The Government are acting shamefully in the case concerning the dismissal of Joanna Hernandez, even after they have had to capitulate and concede defeat. In their vindictiveness against her, they are showing themselves to hold double standards in their policy of employment to the public service.
Government now says they cannot accept the recommendation of the Chairman of the Tribunal that Joanna Hernandez be re-employed within Government, or a Government Agency, company or Authority, because Joanna Hernandez was not a Government employee whilst working at the Doctor Giraldi Home. They contend that to offer her a job as a civil servant would breach the rules of engagement which must be done through the Public Service Commission.
The Opposition has, quite rightly pointed out that the Government is the employer for the whole of the public service and not only the civil service and that this includes persons working for the Gibraltar Development Corporation, The Gibraltar Health Authority, The Gibraltar Electricity Authority, The Sports and Leisure Authority, The Elderly Care Agency and The Social Services Agency.
Joanna Hernandez had been a civil servant in the Education Department for six years when she was asked to resign as a condition of starting as Manageress of the Doctor Giraldi Home. The Tribunal Chairman has recommended she be re-employed in any of the above quangos, not specifically in the civil service and this is in the gift and power of the Government to do, so it is not that they cannot do it, it is that they do not want to. Having claimed that the only person who knew anything about the reason for the dismissal of Joanna Hernandez was Isabella Tosso who they have been unable to bring to the Tribunal, they certainly have no argument whatsoever in denying the recommendation for re-employment
Where the double standards of the Government become more evident is in their hard faced attempt to make us believe that, they are defending and respecting civil service procedures which they have not.observed whenever it has suited them. When they engaged Francis Cantos as Media Consultant they did not even bother to,advertise the job, they employed him without this going through the Public Service Commission and then they made him a civil servant.
When Joe Holliday insisted in moving Peter Canessa from the Tourist Office to be his personal secretary at the Ministry of Trade and Industry they broke all the rules of promotion procedures to have their way. This newspaper is not suggesting they again break the rules for Joanna Hernandez, but there is no reason whatsoever for her not to be employed in any other Government Agency or Authority and this would meet totally the recommendation made by the Chairman of the Tribunal. The GSD have had little problem, despite public criticism, of re-employing Andrew Pererra to head the Bus Company despite this person being a retired Police Officer who has received a handsome gratuity and is receiving a fat pension, but there is no job for Joanna Hernandez.
They had no problem in recruiting Luis Montiel, now a Govt Minister, into the Development Corporation after he retired from the TGWU on medical grounds, but they cannot see themselves employing Joanna Hernandez to redress the wrong they have done her. What of the retired civil servant that runs Community Care, or the former union committee guy that is now dealing with European Community Funds at DTI, or the two Technical Officers recruited into the Buildings and Works from outside the civil service which is without precedence.
We can go on and on forever giving examples of how Government can find jobs within the public service for whoever they want, with little justification, but now find themselves unable to do this in a clear-cut case of victimisation at their own hands. The Government are acting as if they have something to hide and their reluctance to go to a Public Enquiry supports this contention.
They have even had the outright cheek and audacity to lecture the Chairman of the Tribunal for the remarks he made on his recommendations, a blatant interference with the independence of the Tribunal Chairman. As the Opposition quite rightly says, it is not unusual or unknown for chairmen of tribunals, magistrates or judges to express opinions when making judgements which are collateral views.
Acceptance of the right of the judiciary to express independent views is part of the philosophy of defending and protecting the independence of the judiciary.
http://www.thenewpeople.net/index.htm
Home 
