Monday, 30 September 2013

CARILLION & THE BLACKLISTING (2)

Dear Carillion

Please stop telling fibs! 

I'm no liar!

FRANK DUGGAN - DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL 

Best regards,

Alan Wainwright 


Explanation

The GMB contacted me today to inform me that Carillion's lawyers had written to their lawyers basically calling me a liar. Although I doubt the GMB believed them in any way, I was able to provide them with the information needed to disprove the statements made by Carillion.

One of Carillion's claims was that Frank Duggan (named by me as Carillion's main contact with the Consulting Association during my time there) was never a Director of any Carillion company (or words to that effect).

Firstly it's important to remember that Carillion demerged from Tarmac around 1999, so semantics could be at play to some extent. 

Tarmac's construction businesses re-branded to Carillion and the aggregates business was sold on and retained the Tarmac brand. I did mention in my evidence to the select committee that it would be unfair to use the word Tarmac when discussing the blacklisting, as to the best of my knowledge, the aggregates business had nothing to do with it. So we agreed that we would define this business as Carillion, even though it was Tarmac pre 1999.

So back to Frank Duggan. He was most probably never a Director of Carillion, but he was certainly the Director of Personnel for Tarmac during my time there (1993 - 1999) and the main point of contact for all checks with Ian Kerr at the Consulting Association.

The link above confirms that Francis Thomas Duggan was a Director at Markfield (Pension Trustees) Limited (Director of Personnel) from July 1993 to October 1997.

The company was based in Carillion's (Tarmac's) offices in Wolverhampton.

Another notable Director of Markfield during the same period was:

SIR NEVILLE SIMMS

This confirms that Frank Duggan sat on the same board of Directors as Sir Neville Simms during my employment with Carillion.

Frank was also a Director of another Carillion company at the time, Castlecroft Hotel Limited, but I don't want to confuse matters too much by going into too great a detail about this. 

You can view all the other Carillion Directors and the complex weave of companies Carillion owned at the time via a simple Internet search at DueDil.com 

Patrick Eugene McCloskey, Roger William Robinson and John Michael Ball are three other interesting key Carillion Directors involved with labour. The first two being ex Directors of Postworth Limited (Carillion's labour agency NCS). 

John Michael Ball

Is detailed on the following blacklist file of Dave Smith at 2d.

SOURCE 3271 (JB)

Mr Ball has also been a Director of a number of Carillion companies:

Tarmac Pensions Limited

Carillion Pensions Limited

Carillion Quest Trustee Limited

So stick all that in your pipe and smoke it, Carillion lawyers.

Francis Thomas Duggan

So where is he now?

Detailed as retired, but I've tracked him down to a company in Milton Keynes called Fuscha Limited where he's the Company Secretary with a John Patrick Duggan as Director.

FUSCHA LIMITED

There's a telephone number on the website, so any interested parties can contact him direct.

Lies, Lies and More Lies

I'm sure I've demonstrated by now that I'm one of the very few people who has actually told the truth in all this. I have no personal agenda other than to get to the truth and hopefully help myself and the many thousands of blacklisted workers who are not privileged to be part of the Guney Clark Ryan or GMB High Court claims.

I'm used to being called a liar by now. Look at the correspondence from Micky Tuff at Unite in which he calls me a compulsive liar. How the select committee has not asked one single question to Unite about their complicity in all this is beyond me considering the evidence uploaded on this website, but time will tell.

It does appear to be the standard practice in dealing with whistle-blowers and those raising genuine concerns at work. Isolate them and their views so they appear to be the only one making them. If no one else is making them then surely it can't be true. ;-)

There must be so many other people out there struggling to get the truth out about some other abuse of power or human rights. There is quite simply no support whatsoever for whistle-blowers in this country, irrespective of what the PCAW say. There are plenty of bureaucrats sitting around having meetings and discussions, but where is the real help?

So I'd say go find Mr Duggan and get him under oath at the select committee and the GMB High Court case. Let's see what he's got to say for himself under the full spotlight and scrutiny of Messrs Davidson & Co and the GMB Barristers.

