We've got you covered

Potential-Monke

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/garda-chiefs-accused-turning-backs-7372575#ICID=sharebar_facebook

Text quoted below for people who can't follow links. This Garda was assaulted in the line of duty, and has since suffered from brain damage, which management state was not caused by the assault, and as such have cut his pay to unlivable levels, and now they're cutting him off completely. He was perfectly fine before the assault, and is now being told that the brain damage was not caused by it... And now, every one of his colleagues are working today, tomorrow and every day knowing that if they get assaulted, management will not cover them.

Yes, thousands gets paid each year to members who had been assaulted in the line of duty, but now, with this article shows the levels management are willing to go to in order to wash their hands of any responsibility, thus leaving members stuck with bills, loans and other expenses, brought on by an injury at duty which management deny. Trust me, this is not an isolated case. The Gardaí are expected to put their lives on the line, knowing that if anything goes wrong, they may not be covered. How can they work to the best of their abilities with this knowledge in their minds? How could anyone?

And not even that, they can't speak up for themselves, between the Garda Code, the Official Secrets Act and god knows what other legislation, they have muted voices, for fear of being not only fired, but prosecuted for speaking the truth! Madness.

Garda chiefs are accused of “turning their backs” on one of their own by slashing an injured garda’s pay to zero - after he was left with brain damage following a serious attack while on duty.

Garda John Nee, a 33-year-old married dad-of-four from Galway, is being treated “worse than a criminal” - according to his father-in-law John Feehan.

Mr Feehan (58) told The Irish Mirror: “My son-in-law was left with brain damage after being attacked while on duty and he should be on full pay - but instead they have turned their backs on him.

“It is unbelievable how they are treating him and his family, who have suffered incredible stress and financial hardship, unable to pay back loans and other costs, because of the ordeal.

“I don’t understand how or why they are treating him like this, but I am told he is not the only garda with this problem and that they fear speaking out due to laws preventing them from speaking to the media.”

John Nee graduated as a garda in 2003 with huge ambitions to rise through garda ranks and received numerous commendations for his police work, which included saving a man from drowning in the River Shannon.

He was based in Athlone Garda Station for three years in June 2009 when he and another garda were attacked by a man near their station.

The man was arrested earlier that night for being drunk and disorderly, but was released a few hours later when Garda Nee and his patrol car partner were told to check on him as he walked through an estate.

But when they tried to speak with the young man, he punched Garda Nee in the head behind his right ear and head-butted the other male garda.

John Nee after graduating as a garda in 2003.
He was taken back into custody, but when Garda Nee arrived at the station he collapsed unconscious and was rushed to hospital.

His next memory, about a week later, is standing in the corridor in Portiuncula Hospital in Ballinasloe, Galway with a nurse running towards him shouting “you shouldn’t be out of bed.”

He had a severe headache, which he still has to this day, mild dementia and vertigo and was told by a neurologist that he was “lucky to be alive.”

Mr Feehan said Garda Nee was back to work a few months later, but he continued to suffer from headaches and memory loss, which saw him being “on and off” duty until July, 2014 when he was deemed unfit for duty after an examination with a garda doctor.

He said: “They effectively wrote him off and began to pay him TRR, which is temporary rehabilitation remuneration and amounted to about €80 a week after his health insurance was paid.

“He has since been sent a letter at the start of February stating that his TRR payment would be cut and that he would be taken off the payroll entirely because his sick leave exceeded 730 days over the past four years. He was told his last payment would be this coming Thursday.

“Incredibly, had he actually done something wrong while on duty he would be suspended on full or near full pay.”

Mr Feehan explained that garda management accept John Nee was injured while on duty in 2009 - but that they deny his brain injuries, that prevent him from working, are due to that attack.

He added: “John wants to go back to work. He wants to get specialist treatment to make him well enough to return, but he can’t afford it and now he has had his pay cut.

“He can’t even get financial support from his local social welfare office because he is still a garda.”

When asked to comment, a garda spokesperson said: “An Garda Síochána do not comment on internal matters.”

The_Valeyard

Disgusting. These men and women are putting their lives on the line every day. The least they should be able to expect is long term care and cover if injured or disabled in the line of duty.


Do they have medical evidence to prove his brain injuries are not from the attack? Then how did he receive them?

recylingbin

I don't know how having brain damage prevents him from carrying out his normal duties as a garda.



Mod: Banned

conjon

recylingbin wrote: »

I don't know how having brain damage prevents him from carrying out his normal duties as a garda.

Great post, give yourself a clap.

recylingbin

conjon wrote: »

Great post, give yourself a clap.

Thanks conjon.
Its support like yours that gives me the motivation to keep posting.

