• Ensuring that service providers provide access to BSL users;
• Bringing BSL back into education as the predominant way to educate Deaf kids;
• Re-training audiologists to stop negative attitudes and forcing parents to conform to oralist methods;
• Improving Deaf and BSL awareness among the general populace; and
• Increasing the number of BSL users in the UK.

So, what do we need to do to get a BSL Act enacted?

1. Draft a BSL Bill, enter into a consultative process;
2. Decide whether to introduce it to Parliament via:
• A Private Members’ Bill by way of a Member of Parliament championing our cause; or
• A Public Bill (go here for more information on Public Bills).
3. The following stages then take place in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords:
• First reading (formal introduction of the Bill without debate);
• Second reading (general debate);
• Committee stage (detailed examination, debate and amendments. In the House of Commons this stage takes place in a Public Bill Committee;
• Report stage (opportunity for further amendments); and
• Third reading (final chance for debate and amendments are possible in the Lords).
4. When a Bill has passed through both Houses it is returned to the first House (where it started) for the second House’s amendments to be considered.
5. Both Houses must agree on the final text. There may be several rounds of exchanges between the two Houses until agreement is reached on every word of the Bill. Once this happens the Bill proceeds to the next stage: Royal Assent.
• Royal Assent (granted by the monarch); and
• Act of Parliament (the proposals of the Bill have now become law).
6. Commencement of the BSL Act, and equality for the Deaf community at last?

Any volunteers to kick off the process and draft a BSL Bill?

RNID’s Employment Training and Skills Service (ETSS), has worked with the CAB to deliver deaf awareness training and a Start to Sign course to advisers.

Do the RNId and CAB honestly think that training hearing advisers in basic BSL will allow them to communicate effectively with Deaf BSL users? The simple answer is: NO! Basic BSL will allow them to ask clients if they want a cuppa, that’s it. There is absolutely no way they can, or should be allowed to, advise Deaf clients on legal issues.

The RNId should know better, but then again, their ignorance doesn’t surprise me anymore.

I have already completed two modules:

• Client Care and Professional Standards; and
• Financial and Business Skills.

Financial and Business Skills required that I sat a one and a half hour exam consisting of multiple choice questions and two case studies, which I did on 19 June 2006. I received a letter today informing me that I passed it, so I’m pleased.

I’m starting the Advocacy & Communication Skills module next Tuesday, and I’ve got a one-day elective in Litigation Drafting Skills next Monday, in Cardiff. My final elective, How to Conduct Unfair Dismissal Proceedings, will take place on 13 November 2006, in Birmingham.

The course in London has been taking place at Regent’s College. It’s dead posh there, unlike Crosskeys College and the other colleges in South Wales I could have gone to to do my A Levels. Surrounded by Regent’s Park, it is a really pleasant place to walk to from Baker Street station, with lakes, fresh air and stillness, as opposed to the busy pace of city life.

I’m sure some of you, particularly those of you who know that I’ve been trying to secure a training contract for four years, would like to know how my training is going.

It’s now been almost two months since I started my training with South West London Law Centres, and all is going swimmingly. Most of the past two months have been focused on clearing my RAD caseload, as well as focusing on my casework supervision duties for the Advice team, and I am now starting to accept Deaf clients referred to me by RAD for the law centre. My first case will be a former RAD client of mine, who is facing possession proceedings for eviction. I’m really looking forward to getting stuck into that case.

I am still covering two advice surgeries for RAD, but with the handing over of Romford on Wednesdays to Laura, I now have up to four days a week at the law centre (three days when I go to Brixton on a Tuesday). It has been a massive improvement.

The Law Society requires that all trainees keep a training record of the work completed and the skills used during the casework, and I have been doing this, and also, I am currently sorting out funding for BSL/English Interpreters on my Professional Skills Course. At the moment, BPP Law School are insisting that *I* pay for the BSL/English Interpreters, and having thrown the DDA 1995 at them, I’m waiting for a response from the Course Director. Will let you know what happens.

All in all, I’m a happy bunny!

As you know, I started my 18-month training contract on 28 November 2005 with South West London Law Centres, based at Croydon & Sutton Law Centre. I have to say that I’ve been really lucky. I’ve secured a training contract employed by RAD, which, despite its faults, is an organisation that I am proud to work for. I am on the same salary as I was as an advice worker, which is an added bonus, and Linda has agreed not to tie me to RAD after the completion of my training contract, knowing full well that once it’s done, I’ll want to move back to Wales to be with Rachel.

The staff I’m working with are all really nice. They have all comfortably adapted to life with a Deaf trainee and his BSL/English Interpreter. Nick, my supervisor, is great and knowledgeable, and I feel I can learn a lot from him, as well as Maria (immigration), Cherry (benefits) and Lisa (employment). I have my own desk with my own stationery, and an IT consultant was there to set up my laptop to access the LAN on my first day. They couldn’t have been more welcoming if they tried.

My main focus will be on RAD clients referred to me by the advice workers, but I will be working on some cases with the solicitors as and when required. So the next 18 months should prove to be an interesting experience. Things have been hampered a little because of the impending Christmas period and also because I’m still covering advice surgeries for RAD, but hopefully once a new advice worker is recruited, things should ease up a bit.

