Sharon shoe smith you just could not make this up....only in this country

[bhafc1972]

Baby P boss Sharon Shoesmith secures £680,000 payout
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Baby P legal fees cost council £196k
Ed Balls attacks Shoesmith payout
Six-figure Baby Peter sum agreed
The former head of Haringey children's services Sharon Shoesmith has been awarded almost £680,000 for her unfair dismissal claim.

Ms Shoesmith was sacked after a damning report into the 2007 death of Peter Connelly, known as Baby P, who was subjected to months of abuse.

The north London council's accounts reveal she was awarded £679,452 in compensation.

Baby Peter's mother, her boyfriend and his brother were jailed over the abuse.

'Unfairly scapegoated'
In a statement, the local authority said: "Following the decision of the Court of Appeal in favour of Ms Shoesmith, and the court's direction that the parties seek to resolve the issue of compensation, the London Borough of Haringey and Ms Shoesmith have reached a settlement in this case.

"The terms of the settlement are confidential. We are unable to comment further on this matter."

The council previously revealed it had spent £196,000 trying to fight Ms Shoesmith's case for unfair dismissal.

But the Court of Appeal ruled Ms Shoesmith had been "unfairly scapegoated" and her removal had been unlawful.

The compensation package is more than the minimum suggested by senior judge Lord Neuberger in a 2011 ruling at the Court of Appeal.

He suggested Ms Shoesmith was entitled to a minimum of three months' salary plus pensions contributions, which would have amounted to about £33,000.

Ms Shoesmith was sacked in December 2008 by the then children's secretary Ed Balls.

 

[glasfryn]

despicable woman

 

[bhafc1972]

despicable woman

660,000 pounds it just beggars believe.

 

[Tarpon]

Predictable: Balls played to the gallery by scapegoating her & failed to follow due process. She is unlikely to ever work again at that level hence (in part) the wonga. Great use of public money.

 

[GT49er]

If she had a shred of decency, she wouldn't take it. But of course, that won't happen.

A little boy died, on her watch. Losing her £130,000 a year (apparently) job was obviously very upsetting for the poor woman. Still, that's British justice for you - the rich looking after the rich.

 

[TomandJerry]

Not only in this country... Some woman sued a cigarette company for getting lung cancer and got $23 odd billion

 

[GT49er]

She is unlikely to ever work again at that level.

Well, at least one good thing's come out of this horrible story.

 

[vegster]

Predictable: Balls played to the gallery by scapegoating her & failed to follow due process. She is unlikely to ever work again at that level hence (in part) the wonga. Great use of public money.

Pretty much this, she was "unfairly scapegoated ". How many of the social workers in her department, who accepted the parents excuses and failed to actively get access to the child and assess if he was in danger got sacked immediately without any investigation I wonder ?

 

[GT49er]

Pretty much this, she was "unfairly scapegoated ". How many of the social workers in her department, who accepted the parents excuses and failed to actively get access to the child and assess if he was in danger got sacked immediately without any investigation I wonder ?

She wasn't scapegoated at all. All this happened ON HER WATCH. She was paid £130,000 a year to make sure the social work teams WERE doing their jobs properly.

 

[clippedgull]

Well she was a 'hard working' taxpayer.

 

[vegster]

She wasn't scapegoated at all. All this happened ON HER WATCH. She was paid £130,000 a year to make sure the social work teams WERE doing their jobs properly.

OK, I have no problem with that. So next time a minister in the government messes up, will the Prime Minister be sacked or will he resign ? After all, he is responsible for appointing those ministers and seeing that they do their jobs, and he does earn a lot of money for doing that.

 

[beorhthelm]

She wasn't scapegoated at all. All this happened ON HER WATCH. She was paid £130,000 a year to make sure the social work teams WERE doing their jobs properly.

right. and had her employers been left to their devices you can be fairly shure she'd have been removed from the role. however senior politicians intervened, to play up to popular clamour, and she was summarily dismissed.

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

OK, I have no problem with that. So next time a minister in the government messes up, will the Prime Minister be sacked or will he resign ? After all, he is responsible for appointing those ministers and seeing that they do their jobs, and he does earn a lot of money for doing that.

And the next time someone is TESCO tries to short change a customer by a tenner so they can pocket it I expect the CEO to be sacked immediately

The same with any shop and any organisation where someone shows incompetence...

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

That bitch was never going to go quietly. Utterly shameful.

 

[Surf's Up]

Ball's fault. He did not have the legal authority to sack her.

 

[vegster]

And the next time someone is TESCO tries to short change a customer by a tenner so they can pocket it I expect the CEO to be sacked immediately

The same with any shop and any organisation where someone shows incompetence...

Exactly.

 

[herecomesaregular]

hmmm, a lot of judges on here, anyone of you choose to work in child care services? aren't most of nsc members accountants? not saying she shouldn't be accountable (pun intended) but some of your comments are idiotic. difficult job, 10% national shortage of social workers, easy to spout a lot of bullshit sitting comfortably in your deskjob.

 

[Kaiser_Soze]

She wasn't scapegoated at all. All this happened ON HER WATCH. She was paid £130,000 a year to make sure the social work teams WERE doing their jobs properly.

By that logic David Cameron should be sacked for any kids that have been molested by MP's while he has been in power. Or Blair whilst Labour were in charge. There are several levels of management. The person at the top is rarely, if ever responsible for everything. The whole situation has been handled awfully.

 

[drew]

My view is she did deserve to lose her job. The ground troops let things go that they should have acted on but how much of that is due to unmanageable workloads. If things happen in government depts, it's not unheard of for the minister in charge of that dept to lose their job.

 

[Screaming J]

The problem is Balls overrode the legal process and gave her the boot. If he hasn't been responding to tabloid clamour this wouldn't have happened. But people - rightly or wrongly - wanted blood, there was an election round the corner.....