A prison officer who claimed he was sacked for whistleblowing following the death of an Aberdeen inmate has lost a claim for unfair dismissal.
William Main, 51, told jail bosses his colleagues had “terrorised” an inmate who later killed himself behind bars.
Main, a warder at Polmont Young Offenders’ Institutions in Stirling, said Raygen Merchant, 17, had been confronted in his cell in 2014.
He claimed two prison officers had told the teenager news had been spread among inmates he was facing sexual misconduct allegations.
Merchant, of Aberdeen, was later found dead in his cell.
The former Northfield Academy pupil appeared at Glasgow High Court days earlier and admitted attacking an Aberdeen woman in her Garthdee home with a knife after her 10-year-old son tried to fight him off.
Main later told Scottish Prison Service (SPS) bosses he had grave concerns over the incident and he also contacted Michael Matheson MSP.
He further gave an interview to police in 2016 over the incident but no charges were ever brought.
A fatal accident inquiry later ruled Merchant had not complained about bullying and that the trigger for his suicide was the fact he had been labelled a sex offender after details of a knife attack he had committed on a woman were made public.
Main, who had 20 years of experience, was on prolonged sick leave until SPS dismissed him in 2017.
‘Claimant’s assertions … are without foundation’
He claimed he had been unfairly dismissed, discriminated against on the grounds of disability and religion or belief and subjected to detriments and unfairly dismissed on the grounds that he had made protected disclosures.
A tribunal heard evidence from Main who alleged he had been labelled a “grass” by colleagues and that he was a victim of bullying.
He further alleged senior managers had colluded against him and that he was being forced out of his position at Polmont.
SPS managers had insisted Main was dismissed over his inability to work.
A tribunal has now ruled Main was not unfairly dismissed and rejected his claims.
‘Not one substantial piece of evidence was brought forward by the claimant’
Tribunal judge Murdo Macleod said: “We were left with the impression that the claimant has been deeply affected by the events which led him to lose a job which he regarded as an important and responsible role, to the extent that he is now capable of only viewing the sequence of events leading to his dismissal from his own perspective, and in particular as part of a plan to remove him from the organisation.
“The claimant considers himself to be one who upholds and honours the truth.
“The Tribunal, however, has to weigh up the evidence as it is presented to us against the relevant issues before us, and our conclusion was that while we could generally believe the claimant’s evidence on the facts, we did not find the totality of his evidence to be entirely reliable.
“It is our strong finding that the claimant’s assertions that there was some form of conspiracy among senior management to have him dismissed are without foundation in the evidence which we heard.
“Not one substantial piece of evidence was brought forward by the claimant to demonstrate that there was any form of collusion to ensure that he was silenced and removed from the organisation.”
Macleod added: “We have therefore come to the conclusion that the reason for dismissal was that which was stated by the respondent, namely that the claimant was, at the date of dismissal, no longer capable of providing regular and effective service to the respondent, and that there is no basis upon which it can be found that the claimant was dismissed due to having raised a protected disclosure.”
SPS have been approached for comment.
