Ex-NHS hospital secretary, 88, who was sacked and frogmarched from the office after colleagues feared they'd 'find her dead' becomes UK's oldest person to win age discrimination case

First topic message reminder :


An elderly hospital secretary has become the oldest person to win an age discrimination case at the age of 88.

Eileen Jolly, of Tilehurst, has successfully sued her former employers, the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, for unfair dismissal on grounds of age and disability and breach of contract.

She was frogmarched out of her office at the Royal Berkshire Hospital in Reading by security staff in late 2016 and sacked four months later over concerns about her 'frailty'.

But the grandmother told her employment tribunal she had not taken a sick day in 10 years, despite suffering a heart attack at work when she had to be resuscitated by a surgeon.

The pensioner, who has a heart condition and walks with a stick, claimed she planned to work until she was at least 90.

She said she was forced to lie to friends out of embarrassment, telling them she had 'retired' as opposed to being sacked.

During her hearing, she told of how she was particularly hurt by one colleague who she quoted as saying: 'It was always a concern that you could walk in and find Eileen dead on the floor.'

The medical secretary will have to wait until October to find out how much she will receive in compensation.

Speaking from her Berkshire home today, she said: 'I have not read the judgment yet. I am seeing my solicitor either this week or next week.'

The tribunal heard that after she was escorted out of the hospital by security staff in September 2016 she was prescribed antidepressants and felt too ashamed to tell anyone what had happened, saying instead that she had 'retired.'

Her husband died two weeks before the tribunal hearing began in November without knowing what happened.

She was told to collect her things and leave and overheard a colleague saying: 'Eileen won't be coming back.'

The medical secretary, who suffers from arthritis and a heart condition, was accused of allowing patients that needed breast surgery to wait more than 52-weeks for treatment.

Mrs Jolly, who worked for the hospital trust from 1991 to her dismissal in 2017, was blamed for not uploading details of women awaiting non-urgent breast reconstruction surgery to a new database.

The error was partially blamed for 14 women having to wait more than a year for surgery, putting the hospital trust at risk of a Government fine.

But an employment judge ruled Mrs Jolly and her managers had different ideas about what her role entailed - and the trust failed to train her in how to manage patient waiting lists.

Employment judge Andrew Gumbiti-Zimuto said: 'The claimant did not understand her role the way that her managers understood her role.

'The role that the claimant understood she was performing, she was performing competently.

'There is a suspicion of the claimant being a scapegoat, the claimant was not offered training where it might be considered appropriate.

'There was evidence of the claimant's training having been inadequate, incomplete and 'on the job' training was ad hoc and not directed.'


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6673691/Royal-Berkshire-NHS-Foundation-worker-oldest-person-win-age-discrimination-case-88.html

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She might not want "hobbies" or to do anything else. She might be one of those rare people who really enjoys their own particular job.

You now say "if she doesn't need the money", and yet you didn't think that a person who has a rich spouse should give up their job - unless they're old of course. It seems to me that you're very much in favour of age discrimination in the workplace. This lady is of as much value as a young person, and I really don't see why she should sacrifice her own job for some person she doesn't even know just because they're younger than her.

That sounds a bit like 'I'm all right Jack sod you'. Society works best if people consider one another.
If a person has worked since they were 15, which this woman possibly did, she has worked full time all her life, surely it's time to free the job up for someone else....who probably needs it more than she does.

No I dont think a person with a rich spouse is the same thing at all, the rich spouse is probably employing other people, plus paying huge taxes, if his partner wants to work also I dont see how that is connected to a person 20 odd years past retirement filling up a vacancy.

You can call it age discrimination if you like, do you also feel the same about people driving well into their 90's and over....or women being denied IVF in their 60's and 70's?

Why is it not the same thing re the rich spouse? You said if this old lady doesn't need the money, she should give up her job. If someone doesn't need money because they have a rich spouse, why should they work when others need a job?

