Jerome Ousted?

[muppet]

'Disingenuous'

The tribunal said: "We assessed the claimant to have been disingenuous at various points in his evidence."

Mr Quinn was not available for comment on Tuesday.

What does Disingenuous mean??

It is a word for those who cant use Google.

[tyroneman]

Mr Quinn appears to have made a complete b@lls of this case going by the published verdict. I will always believe the BBC have been outrageously biased in the past and are only getting slightly better now

Jerome though has allowed the BBC to exculpate itself entirely from any accusations you could level with what if effectively a bulletproof decision

[A Quinn Martin Production]

Very competitive this year Mike

Its been more competitive than The Championship anyway 

Aye, we had it pretty easy in the hurling the year.

My main bugbear with the BBC continues to be the weather.  Why do they feel it necessary to tell us what the weather will be like in Norwich tomorrow yet the 26 appear to have no weather at all

[Evil Genius]

The Tribunal's findings (all 28 pages) are now publicly available online:

http://forms.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/OITFET_IWS/DecisionSearch.aspx
(Just key in Case ID 00142/09FET and click on "Search" - it comes up as a Word Document).

Amongst the "edited highlights" are the following:

DECISION
The decision of the Tribunal is that the claimant was not discriminated against on grounds of race, religion or political opinion.  The claimant was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct.  The claimant's claims are therefore dismissed in their entirety.

Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman:   Mrs Ó Murray
Members:   Mr P McCrossan, Mr B McGuire

Appearances:
The claimant appeared in person and was represented from 6 May 2010 by Mr P Moore of PM Associates.
The respondent was represented by T Sadiq, Barrister at Law, instructed by Mr R Easy of the BBC Legal Department.


7.   The Tribunal found the claimant to be a less than satisfactory witness.  The claimant came across as a very composed, intelligent and articulate individual.  At several points the claimant was evasive when being questioned on points which were not supportive of his case.  In contrast he gave very precise evidence on points which he felt were supportive of his case.  We assessed the claimant to have been disingenuous at various points in his evidence.  The claimant also gave misleading evidence in the form of statistics in his apparent determination to paint an adverse picture of GAA coverage by BBC Sport NI when the actual evidence before us did not support that case.  Examples of the foregoing are set out in the detailed facts under the headings below.
8.   In contrast, Mr Glynn was a particularly impressive witness in our view.  He was consistent in his evidence which was given in a very measured way.  He came across to us in evidence and in the contemporaneous documents to which we were referred, as a considerate, reasonable manager attempting to balance the competing demands of his staff, the different sports audiences in Northern Ireland, the business needs of the organisation and budgetary constraints.  We similarly viewed the evidence of the other witnesses for the respondent as considered and measured and their evidence was corroborated by the contemporaneous documents.
9.   Mr Glynn is Protestant from a mixed background as his father was an Irish/Catholic from Cork and was a fervent Cork GAA supporter.  Mr Glynn gave compelling evidence of his affection for GAA sports given the link with his father.
10.   Given our assessment of the witnesses in the context of the evidence, where the claimant's evidence conflicted with the evidence given on behalf of the respondent we preferred the respondent's evidence.

14.   Since the appointment of Mr Glynn as Editor of BBC Sport NI, in June 2006, Mr Glynn has been instrumental in the creation of four new staff positions in his division.  Three of the four appointees were Irish/Catholics having been appointed following an appointment process in which Mr Glynn was involved.  In the same period six people gained promotions under Mr Glynn and four of those promoted were Irish/Catholics.

16.   The disciplinary process began when it was discovered that the claimant had, for over two years, been posting anonymous messages on a GAA message board.  The postings were of a highly controversial and derogatory nature.  Derogatory and disparaging comments were made by the claimant anonymously about prominent Northern Ireland sports people whom he named; about his colleagues in the BBC; about senior managers in BBC NI; and about the BBC itself.  Over that period, the claimant also actively fomented and promoted a campaign of complaint against the BBC in relation to its GAA coverage.

