MY EMPLOYER  HOUSE OF LORDS  EXPLOITED  AND  RACIALLY HARASSED ME   OVER  A  PERIOD OF   10 YEARS  BECAUSE  I  AM  NON-WHITE.   THE  RACIAL HARASSMENTS  INCLUDED   AND  NOT  LIMITED TO   NON-PAYMENT  OF   DUE  SALARIES,   UNDUE  PRESSURE  TO WORK  WHILE  ON CERTIFIED  SICK LEAVE,   HUMILIATION  & DEGRADING  TREATMENT,  ALLOCATION  OF   SPECIALISED  JOBS  WITHOUT  TRAINING   AND   CONTRACTS  OF  EMPLOYMENT.    THESE  SCANDALOUS  ACTIONS   WERE   COVERED  UP  BY  UK  COURTS   THROUGH  AN  ABUSE OF PROCESS  AND  PERVERSION  OF THE COURSE  OF JUSTICE.    THE  UK COURTS  DID SO,   WITH  THE  CONNIVANCE  OF  THE  THEN LORD  CHANCELLOR,  LORD  IRVINE  TO PREVENT  THE HOUSE OF  LORDS  BEING  TAINTED  WITH THE  STIGMA  OF RACISM. 

I  am  about  to  narrate  the disgusting  racial harassments  that I  suffered  over  10 years  at House of Lords  and the  subsequent  corrupt  practices  of  the  UK  Courts  in order to cover up  the scandalous   actions  of   the  pre-eminent  establishment  of  the  UK  through  an  abuse of process  and  perversion of the course of  justice.    This is  in two parts,  the first  part is a  summary,  the second  part  is an  amplification  and is in my  website   http://racialabuse-houseofLords.com 

I  am  Phyllis  Jayaratne,  a British Citizen  of  Sri Lankan origin  and  have  worked  in UK,  since  1968.   I  joined  HOL  Refreshment Dept   in  April 1989  as  a  part time  Clerical  Officer,  for 18 hours  per week.   In October 1991,  I was  allocated  an  additional  job  of  Desk  Top  Publishing  Duty (DTP)  which  was a full time post  in  itself,  without  the  essential  training  and  with  an  incompatible  software  package.   I carried out  this duty  while  referring to the  instruction manual  at  the  same time  so as to  meet  the  strict  deadlines,   at   tremendous  stress  to myself.   Until  September  1991,  this  duty  was  carried out  by  an  outside  printing  firm,   at  a  cost  of  £90,000  per year  which  HOL  saved   when this  job  was allocated to me.  I  had to  carry out  this  job  in  a  mice  infested  filthy  office  for  2 years.   I  was asked  to  clean the office  when the cleaners refused to clean it,  thus  further   humiliating  and degrading me.   I developed asthma.   The white colleagues had  cleaners.   My salary  and  hours  of  work  remained the same.  Due to my frequent  protests  the  hours  were  increased   after  4 years  i.e. in October  1995,  but  only  to  22 hours p.w.   

Throughout  my employment,  against  all rules  and regulations   I  was  compelled to work while on  certified  sick leave.   HOL  achieved this  either  by  bringing me to work  in taxis  or   faxing  work  home  to carry out the specialised  work.  

In April 1996, 3 more Banqueting Rooms were  opened for business, thus   considerably  increasing the  HOL  profits.   I was  not  given  any  additional  hours,  extra  remuneration   or  an  amended  contract,  although I was  working  67 hours p.w.   My  requests  for  a  full time  post  was disregarded.  Between 1989  and  1999,  seven  full time posts  fell  vacant within the Refreshment Department  and only  when  the  posts  were filled  that I became aware of  such  posts but I was fobbed off  when  I enquired.  These  posts  were  not  advertised  internally  and there was  no  Equal Opportunity  Policy,  this  was affirmed   by the Chairman  at the subsequent  Employment  hearing.   I was  the  only  non-white  in the Administration  Section, other staff did not speak to me and hence  I was unaware of  these  vacancies.  It  is  recorded  in my Personal File,  that  I have requested for a full time post  and that I would be informed of such  posts.   I was  deceived   by  my  racist  line manager,  Lorna McWilliam  MBE.   

