Wednesday, 28 November 2012


Who is RH, accessing blacklisting files from the Consulting Association in 2004 in appendices 2i, 2j and 2k?

Update 2 March 2013: The recently published list of "Main Contacts" would have RH as Roy Hay.


I'm now able to publish my written evidence and appendices to the Scottish Affairs Committee from 5 November 2012.






Wednesday, 14 November 2012


My evidence to the committee investigating the blacklisting can be viewed via the link below. I had previously submitted written evidence c/w appendices to support this evidence which I will publish in due course.

Tuesday, 30 October 2012


I have two statements to publish. The first is the official (49 point) statement from Carillion to the Scottish Affairs Committee and the second (albeit in two emails to the Chairman) is my response.

One of these statements is grossly untrue. See if you can work out which!



Dear Ian
I have now seen the written submission to your committee from Carillion PLC and respond accordingly to set the record straight:

Point 10.

I doubt very much that anyone has (apart from Ian Kerr) or ever now will following the evidence given by David Clancy and David Smith from the ICO two weeks ago. 5%...

Point 22.

Senior management within Tarmac/Carillion were involved with the CA. I have previously mentioned that the instruction for my Central Labour Department in Manchester to use the CA came from the Tarmac/Carillion Personnel Director in head office via Kevin Gorman (the Crown House HR Manager).

Within weeks of meeting Ian Kerr and setting up the name checks, I was instructed to cease all contact with him and fax all future name checks to Frank Duggan's secretary/PA, Anne Johnson at the Tarmac/Carillion head office in Wolverhampton. Frank Duggan was the Group Personnel Director for Tarmac/Carillion at the time.

The lists of names were faxed weekly to Anne (on a fax number that was specifically to be used for this purpose) and she would call me personally if an operative from the list was not to be employed.

I recently called electrician, Dave Smith who has already given evidence to your committee to discuss Carillion and he informed me that the initials JB, KG and LK were on the Carillion blacklist files he'd recovered from the ICO for his case against them. KG would be Kevin Gorman, JB would be John Ball who was the senior HR Manager for Tarmac/Carillion during my employment with them (1993 - 2000) and LK would be Liz Keates who joined around 1999. If true, this confirms that all three were providing information about operatives to the CA.

I can also confirm that Kevin Gorman had confirmed to me on at least one occasion that he had placed two operatives on the CA blacklist following a dispute at a project in Hull.

Please note that I write the following in an email to David Clancy at the ICO in 2008 in response to a scan of a photograph he had forwarded to me in his effort to identify Ian Kerr:

My initial feeling is no.

The image appears to portray a balding man, although this could be the poor quality.

I think one of your best options at this point is to contact Kevin Gorman, as he was closer to this than myself.

Kevin's instructions came from Frank Duggan, who was Tarmac's (now Carillion plc) head of Human Resources.

Frank is now probably retired, but I've tracked Frank down to a website at

In this, he quotes that he was head of HR for Tarmac.

I'm not sure what powers you have to enforce Frank to cooperate and disclose the details about Iain Kerr (or the blacklisting as a whole), but he was fundamental in managing the blacklisting process at Tarmac, and all checks were faxed to his then P.A./assistant, Anne Johnson at the time, prior to going on to Mr Kerr's agency.

Mr Kerr informed me that he relied on one single point of contact at each company to protect his identity.

Please let me know if you require any more help on this.



Point 25.

I think my statement above answers this point about the relationship between Carillion and the CA, but one question the committee may wish to put to Mrs Keates is why she suddenly became uncomfortable about using the services of the CA in 2004, four years after inheriting the functionality of my department in 2000.

Point 27.

I believe Kevin Gorman now works for Bristow Helicopters in Aberdeen who provide crew transport services to offshore rigs. I did provide this information to David Clancy at the ICO in 2008 by email:


Kevin Gorman is at Bristow Helicopters.

He'll be based in Aberdeen, but here's the contact details for the UK.