I'm really at a loss to understand your attitude. You think she's selfish to have a job, and that she should think of others. Why? Who is thinking of her? Nobody by the sound of it, and certainly not you.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:
That sounds a bit like 'I'm all right Jack sod you'. Society works best if people consider one another.
If a person has worked since they were 15, which this woman possibly did, she has worked full time all her life, surely it's time to free the job up for someone else....who probably needs it more than she does.

No I dont think a person with a rich spouse is the same thing at all, the rich spouse is probably employing other people, plus paying huge taxes, if his partner wants to work also I dont see how that is connected to a person 20 odd years past retirement filling up a vacancy.

You can call it age discrimination if you like, do you also feel the same about people driving well into their 90's and over....or women being denied IVF in their 60's and 70's?

Why is it not the same thing re the rich spouse? You said if this old lady doesn't need the money, she should give up her job. If someone doesn't need money because they have a rich spouse, why should they work when others need a job?

I'm really at a loss to understand your attitude. You think she's selfish to have a job, and that she should think of others. Why? Who is thinking of her? Nobody by the sound of it, and certainly not you.

My attitude is just different to yours when it comes to selfishness....and sorry, but she does sound selfish.

 Apart from everything else mentioned, she has had a heart attack in work and had to be resuscitated on the premises, she has an ongoing heart condition and suffers from arthritis, yet seems to finds it hurtful when she heard one colleague had said she was afraid one day she would find her dead on the floor.... well I imagine most fellow workers may feel the same in the circumstances.
All these health  conditions are likely to be age related, when a person reaches 88 they are obviously not in the same physical and mental shape they were in when they were under retirement age.

I know our opinions are very different on this subject,  so we will have to agree to differ on this.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Rise by how much? It would need to be more than double in order to match what someone can earn. Besides, that's not happening at the moment, so she might need the money. There's no reason for her to give up her job and claim benefits on top of a State pension.

It might not be the money, she might enjoy her job. I really don't see where you're coming from this time. Age isn't a bar to working, and I see no reason why someone should give up their job so that someone younger can have it. Let the younger person go and find their own job.

I dont think we are going to agree on this, we obviously see things differently.

But just imagine if it was the norm for an employee to stay in their jobs till they are almost 90 years old. It's OK for you to say let the younger person go and find their own job, but how can they when the older person is clinging onto it till they die? Its the way of the workforce, one out one in to fill the vacancy.
If she doesn't need the money and is working to keep her life interesting, she should take up hobbies, or work as a volunteer or something so she is still mixing with people.
I just think it's selfish to carry on in the workplace when you have long past retirement age, which is getting older in any case.

Some elderly people fit enough to work aren't lucky enough to have a private pension or a partner. So are they expected to just give up work and live in poverty? At least she's still paying taxes and not rotting in a nursing home costing the tax payer thousands.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Why is it not the same thing re the rich spouse? You said if this old lady doesn't need the money, she should give up her job. If someone doesn't need money because they have a rich spouse, why should they work when others need a job?

I'm really at a loss to understand your attitude. You think she's selfish to have a job, and that she should think of others. Why? Who is thinking of her? Nobody by the sound of it, and certainly not you.

My attitude is just different to yours when it comes to selfishness....and sorry, but she does sound selfish.

 Apart from everything else mentioned, she has had a heart attack in work and had to be resuscitated on the premises, she has an ongoing heart condition and suffers from arthritis, yet seems to finds it hurtful when she heard one colleague had said she was afraid one day she would find her dead on the floor.... well I imagine most fellow workers may feel the same in the circumstances.
All these health  conditions are likely to be age related, when a person reaches 88 they are obviously not in the same physical and mental shape they were in when they were under retirement age.

I know our opinions are very different on this subject,  so we will have to agree to differ on this.

Lots of younger people have heart attacks and carry on working. Arthritis isn't necessarily an age-related disease, and there's no reason why someone who has it can't work, unless it's severely affecting them. I'm not taking any notice of her being hurt at what someone said. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with her brain, so I find it astonishing that you think she's being selfish merely for doing her job.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Why is it not the same thing re the rich spouse? You said if this old lady doesn't need the money, she should give up her job. If someone doesn't need money because they have a rich spouse, why should they work when others need a job?