I have written to Mr Duggan appealing for him to now come clean on the blacklisting, but I wouldn't hold your breath as he'll probably adopt the standard 'deny everything and throw a shit load of legal at it' approach like the rest of them.

Wednesday, 25 September 2013

THE LABOUR PARTY & THE BLACKLISTING

So Chuka Umunna promises a "full inquiry" into the blacklisting if Labour get in power. What exactly does he mean by a "full inquiry", as he didn't say a "full public or independent inquiry"?

Would Labour's "full inquiry" investigate why the previous Labour Government and Unite did absolutely nothing with my evidence back in 2006, thus prolonging the suffering of thousands of blacklisted workers?

I somehow doubt it.

This inaction by the Labour party and a major trade union was most accurately reported in this BBC Radio 4 documentary.

RADIO 4 - THE REPORT

Neither the previous Labour Goverment or the trade unions wanted anything to do with the blacklisting until someone somewhere was able to persuade the Scottish Affairs Committee to launch an inquiry in 2012.

And when I say previous Labour Government, I mean right at the top. 

Jack Straw Letter - March 2009

In March 2009 I wrote to my MP, David Hanson (Labour), raising my concerns about the trade unions and the blacklisting. Mr Hanson immediately wrote straight to the then Secretary of State, Jack Straw at the Ministry of Justice, including a printed copy of the 'Introduction' post from this website. This included everything about Unite's involvement in all this and my meeting with Bernard Carter in January 2007.

Does Mr Hanson ask for an explanation, or even an investigation into the serious matters I'm raising? No. He simply asks Straw to "look into this" and provide "A response suitable to pass on to my constituent".

JACK STRAW LETTER 

So the Secretary of State is by this time now fully aware that a major trade union that funds his party to the tune of millions each year were in full possession of all my blacklisting evidence as far back as 2005 and did absolutely nothing with it.

He is also now aware that the most senior civil servant in the country in relation to protecting the rights of trade unionists, Bernard Carter is also fully aware of all my evidence as far back as January 2007 and also appears to have done absolutely nothing about this.

So did Jack Straw take any action to investigate these matters following these disclosures?

I somehow doubt it.

It's 2009 and there's an election brewing. An election in which the Labour Party will rely on the trade unions to fund their campaign. 

Pat McFadden was therefore given the task of providing the 'straight bat' response David Hanson had requested.

PAT McFADDEN LETTER (Pg1) 

PAT McFADDEN LETTER (Pg2) 

So would Chuka Umunna's "full inquiry" therefore fully investigate this?

I somehow doubt it.

There has to be a significant reason why all of these now 'so called' interested parties (Labour MP's, senior trade union officials) wanted absolutely nothing to do with the blacklisting until 2012.

Only a full independent public inquiry can get to the bottom of this.

Now I've met with a number of politicians in relation to exposing the blacklisting over the years and can honestly say that Chuka Umunna is by far the most disingenuous I've met.

So let's not trust the smile, or the charm, or the carefully worded statements from Chuka until he and the current Labour Party pledge a 'full independent public inquiry' into the blacklisting.

Only then will we get to the whole truth.

Ed Miliband was very keen to drum home his catchphrases yesterday at the Labour Party Conderence, but will they now change their pledge to the blacklisted workers from a "full inquiry" to a 'full public independent inquiry'?

I somehow doubt it.

Freedom of Information Act Request

I have now submitted requests for information to the Business Department under the Freedom of Information and Data Protection Acts, so let's see what transpires.


Wednesday, 18 September 2013

CARILLION & THE LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE

Carillion have been told that they are no longer welcome at the Labour Party Conference next week after members of its National Executive Committee highlighted the firms blacklisting history.

Their stand will be replaced by a "GMB Blacklisting Information" stand.

Their Chief Executive, Richard Howson continues to insist that their involvement was limited to a subsidiary, Crown House.

This is simply not true. 