Alan Wainwright

I do recall one member of your committee raising a concern about blacklisting and offshore work in last weeks session with representatives from the ICO, so Kevin Gorman may be able to help you with that line of inquiry.

Point 28.

In my opinion, if true, this decision would have been way above the pay scale of Mrs Keates. Coincidentally, Carillion sell the Crown House business to Laing O'Rourke in 2004 who I think then trade as Crown House Technologies.

Points 30 & 32.

I was National Labour Manager for Tarmac/Carillion's in house agency NCS (mechanical and electrical) in 1993 and then the entire Crown House business from 1995 to 2000 and do not agree with these statements. We had approximately 1800 directly employed operatives, supported by around 300 - 400 agency workers which were essential to meet the flexible demands of the construction process. I do recall there being some problems on a project in Hull which were resolved with the help of a meeting with ACAS in Leeds, but in general I cannot recall any great industrial relations problems. We had set up a Central Labour Department in Manchester in 1997 and introduced excellent database systems for recruitment, electronic time and attendance and bonus/incentive schemes to enhance the earning potential for operatives on our projects.

I do however think that these statements by Carillion sum up the real problem, in that the issue was greatly exaggerated at the time.

Carillion do not provide any evidence to support their statements.

Point 33.

Carillion certainly did have financial arrangements with the unions and I firmly believe this is why Derek Simpson (General Secretary of Amicus/Unite) did absolutely nothing with all the blacklisting evidence I provided to him and other senior trade union representatives in 2005 and 2006. I go into more detail about this in my blog.

Point 34.

I did not publish the names of 500 individuals known to be on the CA database on my blog in 2006. I published a list of operatives who were employed at the Jubilee Line Extension (Emcor Drake & Scull joint venture with Sir Robert McAlpine) and the Royal Opera House and Pfizers projects (Balfour Kilpatrick Limited - a subsidiary of Balfour Beatty PLC). The lists were circulated to myself and the labour managers at Emcor Drake & Scull by Sheila Knight (Group HR Director) in August 2000.

Point 40.

Carillion use industry statistics here to create the impression that health and safety is improving in the construction industry, quoting 50 fatalities in 2011 compared to a five year average of 61 over previous years. It's important to note that turnover in construction in the UK has decreased substantially over recent years due to the recession, which will have had a direct effect on the number of people actually employed on construction projects. Carillions' turnover was 5.5 billion in 2008, 5.6 billion in 2009, 5.1 billion in 2010 and 5.1 billion in 2011. 

Point 45.

Dave Smith informed me there is evidence of information supplied to the CA on the files he recovered in relation to Tarmac/Carillion with the initials KG, JB and LK. If true, that would be Kevin Gorman (Crown House), John Ball (Tarmac/Carillion) and Liz Keates (Tarmac/Carillion).

Point 46.

Carillion may have stopped six years before this became unlawful (as they put it) but the detriment to individuals placed on the blacklist would have been for life if this practice had not been exposed and closed down in 2009. Just because Carillion say they were not involved after 2004 does not mean that the names of the people they placed on the blacklist were then automatically removed. They would not have been and the detriment would have continued to this present day and beyond.

The consulting agency may no longer exist, but the unexplained gaps of employment on the CV's of those affected is in my opinion the most destructive element in all of this.

Point 47.

Carillion were at the centre of the blacklisting and appear to have been long before I met Ian Kerr in 1997.


I do hope you find the information useful as I have tried to be as accurate as I can in relation to events that happened many years ago. I cannot simply sit back and let Carillion mislead you in this way. If I have not commented on a point this does not mean that I do not have information or a view on this. I am just trying to provide you with truthful information to save you being misled and have done my very best with this latest submission by Carillion.

Best Regards

Alan Wainwright


Dear Ian
I have just discussed my email below with Dave Smith and we have been able to establish further proof of Tarmac/Carillion managers who provided information to the CA.

