Statement Concerning the Scottish Courts Service

I have worked exceptionally hard over the last three years or so to promote equality within the Scottish Courts Service (SCS) as an unpaid volunteer member of their Equalities Advisory Group (EAG).

During this time, I took on many challenging subjects and in particular took a lot of time, outside of attending our regular meetings, to take forward additional work.  

I enjoyed this work and also looked forward to each of the meetings to which I contributed fully.  

Regretfully, I was told by Chair on Monday (17 February 2014) afternoon, that I was no longer welcome to be a member of the EAG.  

I am disappointed but to a certain extent, not surprised.    

It was not until I raised concerns recently about ongoing disability discrimination and transphobia, which were backed by evidence, that both Chair and the SCS management decided that I was no longer welcome.  

I tried repeatedly to raise these issues but felt that I was ignored.  

In particular, the SCS authorised the refurbishment of a court room in Dundee with scant regard to accessibility and more regard for financial expediency.  

Needless to say, I objected to this as it is not the manner in which our public services are meant to behave.  

It has subsequently been pointed out to me that as an EAG member I have no right to raise a grievance within the SCS and that the dignity at work policy does not apply to members of the EAG amongst other matters.  

In particular, it has also emerged that Chair has the right to remove members of the EAG.  

Raising a complain under the Equality Act is a protected act.  This means that a person raising a complain about disability discrimination and transphobia as I have done should not suffer any detriment for doing so.  

As a basic human right, everyone is entitled to have their dignity respected.  

Additionally, public bodies, such as the SCS, are required to apply the European Convention on Human Rights to all aspects of their work.   

Volunteer Development Scotland, together with the Scottish TUC, agreed a code of practice for organisations that work with Volunteers.  

The SCS does not subscribe to this code.  Amongst other things, the code states that:- 

Effective structures should be put in place to support and develop volunteers and the activities they undertake, and these should be fully considered and costed when services are planned and development.

 Volunteers and paid staff should be provided with opportunities to contribute to the development of volunteering policies and procedures.

 Volunteers, like paid staff, should be able to carry out their duties in safe, secure and healthy environments that are free from harassment, intimidation, bullying, violence and discrimination.

 All paid workers and volunteers should have access to appropriate training and development. 

There should be recognised machinery for the resolution of any problems between organisations and volunteers or between paid staff and volunteers. 

I was not told in advance that Chair intended to remove me from the EAG nor was I told about a secret letter that had been prepared and delivered to Chair by the SCS management. 

I was not given an opportunity to see this letter or address any of its contents. 

I was mislead as to the nature of this meeting. 

I was also accused of being "aggressive and threatening".  

My dignity was violated yesterday and I left our meeting in a distressed state.

At no stage have I ever been aggressive or threatening to anyone.  

I raised a complaint concerning the SCSs failure to address accessibility and transphobia.  I also stated that there was a problem with institutional discrimination.

I was victimised for doing so.

I was bullied by them.  

If the SCS had in place appropriate structures and machinery for addressing my concerns, I am sure that matters would not have gone this far.  Unfortunately, they do not.  

I am disappointed at the manner in which both Chair and the SCS have handled my complaints.  

I am also disappointed that it appears acceptable to unilaterally remove a member of the EAG, to write a secret letter about them and not provide any opportunity to answer its contents and then accuse someone like myself of being aggressive and threatening. 

I am now considering my position.  

A complaint has been made to the SCS about mondays meeting and the failure to address my concerns. 

We will wait and see what happens.  

I would welcome your support right now as it is a struggle to keep up the good fight on my own. 

This is even more difficult and distressing for me because I have multiple disabilities and I cannot come to terms with how this public body has behaved.

Yours for equality,

Daniel

Are you Mad?

The word "Mad" has a variety of connotations.  

Yet, in today's society we use this word regularly as a pejorative term to describe people who be find difficult to work with, who may see the world in a different way or with whom you may have had political or other disagreements. 

Our understanding of society and human interaction has improved dramatically since the 19th century, yet some of us still behave as if nothing has changed. 