I named senior Carillion (previously Tarmac) managers and their HR Director, Frank Duggan in my evidence to the select committee which can be viewed here.

WRITTEN EVIDENCE & APPENDICES 

There's plenty more on Carillion and the blacklisting on this site if you care to explore.

CARILLION & THE BLACKLISTING 

MY EVIDENCE TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE 

Wednesday, 11 September 2013

GUNEY CLARK RYAN & THE BLACKLISTING

Did Unite buy the silence of the blacklist support group and Guney Clark Ryan in respect of the High Court claim by providing third party funding?

It's a very simple question and one which I've been trying to raise privately with Sean Curran of GCR and Hugh Tomlinson of Matrix for some time now but they've never returned my calls or responded to the messages I've left.

I quite happily met with Liam Dunne from GCR in April 2012 and spent a few hours answering his questions on the blacklisting for the High Court claim. I've also provided ongoing information and potential evidence to GCR since 2010, but when I now attempt to raise a single question with them following evidence that comes into my possession, they don't even return my calls. 

They have now issued a legal threat toward me for raising this question which I'll deal with later in this post, but for now, let's look at the facts and evidence.

1. Unite buried my evidence as far back as 2005.

2. This deliberate inaction prolonged the start of 'the end of the blacklisting' by some six or seven years (with the commencement of the select committee inquiry), which would most probably still be going on had David Clancy from the ICO not acted on my evidence in August 2008.

Hold on to this thought. If David Clancy from the ICO had not acted on my evidence in 2008, we would most probably have no GCR High Court claim and no select committee inquiry. 

Covert blacklisting would most probably still be prevalent in the UK Construction Industry, as very senior Unite officials who were in possession of all my evidence (no more or less evidence than David Clancy used to locate and expose the Consulting Association back in August 2008) as far back as 2005 did absolutely nothing with it.

3. Senior members of the 'blacklist support group' have publicly broadcast and privately stated to me on many occasions that they have evidence of trade union officials contributing to their consulting association blacklist files. These people like Steve Acheson are key witnesses and claimants in the Guney Clark Ryan High Court claim.

4. An ex-employee of Unite and current senior labour manager in the construction industry has stated that Micky Tuff from Unite was instructed to cover up my blacklisting evidence back in 2005 and that the unions are currently "the only people hell bent on telling us who we should and shouldn't employ". He names ex Unite National Officer, Tom Hardacre as the "Spark's Nemesis" and "the worst for blacklist activity".

5. I was informed by Liam Dunne from Guney Clark Ryan in our meeting in Chester in April 2012 that the evidence against Unite was so concerning that GCR were considering a separate legal claim against the union.

These facts are all supported with evidence all over this website and have never been contested by Unite, the blacklist support group, Guney Clark Ryan or any other party.

So we have all this evidence and dialogue regarding Unite's complicity in the blacklisting, then, all of a sudden, around mid 2012, it all goes quiet. The key members of the blacklist support group suddenly stop broadcasting about the complicity of the trade unions in the blacklisting. Not a peep. From any of them.

Well any of them apart from Michael Dooley who continued to bombard the blacklist support group facebook page with allegation after allegation for months and months until all of a sudden, on 17 May this year, he too posts his very last post.

I spoke to Michael last week, who for the uninformed lost the Ucatt leadership election to Alan Richie in 2009 by 4,500 votes to 6,700. Michael informed me that he had now reached a settlement with Ucatt. So not a peep from him anymore now.


Blacklist Support Group Email - 21 Nov 2011

So in addition to the facts published on this website, let's look at more of the evidence that prompted this very simple question to Guney Clark Ryan.

On 21 November 2011, Dave Smith from the blacklist support group circulated the following email to a selection of people.

BSG EMAIL - 21 NOV 2011 (Pg1) 

BSG EMAIL - 21 NOV 2011 (Pg2)

BSG EMAIL - 21 NOV 2011 (Pg3) 

You can see from the subject line on page 1 that the email has been sent to Liam Dunne and Sean Curran of Guney Clark Ryan for their approval.