The following is an extract from Dave's witness statement:
From the disclosures by the ICO [Tab C pp 19-209], I have identified the following initials of Carillion managers who supplied information to the Consulting Association: FD, GG, MH, RH, BA, DH, DW, RS, SP, MC. The initials KG and JB are at different times identified as the ‘main contact’ for Carillion [Tab C page 12 and 15
The initial 'FD' will be the Group Personnel Director, Frank Duggan and Dave confirms there is an entry from him from 1995 for a project on the Canary Wharf. This corroborates everything I have said about his involvement with the CA.

The initial SP will be Sandy Palmer who was the General Manager of Tarmac/Carillion's in house labour agency NCS. NCS (Postworth Limited) was based in Tarmac/Carillion's head office in Wolverhampton and they were providing in the region of 1000 workers each week to Tarmac projects around the country when I joined the company in 1993.

Dave mentions a second entry with the initials SP and DA for a project in Connahs Quay near my home in North Wales. SP will be Sandy Palmer again and DA will be Dave Aspinall who was another manager within NCS.

I'll forward any further information as and when it becomes available.

Best regards
Alan Wainwright

Monday, 23 July 2012


Gail Cartmail Correspondence

I wrote to Gail Cartmail (current Assistant General Secretary at Unite) earlier this year in a bid to gain some justice for the thousands of blacklisted workers who were let down by the union in 2005/2006 when Derek Simpson and other senior union officials came into full possession of all my Blacklisting evidence and did absolutely nothing with it.

Here is a copy of the correspondence exchanged.


Dear Mrs Cartmail

Re Construction Industry Blacklisting

I was the whistleblower in this matter and provided the evidence which eventually exposed this via David Clancy at the ICO in March 2009. Three years on and we now appear to be making a start at holding the companies accountable for this, but I cannot help but feel that we could have saved at least three years if Mr Simpson had acted when he first came into possession of the evidence in 2005/2006.

I'm therefore now writing to appeal to you to investigate Derek Simpsons' lack of enthusiasm to investigate and act upon this in 2005/2006 and provide the reasons behind this.

Mr Tuff (an official from the Midlands) was the very first person I confided in, and he encouraged me to immediately rejoin the union so he could get officially involved. I had previously been a member on and off for many years.

I will however refer you specifically to the correspondence between myself and Mr Simpson in 2006. To the best of my knowledge, he did nothing. Not even a letter to the companies to challenge them about the evidence. Furthermore, he was in a position to support my Tribunal where I would be making this evidence public, but he chose not to do so. This inaction prolonged the suffering of thousands of workers for three more years. A situation which would have carried on indefinitely had Mr Clancy not picked up on this.

I've held senior positions at Crown House Engineering (National Labour Manager), Drake & Scull and Haden Young and during those periods of employment the companies paid the union subscriptions of the members as part of a benefits package. The union also received two pounds per week for every agency worker placed on the sites as part of an 'agency workers membership scheme' set up by the Luton office under Harry Hughes. This was a simple head count system and payment made monthly if I recall correctly. I understand the unions received in excess of one million pounds a year from the companies in question under these schemes at the time.

Although Mr Simpson has now retired, I do believe he receives a handsome pension and a luxury house to live in. I cannot see how this can be justified, as in my opinion he was in a prime position to do something about this and chose not to do so. Mr Clancy had no more or no less evidence than Mr Simpson three years previous but Mr Simpson chose to do nothing about this.

If you do decide to take up this investigation I would strongly recommend that you start with Micky Tuff. Micky was full of enthusiasm to expose this at the time, but his enthusiasm wained. In fact his very last comment to me when asked about what progress was being made was 'no comment' and I didn't hear from him again. I don't place any blame for this on Micky, as the decisions were taken higher up the pay scale and he was most probably pressured into backing down. But I'm sure you'll get to the bottom of it if you start with him.

As you may be aware, Guney Clark Ryan are about to lodge their case to the courts. We may never get full justice for these people, but I think they are at least owed some honesty about why a major union of which many were members did nothing to help them.

Yours sincerely

Alan Wainwright


Dear Alan

Your effort and those now organised within the Blacklist Support Group has been tremendous in exposing the practice of Blacklisting in the Construction Industry.