19.   It is important to set out in full the 11 specific charges outlined in the disciplinary letter as this illustrates the respondent's view of the gravity of the alleged misconduct.  The specific allegations are set out below.  Each allegation also referred to the specific policy which was alleged to have been breached: 
"ii      through your posts on the gaaboard.com you attempted to instigate an organised complaints campaign against the BBC over politically sensitive output (namely GAA coverage) by inciting the public to campaign (individually and in groups) against the BBC. 
iii   you attempted to exploit your connection with the BBC by using knowledge, some of which was potentially sensitive/confidential, acquired through your role in the BBC to promote/support an organised campaign, on gaaboard.com to the detriment (actual or future) of the BBC. 
v.   a number of the posts which you authored on the gaaboard.com threads contain material which is offensive, negative, disparaging and possibly defamatory about colleagues, sports personalities and fellow presenters both from the BBC and other broadcasters (including, but not limited to, Shane Glynn, Mike Edgar, Mark Adair, Wendy Houvenaghel, Stephen Watson, Wayne Duddy, Adrian Logan.
vi.  you used gaaboard.com whether deliberately or otherwise, to abuse/attack BBC colleagues, sports personalities and other presenters (see point 4 above) by externally circulating derogatory/offensive comments. 
vii.   in post on the gaaboard.com you were inconsiderate and abusive towards BBC colleagues, sports personalities and other presenters (see point 4 above); you posted sensitive information without their approval, potentially amounting to cyber bullying. 
viii.   through your posts on the gaaboard.com you advocated a particular position on GAA coverage, a sensitive and controversial subject relevant to your area. 
ix.   your off-air activity and the content of many of your posts on the gaaboard.com threads has led to doubt about your objectivity and impartiality of your work for the BBC.  The personal views you expressed off-air on controversial issues, may have severely compromised your editorial and on-air role. 
x.   that you deceived the public in that at no time did you declare that you worked for BBC NI or that you were Jerome Quinn – despite opportunities to do so. 
xi.   by posting frequently on the gaaboard.com forum you used BBC Equipment in a way that significantly distracted you and/or others from your work and interfered with the performance of your or others' duties. 
xii.      you allowed your outside interests to interfere with your BBC work, causing a conflict to arise between you BBC duties and your private interests and affecting your ability to carry out your duties effectively and placing the BBC in a position where it has been brought into disrepute and its reputation for impartiality has potentially been affected


32.   For BBC Sport NI the negotiation of broadcast rights for GAA coverage have been particularly sensitive and competitive over the years given that RTE, TV3 and Setanta have all been active, competitive bidders in the past.
33.   Mr Glynn was promoted to Editor of Sports NI in June 2006 following a period as a Senior Broadcast Journalist in the News Department.  Following his appointment as Editor for Sport he was instrumental in winning the broadcast rights for coverage of the GAA Ulster Championship and All-Ireland games involving Ulster teams, when the broadcast rights for GAA coverage came up for renewal in 2007/2008.  As a result the live coverage of matches increased substantially. The respondent gave an undertaking during the tender process that they would "revamp" the look, style and tone of the live coverage.
34.   Mr Glynn also gave evidence, which we accept, of the hours of TV coverage, both live and highlights, given to each of 12 sports for the period from 2006 to 2010.  The figures show that coverage of soccer and rugby has decreased whereas coverage of GAA has increased substantially in line with the winning or losing of broadcast coverage rights for those sports and in line with how successful Ulster/NI teams were in a particular year.
35.   The claimant chose two days in October 2008 to illustrate his allegation of a disparity in the coverage between GAA sports and other sports.  October is the high season for rugby and Northern Ireland soccer.  If the claimant had chosen June to illustrate coverage, the GAA season would have been in full swing with widespread coverage on BBC NI whereas rugby and soccer coverage would have been very low because it was not their season.
36.   Mr Glynn gave evidence, which we accept, that, the percentage 'spend per sport' as at March 2009 showed that GAA rights and production costs for live coverage, far outstripped the costs associated with rugby and domestic soccer.


