Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Angry husband says council appeal is ‘putting £25,000 in some rich Edinburgh lawyer’s pocket’

Linda and Vic Ross. Mr Ross has accused the council of wasting taxpayers money.
Linda and Vic Ross. Mr Ross has accused the council of wasting taxpayers money.

The husband of former teacher Linda Ross, who won an employment tribunal against the city council for wrongful dismissal, has launched an attack on the council for “wasting taxpayers’ money” by appealing the tribunal’s decision.

Mr Ross said the council’s move is a “face-saving exercise” after senior officials were singled out for criticism by the panel.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal will take place in Edinburgh over three days in February, which it is estimated will cost the council upwards of £25,000 after the local authority engaged a top advocate to represent it.

In the tribunal judgment last year, former education director Anne Wilson, council human resources (HR) staff and Lord Provost John Letford were criticised.

The tribunal unanimously ruled that the former deputy head teacher had been unfairly dismissed, describing Anne Wilson as not being a “reliable” witness and said the council’s HR department had ignored “correct legal advice” an allegation the council has denied.

Mr Ross says council chiefs have hired the services of top QC Brian Napier, which will cost taxpayers around £15,000 for the three-day hearing.

Including preparation charges, it is estimated the overall cost of the appeal will be more than £25,000, which, taken on top of the original tribunal, would far outweigh any award to the former teacher, her husband claims.

He said: “There was no value placed on our claim. Linda was retired and so it would be limited. So the result is they’re spending more money on this QC than they stand to lose on her award.”

It is believed that attempts were made to have discussions with the council but the attempts were rebuffed.

Mr Ross added: “This is all about the council saving face. It’s about Janet Robertson and Anne Wilson being called liars and the Dundee taxpayers are having to foot the bill for it.

“That amount of money could pay someone’s wages for at least a year, maybe even two people. Instead they are putting that £25,000 in some rich Edinburgh lawyer’s pocket.”

Mr Ross says the case has caused both he and Linda “extreme stress” and says they are “disappointed” that having gone through a very traumatic experience and won their case “the council has chosen to drag us through all the stress of an appeal.”

It was Mr Ross’s letter to his MSP regarding discipline in schools that kicked the affair off more than five years ago.

Mr Ross said: “At that time an ‘independent’ inquiry was footed by the taxpayer, as have the countless man hours for council lawyers, HR people, teachers who gave statements and evidence, press people, heads of department, internal hearings, tribunal hearings.

“There was the extraordinary expense when they went to court to get an interdict on behalf of a headmaster and also installed and paid for CCTV at his house.

“The whole charade was exposed at the tribunal lies were told, what does it tell you when all three members of the tribunal found the director of education to be unreliable when explaining her decision and the reasons for it?

“She said we were internet porn peddlers seeking to undermine the moral fibre of the Dundee school population it became farcical, but at the same time it was vicious and designed to damage our reputation.

“I would have hoped that the verdict would have been cause for an internal investigation. Now further time and expense are thrown at us. Why?

“There is no great legal issue involved in this appeal, in fact it’s exactly the same as it has been from the start Dundee City Council cannot admit wrong.

“If all of this time, money and effort had been devoted to our schools perhaps the latest exam results wouldn’t have been so disappointing.”

The appeal will be heard on February 13-15.

Mrs Ross’ solicitor, John Muir, said he was unable to comment on the matter.

A Dundee City Council spokesman said: “The council is now preparing for an Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing.”

awilson@thecourier.co.uk