Let me be absolutely clear about this, I don't know Mick Williams but I do know of him.
Mick, from what i hear is a good old style Labour Party Activist and ex councilor who knows the local political scene like the back of his hand! We should also remember that he served this city very well in his time as a councilor.
Mick recently received the Labour Party National Merit Award, which is the highest accolade that can be bestowed on a party activist. He was presented his award by non other than Gordon Brown after an amazing 44 years in the party.
Although Mick is 75 years old he obviously still feels that he has a lot to give and so he applied for the position of political assistant to the mayor in August 2007, because he felt that with his qualifications and experience he was a very strong candidate.
He was not even shortlisted for the position and was told that this was because of his political record, Mick felt this was because of his anti mayoral stance. He felt that this should not have had a bearing on his application because it was a political appointment.
He also believed that the council did not even follow it's own constitution in the way they made their eventual appointment and they went for someone younger.
Mick Williams's original tribunal hearing was dismissed on a technicality but after a change of heart by the Judge, the hearing was reinstated where the judge found in favour of the Authority.
Mr Williams says that he will now refer his case to the Standard Board for England after he said that the council admitted not following it's constitution.
I don't think for a moment that Mick Williams expected any more than a fair chance of appointment and as an employer myself I know how fraught with danger external appointments can be. As you know I am also a school governors and have played a part in many appointments.
I always favour a points system in assessing the suitability of a candidate, a set number of categories and then points awarded based on qualifications and experience.
It is hard to understand how this recruitment panel could assess Mr Williams of not worthy of a short listing for this position. It again casts a shadow of the office of the elected mayor and the timing of this could not be worse in terms of negative PR ahead of Thursday's referendum.
What do you think of this case? Do you think that this man at least deserved short listing based on his experience?
To read the Sentinel story follow this link: