The Moonman
2004-07-15 03:09:21 UTC
My name is John Knowles. I've been suffering from clinical depression
- my body does not manufacture enough serotonin, and the problem
needs to be controlled by drugs - for several years. I was absent
from work from January to June 2003, suffering from broken bones (I've
probably got osteoporosis, although that has yet to be confirmed) and a
severe worsening of my depression. While I was absent from work the
Library sacked me, although I was not aware of this until sometime
after July 11th (the revelation that I no longer had a job and no money
precipitated a series of panic responses, so I'm a little vague about
the precise chronology). As a consequence of the Library's actions I'm
marooned in a foreign country, penniless and shortly to have a child to
support.
The following are extracts from emailed correspondence concerning my
position, which ought to explain pretty much everything (some names
have been replaced by ***):
If you'd like to help me by commenting on the Library's policies
regarding depression, then please mail those responsible at the
addresses below. I have no hope of receiving compensation from them,
but without pressure from outside they will not change their procedures
and someone else will inevitably be a victim of their policies.
All of the following have been either a party to the decision, or - as
a consequence of their position in the Library - have some
responsiblity for it, or interest in it:
If you want to mail them all then simply click on this link to raise a
new email. You don't have to write a lot, just point out that you find
the library's treatment of a known depressive apalling and demand a
change in their policy.
***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ;
***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk;
***@bl.uk; ***@bl.uk; ***@bl.uk
At the end of the day, it might not make much difference to what they
did to me; but it might make the difference that they don't do it to
someone else!
Update: Christmas Eve, 2003
The Library has offered me a derisory £500 to drop my tribunal case
against them - a sum which, by their own reckoning, will only just
cover the cost of shipping the possessions of mine which they still
hold (including much-needed medication for several auto-immune
conditions from which I suffer). I have refused this, so I am facing
the prospect of having to travel to the UK sometime in the New Year (if
I can find some money from somewhere to allow me to do so) to attend
the hearing, or to find someone competent to represent me. I am
literally terrified at the prospect.
I should empasise that I have nothing against the Library as an
institution - it is a magnificent resource for scholars - just its
management. Should you wish to use its resources you will find a page
listing various email addresses at http://www.bl.uk/contact/howto.html
The page for the Library's governing body, the British Library Board,
is at http://www.bl.uk/about/governance/blb.html
Monday, 25 August 2003
Re: notice of dismissal
Dear ***
Thank you for your letter dated 11 July 2003 concerning the
disciplinary board held on the 5 June 2003, to which I was not invited
and of which I had no previous knowledge.
I have not received the Board minutes and reports of 19 June 2003 to
which you refer. I am not aware of any attempt by Ms Calnan, HR
Advisor, to contact me on 4 July 2003. You say that she was
unfortunately unable to reach me on that date, and I would be obliged
if you would tell me by what means she tried to reach me, and what
proof you may have of this attempt. Also any proof that you may have
that the Board actually took place and that the minutes were sent to
me.
Regarding my absence on 16 - 17 December 2002, as a result of my jury
service being extended, my manager requested on one (sic) occasion for
documentation to confirm this extension and was advised by phone, by my
partner Sofia, that I was too ill (as he and the Library been informed
I am suffering from clinical depression) to do this myself, and he was
requested to get in touch with Woolwich Crown Court for confirmation.
He agreed to do this, but clearly failed to do so, and we will get the
relevant documentation ourselves and submit it to the forthcoming
industrial tribunal in respect of my dismissal. I fail to see why I
should be punished for his inaction.
Regarding the medical certificates covering my absent (sic)
certificates from 18 December 2002 until 28 January 2003 (sic), they
were delivered in person to *** on the 28 January 2003, when I was
actually at work, and on which date was sent home again by *** due my
distressed state. Certificates for 6 to 20 February 2003, 11 to 24
March 2003 and 8 April to date were posted to ***. Presumably he has
lost all of these, but fortunately we have copies of most, and where we
do not have copies we can produce duplicate records from the Luton and
Dunstable Hospital and m y GP. These will also be submitted to the
forthcoming industrial tribunal.
