New readers may search for the first three well-read episodes if they want the background to this unsavoury episode in recent co-operative history. Perhaps the matter should have been referred to the Co-operative Women’s Guild, which stands for peace and social justice.
A co-operative society member said with reference to this issue, “It does worry me that certain people in the big retail coops talk about fairness but don’t extend it to their own staff”.
Inside information from an unimpeachable source, who was prepared to speak publicly if the matter went to appeal, assures me that the initial accusation was made and following procedures were initiated only by the co-operative’s head office representative.
The individual concerned was expected merely to have a hearing and a ‘slap on the wrist’ for a minimal technical infringement and to be back at work by now.
More in sorrow than in anger I can now update readers. With not one word of explanation from the society -to this member at least – he has left the post, probably because – as an honourable man – he resents the way in which he has been treated.
Throughout he has spoken to no-one about his situation and I fear has been constrained – having a family to support – by the need to have a reasonable reference.
An earlier reflection is repeated here
Does the co-operative movement have to follow the sort of dishonest secrecy/denial tactics indulged in by politicians and multinationals alike?
Should not an ethical enterprise be open and transparent, sorting out these issues in a couple of weeks and allowing both sides to state their cases to those members who are said to own and control their societies?