The Suffolk Hyde Affair - Doc 93 Suffolk Fire Service Management Team

Administrators Notes Arising from Doc 92

Firstly, as Lin Homer has taken 33 days to make a 5 line reply to the letter of 6th March 1999, (see Doc 59 link below) it might be reasonable to suggest she has little interest in dealing with the concerns of her lower employees. Incidentally, the public promise in connection with such issues undertakes to reply to correspondence within 4 days. So, late by 29 days on this particular occasion. One wonders why?

One also wonders why Lin Homer devotes 24 of her 63-word single paragraph response to the issue of Ff Hyde being subject to Fire Service Discipline investigation.

As to the matter being dealt with by Deputy Chief fire Officer Smith? Well she seems pretty badly misguided on that (see Doc 51, 65 , 68 and 72 links below ) and has neglected entirely the purpose of Doc 59. As well as blatantly neglecting Firefighter Hyde’s contractual right for the grievance to proceed to a hearing before Suffolk County Council Elected members.

Overall Ff Hyde has made 4 applications to DCFO SASmith and 1 to Lin Homer for the grievance to proceed in line with contractual rights. Maybe that is more than reasonable?

Doc 51http://journals.aol.co.uk/nameandshameuk/TheSuffolkHydeAffair/entries/694

Doc 59 http://journals.aol.co.uk/nameandshameuk/TheSuffolkHydeAffair/entries/737

Doc 65 http://journals.aol.co.uk/nameandshameuk/TheSuffolkHydeAffair/entries/779

Doc 68 http://journals.aol.co.uk/nameandshameuk/TheSuffolkHydeAffair/entries/782

Doc 72 http://journals.aol.co.uk/nameandshameuk/TheSuffolkHydeAffair/entries/813