employers MUST be held accountable to provide a similar duty of care to the front-line nurses who do nothing more immoral than follow the NMC guidelines they are duty bound by.

Indeed, the NMC itself, instead of placing nurses in an impossible “double-bind” situation - must be seen to actively support “whistle blowers” by somehow sanctioning (e.g. 'victimising') amoral employers that bully nurses who act (with more backbone) to a higher moral code than the bosses themselves display.

BTW, what were the bloody unions and the RCN doing while these three nurses were being so blatantly discriminated against? I think we should be told!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Aug-2010 12:33 pm
Bravo. I hope that sense prevails and these nurses are able to get the correct decision and set a precedent for others. Everyone is so right that whistleblowing, (terrible word), is viewed with trepidation as the whistleblower is often the person who suffers. Professionalism is at the heart of nursing and we should never over egg our qualifications. This is not only dishonest (honesty is vital in nursing), we are leaving ourselves open to error and most of all, patients could suffer. They were quite right to highlight this nurse. I am also sad that the department became such a 'bad' place after the event. I presume there may be other stories behind the scenes that we are not party to but hey, the initial reporting sounds justified.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Aug-2010 5:59 pm
With respect to the last comment - your so right! There was more to this story than what has been reported. A 'Board to Door' bullying approach was adopted against these 3 nurses - why? Because unbeknown to them, what they blew the whistle on and NHS Manchester's own whistle blowing investigation, opened up a can of worms with respect to that employer not checking NMC registration at recruitment, failing to appoint nurses without the essential qualifications, then to compound it all, no checks to ensure competency of staff. Senior management saw the bullying and did nothing - why- because they knew 2 years ago he was not qualified to do the job, but even then did nothing to ensure he was safe. This is what the original tribunal found, but then it appears as though the courts misinterpreted the whistle-blowing laws, because these 3 brave nurses would have never have got an Appeal at the High Court. Appeals are only allowed if there has been an error in the law at the original hearing.

I believe the nurses are funding themselves although I believe they are RCN members - read into that what you like!

I have been following this case very close, both in the court room and in the press. Best of luck to them. A line in the sand needs to be drawn, and any individual management officer who fails to work within the whistle blowing law, should be made to foot the legal bill, rather than it be funded via the patient funds. That will stop their disgraceful behaviour overnight!! Any nurse management who fails to protect another nurse, well shame on them, the NMC MUST lead by example and hold them to account!

In my view, Managers and Directors (including HR) who bully whistle -blowers should be shown the door - and never ever allowed to practice in the NHS again! As for the nurses in the Walk in Centre who bullied them - someone should be pointing them to their NMC Code of Conduct and refering them to the NMC along with the original nurse who lied about his qualifications and experience.

As for the DoH - they need NHS organisations to have robust Whistle Blowing policies that not only ensure concerns will be investigated but give 110% assurance that anybody blowing the whistle will be protected! Read your policies, there is nothing about how your employer will ensure you are protected!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 24-Aug-2010 10:42 pm
What really gets me is where was the support from the registered nurses who allowed these 3 girls to be bullied by their team mates, middle managers and directors. Why did they not stand up for their nursing colleagues. For those of us who have worked in the NHS for many years know all to well of the management culture in the NHS which is "shoot the messenger", but what the hell went wrong with their nursing work colleagues who allowed them to be treated this way. Did they do NOTHING to support their whistle blowing colleagues? I am not condoning the disgraceful conduct of the managers...but what I fail to understand is why their fellow nursing colleagues did nothing....SHAME ON THEM!!!!!!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 25-Aug-2010 4:08 am
Whistle-blowers? Don't get me started!

This very Nursing Times forum is set up to subjugate nurses and deny them their rights.

Don't believe me? Then go to http://www.nursingtimes.net/whats-new-in-nursing/acute-care/top-hospitals-show-bias-for-male-nurse-directors/5018275.article#commentsubmitted
and see the hypocrisy for yourself.

This is a Martha Park issue.

Nurses are being told to sit at the back of the bus!

No longer NT!!!

Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 12:16 pm
Apologies for sounding a note of caution
here, but not everything is known about this case or the little details that are so important. We are basically being told what the author's want us to hear, their account of events. Remember the male nurse has rights too! For instance what is meant by a 'dysfunctional environment ' and why the need for three members of the nursing staff to 'out' the one male member of staff. I'm not sure if that is strictly 'whistle blowing is it'?
( He has obviously acted very foolishly and dangerously to exaggerate qualifications and experience) but what were the circumstances surrounding the discovery of this? . It doesn't sound as though it was handled well. I know it's great to 'demonise' management at the moment but not all the facts may not be as innocent as we are being led to believe and I think we should be careful before we leap to hasty judgement before the appeal is heard.
Sorry to be the only voice of criticism..but there we are!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:31 pm
To the last comment.....I think you'll find the courts said they made protected disclosures against this male nurse - go read the judgement for yourself and while your at it.... go read the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. For there to be a 'Protected Disclosure' it has to fit in a very defined category e.g breaking the law, health & safety, covering up etc etc. Once the courts have decided that the protected act fits one of the defined list of 6 I think, they then have to rule that the whistleblower made it in good faith and had reasonable believe.

