The Dying to Work Charter: Putting Things Right CORPORATE AND GENERAL NEWS

Recently, SWB has made a number of changes aimed at ensuring all colleagues are treated compassionately and fairly during their employment with the Trust. These include a new leadership framework, new values, and the implementation of a just and learning culture approach.

Part of this is the Dying to Work charter, adopted by the Trust in 2022. Created by the Trade Union Congress (TUC), the charter sets out a voluntary agreement providing additional employment protection for terminally ill colleagues.

The Dying to Work Charter helps alleviate some of the stresses of a terminal diagnosis by setting out an agreed approach to how an organisation can actively support a colleague in the event of a terminal diagnosis.

This recent commitment to supporting colleagues who are suffering with ill health has been made in response to certain instances where, prior to the adoption of the charter, we have missed the mark.

One such case is Julie Harris, who worked at the Trust for 23 years as a domestic. Not only this – her husband, Malcolm, and daughters are also Trust employees. We spoke with Malcolm to hear more about Julie’s story.

“Julie’s first diagnosis was in 2005, when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. After treatment, she had a period of remission. However, in 2010, following pain in her legs, it was discovered that the cancer had spread and she was diagnosed with pelvic and lung metastasis. Julie continued treatment, working when she could, and was lauded by colleagues for her attitude.”

Unfortunately, her condition deteriorated, and she required blood transfusions due to high calcium levels. During one such transfusion, in May 2018, she received a call from human resources.

“In the call, she was told that she had to attend an upcoming meeting – and that if she was not there, a decision would be made about her employment without her present.”

She was worried about this, but attended the meeting alone, having been denied the opportunity to bring her husband for support. At this time, Julie had been off for 12 months due to her illness, but had been planning a return to work: her manager had stated that despite changes in ability, she may be able to find appropriate work for Julie.

“The meeting itself was held on a floor accessible by stairs, which was extremely difficult for Julie due to her low energy levels and ongoing cancer treatment. She persevered and attended the meeting, at which she was dismissed,” said Malcolm. Julie was dismissed by a manager who had not been directly involved in her role or illness prior to this point, but was the decision maker.

Julie passed away a few months later.

Frustrated with Julie’s treatment, Malcolm began to pursue routes to identify support she should have received. Having exhausted several options, a colleague told him Richard Beeken, the chief executive, would likely listen to and talk with him. He sent Richard a message, who in turn talked with Malcolm and escalated the issue to HR.

Upon escalation, HR acknowledged shortcomings and mistakes in how the case was dealt with. It was taken on by the Chief People Officer Frieza Mahmood; Malcolm and

Frieza have since had several meetings and are in direct contact. We met with Frieza to find out more about the Trust’s response.

“I was devastated to hear that anybody had lived this awful experience in our organisation: we are committed to creating an environment in which our people receive the best possible support from us. Upon investigating Malcolm’s concerns further, I discovered significant issues with the lack of compassion shown to Julie in circumstances where much more empathy and discretion was required to support her. Given the obvious sensitivities of the situation and how vulnerable she was feeling at this time, more flexibility and support should have been provided. As well as righting the wrongs in this specific situation, I wanted to ensure that moving forward, nobody has to go through something like this again at SWB.

“I was inspired by Malcolm. I learnt that he had retrained to a role in palliative care at SWB, and like him I wanted to make changes following Julie’s passing whilst recognising the overarching sadness of the loss.”

Frieza organised a meeting in which those involved in the management of the case met with Malcolm to hear more about the human impact of the decisions which had been made.

“I wanted to ensure they were able to understand the emotion involved in this. I think these things can become impassive as people get used to the processes: they can be at risk of forgetting that the decisions made will have an impact on a person”.

“Malcolm spoke with us all and the room was moved to tears. It was sobering and emotional, but it was something we needed to hear at that time.”

Frieza stated she feels a personal responsibility to ensure that nobody has to go through something like this again: “I believe if we make mistakes, we need to be transparent and then work to correct them. I want to ensure that the feelings of Malcolm and his children about the way in which Julie was treated are validated and used as an opportunity to learn: to show how the new Trust values should be lived and breathed every day in the way we respond when things go wrong.”

“I want Julie’s experience to be something that drives real and lasting change in the Trust.”

In Julie’s specific case, Frieza and the HR team have worked to ensure the family receive Julie’s retirement award posthumously, access to counselling support and a plaque with memorial service for Julie in remembrance to recognise her contribution. They have also written to the pensions agency to ask them to reconsider their decision along with exploring other avenues for support.

In a wider sense, Frieza arranged for training of the HR team to ensure they understand the impact of their involvement, along with reflecting on lost opportunities for more effective support which could have been provided by the team and the managers involved. Training also aimed to ensure any future approach is in line with the commitments in the Trust’s new People Plan. These are specifically implementing the principles of a ‘just and learning culture’, with restorative people management practices at the heart of our renewed approach. The dying to work charter is just one component of this.

The changes align with our new ‘ARC’ values of “Ambition, Respect and

The Dying to Work charter: how does it work?

Following a terminal diagnosis, some colleagues will understandably prioritise time with friends and family, but others may wish to continue to work, for reasons of financial stability or to provide a welcome distraction from a frightening reality. A significant illness can impact on someone’s ability to work to a standard expected by themselves and their employer, and through no fault of their own.

• A terminal illness is a disease that cannot be cured or treated. They are usually progressive diseases such as cancer or advanced heart disease.

• UK Social Security legislation defines a terminal illness as: “a progressive disease where death as a consequence of that disease can reasonably be expected within six months”. However, many people live longer than this expected period.

• Staff who lose their job due to terminal illness lose their source of income and lose any possible death in service payments through no fault of their own. These payments are earned through over years of working at an organisation.

Compassion” which have been co-produced with Trust staff. These are supported by a new leadership framework to be launched next month. It has been successfully trialled over the last few months with a selection of managers. A key focus of this is compassionate leadership with the emphasis on adapting approaches to reflect the sensitivities of the situation and taking action to address this.

Malcolm has now remarried and moved to a role in palliative care. He hopes that, moving forward, anyone working at the Trust with a serious illness is treated with compassion.

“You can’t get compassion from a book, or from paperwork. I go out and see my patients, who know they are going to die, and they get compassion from me. That’s what was lacking for Julie: compassion, empathy and understanding.”

Frieza states; “In the event of a member of staff being in the unfortunate position of experiencing similar health related difficulties, our approach would be different in the Trust. This is on the basis that it is now intrinsically underpinned by our commitment to our values. However, this doesn’t make what has happened to Julie disappear. I recognise that I will never have a chance to meet Julie to apologise in person for what happened to her in 2018 but she does continue to have the right to have her experience acknowledged and addressed.”

“To make this right for Julie and her family, I would like to apologise unreservedly on behalf of myself, the People and OD Directorate and the Trust’s management team. I will continue to work with colleagues to ensure this never happens again. Malcolm has also kindly offered to share his story with the Board and I know they will be as committed as I am to ensuring we learn from it.

The Dying to Work charter adopted by SWB:

• We recognise that terminal illness requires support and understanding and not additional and avoidable stress and worry.

• Terminally ill workers will be secure in the knowledge that we will support them following their diagnosis and we recognise that, safe and reasonable work can help maintain dignity, offer a valuable distraction and can be therapeutic in itself.

• We will provide our employees with the security of work, peace of mind and the right to choose the best course of action for themselves and their families which helps them through this challenging period with dignity and without undue financial loss.

• We support the TUC’s Dying to Work campaign so that all employees battling terminal illness have adequate employment protection and have their death in service benefits protected for the loved ones they leave behind.