With respect of your refusal to regard my submission of medical
certificates from my doctor dated 15 May 2003 to cover previous periods
of absence, I would like to remind you that I am suffering from
clinical depression and cannot be expected to be in control of my life,
the absence of which control is one of the defining characteristics of
depression. *** was offered, by my partner, information concerning
depression and its effects (by this time we were talking to *** rather
than *** because he consistently failed to return our calls). She was
also offered an opportunity to talk to my psychiatrist. She declined
both offers, an attitude which I find completely contemptible.
Further to the above, I would like to enquire just how someone who is
incapable of getting dressed by himself, and is terrified of letters
and telephones, can be expected to remain in constant touch with you?
Throughout all of this terrible period in my life I have met absolutely
no understanding by anyone in the Library of the debilitating effects
of depression, a clear breach of your responsibilities under the
Disabilities Discrimination Act. Given that shortly before your letter
of dismissal arrived I had been hospitalised after a botched suicide
attempt, your action in dismissing me could have destroyed me rather
than, fortunately, breaking the mental paralysis from which I was
suffering. You have no right to play with people's lives in this way.
In short I am not guilty of 'gross misconduct'; the Library is
guilty of unrealistic and callous expectations.
I have not abandoned my post. On the contrary - given the limitations
imposed on me of my medical condition - I have attempted to remain in
contact with the Library, and have expressed my desire to continue
working there or, if the Library found me too great a burden, to seek
early retirement. In response I have been met with a complete lack of
sympathy and understanding.
With regard to alleged correspondence from the Library dated 20
February, 17 April, 15 May, 5 June and 25 June 2003, I can state with
confidence that none of these have arrived. The correspondence sent by
recorded delivery on 23 May, 5 June, 19 June and 25 June 2003 has also
not been received by me. To hold me responsible for the inadequacies of
the postal service does not so much offend against the principle of
natural justice as leave it spitting its teeth into the gutter.
The Library has been told that the postal system in the Dunstable area
is abysmal but has, apparently, not taken this into account. What
precisely were you planning to do should your last recorded delivery
letter not have reached me? Set fire to central London and send me
smoke signals?
*** and *** have both been told that the home phone line at my
mother's house was permanently disconnected since I have panic
attacks whenever the phone rings (they have both been given Sofia's
mobile number), and you have had an e-mail address for Sofia which you
have never used. In short, your efforts to get in touch with me have
been less than exhaustive.
With regard to your paragraph concerning removal of my personal
property from the Library, please note that I am no longer a Library
employee and you may not require (sic) me to do anything whatsoever.
Your phrasing was impolite at best: regardless of my mental illness I
am still entitled to respect and you have shown me none.
Unfortunately, as we are broke and homeless, we have been forced to
seek refuge with my partner's parents in Sweden, and are currently
without a permanent address. I am copying this to my former colleagues
in Reader Admissions with the request that one of them should look
after my possessions until I can return to collect them, and also that
they should forward this email to the relevant union representatives.
I'd be grateful if whoever among them chose to do this notified me by
email. <HUGS>
Should the Library have disposed of these already the Library will be
receiving an invoice from me for their replacement value or,
alternatively, I will be giving your name to the police in connection
with their illegal disposal. The choice is yours.
Incidentally, before we were forced at short notice to move here we had
talked to *** concerning the removal of my possessions and he was
reluctant to allow my partner to take them on my behalf on the grounds
that he "didn't want a fuss". I resent the implication that the
woman I love is some kind of wild animal who is, presumably, in need of
restraint. It also smacks to me of cowardice on his part: he is being
paid - at ***.'s insistence, I gather - at the top of the range for
a Grade B post, and I would have thought dealing with 'fuss' was
part of the territory.
You will be informed of our permanent address as soon as we have one.
In the meantime please use this email address for all correspondence.
Yours sincerely,
John Knowles
27th October 2003
Dear ***
Thank you for phoning on Friday 24th October and talking to my partner.
I'm still phobic about phone calls on 'bad' days, but writing email
doesn't provoke quite so much anxiety any more.
