A SENIOR nurse sacked for criticising cuts in the NHS has settled her employment tribunal with Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust.
Karen Reissmann, from Hulme, was dismissed for gross misconduct after she publicly hit out at cuts and privatisation within the NHS.
She grinned broadly after she left the tribunal to announce a settlement had been reached. But Ms Reissmann was unable to talk about details of the agreement, because of a strict 'gagging' order.
At the start of the tribunal the chief executive of the Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust defended her decision to sack the senior nurse.
On day three of what was scheduled to be a week-long hearing, proceedings were ended when it was announced that after talks lasting some hours, an agreement had been reached.
The details, however, are being kept strictly secret, and neither Ms Reissmann nor the Trust would make any comment after issuing a terse joint statement.
The statement, read in public after the hearing, said: "Karen Reissmann was dismissed by the Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust for gross misconduct for matters unrelated to clinical practise.
'Mutual satisfaction'
"The parties are satisfied that the dispute between them has been resolved and the employment tribunal proceedings are at an end by agreement being reached to their mutual satisfaction.
"No further comment will be made by either party in this matter."
It is believed that the total costs of the issue will run into many tens of thousands of pounds, without taking into account any sum paid personally to Ms Reissmann as part of the settlement.
The nurse, who had a 25-year NHS record working within psychiatric services in the city, was at the centre of months of strike action involving psychiatric care staff, after being sacked.
The trust applied to get the tribunal case struck out when she made her claim for unfair dismissal and then asked to have press and public excluded from a preliminary hearing held in Manchester.
Ms Reissman, who has been earning a living from agency work since being sacked, was suspended in June 2007 after giving an allegedly 'damaging' magazine interview criticising the transfer of NHS services to the voluntary sector.
Denial
The trust then claimed she had breached the terms of her suspension which banned her discussing it with colleagues - and had tried to influence an independent investigation into her conduct by giving interviews to the media.
Ms Reissmann insisted she had been speaking in her capacity as a union leader when she gave the interview to Enterprise magazine, relating to the trust's voluntary sector partner HARP, which looks after seriously ill patients with chaotic lives.
The tribunal was told she later exercised her right to freedom of speech in making a public denial of charges that were brought against her.
Chairman of the tribunal panel Murray Creed said: "We as a tribunal are always anxious to see matters resolved, and we are pleased that that has been achieved.
"It involved allegations of inappropriate behaviour and it is important to record that we have made no findings whatsoever as to whether a case for gross misconduct was made out.
"There has been a great deal of effort put into this resolution. It would be a tragedy if that was undermined by any comments made by either party, other than the statement agreed."
Alec McFadden, north west regional TUC executive, said after the end of the proceedings: "All we would want to say at this stage is that Karen Reissmann starts a new life from today.
"I am pleased that it has been resolved and both sides appear to be happy with the agreement. Hopefully Karen will be able to get a job back within the NHS in the future. Certainly her patients need her."
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.
Tweet

Showing comments 1 to 16 and replies | View All
umpire 2, Salford M7 4HT (28/01/2009 at 15:44)
Also, if they have paid out then they have admitted some of the liability that they were wrong, the trust board should be asked to explain to the public and the reasons it went this far.
Time for the trust chairperson's to think about their career.
robert (28/01/2009 at 15:54)
d1v1s1onby0, Wigan (28/01/2009 at 16:49)
Very ironic considering she was sacked for speaking out.
I guess everyone does have their price after all
andanotherthing, Mcr (28/01/2009 at 16:49)
Someone needs sacking, and it wasn't Karen.
How much money have the social care trust (full Total) thrown away.
Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (28/01/2009 at 17:47)
AND WHO ARE YOU? AND WHY ARE YOU ABOVE DUE LEGAL PROCESS?
Also, if they have paid out then they have admitted some of the liability that they were wrong, the trust board should be asked to explain to the public and the reasons it went this far.
IT MEANS NOTHING OF THE SORT. IT MEANS THEY HAVE VIEWED THE RISKS AND REWARDS OF CONTINUING AND HAVE DECIDED TO TAKE THE SAFEST OPTION. THERE WILL BE NO ADMISSION OF ANY LIABILITY. IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT KAREN'S SETTLEMENT IS HER ADMISSION THAT SHE WOULD NOT WIN.
Time for the trust chairperson's to think about their career.
I HAVE TO AGREE WITH DIVISIONBY0. IT IS A TAD IRONIC THAT A CAMPAIGNER FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH HAS AGREED TO BE GAGGED AS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT.
ROLL ON THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE CHIEF EXEC.....
umpire 2, Salford M7 4HT
28/01/2009 at 15:44 "
bongser, leyth (28/01/2009 at 18:10)
dave pickup (28/01/2009 at 18:16)
Turton, Manchester Central (28/01/2009 at 19:27)
Ewarwoowar, Manchester (28/01/2009 at 22:36)
My guess would be that she realised that she would lose the case and the Trust agreed a low commercial settlement to save them the costs of continuing with the Hearing.
LogicalLion (29/01/2009 at 00:31)
This should never have happened. Somebody is accountable for the huge ammout of money spent prosecuting the Lady who actually cared about the patients enough to speak out.
Shame on all those involved who did not put the patients first.
Martin Rathfelder, East Chorlton (29/01/2009 at 08:11)
Ewarwoowar, Manchester (29/01/2009 at 11:21)
dave pickup,
28/01/2009 at 18:16
Unlikely. The maximum an employment tribunal can award in unfair dismissal claims is about £60,000.
If Karen thought she was going to win the case, she wouldn't have settled because she wanted the Tribunal to order reinstatement.
I'd guess that the Trust paid a few thousand pounds to settle the claim and save them the money from fighting on.
Theowolfe (29/01/2009 at 13:08)
Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (29/01/2009 at 23:53)
She was never prosecuted.
Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (29/01/2009 at 23:55)
Martin Rathfelder, East Chorlton
Next you will want to know about patient records
LogicalLion (30/01/2009 at 01:42)