Truth will out!

Maybe this is a good place to put some very public questions to Nigel Tate, Rob Munro and others in the leadership of St Mary's Cheadle about decisions, actions and discussions that were behind my deeply flawed 'redundancy' in 2009?

• What discussions did you have with others (including but not limited to Rob Munro and Sheila Grieve) at St Mary's Cheadle about me before 23rd Nov 2009?
• Were the reasons for the fabrication of a redundancy case - my age and also my holding views that you would regard as liberal on LGBT issues? (though liberal compared with the leadership of St Mary's Cheadle isn't saying a lot!)
• Were you aware (before Nov 2009) that I was on the Chester diocese organising committee for Changing Attitude?
• Did you (Nigel) write the alleged minutes for the redundancy scoring meeting. Were those minutes a lie from start to finish as the meeting never took place on that day - and therefore it never took place in the period stipulated by employment law?
• After the final meeting, my witness and I were left alone for a private conversation. Was our discussion eavesdropped, bugged or did someone 'accidentally' leave the conference call phone on record?
• Was Gary Higham - who was made 'redundant' along with me - employed on the basis that his employment would only be for 12 months? - so that you could feign hurt innocence if accused of age discrimination. (Of course Gary wouldn't have been aware of this!)
• Did Jo Smith's sudden departure in 2008 have anything to do with a desire not to be implicated in the redundancy process?
• Were Siemens offered any inducements (financial or otherwise) to take me on as a contract worker for a very nominal time to make it less likely I'd go to industrial tribunal?
• And most smallminded - was a staff meeting hastily arranged on my afternoon of my last day in the office designed to make it impossible for me to say farewell to my colleagues - at least on company premises?
• And I've not even mentioned the non-existence of the software group which was allegedly used to determine who was at risk of redundancy - oops!