This article explores the 21st century of the word "mad" and its use in the vernacular; to discriminate and stigmatise despite increased awareness and legal protection.

Why would you call someone mad?

It is easy to use the word in its ordinary meaning; perhaps to describe an action which you would consider foolish.

It is also easy to use the term to describe someone who you find unpleasant or perhaps disagree with.

The key question is why do you consider the action to be foolish, why do you find the person unpleasant or why do you disagree with them?

In any event, the use of the word mad to describe someone is inappropriate.

Mental health, Autism, Learning disability

In recent time, Mad, was used to describe someone who may have had a mental health condition, who was autistic or had a particular learning disability.

However, we now recognise mental ill health for what it is, notwithstanding the discrimination that still persists.  For example, someone who is bi-polar, will experience a wide range of mood.  At times, behaviour will seem energised, enthused or even manic.  This lasts but a short time, there after, the same person may appear withdrawn, closed in on themselves and disinterested or not engaged.   

We also have a better understanding of autism.  Not everyone experiences the world in the same way and communication is a skill the majority of society takes for granted, often ignoring that for some people, communication, even in its basic form, can be extremely challenging or even scary.     

Similarly, if someone is dyslexic, they may come across as articulate, intelligent and knowledgeable.  However, reading, writing and remembering all may pose particular challenges.  In a highly focused written world, it would be easy to write someone off as just being lazy or not capable.   

See me

If you find someone difficult to get along with, ask yourself - why? 

Is it because you have nothing in common or do not share their political beliefs?

Is it because you find their decisions or actions foolish?

Is it because you find it difficult to understand what they say alot of the time or do not understand why they look dire one minute and full of beans the next?

Is it because you simply can not be bothered, find the person irritable or irrational, they speak their mind, including voicing criticisms?

Do you lack patience?

Have you considered seeing the world through their eyes?

Do you jump to conclusions or make certain assumptions about the person's suitability for particular roles or what they are capable of?

Have you discussed the person with colleagues, friends, co-workers and ignored the person?  (perhaps you even encouraged others, whether directly or indirectly, to isolate the person?)

Did you describe the person as Mad, what about crazy, hostile or stupid?
  
Legal Aspects

The Equality Act protects individuals who share protected characteristics from discrimination - which can be both direct and indirect.  Individuals are also protected from harassment and victimisation.

It is likely that mental health, autism and learning disability fall within the legal definition of disability.  In order to benefit from protection, you do not have to be disabled personally.  You are also protected from discrimination based on perception of disability and or association with someone who is disabled.

The civil law also affords protection.  There is statutory protection from harassment in the form of the protection from harassment act and also at common law - where it is a civil wrong (tort/delict) to cause an injury or loss to your neighbour.

It is also important to keep in mind that disabled people are protected from hate crime.

Actions have consequences

It is easy to avoid or seek to exclude the individual or individuals whom you consider to be problematic.

It is also easy to encourage others to marginalise or avoid. 

However, what are the practical consequences? 

In some circumstances, a person may be denied opportunities for promotion or to advance themselves because of the negative attitudes and rumours spread by others.

Likewise, a person may not feel comfortable coming forward to engage in future if they feel that they are going to be marginalised or exposed to exclusion.

In some extreme cases, this can lead to bullying, harassment and victimisation.

In many employment circumstances, it is easy for illfounded complaints to add up, resulting in making it difficult to remain in employment because of negative working relationships.

It is easy to get rid of the difficulty, by removing the person, rather than tackling the prejudice behind the problem.

This is discrimination and is why many people, who have mental ill health, who are autistic or have a learning disability are excluded from work.

This is also one of the reasons why so many people with mental health problems or who have autism are found in the criminal justice system or are excluded from education.   

Dont judge - support and encourage

I would have hoped that attitudes would have improved in the 21st century. 

There has been progress, but probably too little, too late. 

It is important that if you find yourself working alongside a colleague who sees things differently, or who needs some support, that you show support and challenge any of the ill-will that the tyrany of the majority will send his or her way.

We are all unique individuals and there is no 'normal'.

Challenge the stigma.  

Please don't judge others, lest you be judged yourself.