As my partner told you the Library's response leaves me trying to guess
how much they're willing to offer me, and this is not a game in which
I'm willing to participate: I'm having frequent nightmares about this
situation as it is, and I need to decrease rather than increase the
stress I'm feeling. I'd be grateful, therefore, if you'd ask them to
make me a definite offer.
I suspect that any offer they make will be derisory given that they're
claiming that they can't scrape together enough money to send me the
medication they hold - and which I need - but I'd be grateful for
anything concrete: for the Library the issue is about money, for me
it's about survival!
Their action has deprived me of income for the foreseeable future. I'm
51, in a foreign country whose language I don't speak, I'm years away
from what will now be a significantly reduced pension, my health is
poor and I will not be able to produce acceptable references for any
employer over here. Realistically my chances of finding work here are
vanishingly small. And I am not the only one who will suffer as a
consequence, as I have somehow to find a way of supporting my child
(who is now two weeks overdue to make his or her appearance. Lazy
bugger! :-)).
I'm disgusted by the Library's refusal to put in place procedures to
deal with staff suffering from depression, but not surprised. When I
was still employed by them I asked for permission to use the Library's
internal newsletter to set up a self-help group for Library employees
suffering from depression, and was turned down on the grounds that they
did not have the resources to support such a group. This completely
missed the point of the request - obviously a self-help group wouldn't
require any Library resources - and my suspicion is that they were
afraid that it might turn into some kind of internal pressure group.
Back in the days when the Library employed a Welfare Officer it would
have been impossible for someone to have sunk so deeply into depression
that they lost contact. Mick Maher - who was the last person to hold
the post before it was axed - was assiduous in making home visits to
people who had been absent without contact. No-one now seems to see
that as their responsibility.
What hurts me most of all about this situation is that the Library must
know that I didn't deliberately embark on a course of action that would
leave me homeless and penniless (who in their right mind would?), but
they persist in treating me as though that was exactly what I did.
Incidentally, despite a request to Mary Calnan I still haven't received
a copy of the Disciplinary Board minutes.
My apologies for the length of this email.
Thank you for your time.
Yours sincerely
John Knowles
- my body does not manufacture enough serotonin, and the problem
needs to be controlled by drugs - for several years. I was absent
from work from January to June 2003, suffering from broken bones (I've
probably got osteoporosis, although that has yet to be confirmed) and a
severe worsening of my depression. While I was absent from work the
Library sacked me, although I was not aware of this until sometime
after July 11th (the revelation that I no longer had a job and no money
precipitated a series of panic responses, so I'm a little vague about
the precise chronology). As a consequence of the Library's actions I'm
marooned in a foreign country, penniless and shortly to have a child to
support.
The following are extracts from emailed correspondence concerning my
position, which ought to explain pretty much everything (some names
have been replaced by ***):
If you'd like to help me by commenting on the Library's policies
regarding depression, then please mail those responsible at the
addresses below. I have no hope of receiving compensation from them,
but without pressure from outside they will not change their procedures
and someone else will inevitably be a victim of their policies.
All of the following have been either a party to the decision, or - as
a consequence of their position in the Library - have some
responsiblity for it, or interest in it:
If you want to mail them all then simply click on this link to raise a
new email. You don't have to write a lot, just point out that you find
the library's treatment of a known depressive apalling and demand a
change in their policy.
***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ;
***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk ; ***@bl.uk;
***@bl.uk; ***@bl.uk; ***@bl.uk
At the end of the day, it might not make much difference to what they
did to me; but it might make the difference that they don't do it to
someone else!
Update: Christmas Eve, 2003
The Library has offered me a derisory £500 to drop my tribunal case
against them - a sum which, by their own reckoning, will only just
cover the cost of shipping the possessions of mine which they still
hold (including much-needed medication for several auto-immune
conditions from which I suffer). I have refused this, so I am facing
the prospect of having to travel to the UK sometime in the New Year (if
I can find some money from somewhere to allow me to do so) to attend
the hearing, or to find someone competent to represent me. I am
literally terrified at the prospect.