47.   In August 2007, in the course of a radio broadcast, the claimant made four references to the Northern Ireland soccer team by calling them "the North".  Mr Edgar heard the broadcast and raised it with Mr Glynn to ask him to speak to the claimant informally to confirm that the factually accurate term is "Northern Ireland".  Mr Edgar's motivation in asking for this to be raised was because of the importance of accuracy in the terms used for Northern Ireland as this also relates to impartiality of reporting, a core BBC value.  The claimant accepted being spoken to at the time but later raised the matter with Mr Glynn in the course of a heated exchange in October 2008 about his career in general.  In that meeting on 30 October 2008, the claimant disputed Mr Glynn's assertion that it was actually Mr Edgar who had raised the issue. 
48.   In evidence to us the claimant accepted that he had accepted correction on that term at the time, but maintained at tribunal that he had no idea what the problem was with using that term.  We regard it as incredible for the claimant to assert before us that he had no idea that the use of the phrase "the North" to refer to the Northern Ireland soccer team, had the potential to cause offence to one section of the community in Northern Ireland and the claimant's persistence on this point tainted his credibility for us.  We simply do not accept that the claimant was unaware of the sensitive, political connotations of that term in that context.  We also do not accept that the claimant was unaware that use of such a term was very sensitive for a broadcaster.  We accept the respondent's evidence that this was a legitimate matter to raise with the claimant, that it was prompted by Mr Edgar, and that it related to accuracy and the principle of impartiality.  We therefore do not accept the claimant's point that this was evidence of adverse treatment against him by Mr Glynn or anyone else.


50.   Mr Glynn's response sets out the criticism which he had of the running order followed by the claimant that morning.  The bulletin ran on a Friday morning and the claimant gave precedence to several GAA stories including a report of an award ceremony the previous night and a forthcoming club match.  These matters were given precedence over, firstly, the Rugby World Cup which was to start that weekend; secondly, the imminent Walker Cup golf opening ceremony; and thirdly, an international Northern Ireland soccer match due to take place that weekend.

55.   In summary we utterly reject the claimant's contention that there was a plot by Mr Glynn, Mr Fullerton or anyone else to ensure that a GAA person did not win [Sports Personality of the Year].

56.   The claimant referred to the script for the radio broadcast on Good Morning Ulster on 8 October 2008.  This was the broadcast which the claimant made and after which Mr Glynn spoke to him at the behest of Ms Carragher, to say that there was "too much GAA" in the broadcast.  Ms Carragher and Mr Glynn were clear in their evidence that the criticism was that there were too many GAA stories grouped at the beginning of the broadcast which resulted in an international Northern Ireland soccer game being reported after news of the appointment of a new manager to Limerick hurling team. 

63.   Soon after his appointment in 2006, Mr Glynn ensured that the claimant was engaged again in Newsline presentations on TV.  The claimant had not been involved in Newsline since a disagreement with the editor of that programme Ms A F who was Irish/Catholic.  Mr Glynn persuaded that editor to allow the claimant to recommence presentation on Newsline.  Two other journalists had been dropped at the same time as the claimant and one of them was Protestant/British and one of them was Irish/Catholic.
64.   After Mr Glynn's appointment, five other members of his staff had also made complaints to him, at various times, about their careers.  Three of those individuals were Protestant/British and two were Irish/Catholic.

101.   The claimant clearly felt that he was some sort of "standard bearer" for all the followers of GAA in Northern Ireland and, in our view, this caused him to perceive any change to his working practices as an attack not only on him but on the GAA community in general.
102.   The claims of discrimination, other than those related to dismissal, rest on the claimant's two allegations that:  firstly, Mr Glynn had a personal animosity towards the claimant and towards the GAA; and, secondly, that Mr Glynn instituted a policy of downgrading the coverage and priority given to GAA causing detriment to the claimant and to the group to which he belonged.
103.   As outlined out in the facts found above, we have found that Mr Glynn did not have animosity towards GAA but had a positive view of GAA given his background and experience and the actions he took when he was appointed as Editor of Sport and  negotiated increased coverage through the acquisition of contracts.  We have found as a fact that there was no policy or practice of downgrading the coverage and priority given to GAA.

