RSS Feed
December 23rd, 2011 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda
By
Hugo Gye
Last updated at 8:30 PM on 22nd December 2011
A deputy head sacked for sending sexual texts to one of his colleagues has been handed nearly £10,000 after a tribunal decided today that he had been unfairly dismissed.
Gary Quigley was kicked out after an internal investigation, but the tribunal judged that his school had ignored the alleged victim’s ‘mixed messages’.
While accepting that he had sent ‘foolish’ messages to teaching assistant Donna Cummings, Mr Quigley argued that he had in some cases been ‘encouraged’ by her.
The tribunal in Birmingham agreed that
he had not been allowed to put his case forward, and awarded him £9,690
for unfair dismissal.
Compensation: Gary Quigley has been awarded £9,690 after being sacked for sending sexual messages to teaching assistant Donna Cummings, right
Miss Cummings had complained that the deputy head had bombarded her with texts, attempted to hold her hand and, on one occasion, cupped her face with his hand and kissed her on the head.
A subsequent investigation by Woodlands School in Coventry upheld her complaint and Mr Quigley was dismissed in January this year.
But the tribunal found that the texts and emails had not been entirely unwanted, and concluded that the school investigation was prejudiced by similar but unproven allegations made about Mr Quigley by another colleague two years earlier.
Judge Pauline Hughes said that the school’s investigation had been ‘one-sided’ and had taken Miss Cumming’s evidence ‘at face value’.
Though the panel upheld Mr Quigley’s complaint of unfair dismissal, it rejected his claim for wrongful dismissal, as it said an unbiased investigation would still have found grounds for dismissal.
Workplace: Mr Quigley was deputy head at Woodlands School in Coventry
Delivering the panel’s findings, Ms Hughes accepted that Mr Quigley had been ‘foolish’ to send texts and e-mails to Miss Cummings, but said that many had been in response to messages from her.
She said: ‘What is definitely the case, and it is fair to say that this is not denied by the claimant, is that there was a large number of texts and some e-mails to Miss Cummings, many of which appeared to be in response to texts or emails from her which contained language that could best be described as unprofessional and not appropriate.’
She added that the panel felt that Miss Cummings had reciprocated a number of the texts and emails from Mr Quigley, and that the communication ‘was not one-way traffic’.
The panel also believed that Miss Cummings had been sending ‘mixed messages to the claimant as to whether she was wanting him to be in contact with her or not.
‘Even if she was complaining to other people about him contacting her, she wasn’t complaining to him.’
Ms Hughes concluded by saying that Mr Quigley’s behaviour had been ‘foolish rather than malicious or predatory’.
Share this article:
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
