right about now im angry

I don’t have an insurmountable problem I just need someone to put it all in a time and I context so nobody is listening and analysing what is going on


so I’m pissed off very pissed off .I ring the helpline for the department of labour I lady I get doesn’t conceptualise the problems I’m having so in frustration I say please have the head of the mediation team ring me asap


which he dually does he asks me to forward my concerns to him which I do he promises to get back to me

so i give him about 4 days and send him a wee note

hi bill

Have we had any progress on my concern. regarding questions posed, as I am under a time limit

I have received this reply from ERA member Mr. Anderson

“Further to your email Paul – Authority Member – Ken Anderson has advised the following: -

“The role of the Authority in regarding his claims and allegations is now completed. If Mr Evans-McLeod is unhappy with my determination he has 28 days from the date of the determination to file a challenge (appeal) with the Employment Court”.
Kind regards,
Sara Norman”



Which is not helpful .as he is focusing on the fact that the agreement was signed not that fact that the “fraud’ was perpetrated as a means in part to get me to mediation .and preceded the mediation



It seems to me to be a simple question either



Does this act of fraud proven with details supplied with my submission , negate any and all effects of the mediation and events that flowed from it , if it doesn’t please show me the precedence in law that allows it

So why is everybody dodging it. comment as been passed that era is afraid of the corporate power
This note form part of my submissions
I take heed and note that Clive McGregor who holds a senior position within the DOL was concerned enough with both cases to indicate he wish to peruse the matter


Refer attachment 28 Tuesday 26 Jan subject dol update


And would ask the ERA to find out why he was dissuaded for this option

Thanks for your time and effort in at least looking into the matter it is appreciated if the tone of letter is not quite right it is unintended as I am very frustrated with it .if fact so frustrated I have put my concerns to the attorney general



Those invested in the process are as follows



Bridget Dalzell: national manager : who had oversight of the process

Michelle Young: Call Centre Manager who had oversight of Shaun Hoult

Shaun Hoult: My team manager and instigator of alleged letter

Iain Galloway :HR representative on Hamilton Site .who was involved in disciplinary meetings, sometimes as note taker

Hannah Sullivan: national HR representative who had oversight of process