113.   The claimant claimed that his dismissal was an act of victimisation caused by him raising the grievance about discrimination.  The chronology does not support this allegation.  The grievance was only raised after the claimant was invited to the disciplinary hearing and could see exactly how many allegations there were against him and how serious they were.  The claimant then sought to put his dissatisfaction about his career over the previous two years into a discriminatory context which simply was not there in our view.

115.   In summary the claimant's dismissal was dealt with by two Irish/Catholics who had good reason to regard the charges as very serious indeed.  The claimant admitted the charges and that they were a gross error.  In those circumstances we conclude that Ms Carragher and Mr Keeling had very little option but to dismiss the claimant.  This was nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the claimant is Irish/Catholic.
   
117.   It is for the claimant to prove facts from which we could conclude that his allegations against Mr Glynn amounted not only to acts of discrimination but that they were evidence of an ongoing state of affairs whereby the claimant was discriminated against on an ongoing basis.  The claimant has simply failed to prove such facts from which we could make such a conclusion.  Almost every person mentioned by him in relation to alleged adverse treatment was Irish/Catholic.  Almost every person who benefited following the alleged detrimental treatment was Irish/Catholic.  Mr Glynn is from a mixed background and promoted Irish/Catholics and employed Irish/Catholics in his division.  Indeed Mr Glynn made a particular effort to assuage the claimant's concerns about his career particularly in light of his disappointment about being removed from The Championship.  Mr Glynn acted as a good manager in listening to the claimant's concerns about his career and took active steps to develop the claimant's career as outlined in the factual findings at paragraphs 63-68 above.
118.   Most of the claimant's disgruntlement appears to stem from the decision to remove him from The Championship.  That decision was not Mr Glynn's alone but was a joint decision, made for valid reasons and sanctioned by higher level managers who included an Irish/Catholic.  The person chosen to replace the claimant was an Irish/Catholic.  The claimant has failed to prove facts from which we could conclude that that decision was an act of discrimination. 

122.   This is a case where the claimant felt that The Championship programme was his domain and that he was the "face" of the GAA on BBC television.  He therefore took very badly the decision to move him from The Championship to other duties, and to replace him by other Irish/Catholics on The Championship.  We accept that the claimant was moved for valid reasons completely unconnected to the fact that he was Irish/Catholic.
123.   The claimant's case was that Mr Glynn 'consciously and deliberately' targeted him for adverse treatment because he was Irish/Catholic and connected with the GAA.  We do not accept this as it is not borne out by the evidence, especially where Mr Glynn promoted and engaged Irish/Catholics in his department and encouraged the claimant and sought other avenues for him to develop his career.  Mr Glynn clearly respected and promoted GAA coverage and actively negotiated increased coverage.  The claimant has therefore failed to prove facts from which we could conclude that Mr Glynn's treatment of him was tainted by unlawful discrimination.

128.   In his indirect discrimination case the claimant relied on the existence of a policy whereby GAA was downgraded compared to other sports. As we have outlined in the evidence above, we have found that GAA is one of the four core sports covered by BBC NI Sport and expenditure has increased substantially on it over the last few years in line with the acquisition of broadcast rights and allied rights.  The claimant has therefore failed to prove that there was a policy whereby GAA was given lower priority than the other core sports.  As we have found as a fact that such a policy or practice did not exist, the claimant's claim for indirect discrimination must fail.
129.   In addition, there was no evidence to show any group disadvantage as required by the definition of indirect discrimination.  On the contrary the people within the group defined by the claimant, namely Irish/Catholic employees of BBC Sport NI, appear to have prospered under Mr Glynn.  On the evidence before us, it was only the claimant who felt that he was targeted, sidelined and disadvantaged.

131.   There was absolutely no evidence of harassment of the claimant by Mr Glynn or any other staff.  We specifically reject the argument put forward on behalf of the claimant that the discrimination alleged by him amounted to harassment in and of itself.  Harassment is a specific statutory concept and there was no evidence at all before us of anything remotely resembling harassment in this case.  The claimant's representative at one point towards the end of the hearing referred to Mr Glynn as having conducted himself "in a sectarian manner" and alluded to Mr Glynn as a "bigot".  We think it is very important to record that there was no evidence presented to us to support such allegations about Mr Glynn and his conduct.




