During an Employment and Discrimination Tribunal hearing yesterday, Julian Radcliffe said that government chief executive Charlie Parker delivered news that jobs would be cut insensitively and that there had been a poor standard of communication.
He also alleged that he found out that a safeguarding position he held had been removed when he turned up to a meeting only to be told ‘you’re not meant to be here’.
Mr Radcliffe moved to Jersey in April 2013 after accepting a role as a principal psychologist.
At the tribunal he alleged that his colleagues have also been seriously affected by the OneGov project to reshape the make-up of government – with some resigning and others being signed off with stress.
Speaking during a hearing yesterday, Mr Radcliffe said he first became aware of plans during a ‘big reveal’ meeting at the Town Hall, led by government chief executive Charlie Parker.
‘He stood up and said that 22 of us would eventually not be here. That was a bold statement and I do not think it was sensitively delivered,’ he said.
‘He put up a slide and indicated how functions would be broken up across the departments. I walked away from that meeting wary that the aspects of my directorate or department would be split up and that 22 directors would be removed from the organisation.’
He added: ‘The whole process was then spoken about in detail and [we were] told that the process would be finished in three months. After that we were told there had been a three-month delay and after that we were told there would be another three-month delay and in October 2019 [a month after Mr Radcliffe left] the consultation began.’
Mr Radcliffe also claimed that there was a poor standard of communication and that he was only informed his Safeguarding Partnership Board position had been removed when he turned up to a meeting.
‘The independent chair in the Safeguarding Partnership Board looked across at the table at me and said “you’re not meant to be here” and she had no idea that I had not been told,’ he said.
‘I was given a pitiful look by the others who were there.’
However, Advocate Jacqueline Tobias, representing the government, said Mr Radcliffe failed to engage with the restructure consultation process, had circumvented his line manager to try and get information from the department director general and chief executive and that he had taken no action to raise his concerns.
‘It is clear that Mr Radcliffe was angry and disappointed but he did not raise a grievance or contact HR services and he did not engage constructively with the restructure.
‘He saw the restructure as a negative process. He was told that he was valued and told he had the skills that were needed.
‘A restructure on this scale is stressful for all involved but he was not the only one affected by it.’
She added: ‘Mr Radcliffe’s behaviour was not of someone engaging in the process and he was trying to speak to Charlie Parker and Mark Rogers [CYPES director general], fishing for more information about his role to set up a plan B or put his employer in a stranglehold.’
Tribunal deputy chairman Hannah Westmacott, overseeing yesterday’s hearing, said a final judgment was expected to be published within six weeks.