Speedwell

When I lived in the US, I did a bit of freelance IT work for a charity that existed to help with the medical and other bills of policemen hurt in the line of duty and their families. Are there any charities like this in Ireland?

Mr. CooL ICE

Mod:

recylingbin's post has been dealt with. No need to quote him.

For anybody else; remember that this man's family could easily be reading this forum. Further comments like this will not be tolerated.

listermint

Surely this is one for the GRA ? after all are they not there for their members ?

The_Valeyard

Speedwell wrote: »

When I lived in the US, I did a bit of freelance IT work for a charity that existed to help with the medical and other bills of policemen hurt in the line of duty and their families. Are there any charities like this in Ireland?

There shouldn't need to be. Senior Gardai and management should be taking care of front line personnel.

SEPT 23 1989

I thought the state looked after their own very well

obviously not

Duggy747

What are the Gardaí supposedly claiming then, that his brain issue is something degenerative / he was going to suffer these problems regardless of the attack?

Oranage2

I don't know the facts but AGS should be financially supporting any garda that is injured on duty!

Speedwell

The_Valeyard wrote: »

There shouldn't need to be. Senior Gardai and management should be taking care of front line personnel.

Should.

allibastor

Jesus that is actually shocking to read!!!

McDermotX

Sounds like there is something missing from this story to be honest.
If they are claiming that the individual's current condition is unrelated to the attack, then there must be some professional argument to back that up, otherwise you would think such an outwardly harsh measure wouldn't be acted upon.

Not enough information, and unlikely to be seeing as how 'there's no comment'.

Ten of Swords

I would imagine this had something to do with their decision.

Poor man, just to save a few quid.

Potential-Monke

McDermotX wrote: »

Sounds like there is something missing from this story to be honest.
If they are claiming that the individual's current condition is unrelated to the attack, then there must be some professional argument to back that up, otherwise you would think such an outwardly harsh measure wouldn't be acted upon.

Not enough information, and unlikely to be seeing as how 'there's no comment'.

Put it to you this way. He was injured, was out of work due to a "work related injury" and subsequently returned. Shortly after, he was still suffering the headaches, and had to go sick again because of them. The way AGS works is, once you come back to work from and injury on duty, that's it. If you ahve further complications from an injury on duty, after you've returned, when you go sick it's no longer classed as an injury on duty, it's a separate sickness, tied into the new sick leave arrangements in the public service. That's what i'd say they're disputing. This didn't happen initially, but happened after he returned to work. And you'll never get a comment, AGS doesn't like the public to know how crap they are to their members.

Ten of Swords wrote: »

I would imagine this had something to do with their decision.

Poor man, just to save a few quid.

That's exactly why there was a challenge to it. It expects members to go to work sick now, so that they won't have their pay reduced. I'll be honest, i'd prefer to have Gardaí off sick and paid for it, rather than having to rely on to make good, legal and sound decisions or actions when they're not 100%. It's crazy. People taking the mick with sick leave in AGS should be dealt with individually. Instead, the Government has decided to make the innocent people in this suffer by putting these regulations on every member of AGS (and, until last year, pregnancy leave was bundled into this too!!).

RobertKK

It is a disgrace, why would anyone want to be in the Gardai if you are abandoned if you suffer a severe injury while on duty that means you can't work.
The family would have enough going on given he has four children without that thrown on top of it.
It looks like cost cutting and the victim who got his injuries while on duty is made a victim again.

Stigura

Potential-Monke wrote: »

the Government

And there we have it. IDS has Enda's undivided attention. Monkey see, monkey do.

Donald Trump

Ah here, 730 days missed in the past four years? 180 days a year? How many days are they supposed to work? That's 36.5 weeks a year assuming a 5-day week. 45.6 if they work 4 day weeks.

More to this than meets the eye. The quotes and source of information are all from a "Mr. Feehan" who is his father-in-law. Not "Dr. Feehan, neurosurgical expert". I'm not saying that he's wrong, just that I might place more trust in a medical doctors expert opinion. Perhaps the father in law has to say it though because maybe the man can't comment himself if he is still employed by the state.

Also the article says that this "TRR" is paid at 80 a week after his insurance is paid. I interpret this to mean that this TRR is making whole the part of his wages that his insurance does not cover. If this is correct, the he is/was still receiving 100% of his wages while not working, it was just that he was receiving it split across two sources.

If this man received a genuine injury while working for the state, and he is still suffering from that injury, then he should be looked after. But I equally strongly believe that we should not have a situation that once an individual passes through training at Templemore, that they will be looked after forevermore regardless of their path in life.


Article is shite anyway. I have no reason to either believe or doubt any of the "facts" mentioned in it. At the end of the day, I hope the man is alright, whatever is wrong with him and however it happened.

Let the man take them to court and let the court decide on the evidence.