Due  to the systematic  injustices,   I  became  extremely  stressed.   HOL   accrued  their  profits  by exploiting me.   I  explained  that  if they  did not  pay  for the 67 hours  I was working,  and  if  I was not offered  a full time post,   I would have to  reduce  my hours  to  13.9 hours  p.w.   to claim  DSS  benefits.   I  visited my GP  who  advised me  not  to   work  full time   hours,  but  to  do  part time  temporarily.   The GP  forwarded  a letter  to HOL   to  that  effect.  The  hours  were officially  reduced  to 13.9 hours p.w.  with  effect from  July  1996  but  as  no one  was recruited to  carry out the balance of  my duties,  I  had  to  work  the 67 hours p.w  against  the advice  of  my GP.  I was  working  for  7  other managers within the Refreshment Department and  my part time hours  failed  to  include  it.

For  2 years i.e. July 1996  until  May  1998  I  was  carrying out  67 hours p.w  but  was paid for  13.9 hours  p.w.  and  was  claiming  DSS  benefits.   Lorna McWilliam  fraudulently  confirmed in writing to the DSS  that  I was  only  working  13.9 hours p.w.   HOL  should have  paid  the  full  time  National  Insurance Contributions   on my behalf,  so that  I  would  be  eligibile for the correct Pension Benefits  on  retirement.

In order  to prevent me  from   requesting   a full time post  in the  Refreshment Department,  she  deliberately  lied  to  me  by  stating  that  she would  appoint  another  person  to help  me  ‘with  my  heavy  workload’.    However  the  person  appointed  in May 1998  was   Carole Hunt,  a  white   female (my comparator)   for  30 hours p.w.   I  was  astounded  when  all  along  Lorna  stated that  she  was  unable to exceed  my  hours  to more  than  22  hours p.w.   When   I  enquired,   I was  fobbed off.    What  really  happened  was  that   in spite of   the new   white  colleague  I was  still   working  more than  full time hours  as   I  was working for  7   other  managers  besides Lorna,  as well as  ad hoc  work  from the Peers  which she  did not  take into account.   I  should also state  that  my  main duties  such  as   liaison  with  the  outside  Corporate  Sector  and  Peers,   were  transferred  to  Carole Hunt.  This is  mainly  because  the  HOL  wanted a  white  face and  a  white  voice to the public,  thus  barring me  from   using  the telephone  and  collecting  visitors  from the  Pass Office.  

On  the  pretext  that  Carole  Hunt  was  off  sick,   Lorna  and  Carole  Hunt   went  on  a  3 day  training  course  so  that  she  would  be able  to carry  out my duties.   She was  also  given a  study grant  to pursue  a course of  studies  which  were   irrelevant  to  her duties,  while  HOL   were unwilling  to pay  for  my  essential training  for  10 years.   Furthermore  she  was  given  skirts,  blouses  and  jackets a month after  she joined  while  I  was refused  even a  replacement skirt  which was  damaged at  work  previously.  I was given  the  same,  soon after  Carole  received hers,  but  I  was told that I  received it because  I worked  long hours  without  remuneration.   Carole was invited to help out at the  State Opening of  Parliament  and Lorna bought her  a bow tie.    In my  10 years  I was never  asked  to  help  out  at the  State Opening  or given clothes. 

In  May  1999,  I  was  asked  to sign  a new  job  description in my Appraisal Report  completed  by  an unauthorised  person,  Rupert  Ellwood,  demoting  me to a  post that  of  a  typist.    The job  description  should  have  been  completed  by me.   I  refused  to sign  the  Report.   I  was  then  humiliated,   by Lorna  and  Rupert  with  the  offensive  comments  i.e.   ‘THE OFFICE  WAS  SMELLY  BECAUSE OF  PHYLLIS’   and   proceeded to  open the windows  to  ‘Let’s  get the smell out’,  in the  presence of   visitors.   I was  excluded,   isolated  and the  work instructions  came  via  Carole Hunt  my  supposed to be  ‘helper’  whom  I trained  to  carry out  my  duties.