I'm really at a loss to understand your attitude. You think she's selfish to have a job, and that she should think of others. Why? Who is thinking of her? Nobody by the sound of it, and certainly not you.

My attitude is just different to yours when it comes to selfishness....and sorry, but she does sound selfish.

 Apart from everything else mentioned, she has had a heart attack in work and had to be resuscitated on the premises, she has an ongoing heart condition and suffers from arthritis, yet seems to finds it hurtful when she heard one colleague had said she was afraid one day she would find her dead on the floor.... well I imagine most fellow workers may feel the same in the circumstances.
All these health  conditions are likely to be age related, when a person reaches 88 they are obviously not in the same physical and mental shape they were in when they were under retirement age.

I know our opinions are very different on this subject,  so we will have to agree to differ on this.

If that attitude was widespread, no disabled person would be allowed to work then?

so she drops dead on the job...so what? At least she gets to go doing what she obviously enjoys.
why are people so scared of death? especially someone elses? you go in to work and there she is ..stiff as a board...so call 999/911 and let them get on with it...

AND, if they are capable, why shouldnt someone of 90+ drive?
as for IVF for ANCIENT LADIES.... well there are other issues there than mere age.......

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:
My attitude is just different to yours when it comes to selfishness....and sorry, but she does sound selfish.

 Apart from everything else mentioned, she has had a heart attack in work and had to be resuscitated on the premises, she has an ongoing heart condition and suffers from arthritis, yet seems to finds it hurtful when she heard one colleague had said she was afraid one day she would find her dead on the floor.... well I imagine most fellow workers may feel the same in the circumstances.
All these health  conditions are likely to be age related, when a person reaches 88 they are obviously not in the same physical and mental shape they were in when they were under retirement age.

I know our opinions are very different on this subject,  so we will have to agree to differ on this.

If that attitude was widespread, no disabled person would be allowed to work then?  

Indeed.

I have to say it does annoy me when people are said to have "arthritis". What kind of arthritis? There's a world of difference between the different types, and differences between whether it can be controlled or not. Then if someone does have "arthritis" everyone assumes it's because they're getting old.

Lord Foul wrote:so she drops dead on the job...so what? At least she gets to go doing what she obviously enjoys.
why are people so scared of death? especially someone elses?  you go in to work and there she is ..stiff as a board...so call 999/911 and let them get on with it...

AND, if they are capable, why shouldnt someone of 90+ drive?
as for IVF for ANCIENT LADIES.... well there are other issues there than mere age.......

Well yes. You can't sack someone because they might die at work.

We've had to call ambulances on a few occasions at work. Nobody died, but at the time you don't know if they're going to or not, you just have to deal with it.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:

I dont think we are going to agree on this, we obviously see things differently.

But just imagine if it was the norm for an employee to stay in their jobs till they are almost 90 years old. It's OK for you to say let the younger person go and find their own job, but how can they when the older person is clinging onto it till they die? Its the way of the workforce, one out one in to fill the vacancy.
If she doesn't need the money and is working to keep her life interesting, she should take up hobbies, or work as a volunteer or something so she is still mixing with people.
I just think it's selfish to carry on in the workplace when you have long past retirement age, which is getting older in any case.

Some elderly people fit enough to work aren't lucky enough to have a private pension or a partner. So are they expected to just give up work and live in poverty?   At least she's still paying taxes and not rotting in a  nursing home costing the tax payer thousands.

If she has worked all her life and bought her own house, dont fret that if she ends up in a carehome taxpayers will fund her, her house will be sold to pay the extortionate fees.

Why though do you think the choice is between working or rotting in a carehome?
If she feels well enough to work she would be well enough to enjoy her retirement.

Lord Foul wrote:so she drops dead on the job...so what? At least she gets to go doing what she obviously enjoys.
why are people so scared of death? especially someone elses?  you go in to work and there she is ..stiff as a board...so call 999/911 and let them get on with it...

AND, if they are capable, why shouldnt someone of 90+ drive?
as for IVF for ANCIENT LADIES.... well there are other issues there than mere age.......