Your entitled to your opinion on what you think is or is not a protected disclosure, but are you really qualified to make that observation - I think not!! Best left for the courts. In fact the courts found what the 3 girls blew the whistle on (ie. this Daniel Swift guy) was in fact a protected disclosure. Makes sense really.....someone who is not trained is putting the health and safety of patients at risk....end of!

Your right....we dont know all the facts about this case...but surely the 3 of them would have never have got this far if the courts never 'found in fact' that they were in fact whistleblowers.

We are not legal bods either but I guess that the fact 2 of them had to be transferred against their wishes may be because of the bullying metred out against them and that management thought that was the only way to stop them from being bullied any further was to move them. Dosn't make it right though - does it? If you make a protected disclosure, surely you shouldn't suffer any detriment (thats what the law says). If they were being bullied, that was a detriment and if management moved them, that was a further detriment. To say that management acted fairly by moving them is wrong, the bullying should have never have started in the first place. Its like 'stable door, horse bolted' situation. Indeed, who the hell told the male nurse and work colleagues - I thought if you blow the whistle the protection starts at the moment you blow the whistle. Surely, the 3 of them should have never been exposed to that nurse and his fellow supporters.....that is a detriment in itself.

Your right we don''t know everything....but what little we do know is that what they did was put their patients first and I don't know about your view......that in itself is a selfless act. The fact that they are still fighting it may suggest that they have a case. There is a comment above that suggests they are funding themselves (if thats the case...no one throws that kind of money away lightly). Maybe what they doing is getting a legal precent to nail down what an employer's duty of care is to whsitleblowers....maybe I should be the voice of optimisum......but there we are!!

Go to pcaw.co.uk there is some great info on whistle blowing and the law.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:52 pm
To the last comment above.........

maybe the person making the comments that your making to them are HR!!!! They know jack when it comes to employment law!!!! The person is certainly not a nurse...well lets hope not!

Saying that, it might be a member of the team who bullied them (lol) as they make a comment that the girls singled out "the one male member of staff". How do they know there was only one member male of staff that worked there? Boo hoo!

BEST OF LUCK TO THE 3 NURSES - WE NEED STRONG NURSES LIKE THIS TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE!! The profession is proud of you!!!!!!! Go girls....go!!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 2:23 pm
Thanks for that. But why was the disclosure the responsibility of three nurses regarding the appointment of qualified staff in areas of great importance??.
Management are suppose to check qualifications and references thoroughly before appointing people, were they remiss in some way?
All members of the public have access to the NMC register to check the qualifications of staff registered with them
so that surely wasn't a problem in terms of disclosure.
I am sure that most nurses put there patients first that is not in question I hope.

If there has been an attempt to cover up this chap's lack of qualification and the three nurses were victimised in some illegal way then there is a case of whistleblowing to answer of course. But checking someone's qualifications is pretty easy to prove one way or the other and really isn't a cause for disputation I would have thought. I just wonder whether this constitutes a case for whistle blowing which to me has connotations of cover up and illegal activity. I am sure the appeal will set it to rights for all concerned in due course.
Sorry to be a doubting thomas and I will check the web pages you have given on whisle blowing and the law. Thanks
Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 25-Aug-2010 2:28 pm
@ Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:31 pm

Jeez, I don't know what gender you are but I love you.

I honestly wish I could be that incisive and apposite – your reply just blew me away. Can we get married? WHATEVER!

Okay so I've got to butch up a bit now...

Nahh.. honestly, I'll have your babies.

Whoops!

“Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:31 pm” you have seriously got to register on this site and talk some serious sense to this motley-crew.

Please tell me you are a girl – please, please, please...

Yeah, like that's ever going to happen!

And like "Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:52 pm" said BEST OF LUCK TO THE 3 NURSES - WE NEED STRONG NURSES LIKE THIS TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE!! The profession is proud of you!!!!!!! Go girls....go!!!
Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 25-Aug-2010 3:01 pm
@ Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 2:23 pm
who I presume was the same person as...
@ Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:31 pm

who is obviously a lawyer of the between-the-legs dangley gender.

First off. I was just joshing. Truly! :)

Secondly. You'd be surprised how common this “faking” your quals stuff is and how lax employers are at checking up – even here in Canukland. Employers get so desperate to fill posts they'll hire anything that looks remotely competent and ask for proof of qualifications later.

I, personally, came across a guy that I absolutely KNEW could not be an RN, just from the way he reacted to 'emergency' situations. When I mooted the point to my colleagues I was told that he had somehow managed to avoid the annual “proof of registration” procedure THREE TIMES!

It was somehow insinuated that I should not be questioning his registration because “if management thinks he's OK then he must be...”

I quit that place – far too hooky for my liking. But I did hear a few months later that not only did the fake RN get the heave-ho (he was only ever a medic in the U.S. marine corps) but the whole of the management team got strong-armed out of the building too.

So, yeah. Shit like this happens in nursing and that's why we applaud people who stand up and draw a line in the sand like these three ladies have done.