I  exploded   and   called  them   ‘YOU  ARE  RACISTS, YOU ONLY  WANT  A  WHITE  FACE AND  A WHITE  VOICE IN MY   PLACE’.    I was  suspended from duty   before  the Internal Grievance  Procedure  took place.   Internal Grievance  process  was a sham  therefore  I  lodged  my complaint  at  the  Employment Tribunal   in Croydon.  The  case was  heard in two tranches  for  3  days  in April  2000  and   5  days  in  November  2000. 

The Lord Chancellor  appoints  the  President of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales),  Chairman of the Employment  Tribunal panels  and  Judges  of the High Court.   I   was  a minor employee  at the House of Lords in its capacity as an  employer.   It is inconceivable that the Lord Chancellor  did not have any  interest in the outcome  of  this  case both from a personal and  an institutional  point of view,  given the public interest   in  such a  case.   Hence  he appointed  Mr Bano  as the Chairman  of the Tribunal  and  I  believe  that  Mr Bano was given  instructions to  dismiss my claim. 

Mr  Bano  rebuked  the Respondents  for the  lies  and  the  perjured  evidence stated  in the  Witness Statements  and  in their  oral  evidence.   However  he  only   maintained  the form  while  denying me   substance.  In their Witness Statements  it was documented  that  two  white  full time  employees  were employed  to carry out my workload  within  90 hours p.w. in total,  for which  I was paid only for  13.9 hours p.w.   This was pointed out by  Mr J,  my representative   to Mr Bano who  replied  ‘YOU PROVED YOUR  POINT’.   He  made  a number of  further  comments  in my favour.   However   in his  written  Decision,   he  did  a  U-Turn  and  stated  that  the  Respondents were  more  credible than  the Applicant,   which  was  a  palpably untrue statement.

During the hearing  Mr Bano   was  in  an  extreme  hurry  as  he  wanted to wind up the case   as  he was  appointed  as  a  Social  Security  Commissioner  by  the Lord Chancellor.   Mr Bano’s   biased  and  prejudicial  conduct  was  further  evident   when   he  told  Mr J,   to submit  his Closing Argument  prior  to  Mr J  cross-examining  two  key witnesses.   I  firmly  believe  that  the Lord Chancellor  offered  this   bribe   in return  for  dismissing  my  claim.  

It was only  during the Croydon Hearing  that  I  learned   that   the complaints  I made to  the Welfare Officer  had  been  removed from the file  but  the  confidential information  I had  given about  my husband  was  typed   on letter heads  and  forwarded to him   so that   he  would not represent  me.   Through the disclosure of documents  I also learned  that  over  a period of time,  HOL   by using  false information,  was deliberately  building up  a case  against  me  which was prejudicial  and tendentious. 

We  appealed  against   Mr Bano’s  decision  at  the  Employment Appeal Tribunal  chaired  by   Mr Justice Lindsay.  Once again  we  were  up  against  the Establishment  and he  turned down  our  appeal.  

We  appealed  once again.  Our  case  was heard  at  the Court  of  Appeal  on  an  Ex-Parte  hearing  by  Lord Justice Latham,  who  never  referred to our  legal  issues  specially the Breach of  the Articles  3, 6, 8 and  14  of the Human Rights Act.   Once again  we were unsuccessful.   We  requested  for his  written  Decision  several times,  which  we  had to obtain  from the Transcribers  which was  without   the  Seal of  the  Court of Appeal.

Due to their  actions,   I  have  suffered   tremendous  stress  and  continue  to do so,  and   I  am now  a  registered  disabled person,  living  in poverty,  and alone.    I have also   lost   my Basic pay, overtime, holiday pay,  Staff Gratuities,  Bonus,  State Pension and Occupational Pension  as  they were  based on  13.9 hours p.w.

As  I  said  earlier  this  is  only  a  summary,  I  will  now  begin  the  comprehensive  story.