If the women who are refused IVF are ANCIENT, what does that make the drivers who are 40 plus years older yet still getting behind a wheel?

so I suppose Syl thinks that come september this year I should just shut down my little business (as I reach 65) in case it is stopping some spotty faced kid from running a similar one? Rather than keep running it for a "bit extra" on top of my pensions

perhaps she would also like to dictate when I should hand over my driving licence ...thus preventing me from enjoying my "hobby" of the woodland we have in wales....perhaps i should "give that to some entitled feeling brat.

Maybe she would like to demand when exactly I am transported to one of those death camps they call nursing homes and maybe, whilst she is waiting, demand I sell my home for a "smaller " one so, disgusting older person that I am, I dont clog up the housing chain.

Syl wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:so she drops dead on the job...so what? At least she gets to go doing what she obviously enjoys.
why are people so scared of death? especially someone elses?  you go in to work and there she is ..stiff as a board...so call 999/911 and let them get on with it...

AND, if they are capable, why shouldnt someone of 90+ drive?
as for IVF for ANCIENT LADIES.... well there are other issues there than mere age.......

If the women who are refused IVF are  ANCIENT, what does that make the drivers who are 40 plus years older yet still getting behind a wheel?  

Ancient too...but that is the ONLY common point. there are no other comparable issues between age of a driver and age for IVF

Lord Foul wrote:

Syl wrote:

If the women who are refused IVF are  ANCIENT, what does that make the drivers who are 40 plus years older yet still getting behind a wheel?  

Ancient too...but that is the ONLY common point. there are no other comparable issues between age of a driver and age for IVF

Age IS the common point.
The body and mind naturally deteriorates with age. A woman of 50 is usually not able to conceive naturally because mother nature deems her too old.

A man/woman of 90 has lost a lot of their faculties and slowed down with the ageing process.....it's inevitable...thank mother nature again.

Lord Foul wrote:so I suppose Syl thinks that come september this year I should just shut down my little business (as I reach 65) in case it is stopping some spotty faced kid from running a similar one? Rather than keep running it for a "bit extra" on top of my pensions

perhaps she would also like to dictate when I should hand over my driving licence ...thus preventing me from enjoying my "hobby" of the woodland we have in wales....perhaps i should "give that to some entitled feeling brat.

Maybe she would like to demand when exactly I am transported to one of those death camps they call nursing homes and maybe, whilst she is waiting, demand I sell my home for a "smaller " one so, disgusting older person that I am, I dont clog up the housing chain.

You seem to be taking this a bit too personally.
There is a huge difference in a 65 year old and an 88 year old.
Incidentally, I am actually older than you are.

Lord Foul wrote:so I suppose Syl thinks that come september this year I should just shut down my little business (as I reach 65) in case it is stopping some spotty faced kid from running a similar one? Rather than keep running it for a "bit extra" on top of my pensions

perhaps she would also like to dictate when I should hand over my driving licence ...thus preventing me from enjoying my "hobby" of the woodland we have in wales....perhaps i should "give that to some entitled feeling brat.

Maybe she would like to demand when exactly I am transported to one of those death camps they call nursing homes and maybe, whilst she is waiting, demand I sell my home for a "smaller " one so, disgusting older person that I am, I dont clog up the housing chain.

Some people sadly stigmatize the elderly, based on capabilities. When in reality many of their minds are far sharper and full of far greater wisdom, than many can care to admit.

Like you say, age should never come into the equation. If we took a stance on age, and careless driving we would ban thosae under 25 from driving. Being as they are the cause of most accidents.


Some people sadly like to think they can dictate how others live their lives. Based and yet again on apoor ill concieved sterotype they hold on others due to age.

If people are still able and capable, then there is no difference between 65 or 88. Its always going to be individually different in each and every case. If there is then a difference, which in most cases there will not be. Hence its people having a poor percieved view on what people older are capable of

I would place listening to this 99 year old and their wisdom, over any teenager

https://www.bbc.com/ideas/videos/theres-a-danger-of-losing-our-tenure-on-this-plane/p06yyqvc?playlist=older-and-wiser

As he has something they have not had yet

Lived a full life of experince and knowledge

Syl wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Some elderly people fit enough to work aren't lucky enough to have a private pension or a partner. So are they expected to just give up work and live in poverty?   At least she's still paying taxes and not rotting in a  nursing home costing the tax payer thousands.

