Why is there a Clash between the Tutors and the AFC

I have just learned that today is the 123rd birthday of the SNU! The SNU was formed this day in 1901.

What a day for them to have a court case against them launched!

Plus nothing on their website or social media and it's almost midday! They really have dropped the ball again!

Let's see if they read this and now post something to mark what is a significant day for them?

I am unaware of the legal proceedings I think this was the application hearing. If anybody knows how this works. Please enlighten. Thanks

Anniemillo1 wrote:I am unaware of the legal proceedings I think this was the application hearing.    If anybody knows how this works.  Please enlighten.  Thanks

It's the first stage of several. However, it does show that the rumours about an impending court case, against the SNU/AFC are indeed accurate.

Will the listed action be about the tutors' case against the SNU/AFC for compensation etc. in respect of employment rights and the way they've been mistreated?

It's hardly a surprise, though, there's not been a formal announcement anywhere by the SNU of the upcoming legal action.

mac wrote:Will the listed action be about the tutors' case against the SNU/AFC for compensation etc. in respect of employment rights and the way they've been mistreated?

I believe this is a separate case Mac.

mac wrote:It's hardly a surprise, though, there's not been a formal announcement anywhere by the SNU of the upcoming legal action.

Previously (and mostly for employment tribunals) they settle with an NDA. It never gets publicised.

notabigjump wrote:

mac wrote:Will the listed action be about the tutors' case against the SNU/AFC for compensation etc. in respect of employment rights and the way they've been mistreated?

I believe this is a separate case Mac.

Oh that's a surprise! I was expecting the tutors' case would start the ball rolling of cases against the SNU/AFC. This is something different, then....

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

mac wrote:Will the listed action be about the tutors' case against the SNU/AFC for compensation etc. in respect of employment rights and the way they've been mistreated?

I believe this is a separate case Mac.

Oh that's a surprise!  I was expecting the tutors' case would start the ball rolling of cases against the SNU/AFC.  This is something different, then....

It is, but given it involves both the SNU and AFC it is relevant to the general dissatisfaction. Hopefully there will an update from the Tutors or the SNU asap.

Do we know who is taking this notified legal action and about what?

mac wrote:Do we know who is taking this notified legal action and about what?

I would be concerned that if we tried to dig into this further it may jeopardise the case and really that is the last thing that we need to do when it is soo close.

Anniemillo1 wrote:

mac wrote:Do we know who is taking this notified legal action and about what?

I would be concerned that if we tried to dig into this further it may jeopardise the case and really that is the last thing that we need to do when it is soo close.

I wasn't wanting to investigate I was simply wondering who-and-what the case involved.

It's been listed so presumably the major details won't change. I imagine they will soon be known by both parties anyway - if they've not already been made known.

notabigjump wrote:

Admin wrote:Thanks notabigjump this is fascinating and as you say should make the whole NEC , President, Vice Presidents, Finance Director and the ordinary directors think hard. No way back now you have, even if you did not know what was going on, been a part of what has happened, liable. Good luck if it goes wrong because the charities commission will not allow the SNU to cover your legal costs and penalties. Time to seek advice for your own good. This is going so wrong and damaging the reputation of the organisation.

This is interesting. The SNU is bound by law to inform and involve the Charities Commission if there are any legal proceedings against them. They cannot simply pay someone off with an NDA out of their own funds.

Possibly true notabigjump, but the regulators have been showing every intention of staying hands off. This is the first stage and at some time I am surethe judge will ask the parties to sit down and see if they can settle it. If the SNU and AFC think they will lose they will hope to offer a generous settlement stitched up with NDA's this would also give her some wiggle room not to inform members of the outcome.

I think members should want this case to go all the way with a judgement in the full light of day, not obscured by NDA's. Hey maybe the press will pick it up lovely 123rd Birthday Headline "None of the Spooks Saw it Coming".

notabigjump wrote:

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

mac wrote:Will the listed action be about the tutors' case against the SNU/AFC for compensation etc. in respect of employment rights and the way they've been mistreated?

I believe this is a separate case Mac.

Oh that's a surprise!  I was expecting the tutors' case would start the ball rolling of cases against the SNU/AFC.  This is something different, then....

