A former foodbank worker who will be given £8000 in compensation after being unfairly dismissed says it’s been a “dreadful ordeal” which has “devastated” her mental health.
Caroline Marsland took Dumbarton -based Food For Thought to an employment tribunal after being dismissed in 2019, with a judge last month finding the process had been procedurally unfair.
She claimed she was let go over her concerns about a married priest having a relationship with a ‘vulnerable’ member of his congregation – an allegation the clergyman last week told the Lennox was “seriously untrue.”
A judge ruled the dismissal was procedurally unfair but said it was not related to the allegation.
Last week, the foodbank hit out at being forced to hand over the cash “during the worst cost of living crisis we have seen” – with the priest saying £8000 had been taken “from the mouths of hungry people.”
Caroline has hit back this week, telling the Lennox Herald she has been left with extreme anxiety and depression.
She said: “This has been the most dreadful ordeal for both myself and my family. It has devastated my mental health, my career and my religious life.
“I have been left with no job, no income, no self-esteem and no church through no fault of my own.
“I still have extreme anxiety and depression and take medication daily.”
She said she felt “sick to the stomach” over the comment saying she has taken food out of people’s mouths, saying she was unfairly dismissed “only a matter of weeks” after she “blew the whistle.”
She went on: “This sum of money in no way compensates me for my subsequent loss of earnings or indeed the damage to my mental health.
“I am thankful to my family for all the financial and emotional support, for support from medical and legal teams without which I may not have made it through the darkest of days.”
The charity, which provides emergency food parcels to struggling residents across West Dunbartonshire, last week told the Lennox Herald the payout was “not welcomed” and claims the original bid was for £48,000.
But it said it was pleased with the tribunal process outcome, saying it “allowed a lot of false claims and inaccuracies to be quashed.”
At the time, the foodbank operated from the community hall of St Augustine’s Scottish Episcopal Church on Dumbarton High Street and the priest was chairman of the charity’s committee.
The employment tribunal, held in Glasgow in February, heard Mrs Marsland was unhappy that the clergyman, referred to as ‘DE, in the judgement, was allowed to return to work after it was alleged he had a ‘relationship’ with the woman.
According to the judgement, the allegations came to light after the unnamed woman’s partner complained to the Diocese of Glasgow and Galloway in June 2018.
The tribunal heard: “[Mrs Marsland] was shocked by the complaint against DE. She had strong views about DE as a married man having a relationship with a client.
“She considered the client to be a vulnerable adult.
“She was angry and upset. She felt disgusted.”
The Diocese launched an investigation, with the outcome resulting in the priest being allowed to return to the church and his duties.
While signed off with work-related stress, Mrs Marsland confided all she knew in a friend, who was a member of the church vestry, despite requests to keep the information confidential.
She returned to work in December 2018 and was told she would be made redundant the following month, with the charity saying it had decided to use volunteers instead of paid employees.
They said there were concerns over whether there would be enough forthcoming funds to pay for wages but mistakenly believed Mrs Marsland was self-employed, according to the hearing.
The former worker claimed the real reason was because she had discussed the claims with her friend.
Employment Judge Frances Eccles found the dismissal lacked a ‘fair procedure’ as she was not considered an employee with employment protection rights but ruled her disclosures were not the principal reason behind her losing her job.
She said: “[She] was entitled to disagree with the outcome of the investigation.
“She was entitled to feel that it was contrary to her moral principles.
“This was not sufficient however, to persuade the tribunal that she held a reasonable belief that the information disclosed to [her friend] tended to show that the health and safety of any individual had been, was being or was likely to be endangered.
“At the time of dismissing the claimant, the respondent did not recognise that the claimant was an employee with employment protection rights including the rights not to be unfairly dismissed. There was no warning or consultation.
“There was no consideration given to the possibility of alternative work or other steps to avoid dismissal, including part-time
work.
“The respondent did not dispute that the claimant’s dismissal lacked fair procedure.”
Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - Sign up to our daily newsletter here .