If she has worked all her life and bought her own house, dont fret that if she ends up in a carehome taxpayers will fund her, her house will be sold to pay the extortionate fees.

Why though do you think the choice is between working or rotting in a carehome?
If she feels well enough to work she would be well enough to enjoy her retirement.

Sometimes working is what keeps people fit and healthy. Take that away and they die.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:

If she has worked all her life and bought her own house, dont fret that if she ends up in a carehome taxpayers will fund her, her house will be sold to pay the extortionate fees.

Why though do you think the choice is between working or rotting in a carehome?
If she feels well enough to work she would be well enough to enjoy her retirement.

Sometimes working is what keeps people fit and healthy.  Take that away and they die.

And sometimes people work themselves to death and die before they have a chance to enjoy retirement....it's swings and roundabouts.

Syl wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Some elderly people fit enough to work aren't lucky enough to have a private pension or a partner. So are they expected to just give up work and live in poverty?   At least she's still paying taxes and not rotting in a  nursing home costing the tax payer thousands.

If she has worked all her life and bought her own house, dont fret that if she ends up in a carehome taxpayers will fund her, her house will be sold to pay the extortionate fees.

Why though do you think the choice is between working or rotting in a carehome?
If she feels well enough to work she would be well enough to enjoy her retirement.

She might not have enough money to enjoy her retirement.

Syl wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Sometimes working is what keeps people fit and healthy.  Take that away and they die.

And sometimes people work themselves to death and die before they have a chance to enjoy retirement....it's swings and roundabouts.

If they enjoy their work, they're not working themselves to death. Some people don't want to retire - they prefer to go to work.

HoratioTarr wrote:
The error was partially blamed for 14 women having to wait more than a year for surgery, putting the hospital trust at risk of a Government fine.

If her standard of work is bad, all bets are off.
Patient care comes first.
Not blaming her clerical errors on her age, people make errors which have nothing to do with their age.
The NHS is the one place where the consequences of mistakes are usually dire.

Syl wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Sometimes working is what keeps people fit and healthy.  Take that away and they die.

And sometimes people work themselves to death and die before they have a chance to enjoy retirement....it's swings and roundabouts.

It's about free choice, though, and not being forced, coerced or bullied out of the work place.

HoratioTarr wrote:But the grandmother told her employment tribunal she had not taken a sick day in 10 years, ]

despite suffering a heart attack at work when she had to be resuscitated by a surgeon.

      

This story like an April 1st joke.  ::

HoratioTarr wrote:

Syl wrote:

And sometimes people work themselves to death and die before they have a chance to enjoy retirement....it's swings and roundabouts.

It's about free choice, though, and not being forced, coerced or bullied out of the work place.

I certainly dont agree with the way she said she was frogmarched out of the building, there is no excuse for that.

It shouldn't be a matter of ever bullying anyone, the law used to be clear that people would retire at a certain age. Human rights now dictate (from 2011) that a person can work till he/she decides not to....be that 65 or 105. I just dont think thats good for society.
Thats my opinion and nothing anyone has said here has changed it one iota.

Jules wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:But the grandmother told her employment tribunal she had not taken a sick day in 10 years, ]

despite suffering a heart attack at work when she had to be resuscitated by a surgeon.

      

This story like an April 1st joke.  ::

She must have stayed at her desk and soldiered on as he was working on her....what a trouper.

Jules wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:  
The error was partially blamed for 14 women having to wait more than a year for surgery, putting the hospital trust at risk of a Government fine.

If her standard of work is bad, all bets are off.
Patient care comes first.
Not blaming her clerical errors on her age, people make errors which have nothing to do with their age.
The NHS is the one place where the consequences of mistakes are usually dire.

If you read it you'll see that the mistakes were blamed on lack of training. It wasn't urgent surgery anyway.