I should empasise that I have nothing against the Library as an
institution - it is a magnificent resource for scholars - just its
management. Should you wish to use its resources you will find a page
listing various email addresses at http://www.bl.uk/contact/howto.html
The page for the Library's governing body, the British Library Board,
is at http://www.bl.uk/about/governance/blb.html
Monday, 25 August 2003
Re: notice of dismissal
Dear ***
Thank you for your letter dated 11 July 2003 concerning the
disciplinary board held on the 5 June 2003, to which I was not invited
and of which I had no previous knowledge.
I have not received the Board minutes and reports of 19 June 2003 to
which you refer. I am not aware of any attempt by Ms Calnan, HR
Advisor, to contact me on 4 July 2003. You say that she was
unfortunately unable to reach me on that date, and I would be obliged
if you would tell me by what means she tried to reach me, and what
proof you may have of this attempt. Also any proof that you may have
that the Board actually took place and that the minutes were sent to
me.
Regarding my absence on 16 - 17 December 2002, as a result of my jury
service being extended, my manager requested on one (sic) occasion for
documentation to confirm this extension and was advised by phone, by my
partner Sofia, that I was too ill (as he and the Library been informed
I am suffering from clinical depression) to do this myself, and he was
requested to get in touch with Woolwich Crown Court for confirmation.
He agreed to do this, but clearly failed to do so, and we will get the
relevant documentation ourselves and submit it to the forthcoming
industrial tribunal in respect of my dismissal. I fail to see why I
should be punished for his inaction.
Regarding the medical certificates covering my absent (sic)
certificates from 18 December 2002 until 28 January 2003 (sic), they
were delivered in person to *** on the 28 January 2003, when I was
actually at work, and on which date was sent home again by *** due my
distressed state. Certificates for 6 to 20 February 2003, 11 to 24
March 2003 and 8 April to date were posted to ***. Presumably he has
lost all of these, but fortunately we have copies of most, and where we
do not have copies we can produce duplicate records from the Luton and
Dunstable Hospital and m y GP. These will also be submitted to the
forthcoming industrial tribunal.
With respect of your refusal to regard my submission of medical
certificates from my doctor dated 15 May 2003 to cover previous periods
of absence, I would like to remind you that I am suffering from
clinical depression and cannot be expected to be in control of my life,
the absence of which control is one of the defining characteristics of
depression. *** was offered, by my partner, information concerning
depression and its effects (by this time we were talking to *** rather
than *** because he consistently failed to return our calls). She was
also offered an opportunity to talk to my psychiatrist. She declined
both offers, an attitude which I find completely contemptible.
Further to the above, I would like to enquire just how someone who is
incapable of getting dressed by himself, and is terrified of letters
and telephones, can be expected to remain in constant touch with you?
Throughout all of this terrible period in my life I have met absolutely
no understanding by anyone in the Library of the debilitating effects
of depression, a clear breach of your responsibilities under the
Disabilities Discrimination Act. Given that shortly before your letter
of dismissal arrived I had been hospitalised after a botched suicide
attempt, your action in dismissing me could have destroyed me rather
than, fortunately, breaking the mental paralysis from which I was
suffering. You have no right to play with people's lives in this way.
In short I am not guilty of 'gross misconduct'; the Library is
guilty of unrealistic and callous expectations.
I have not abandoned my post. On the contrary - given the limitations
imposed on me of my medical condition - I have attempted to remain in
contact with the Library, and have expressed my desire to continue
working there or, if the Library found me too great a burden, to seek
early retirement. In response I have been met with a complete lack of
sympathy and understanding.
With regard to alleged correspondence from the Library dated 20
February, 17 April, 15 May, 5 June and 25 June 2003, I can state with
confidence that none of these have arrived. The correspondence sent by
recorded delivery on 23 May, 5 June, 19 June and 25 June 2003 has also
not been received by me. To hold me responsible for the inadequacies of
the postal service does not so much offend against the principle of
natural justice as leave it spitting its teeth into the gutter.
The Library has been told that the postal system in the Dunstable area
is abysmal but has, apparently, not taken this into account. What
precisely were you planning to do should your last recorded delivery
letter not have reached me? Set fire to central London and send me
smoke signals?
*** and *** have both been told that the home phone line at my
mother's house was permanently disconnected since I have panic
attacks whenever the phone rings (they have both been given Sofia's
mobile number), and you have had an e-mail address for Sofia which you
have never used. In short, your efforts to get in touch with me have
been less than exhaustive.
With regard to your paragraph concerning removal of my personal
property from the Library, please note that I am no longer a Library
employee and you may not require (sic) me to do anything whatsoever.
Your phrasing was impolite at best: regardless of my mental illness I
am still entitled to respect and you have shown me none.
Unfortunately, as we are broke and homeless, we have been forced to
seek refuge with my partner's parents in Sweden, and are currently
without a permanent address. I am copying this to my former colleagues
in Reader Admissions with the request that one of them should look
after my possessions until I can return to collect them, and also that
they should forward this email to the relevant union representatives.
I'd be grateful if whoever among them chose to do this notified me by
email. <HUGS>
Should the Library have disposed of these already the Library will be
receiving an invoice from me for their replacement value or,
alternatively, I will be giving your name to the police in connection
with their illegal disposal. The choice is yours.
Incidentally, before we were forced at short notice to move here we had
talked to *** concerning the removal of my possessions and he was
reluctant to allow my partner to take them on my behalf on the grounds
that he "didn't want a fuss". I resent the implication that the
woman I love is some kind of wild animal who is, presumably, in need of
restraint. It also smacks to me of cowardice on his part: he is being
paid - at ***.'s insistence, I gather - at the top of the range for
a Grade B post, and I would have thought dealing with 'fuss' was
part of the territory.
You will be informed of our permanent address as soon as we have one.
In the meantime please use this email address for all correspondence.
Yours sincerely,
John Knowles
27th October 2003
Dear ***
Thank you for phoning on Friday 24th October and talking to my partner.
I'm still phobic about phone calls on 'bad' days, but writing email
doesn't provoke quite so much anxiety any more.
As my partner told you the Library's response leaves me trying to guess
how much they're willing to offer me, and this is not a game in which
I'm willing to participate: I'm having frequent nightmares about this
situation as it is, and I need to decrease rather than increase the
stress I'm feeling. I'd be grateful, therefore, if you'd ask them to
make me a definite offer.
I suspect that any offer they make will be derisory given that they're
claiming that they can't scrape together enough money to send me the
medication they hold - and which I need - but I'd be grateful for
anything concrete: for the Library the issue is about money, for me
it's about survival!
Their action has deprived me of income for the foreseeable future. I'm
51, in a foreign country whose language I don't speak, I'm years away
from what will now be a significantly reduced pension, my health is
poor and I will not be able to produce acceptable references for any
employer over here. Realistically my chances of finding work here are
vanishingly small. And I am not the only one who will suffer as a
consequence, as I have somehow to find a way of supporting my child
(who is now two weeks overdue to make his or her appearance. Lazy
bugger! :-)).
I'm disgusted by the Library's refusal to put in place procedures to
deal with staff suffering from depression, but not surprised. When I
was still employed by them I asked for permission to use the Library's
internal newsletter to set up a self-help group for Library employees
suffering from depression, and was turned down on the grounds that they
did not have the resources to support such a group. This completely
missed the point of the request - obviously a self-help group wouldn't
require any Library resources - and my suspicion is that they were
afraid that it might turn into some kind of internal pressure group.
Back in the days when the Library employed a Welfare Officer it would
have been impossible for someone to have sunk so deeply into depression
that they lost contact. Mick Maher - who was the last person to hold
the post before it was axed - was assiduous in making home visits to
people who had been absent without contact. No-one now seems to see
that as their responsibility.
What hurts me most of all about this situation is that the Library must
know that I didn't deliberately embark on a course of action that would
leave me homeless and penniless (who in their right mind would?), but
they persist in treating me as though that was exactly what I did.
Incidentally, despite a request to Mary Calnan I still haven't received
a copy of the Disciplinary Board minutes.
My apologies for the length of this email.
Thank you for your time.
Yours sincerely
John Knowles