Is there still Rule of Law in Gibraltar? Is there corruption in the local police?
Are employees' Human Rights protected? Is there a mafia in Gibraltar?
How corrupt are the Courts in Gibraltar? Is Entain a bad employer?
- Home page
- My witness statement for the courts
- Evidence supporting my witness statement
- Failure of the first Tribunal Chairman
- Sabotage of the Tribunal transcript
- The evidence in the Tribunal transcript
- Press articles about Tribunal failings
- Corruption articles in the international press
- Entain / GVC
- Hassans law firm
- The Disciplinary Committee and LSRA
- Gibraltar Police
Previous page | Witness Statement Bart Van Thienen Page 190 | Next page
|
team members to cover the shifts. You challenged this decision. The reasons for the decision were explained and it was pointed out that you should get holiday approval before making plans. However, on 4th May 2018 you wrote to us to tell us you would be taking the annual leave despite it not being approved. - Roni Maman wanted to speak to give you an opportunity to explain and go over some of your points, for clarity. This meeting took place on 24th April 2018 at 9.30am and I was in attendance to take notes (which have been shared with you and you have provided input to). - Following this meeting with yourself, the meeting with Susana Martin and assessing all information provided, Roni Maman delivered an outcome which was detailed in writing and sent to you on 26th April 2018. This letter offered a solution to enable you to return to work on 27th April 2018. - On the morning of the 27th April 2018, you emailed myself and Danielle Wood to advise of your intention to appeal against the decision and stated you intended to remain on suspension on full pay for the 5 working days. Danielle Wood responded at lunchtime on 27th April 2018 explaining what the next steps looked like regarding the appeal. She also explained that it was not practice for you to be suspended for the purpose of an appeal and as such you were expected back on your shift. - You failed to appear for your shift on 27th, 28th, 29th and 30th April 2018. As normal practice and in line with company policy, your line manager tried to contact you when you failed to appear to check on your wellbeing and understand why you had not attended work. - Danielle Wood again emailed you on 30th April 2018 to clarify the situation, confirming you were not suspended on full pay and you would be expected back in the office for your shifts. She also confirmed it was appropriate for your line manager to be contacting you to check on your whereabouts following the delivery of the outcome of the investigation. Furthermore, your attention was drawn to the fact that your current absence was considered unauthorised and that you should be aware that, in accordance with your Clause 10 of your employment contract your absence could be considered as gross misconduct. - On 1st May 2018 you emailed myself and Danielle Wood claiming you were confused about the content of Danielle Wood's email of 27th April 2018 regarding your return to work. Danielle Wood responded on 1st May 2018 and again highlighted the fact you were due back on shift and that you were now absent without leave and referred you to Clause |
Previous page | Witness Statement Bart Van Thienen Page 190 | Next page
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206
"Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference."