11 Mar 2019 David Alexander MOBSBY · Prevention of Future Deaths report Brighton and Hove
View report summary
Concerns raised 10 Lack of management training for managers View source Unavailability of first-aid or designated emergency personnel on site View source Failure to undertake risk assessments for work tasks View source Failure of health and safety assessment templates and audits to address work at height View source Failure to control lone and unsupervised working View source Failure to plan work methods and equipment View source Failure to monitor and instruct staff undertaking work View source Failure to carry out annual employee appraisals View source Exposure of workers to heat and direct sunlight View source Lack of working-at-height training View source See 7 more concerns
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statements No action or position from this recipient is clearly linked to the concerns in this report.
×
AI-generated summary
David Alexander MOBSBY · Prevention of Future Deaths report
This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.
Report summary
David Alexander MOBSBY fell while working at Blatchington Mill School on 3 August 2018 and was found unconscious after working alone. The report raises concerns about inadequate health and safety arrangements for work at height, lack of training, supervision and risk assessment, and delays in providing CPR, including the absence of a first aider or designated person on site.
Read the report on judiciary.uk
× Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of management training for managers
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Unavailability of first-aid or designated emergency personnel on site
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to undertake risk assessments for work tasks
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure of health and safety assessment templates and audits to address work at height
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height .
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to control lone and unsupervised working
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to plan work methods and equipment
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to monitor and instruct staff undertaking work
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work .
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked .
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did , even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to carry out annual employee appraisals
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually .
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Exposure of workers to heat and direct sunlight
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height.
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly , from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report × Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Blatchington Mill School; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of working-at-height training
Wider context from the report “(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety.
They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS.
This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height.
(2) Although Mr MOBSBY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work.
He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked.
Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBSBY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height .
• On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day.
• His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers.
• No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use.
• There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did.
• He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day.
• His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade.
• He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs.
• It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBSBY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed.
• Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him.
• They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually.
• There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBSBY had ever been appraised.
I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country.
” Open source report
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations