Discrimination ?

sangie595

Gosh OP. You spoke to all those people today, and have them all your evidence, and they also contacted the employer to get their version, and they are all supporting you. Amazing. Especially since four of the four don't provide legal advice and don't know laws! Alongside a solicitor who had nothing to do and ask the time in the world just for you at the drop of a hat. That confirms what I suspected - it's easy to claim that you have spoken to a solicitor because nobody here can prove anything else. But anyone who knows how solicitors work, and those organisations work, will know that what you are claiming is impossible. Maybe you really believe your position, or maybe it's a wind up, but I'm out - you are determined to ensure that the word not to employ you gets around, and it will. If you think the public sector doesn't have lists of people that gets passed around, you are living in a bubble. If you are really going down this route, then you are won't be working anywhere in the public sector in your locality. They share this information. They shouldn't. But we all know they do. And there is not a shred of evidence they do it, so you will never prove it.

daytona0

nathanjpj wrote: »

Will do. Thanks.

The rejection hit me hard, I honestly didn't think I'd have the energy to complain, but I've bounced back. Really helped being back in the office today.

So the million dollar question is;

Are you have a period of mania at the moment?

May I kindly refer you to the (Allegedly!) not so useful NHS service to paraphrase one point;

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Bipolar-disorder/Pages/Symptoms.aspx wrote:

The manic phase of bipolar disorder may include:

doing things that often have disastrous consequences – such as spending large sums of money on expensive and sometimes unaffordable items

So maybe you should be going to the doctor before you go to the solicitor and spend a load of money chasing an employer over a job rejection?

But you want to know something? Nobody on this forum cares if you go to your doctor or a solicitor (though I can imagine which one would get the bigger vote, purely out of concern), so you have to make this decision on your own.

I think the Bipolar is impairing your judgement personally. And I think you are likely to crash and burn big time if you pursue this. EVEN IF I'm wrong in regards to your mania, it is the correct option to consult your doctor BEFORE you engage in solicitors. And if you don't do that then you're a fool. May I be so blunt as to suggest that, if you do not consult your doctor before chasing this, then you don't really care about getting better. Just throwing it out there.

FBaby

They share this information. They shouldn't. But we all know they do. And there is not a shred of evidence they do it, so you will never prove it.

Indeed, indeed, but sometimes they get caught and they get punished even when it is just a phone call.

http://www.employmentcasesupdate.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed28717

nathanjpj

sangie595 wrote: »

Gosh OP. You spoke to all those people today, and have them all your evidence, and they also contacted the employer to get their version, and they are all supporting you. Amazing. Especially since four of the four don't provide legal advice and don't know laws! Alongside a solicitor who had nothing to do and ask the time in the world just for you at the drop of a hat. That confirms what I suspected - it's easy to claim that you have spoken to a solicitor because nobody here can prove anything else. But anyone who knows how solicitors work, and those organisations work, will know that what you are claiming is impossible. Maybe you really believe your position, or maybe it's a wind up, but I'm out - you are determined to ensure that the word not to employ you gets around, and it will. If you think the public sector doesn't have lists of people that gets passed around, you are living in a bubble. If you are really going down this route, then you are won't be working anywhere in the public sector in your locality. They share this information. They shouldn't. But we all know they do. And there is not a shred of evidence they do it, so you will never prove it.

lmao. I work for a Trust's info department ... you really think we have time for that? We are constantly firefighting. We have problems sharing info internally, never mind externally! Despite public opinion, we work hard just to keep services running.

And I have had since Friday afternoon to contact those people and agencies. And I've been chatting on other forums. Busy busy busy.

Accuse me of lying all you like. Duck's back, water.

You are ill informed, bitter and negative. Enjoy yourself.

FBaby

OP, I personally agree that having a disability should give you more rights than those who don't. There are people who don't get offered jobs because of their sickness records, maybe because they had a bad year and caught every illnesses around, but because they don't have a disability, they can't do anything legal about it. I personally believe that this is indirect discrimination but...

...I do agree that you might have a case based on the one above, so I would just forget about this forum and seek proper legal advice, or indeed further legal advice if you have genuinely already done so.

nathanjpj

daytona0 wrote: »

So the million dollar question is;

Are you have a period of mania at the moment?

Sadly, no. Mania is amazing and I'm missing it very much. Normally I would be buzzing with all this sun, but the Quetiapine is stabilizing my mood.

daytona0

nathanjpj wrote: »

Sadly, no. Mania is amazing and I'm missing it very much. Normally I would be buzzing with all this sun, but the Quetiapine is stabilizing my mood.

Ok Doctor Nathanjpj, I will take your word for it.

nathanjpj

FBaby wrote: »

OP, I personally agree that having a disability should give you more rights than those who don't. There are people who don't get offered jobs because of their sickness records, maybe because they had a bad year and caught every illnesses around, but because they don't have a disability, they can't do anything legal about it. I personally believe that this is indirect discrimination but...

...I do agree that you might have a case based on the one above, so I would just forget about this forum and seek proper legal advice, or indeed further legal advice if you have genuinely already done so.

Good advice.

Nasty trolls making this place smell a bit. Winding them up when their words have no real effect on you is, though, a surprisingly medative pastime.

nathanjpj

daytona0 wrote: »

Ok Doctor Nathanjpj, I will take your word for it.

Sadly, that's the date of affairs. You see all these psychiatrists, after months of waiting, for just a few minutes, and they try to put the decision back on you.

It was a difficult journey getting to this recovery point, so I appreciate the title you're giving me. Dr Jones. Suits me.

daytona0

nathanjpj wrote: »

Good advice.

Nasty trolls making this place smell a bit. Winding them up when their words have no real effect on you is, though, a surprisingly medative pastime.

Ok I'm done with this thread. Taking the time and effort to post to try and help you, along with other people (who share a similar view), yet you dismiss us as "trolls [that are] making this place smell a bit".

Absolutely defeats the purpose of a "forum" if you cannot appreciate both sides of the coin. But you are the one who is going to stump up the £££ to chase this, so I wish you luck. You do have a chance to win, but I don't think it is enough to justify the risk. I also question whether you are of sound mind if you have Bipolar. The mere fact that you'd embark on this without consulting your doctor first is lunacy in my eyes. I also personally think it is an insult to you wanting to get better, but that could be a bit wide of the mark. I also don't like how you've been rude towards me by ignoring a good chunk of my posts.

I'm done. I hope you reflect on what I (and others) have said, but if you don't then good luck.