Potential-Monke

Donald Trump wrote: »

Ah here, 730 days missed in the past four years? 180 days a year? How many days are they supposed to work? That's 36.5 weeks a year assuming a 5-day week. 45.6 if they work 4 day weeks.

That's how much he's missed due to the injury. They work the same as everyone, 39 hour week on average.

Donald Trump wrote: »

More to this than meets the eye. The quotes and source of information are all from a "Mr. Feehan" who is his father-in-law. Not "Dr. Feehan, neurosurgical expert". I'm not saying that he's wrong, just that I might place more trust in a medical doctors expert opinion. Perhaps the father in law has to say it though because maybe the man can't comment himself if he is still employed by the state.

The chief medical doctor up in HQ, is just that. A doctor. Same as the one everyone goes to. He makes the decision if it's work related or not. I'd be more inclined to believe a neurosurgeon (or whatever a brain doctor is called) over a GP. He didn't have brain damage before the injury, he does now.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Also the article says that this "TRR" is paid at 80 a week after his insurance is paid. I interpret this to mean that this TRR is making whole the part of his wages that his insurance does not cover. If this is correct, the he is/was still receiving 100% of his wages while not working, it was just that he was receiving it split across two sources.

No, TRR is basically the lowest a Garda can be paid under the new legislation, and it's basically about €150 a week, give or take depending on service. Assuming he has the Garda Medical Aid, that's anywhere from €38 to €80 per week, depending on if it's solo cover or family cover with x dependents. €80 per week is what he's left with after paying the insurance, and that's it. Don't know if he can get social welfare on top of that, i believe it's means tested. But still, he's not receiving full wages due to a work related injury. That's just wrong.

Donald Trump wrote: »

If this man received a genuine injury while working for the state, and he is still suffering from that injury, then he should be looked after. But I equally strongly believe that we should not have a situation that once an individual passes through training at Templemore, that they will be looked after forevermore regardless of their path in life.

He did receive it on duty, they are now disputing if that injury resulted in the brain damage which has caused his massive absence from work. He didn't have it before, he does have it now. Seems open and shut to me.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Article is shite anyway. I have no reason to either believe or doubt any of the "facts" mentioned in it. At the end of the day, I hope the man is alright, whatever is wrong with him and however it happened.

Let the man take them to court and let the court decide on the evidence.

Yes, his father in law spoke out because the Garda is subject to the Official Secrets Act and the Garda Code, which basically gags him from talking about anything to do with work. Anything. And this is why it's very hard for a member to speak out about these things. The "source" can never out and say it himself, and those who do are then subject to credibility questions, ie: it's not first hand, he's biased, etc. The GRA could speak for him, but they too are serving members of AGS, and are subject to the same conditions. There's no way around it.

If anything, it highlights other areas which are seriously lacking in AGS, but that's for another thread.

Donald Trump

First thanks for your informative response. I will try to clarify one or two of my points.

Potential-Monke wrote: »

That's how much he's missed due to the injury. They work the same as everyone, 39 hour week on average.

I assumed they work 39 hours or similar. But that could be spread across 5 days or 4 days or even 3 days. I know someone who worked in a similar area who used to do 3x13 (or maybe it was 12 or 12.5 hours) shifts a week. (and an extra half day shift every few weeks). I don't know what guards work. If they worked 3 x 13 hour shifts a week then missing 90 days would mean missing 30 weeks. Whereas for someone who does 6 days a week, they're missing 15 weeks.

The chief medical doctor up in HQ, is just that. A doctor. Same as the one everyone goes to. He makes the decision if it's work related or not. I'd be more inclined to believe a neurosurgeon (or whatever a brain doctor is called) over a GP. He didn't have brain damage before the injury, he does now.

I'm sure that the doctor is eminently qualified. But in this case, from the shoddy article alone, I'd gather that he thinks the brain damage is not due to the incident. The only person quoted in that article is the father in law. I did not see the chief medical doctor mentioned.

No, TRR is basically the lowest a Garda can be paid under the new legislation, and it's basically about €150 a week, give or take depending on service. Assuming he has the Garda Medical Aid, that's anywhere from €38 to €80 per week, depending on if it's solo cover or family cover with x dependents. €80 per week is what he's left with after paying the insurance, and that's it. Don't know if he can get social welfare on top of that, i believe it's means tested. But still, he's not receiving full wages due to a work related injury. That's just wrong.

Seems a bit rough to be honest if that is all there is available for the man. Sure if he quit the job he'd get more on illness benefit (Not trying to suggest he should do that, just saying it seems a bit mental)

He did receive it on duty, they are now disputing if that injury resulted in the brain damage which has caused his massive absence from work. He didn't have it before, he does have it now. Seems open and shut to me.