 

[Puckoon]

Where does this leave Jerome. An independent tribunal (and there doesnt seem to be too many of themmuns on the tribunal) have pretty much suggested he was tailoring the truth to suit his agenda, and backed up the actions of the BBC.

How much of this are we to believe now? I am close to believing the report - unless anyone can give me good reason not to. Did Jerome lose the run of himself a bit?

[NAG1]

Of course he did, he is a balloon   

He was stupid enough to use a work computer to run down the company who he was being paid by at the time.
Whether he felt he was right or not makes no difference any other walk of life or work and anyone would be shown the door for this kind of thing.

IMO he was pure rubbish as the presenting malarky anyway, the Tyrone thing sickened my happiness and Im not anti-tyrone. While Austin and Thomas arent great Im certainly not pining to have J back on the Championship.

[A Quinn Martin Production]

101.   The claimant clearly felt that he was some sort of "standard bearer" for all the followers of GAA in Northern Ireland and, in our view, this caused him to perceive any change to his working practices as an attack not only on him but on the GAA community in general

The crux of the case.

[haranguerer]

'...through your posts on the gaaboard.com you attempted to instigate an organised complaints campaign against the BBC over politically sensitive output (namely GAA coverage)'

Ffs - if this is how the tribunal view GAA coverage its not much surprise they found against him.

And if it is accepted as such, then surely just about everything on local tv is politically sensitive?

[dublinfella]

'...through your posts on the gaaboard.com you attempted to instigate an organised complaints campaign against the BBC over politically sensitive output (namely GAA coverage)'

Ffs - if this is how the tribunal view GAA coverage its not much surprise they found against him.

And if it is accepted as such, then surely just about everything on local tv is politically sensitive?

Isn't the point that Jerome made it a political  issue by playing the sectarian card?

[A Quinn Martin Production]

'...through your posts on the gaaboard.com you attempted to instigate an organised complaints campaign against the BBC over politically sensitive output (namely GAA coverage)'

Ffs - if this is how the tribunal view GAA coverage its not much surprise they found against him.

And if it is accepted as such, then surely just about everything on local tv is politically sensitive?

Isn't the point that Jerome made it a political  issue by playing the sectarian card?

I think haranguer's point is that GAA coverage was considered politically sensitive by the BBC before JQ's dismissal.  Get rid of the feckin motor sports and there'd be plenty of room for soccer, rugger and GAA!!

Must go, I see Shane Glynn coming down the corridor

[mournerambler]

I have to say I am pleased to see this pompous idiot got what he deserved from this tribunal, this man is so full of his own importance & he got what he deserved for biting the hand that was feeding him.

[Muzz]

Not in anyway defending Jerome here but the comments people are making against him here seem to rather harsh for people that probably have not met the man.

I agree with a lot of people that he should never have taken the case and that he was wrong to be publicly condemning the BBC being a BBC employee - and perhaps should have used his position to bring about change within the BBC.

I for one think that Jerome does ALOT for the GAA and has done over the years.  His work at the minute I think should be commended as this work was never done before and teams/clubs/individuals are getting coverage we all thought never possible.

[red hander]

I have to say I am pleased to see this pompous idiot got what he deserved from this tribunal, this man is so full of his own importance & he got what he deserved for biting the hand that was feeding him.

Nail on head ... the hubris of a man who chose to represent himself (I assume any barristers he approached told him the case was unwinnable) against the BBC, which probably has its own stable of top legal brains paid for by the licence fee, is shocking

[dublinfella]

Not in anyway defending Jerome here but the comments people are making against him here seem to rather harsh for people that probably have not met the man.

People don't need to have met the man, and frankly its irrelevant. People are commenting on what has been reported in this case, and he looks like an arrogant bungler from all reports and its quite frankly offensive to me to play the sectarian card when it appears none existed.

He organised a campaign against his employers from his work computer ffs. How thick is that?

[Doogie Browser]

I work for the BBC, that Sarah Travers is some craic on a staff night out.