It is, but given it involves both the SNU and AFC it is relevant to the general dissatisfaction. Hopefully there will an update from the Tutors or the SNU asap.

I do understand why there's general dissatisfaction with the running of the SNU/AFC but legal proceedings have to - I'm thinking - be specific and they can't bring in or be influenced by general matters. As things look set to go, I'm left wondering whether the tutors are ever going to be in a position they're able to publicly make known the basis of their complaints and any legal actions resulting from them.

I expect that unless regulatory bodies become involved - if there's sufficient justification - the whole business will slowly fizzle out with new procedures and new bods in key positions to steer the ship in a direction very different from that of the past.

I don't think the tutors would leave us high and dry without saying anything further. My view is that they will either tell us what happened or tell us there will be no further announcement from them. As long as they say nothing I am assuming it is still ongoing.

I don't see how we'd be left "high and dry" were we to hear nothing from the tutors - they owe us nothing.  

It's not a case of "anything further" either as to the best of my knowledge they've been unable to say anything in the first place because of the SNU complaints procedure always demanding their signed NDA.  

Even if the tutors wanted to speak out the damned Non Disclosure Agreement will presumably prevent them ever doing so. Whether the SNU is also bound by it is moot.  Perhaps if that agreement has an expiration date - unlikely - or if some other process frees them from the terms of the agreement - unlikely? - we may get to learn more.

mac wrote:I don't see how we'd be left "high and dry" were we to hear nothing from the tutors - they owe us nothing.  

It's not a case of "anything further" either as to the best of my knowledge they've been unable to say anything in the first place because of the SNU complaints procedure always demanding their signed NDA.  

Even if the tutors wanted to speak out the damned Non Disclosure Agreement will presumably prevent them ever doing so.  Whether the SNU is also bound by it is moot.  Perhaps if that agreement has an expiration date - unlikely - or if some other process frees them from the terms of the agreement - unlikely? - we may get to learn more.

I think they will feel that they do owe their AFC  students something (not us I agree) but they very much wanted to apologise and explain to their students as much as they could in their two original statements which, in my view, said quite a lot. They did say they would not allow anything to be swept under the carpet, indicating, I felt, an intention to say more at a future time. The NDA, presumably, still holds but I think when all is completed, at the very least, they will probably inform people of their future intentions, which in itself would indicate if they might eventually return to the AFC- or not, even if they are unable to speak about the complaint. An ongoing NDA, if there was one, would not mean they could not talk about their future hopes and plans.  Meanwhile, as far as I’m concerned, no news is nothing more than that……it means no news yet.

I agree the tutors would love to explain their position to students old and new.

And I agree they can tell anyone about their future ideas and plans but all that is different from the dispute that began earlier in the year.  Let's reflect how things started with great unhappiness about the tutors' working environment and (we believe) remuneration.  We then learned how their complaint was taken away from the complaints committee and eventually a gagging order was deployed before the SNU would consider the complaints.  

I don't doubt that the tutors would love to say something in the future and would love nothing to be swept under the carpet but it appears to me that an enduring NDA would scupper those desires.

mac wrote:I agree the tutors would love to explain their position to students old and new.

And I agree they can tell anyone about their future ideas and plans but all that is different from the dispute that began earlier in the year.  Let's reflect how things started with great unhappiness about the tutors' working environment and (we believe) remuneration.  We then learned how their complaint was taken away from the complaints committee and eventually a gagging order was deployed before the SNU would consider the complaints.  

I don't doubt that the tutors would love to say something in the future and would love nothing to be swept under the carpet but it appears to me that an enduring NDA would scupper those desires.

It would indeed scupper those desires so let’s hope there isn’t one. However, an NDA is usually in return for something, but maybe the tutors will not be asking for anything other than whatever is needed for them to work in harmony at the AFC.  If they win that we will see the result and the details of the complaint can remain bound by an NDA for ever….it will not matter any more.
If, on the other hand, no agreement is made and they leave the SNU they can say what they like as long as it is not defamatory, personal or untrue. Correct me if I am wrong.

I have heard about NDAs only in connection with payouts, presumably to effectively keep out of the public domain sensitive details of the reason in the first place for the payout. To the best of my understanding they are permanently binding on those agreeing to them - I'm happy to be corrected by anyone who knows any exact details.