The email opens on page 1 with the following statement:

"Steve and Dave from the Blacklist Support Group (BSG) had a meeting with John Townsend & Liam Dunne from Guney Clark and Ryan about the High Court claim last Friday. Here is an update."

Last Friday would be 18 November 2011.

The following statement is made in point 6 on page 2 of the email:

"Role of Unite"

"At the BSG AGM, Gail Cartmail and Howard Beckett from UNITE pledged to support the High Court claim. The level of involvement by UNITE will have to be determined but there is a legal duty upon the solicitors GCR to discuss with UNITE. A possible outcome would be for UNITE to become a 'third party" funder of the claim. This would mean that UNITE could fund aspects of the litigation process (such as time consuming document searches etc..) but GCR would remain working for us as individual clients. We would remain the client and GCR would continue to take instructions from their clients ie: us. This option would also mean that UNITE would not be liable for potential court costs from the blacklisting firms if the High Court claim was unsuccessful."

In the final paragraph on page 3 we read:

"We support the option of UNITE (and hopefully UCATT as well) providing "third party" funding which will greatly speed up the process and would allow the unions to be party to discussions (and can therefore rightly claim that they are supporting their members in the High Court) but the client who has the final say in giving instructions to GCR remain the blacklisted workers themselves."


Blacklist Support Group - AGM - 2011

Now the blacklist support group email of 21 November 2011 refers to the blacklist support group AGM which took place on 29 October 2011.

The following email is from from the blacklist support group dated 3 October 2011 announcing the proposed agenda for the AGM and is 'blind copied' to me.

BSG - AGM 2011 

If you study points 3 and 7 you'll see the following:

"3. High Court claim - a representative of the Guney Clark Ryan legal team will be in attendance."

"7. What are the official unions doing? - UNITE - UCATT - RMT
This bit will be where the collusion issue will be discussed."


Guney Clark Ryan Legal Threat - 10 Sept 2013

Over the last eight years I've simply sought to expose the blacklisting of construction workers and get to the truth in what happened to me and over 3,200 other workers. This has not been easy and has cost me at least sixty thousand pounds.

I'm pretty sure I'm the only blacklisted worker who has turned down an offer of twenty thousand pounds to quietly back down and walk away.
 
I don't have the unlimited financial and legal resources the construction companies and trade unions have. I don't have the political advisers or mainstream press support the politicians have, and nor do I have the benefit of or can afford any legal support.

I just have me and this website and all I can do is ask questions of and post the evidence in my possession to try to help myself and the other three thousand or so construction workers who are currently either not privileged to be represented by GCR or the GMB or do not yet know that a blacklist file in their name exists.

So after trying to ask Guney Clark Ryan, a company who I've done nothing other than help over the last few years, the simple question I've attempted to ask on numerous occasions over the last few months, I get the following threatening letter following an email to them yesterday, again asking the very same simple question. 

Did Unite buy the silence of the blacklist support group and Guney Clark Ryan in respect of the High Court claim by providing third party funding?

GCR's letter dated 10 September 2013 to me can be viewed here:

GCR LETTER - 10 SEPT 2013 

In this they state the following:

"We can categorically state in open correspondence that neither the UNITE union nor any other union for that matter has provided any third party funding or any insurance in respect of the High Court claim that is currently being brought by this firm."

Now that's fine and I'm happy to publish this as requested, but then they go on to threaten legal action, stating that my comments in their view amount to libel. They demand removal of the 'Coming Soon' post and an apology within 24 hours and threaten an application in the High Court of which they will seek to recover costs from me. They go on to threaten further legal action and threats of more costs etc, etc, etc.

Dear, oh dear, oh dear... 

Guney Clark Ryan threatening a blacklisted worker with legal action and costs for, based on the evidence now published on this website, attempting to ask them a very simple and legitimate question.