It truly IS a genuine 1955 Rosa Parks moment for us. We won't give up our seats to make room for the institution’s oppressors.

Montgomery Bus Boycott it may not be but, hey, even Rosa Parks wasn't original. Irene Morgan did it nine years before her...

Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 4:23 pm
@ Ste Williams - yeap I am of the female gender.

I say it as it is Ste....
Everyone is allowed their opinion, but what really gets my goat is when folk voice an opinion when their have not researched the facts first.

All the press reports on these 3 nurses clearly state the original court ruling was that:
1. They made protected disclosures (whistle blew on this Daniel Swift guy)
2. and that they were right to take it further when management failed to act on their concerns
3. And as a direct result of the protected disclosure, they were bullied in the work place, got threatening phone calls and had their names splashed across Face Book by the staff at the centre who supported this Daniel Swift, and then removed against their wishes and got no more hours.
4. and that management could and should have protected them more than they did

Its all in the press (Manchester Evening News - 4th Feb 2010). The press are not allowed to lie about the outcome of legal cases, because they will be sued to high heaven.

Therefore, with those 4 points already found as proved by the courts, yeah, the 3 nurses do have a case, and correct me if I am wrong, the Appeal Courts only deal with errors made in law. Therefore the original court hearing must have made an error in the law (which it clearly must have done if it still dismissed the 3 nurses claims on their own findings of fact above).

Therefore what is being reported in this article is correct, just like their Barrister says in the press article. and is any barrister going to lie to the press - I think not!!! That would be professional suicide!!

I just get hacked off when people raise their opinion, who clearly don't know the law, and clearly have not been following this national press coverage on these 3 nurses, and are very naieve to think it is not going on in the NHS.

Yeap, i agree there are nurses out there who lie about their qualifications.......and its called misrepresentation....and by the way.... its an offence.

So good on the 3 of them for protecting patients from someone like that! and they should be congratulated for carrying this case to go on to set a legal precedent for nurses in the future, because if they win their appeal, the NHS big wigs will think very very carefully in the future about their legal duty of care to whistle blowers. and maybe, just maybe the profession can have the confidence to raise concerns without the disgraceful 'fall-out' seen in these 3 girls case and others posted on this comment box!!

Unsuitable or offensive?
Steve Williams | 25-Aug-2010 6:10 pm
@ Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 2:23 pm
who I presumed was the same person as...
@ Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 1:31 pm
who I thought was a lawyer of the between-the-legs dangley gender.
And now I find out that “Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 4:23 pm” is in fact of the opposite faction that has an awesome brain. We gotta give you an alias... “LegalBeagle” might be one... much better than Anonymous | 25-Aug-2010 2:23 pm.... Oh shute I love you please marry me...

I'm sorry folks, my knees turned to jelly following my brain and groin's sudden example.

I am finding it hard to concentrate right now.

Bloody hell LB I have just been through your last post. Nothing I could say that you haven't said better. Crap! I am like a bloody “nodding-dog” here. It's not fair. Please marry me.

Where have you been all my life? Please marry me.

Yup it SHOULD be as easy as ABC, 123. The due process of law must be exacted. There are already statutes enshrined not only in current but also in common law that protect these three UK citizens... But f*ck this is UK nursing, ergo all normal rules go out of the window because “management” has grown up in a climate where intimidation is the norm – not the exception.

I love you LegalBeagle please marry me...

As the Bard scribed. “Aye... and there's the rub.” LegalBeagle's most probably a bye doing it for the lulz. Shute, hoisted by own petard yet again...

Sorry mike, I'll be back in the bunker shortly. Evidently Corporal Bazzer is waiting for us down there too. Seems he's recently “come out” too... although whether Private “Bob” had anything to do with that I am not too sure???
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 26-Aug-2010 6:31 pm
All the best to these 3 brave nurses. It takes alot to do what they have done and to fund themselves legally to see it to the end so others will not suffer in the future is honorable. The NMC should be putting the 3 of them forward for an OBE.

On a wider note, with respect to protecting the public and upholding the profession, the NMC should also be chasing this male nurse who misrepresented his qualifications and hold him to account before the Conduct and Competence Committee, along with the nurses who bullied these girls and the nurse managers who clearly failed to protect them.
Unsuitable or offensive?
kathleen white | 26-Aug-2010 6:46 pm
Yes Anon 26-Aug-2010 6:31pm, this needs to be referred to the NMC. I do hope that the 3 nurses will do so as soon as their appeal is complete.

Kathleen White (Edinburgh)
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 28-Aug-2010 11:07 am
Atticus stood up and walked to the end of the porch. 'First of all, if you can learn a simple trick,Scout you'll get along better with all kinds of folks. You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view, until you climb into his skin and walk around in it'.
(pp33.To Kill a Mocking Bird, Harper Lee,1960)
I think nurses mostly demonstrate toleration, support and kindness for fellow nurses who find themselves in a predicament, whether for the right reasons or not.
I hope it continues to be the hall mark of this profession today.
Unsuitable or offensive?