SCAB sacking upheld

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

I can't see them either. It's not the first time that the paper has not allowed comments on controversial topics so we shouldn't be surprised. It does make me wonder though if the paper has returned to type after a brief interlude of independence.

Not so this time, as I've just been able to view the comments (up to 16), but the Mail site does seem to be a bit temperamental!

[mk1]

It appears that 'comments'  vanish only to reappear  on a regular basis. I suspect  articles on the SCABs need monitoring as they tend to get very personal and insulting. I have noticed in the past that the entire comment section on an article gets removed only to reappear later with the more salacious claims removed.

I am glad the forum is back on track and no longer dominated by  'EU/Immigrant/Muslim' obsessives!

[mk1]

Can I ask that no one replies to UKIP  matters in this thread. It takes 2 to keep an argument going.

[steveL]

I still can't see the Mail comments. I'm beginning to wonder if I should take it personally.

[clav 73]

I had to refresh the page to see them

[steveL]

It appears to be caused by some silly advert that you have to click on before you get to see the full article

[Party Pooper]

I agree with SteveL on this that the man is apparently stupid and has put Newcastle CC in a position whereby they have to defend and clear their name.
I am not an expert but as I see it, it looks like SAB's tactics were designed to put Newcastle CC under pressure and get them to do a deal out of court, give him some money and gag both sides. that might have been what they would have done had he the sense go keep his mouth shut, he blew that the minute he went public and claimed he was protecting the elderly in Newcastle from some nasty goings on or such like.
He now looks like being exposed in the tribunal come April, but he could pull out of the action, and if he does that won't clear HIS name! And presumably Newcastle could then go public as it would no longer be restricted by the legal system and they will want to clear THEIR name.
I read in the mail when the hey announced he lost his appeal SAB said it was a "private matter" he wasn't saying it was a private matter when he was shouting that he was a whistle blower. And remember although he is saying he blew the whistle on Newcastle council he has implicated his fellow workers and come April we will see if that was falsely implicating his colleagues. If he has falsely accused fellow workers of wrong doing to cover his own sizeable ar**, how can he continue as a Labour Party member let alone a leader.?
He could not have played this any worse, and if this is an example of his tactical prowess then I pity Hartlepool Council and the Hartlepool Labour Party.
Is there a village near by that is short of and idiot ?

[one direction]

For years Hartlepool people have been played as idiots by Labour so why should SCAB have to move to another town when he and his partner are already established  in Hartlepool and enjoying lucrative careers here as the resident village idiots

[mk1]

One of the SCABs is  markedly smarter than the other. Granted the  bar is set so low that  even a twofold increase in IQ only elevates the genius in the family to  the level of the average 15 year old but when they both used to post here sharing the name 'Straight Talking' the contrast between 'dumb' and 'dumber' was striking

[Party Pooper]

Another thought on this matter is what position will CAB the leader of the council and the leader of the Labour Party will take at the tribunal.

From what has been reported it seems like SAB the mayor and chairman of the council took time off work claiming he was sick, and then his pictures appear in publications with him in his mayoral garb at some event/function down South somewhere. One would imagine that his partner who was photographed with him at the said event / function would know if he was sick or not. Will the council leader CAB lie in court under oath in favour of his partner and against a partner labour controlled council?

It will be really interesting to see what a tribunal judge makes of both their evidence, one thing is for sure they both  have taken a massive gamble and the odds look stacked against them. If they are found to be not telling the truth at the tribunal will this have implications on their ability to remain as Councillors under their code of ethics?

[craig finton]

Personally, I don't think he has a case and I hope the whole nastiness of his allegations against his former work colleagues is revealed for all to see, but if by some technical matter he manages to win then I hope to dear God that he is left waiting years for any compensation - now that would be poetic justice.

[one direction]

I hope im wrong but i ecpect him to play the homophobia card and watch Newcastle Council back down immediately! Confidentiality  ageeements all round, he goes away to do it again somewhere else and Newcastle Council avoid an unpleasant scene. ALl winners apart from the newcastle public purse which pays for it al, but lets face it, people like the SCABs seem to think public mobey is theirs to do what they like with!

[Party Pooper]

If he attempts to claim it is because he is gay his public comments that he is a Whistle Blower would be used against him and big time. It has to be one or the other it can't be both.

Presumably Newcastle council knew he was gay when they took him on, so why sack him for that reason now after how many years he has been with them.? More likely will be it's everybody else's fault, like his managers, his work colleagues, the pressure of his council duties, fellow Councillors,pressure of the MRA fiasco, the obstacles to over come being gay ( different from saying because he is gay), bad hair days, chaffing thighs and everyone he has not specifically mentioned.

[steveL]

I wouldn't get carried away with the gay thing. It is 2014 and no one really gives a toss anymore. I reckon the rules of the game have already been set and he will claim that it is all about his 'whistle-blowing' - after all that is what he has already said on the Radio and Regional TV. AS PP says, you can't change stories half way through the game.

As I said earlier, this closes the door on any out-of-court settlement as any such deal would leave the City Council wide open to accusations of paying 'hush money' and with recent events (Rotherham, Mid-Staffordshire, Saville etc), no local authority is going to fall into that trap. No, it's heading for a full-blown tribunal for sure and every detail will be plastered all over the front pages of both The Mail and The Post three weeks before the elections.

The alternative, to withdraw the whole thing, is also closed off to him because it would tell everyone that he didn't feel strongly enough about his allegations of mistreatment of vulnerable adults for it to be worth seeing through to the end.

Incidentally, I believe that it's his seat in Owton Manor that is up for re-election next May. Stupidity in these sort of concentrations is very rare indeed. 

[mk1]

The alternative, to withdraw the whole thing, is also closed off to him

I think that is exactly what he will do. The alternative is to  put his duplicity under public scrutiny so he will do as he always does when facing a challenge-run away and hide. The man has no backbone as he proved when he cancelled his Victory March parade to park road when he though the residents of Hart were about to puncture his dream world of universal aclaim. He ran from MRA and  you will have to look very hard to find sight of him today. He seems to be  bunkered up somewhere. Anyone know of an isolated farmhouse suddenly  getting non-stop Pizza deliveries?