Since February 2011 I have led for the union as AGS for a number of sectors including construction. Over the past 12 months I have learned about different aspects of the ICO raid of the Consulting Association, subsequent litigation and legislative changes introduced by the Labour Government. In the process I have met and come to know many workers who have been the victim of Blacklisting in the industry.

Both Unite's predecessor unions supported numerous members complaints to their employment tribunal where their application to the ICO showed they were on the Blacklist.  We have renewed encouragement to members to bring cases forward. Unfortunately as you probably know the settlements in respect of such cases is relatively low and poor comfort to workers who struggle to find employment commensurate with their qualifications.

Over the past we have endeavoured to campaign against Blacklisting and work with the Blacklist Support Group on a number of fronts including legal challenges on grounds of disclosure of information and human rights.

The purpose of your letter was specifically in relation to what you identify as a wasted opportunity on the part of the retired Amicus/Unite General Secretary Derek Simpson who you believe should have done more arising from your correspondence in 2005/2006.

As you point out Mr Simpson is now retired. The union has no capacity to secure Mr Simpson's cooperation in an investigation. The union recently reviewed Mr Simpson's post retirement benefits, which were subsequently adjusted to the extent that this was possible.

I empathise with your frustration however do assure you that Unite now gives priority to representing members known to be Blacklisted and is proactively working to achieve better law.

Kind regards

Gail Cartmail


Dear Gail

Thank you for your letter dated 20 February 2012.

I think you may have misunderstood the context of what I was asking you to do, so I will put this in much clearer terms. I am asking you to investigate this matter because this does not appear to be a 'wasted opportunity' as you put it, but more a case of a General Secretary of a major union deliberately withholding evidence that could have exposed and ended the blacklisting of its members some three years earlier.

I put it to you that this evidence was deliberately withheld to protect the financial relationship between the union and these employers in the hope that this would simply go away. The odds were stacked against me at the time as I had no income and was up against a major PLC with unlimited legal resources. This matter cost me in the region of fifty thousand pounds to expose (on which I have to pay significant interest payments each year for money borrowed), which could have been avoided had the union taken immediate action with the evidence in their possession. Mr Simpson had every power to override the minimum timescale required to support a Tribunal, so have you any idea how insulting 'a wasted opportunity' appears considering the ramifications of his inaction?

Your comments that I believe Mr Simpson 'should have done more' implies he did something. It appears that he did absolutely nothing, which could have resulted in this never being exposed had Mr Clancy not picked up on this in 2009.

Your comments that 'the union has no capacity to secure Mr Simpson's cooperation in an investigation' should not prevent you from investigating this. I'm aware that Mr Simpson has retired, which is why I suggested you start with Micky Tuff and work upwards. You could at the very least speak to Mr Tuff and write to Mr Simpson for a response.

I note your comments about the current contribution from the union, but this is simply too little too late and is perceived by some I speak to as just jumping on the bandwagon. I put it to you again that these people are at the very least owed an explanation and an apology of why a major union of which many were members did nothing to help them at the time.

I am asking you to specifically focus on why the union withdrew their support of my attempt to expose the Blacklisting, after encouraging me to renew my membership, and why Derek Simpson specifically withheld the evidence in 2006 and did absolutely nothing with this.

Many people underestimated my resolve to get to the bottom of and expose the Blacklisting between 2005 and 2009 and I can assure you that my priority is now primarily focused to expose exactly what went on in the union at the time. I therefore do hope you take this opportunity to get involved and cooperate.

Could you please also provide me with copies of the responses from Mr Simpson in relation to my letters dated 19 June 2006, 5 July 2006 and 6 July 2006, as I'm currently unable to locate these?

Yours sincerely

Alan Wainwright


Dear Alan

I apologise for not acknowledging your letter of 2 March.

I regret that you are dissatisfied with my response as I have done my best to explain the Union's position.

I will pass your request for copies of the correspondence to the General Secretary's office.

Yours sincerely

Gail Cartmail