Well.... possibly. Unless they have their own reasons or suspicions for taking that stance. And of course they could be 100% totally wrong.

Yes, his father in law spoke out because the Garda is subject to the Official Secrets Act and the Garda Code, which basically gags him from talking about anything to do with work. Anything. And this is why it's very hard for a member to speak out about these things. The "source" can never out and say it himself, and those who do are then subject to credibility questions, ie: it's not first hand, he's biased, etc. The GRA could speak for him, but they too are serving members of AGS, and are subject to the same conditions. There's no way around it.

If anything, it highlights other areas which are seriously lacking in AGS, but that's for another thread.

Well I had suspected something along those lines. The situation won't last too long though the way it is. If it has been going on for 6 years, he's not going to keep surviving on 80 a week. Eventually he will have to quit and sue them and I would suspect that all bets are off at that stage as regards being gagged.

Potential-Monke

Donald Trump wrote: »

First thanks for your informative response. I will try to clarify one or two of my points.
I assumed they work 39 hours or similar. But that could be spread across 5 days or 4 days or even 3 days. I know someone who worked in a similar area who used to do 3x13 (or maybe it was 12 or 12.5 hours) shifts a week. (and an extra half day shift every few weeks). I don't know what guards work. If they worked 3 x 13 hour shifts a week then missing 90 days would mean missing 30 weeks. Whereas for someone who does 6 days a week, they're missing 15 weeks.

Gardaí mostly work a 10 week rotating roster, which is 6x10 hours on, 4 days off. It averages out around 39 hours a week. So it's kinda hard to quantify in weeks. You could work it out, but at the end of the day, he's missing loads of time due to a work related injury.

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm sure that the doctor is eminently qualified. But in this case, from the shoddy article alone, I'd gather that he thinks the brain damage is not due to the incident. The only person quoted in that article is the father in law. I did not see the chief medical doctor mentioned.

He's probably well qualified as a GP, but he doesn't have a specialist area. As you said, there's no quotes from him or any other doctors, so it would be hard to say who's right or who's wrong.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Seems a bit rough to be honest if that is all there is available for the man. Sure if he quit the job he'd get more on illness benefit (Not trying to suggest he should do that, just saying it seems a bit mental)

That's the rules they brought in a couple of years back. It's 90 days on full pay, 90 days on half and TRR after that. If you're injured on duty, you get full pay once it's certified as an injury on duty. What happened here is that he got injured, was off for x amount of time and that didn't count towards his "sick leave". He returned to work but had further issues caused by the original injury, but work is not counting those additional times as work-related, so he went into his half pay and eventually onto TRR. Yeah, probably would be better off quitting and going on social, but easier said than done when you're supposed to have a job that looks after you.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well.... possibly. Unless they have their own reasons or suspicions for taking that stance. And of course they could be 100% totally wrong.

This is where you have to take the word of an anonymous poster on the internet. They will try to deny as much as possible. Ask any serving Garda and they may tell you the same, all the while remembering that they are effectively gagged.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well I had suspected something along those lines. The situation won't last too long though the way it is. If it has been going on for 6 years, he's not going to keep surviving on 80 a week. Eventually he will have to quit and sue them and I would suspect that all bets are off at that stage as regards being gagged.

No, it won't, and it shouldn't. Hopefully this will be picked up by the GRA legal team and they can do something about it. It's crazy to think that receiving a work related injury would result in something like this. Like, i'm sure his in-laws wouldn't go to the media if there were further issues which lead to the brain damage that wasn't work related. It would be stupid to go public and then have something like that to be discovered. Only time will tell i suppose.

mzungu

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Put it to you this way. He was injured, was out of work due to a "work related injury" and subsequently returned. Shortly after, he was still suffering the headaches, and had to go sick again because of them. The way AGS works is, once you come back to work from and injury on duty, that's it. If you ahve further complications from an injury on duty, after you've returned, when you go sick it's no longer classed as an injury on duty, it's a separate sickness, tied into the new sick leave arrangements in the public service. That's what i'd say they're disputing. This didn't happen initially, but happened after he returned to work. And you'll never get a comment, AGS doesn't like the public to know how crap they are to their members.

Christ, trying to shirk their responsibilities to a injured man by using loop hole. That is an utter disgrace, everything should be done to make sure that he is looked after, rather than taking away his livelihood.

the_barfly1

I'm shocked to say this but it seems that AGS are being more than fair here.
This guy needs to put in a claim if he hasn't already, and let insurance sort this out (surely the gardai have employers liability?) rather than having the state pick up the tab for this.

It's madness to continue paying someone to not work while having such safeguards (insurance) in place to deal with these situations.

No disrespect to the man and I sympathise with his situation- there can be a stigma around making claims against an employer- but this is exactly what employers liability insurance is for.