Demanding agreement to an NDA before starting a complaint procedure was a new one for me but I'm completely out of touch with the world of work to the tune of 30 years so what do I know about anything?

I expect the exact details of the NDA will determine what can be disclosed without risking legal action - if anything, if ever.  Whether the tutors could later speak about an agreed NDA were they to leave the SNU and no longer working for them or being members of that Union I don't know but I doubt it.  My guess is that they would risk being sued for breaking the NDA even if they no longer have anything to do with the Union or the Findlay College.

I'll be happy to be corrected by anyone who knows actual details of their NDA and the way it operates.

As an addendum to my last post, I think it’s important to remember that an NDA about their own complaint does not necessarily prohibit them from giving an opinion about other matters. This, presumably, is why Libby felt she was able to talk about the BCC “sacking” and all that preceded it. Nothing to do with their original complaint.

Janhar wrote:

However, an NDA is usually in return for something, but maybe the tutors will not be asking for anything other than whatever is needed for them to work in harmony at the AFC.  If they win that we will see the result and the details of the complaint can remain bound by an NDA for ever….it will not matter any more.

Yes maybe that's all the tutors might be asking for but even if they win their complaint I really do wonder if they would now - after several months as things stand - want to return to an organisation and be alongside individuals they have fallen out with so disastrously.  And would they even be allowed to return to their previous roles even if they had won their case, one might also wonder.

  And my view is that the details of what's happened might actually still matter to those involved.

Janhar wrote:As an addendum to my last post, I think it’s important to remember that an NDA about their own complaint does not necessarily prohibit them from giving an opinion about other matters. This, presumably, is why Libby felt she was able to talk about the BCC “sacking” and all that preceded it. Nothing to do with their original complaint.

Yep I agree - that issue is outside of the tutors' dispute but the 'BCC' event might become the subject of a complaint etc.

Would that then mean her signing an NDA one might wonder?

mac wrote:

Janhar wrote:

However, an NDA is usually in return for something, but maybe the tutors will not be asking for anything other than whatever is needed for them to work in harmony at the AFC.  If they win that we will see the result and the details of the complaint can remain bound by an NDA for ever….it will not matter any more.

Yes maybe that's all the tutors might be asking for but even if they win their complaint I really do wonder if they would now - after several months as things stand - want to return to an organisation and be alongside individuals they have fallen out with so disastrously.  And would they even be allowed to return to their previous roles even if they had won their case, one might also wonder.

  And my view is that the details of what's happened might actually still matter to those involved.

Well we have heard that there was meant to be an overheard conversation where the Words "never let them back in" are reported to have been said.

Quick summary we know the Tutors made a complaint, that this was upheld, that the complaints committee disbanded and their ruling overturned. That is the start of the current issue. The nature of the contract itself, which we have seen enough of to know it was pretty heavy handed, has added to the issue. This dispute is in mediation and arbitration which seems to be bogged down, I suppose if you do not want people back stalling the process may work.

We have no knowledge of what the Tutors can and will do if the mediation fails or is discontinued.

There has to be a possibility the problem goes back to Paul Jacobs exile by the previous NEC and the nature of the complaints against him and who raised them. Is it his resurrection, immediately Jackie Wright was elected, and return to the AFC in a more senior role as JW's close friend the major cause of the problems? Could there be previous with a group of Tutors as a result of his prior dismissal, which has led to this impasse.

Unlike trades unions disputes and withdrawals of labour the recent events in the SNU/AFC saga are now - and perhaps always have been - highly personalised.

The dispute is no longer just about the tutors' working environment or contract conditions at the Findlay College but involves the personalities of the key players, those individuals in positions of authority within the Union and the college.  It also involves their relationships and behaviour towards one another and in many ways is like a family feud.  Using labour dispute practices like mediation or arbitration when there are very clear personality issues doesn't look likely to heal the obvious personal rifts.  

Whatever the outcomes of whatever legal actions are taking place it seems to me the likelihood of the players being able to work together again is remote.  Add to that the alleged declaration the tutors won't ever be allowed back into the Findlay College anyway, along with the widely reported resignations of key individuals, and it's a grim outlook for both the Findlay College and the Union itself.