As previously mentioned, there would most probably be no Guney Clark Ryan High Court claim or select committee inquiry without my ongoing efforts, sacrifices, website posts and evidence over the last seven or eight years and blacklisting would still most probably be prevalent in the UK construction industry.

I can categorically confirm that I have never had any intention to damage the reputation of Guney Clark Ryan or any of the solicitors who have worked on the case and have simply tried to engage with them on the evidence now published that demonstrates that third party funding by Unite was proposed, discussed and considered.

So my message to Guney Clark Ryan in response to their legal threat is "please do now wind your neck in and let me get on with trying to help myself and the many other blacklisted workers who are not privileged to be part of your High Court claim".

And maybe next time, please also just have the simple courtesy to pick up the phone and return my calls. It's not rocket science...

We're on the same side.


The High Court Claim

To the best of my knowledge, only approximately 400 people from the 3,200 known blacklist files actually know they have a file.

Again, to the best of my knowledge, Guney Clark Ryan are only representing a selection of these (say 100) and the GMB union are representing approximately the same.

So who is representing the other 200 people, who like myself are most probably gasping for air as they drown or have drowned in the financial and emotional debt caused by the backlisting?

The answer is most probably no one! 


Legal Threats

On the subject of legal threats, the question still needs to be asked as to why key founder members of the blacklist support group, all who have been very vocal about the complicity of senior trade union officials in the blacklisting have suddenly gone quiet on this.

Were they making it up? Were they telling lies?

One reason could be that these very vocal blacklisted workers have been silenced with legal threats.

The following two pages are extracts from the blacklist support group Facebook page.

The first is a link to the Steve Acheson Defence Campaign' from April 2013 which is currently calling for donations, stating that Steve is in serious debt (to the tune of some 25,000 pounds) and about to lose his home. In this, Michael Dooley comments: "UCATT have threatened to sue Steve in the High Court unless he pays money and stops saying things about ucatt. Denis Doody is on the UCATT Executive Committee and wants people to stop criticizing UCATT."

DOOLEY - FACEBOOK (Pg1) 

The second details an extract from a lengthy conversation in which Dooley asks Denis Doody why his union, Ucatt have instructed OH Parsons to demand money from Steve otherwise he will be sued in the High Court.

DOOLEY - FACEBOOK (Pg2)

Dooley and Acheson are founder members of the blacklist support group and very close. The conversation is there to view in full on Facebook. Well I say in full. It does appears to have been censored.


Blacklist Support Group - Facebook Censorship

At 07:03 am this morning, a link to this website was posted on the BSG Facebook page. A screenshot of this can be seen via the following link:

BSG FACEBOOK CENSORSHIP 

An hour or so later, after a few posts from Dave Smith and 'Hey Presto', it's gone. Disappeared. Just like magic...

It was then posted again a couple of hours later with slightly different wording and again... Disappeared. Just like magic...


One More Thing

On the role of the trade unions in the blacklisting:

THERE'S AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
 

Tuesday, 3 September 2013

CROSSRAIL PRESS RELEASE

Happy to have helped clear this up...

Please read in conjunction with the following posts:

CROSSRAIL & THE BLACKLISTING 

FRANK MORRIS & THE BLACKLISTING 

BENT UNION OFFICIALS? (5) 


PRESS RELEASE 

Crossrail response - Unite drops claims of blacklisting on Crossrail project 

The Unite union has today confirmed that there has been no contravention of the blacklisting regulations on the Crossrail contracts being undertaken by BFK JV (Bam, Ferrovial, Kier) with Unite agreeing that no blacklisting has taken place.

Andrew Wolstenholme, Crossrail Chief Executive said: “Blacklisting is indefensible, unacceptable and unlawful. Over the last year, the Unite union has made a series of misleading and unsubstantiated allegations concerning blacklisting on the Crossrail project. By their own admission, Unite advised the Scottish Affairs Committee that their evidence was circumstantial and was not sufficient to prove blacklisting.  Unite has now issued a joint statement with our western tunnels contractor BFK stating that no blacklisting has taken place.”