All in all, I’m one happy bunny.

What was that all about? Well, you all know that my training contract with SWLLC starts on 28 November 2005. I was offered an interview for a law firm in Cardiff, Thomas Graham, and I was one of four candidates they wished to interview. You can imagine my excitement, and all the attempts to keep my hopes and expectations down, in the event of bitter disappointment.

Over the past month or so, we have tried to arrange an interview date, but this has been beset by delays. This morning, however, I received an email to inform me that they are unable to offer me an interview and the position has been put on hold. So that’s that. My dream of securing a training contract in Wales dashed, an opportunity to move back to Wales permanently gone.

While this is a bitter pill to swallow, at least I do have a training contract. I am looking forward to it. I’m going to be working with a really good training provider, the law centre, and will be working with a bunch of good people. The best thing of all, however, is the fact that I will continue to be employed by RAD.

May 2007, here we come!

My training contract with RAD/WMLC will commence on Monday 28 November 2005.

This means that I am now able to fulfil my dream of becoming a qualified solicitor; something I’ve wanted to do since I was 15 years old.

However, it’s a little bit funny. I’m so thrilled about it all, and yet, it’s such an anti-climax. I always thought that when I get a training contract, I would be bouncing up and down for days. However, instead of being happy, I just feel so angry. Angry at the fact that it’s taken four years to get a training contract.

I’ve been hearing about other people who want to be solicitors who have not even yet finished their LLBs walking into a training contract with a City law firm at a starting salary of £35,000pa, and getting their LPC paid for by the firm, plus maintenance grants. I’ve got friends who I did the LPC with already qualified solicitors, and others who are over halfway through their training contracts. And yet, I’m only just starting mine. I finished my LPC 2.5 years ago.

Why have all these people had all the luck? I do consider myself lucky; particularly as I was lucky to find myself working for RAD and having Linda Isaac as my line manager, as it paved the way for a secondment to a law centre. I do feel vindicated because I know I earned this training contract; I’ve worked bloody hard as an advice worker for the past 2.5 years, and now I’m getting a just reward. But there’s still something inside of me that feels wronged.

This anger is something I wasn’t expecting to feel, and I don’t really understand it.

The main thing is, however, I do have a training contract. Halleujah!

The terms of the training contract will be that I will be a full time trainee solicitor with SWLLC, based at their office in Croydon. I will be carrying outreach work two days a week in RAD centres, doing casework with RAD clients who need specialist legal advice, under the Legal Help scheme. Three days a week, I will be interviewing clients and doing casework at the Croydon office.

It is anticipated that the training contract will last for 18 months, as my two years experience with RAD will be used as “time to count”, thus reducing the contract by six months. I’ll still be employed by RAD, and managed by my current manager, Linda Isaac, while supervised by a senior solicitor at the Croydon office.

The subject areas will be as follows:

1. Welfare benefits
2. Housing
3. Employment

The reason I say *almost* is because the training contract itself needs to be approved by the Law Society, and also Tom Fenton, Chief Executive at RAD, needs to agree to the new arrangements.

So, all being well, I will be a qualified solicitor in April 2007! I would like to say a massive THANK YOU to Linda for making it possible. It’s a dream come true!

This letter explains why I’ve quit.

Dear all

The reason I am emailing you all today is because I have decided to resign from the GSD Executive Committee and as Editor of ‘The Bridge’, as well as my other duties for which I have volunteered for in the past few years.

This has not been an easy decision to make. However, I do feel it is the right one. I have decided to do this because I have very little time to myself these days. I have a demanding job and am uncomfortable about the amount of time I take off to attend meetings for the GSD. Also, I am looking to hopefully obtain a training contract within the next few months, which will take up nearly all of my time. With a fiancée on the other side of the country in Wales, studying a LLM by distance learning and moving into a house I have bought this summer, I feel that I will be stretching myself too far if I continue to be involved with the GSD.

Nonetheless, I would like to very much remain a member and to receive the mail outs that are sent out from time to time. I do not wish to detach myself from the GSD completely.

I would like to say a big thank you to Judith for all her support over the last few years, and to wish the rest of you the best of luck in every endeavour.

Best wishes

Rob

If one looks at this post at Woolamaloo you can see that Joe Gordon has been sacked from Waterstones simply “because he kept an online diary in which he occasionally mentioned bad days at work and satirised his “sandal-wearing” boss” (Guardian Unlimited, 12 January 2005).

What does this mean for bloggers everywhere? I could potentially be a victim like Joe Gordon simply because I post about RAD, my employer. Does that mean I’m bringing my employer into “disrepute”? I don’t say anything derogatory about RAD – I could say a lot of bad things, but I don’t, because I respect that some things should remain confidential. However, Gordon didn’t say bad things about Waterstones. He simply satirised his work colleagues and the work he did. No one would be able to identify just who or what he was talking about that easily.

This issue is quite timely. I’m currently researching for an essay with the following title:

You can see here that I am required to discuss an employee’s right to privacy. The Woolamaloo case is certainly relevant here (and will allow me me to bring a bit of topicality into my assignment! )). Essentially, what it all boils down to: how do you achieve an equal balance between an employer’s right to protect his own interests, while ensuring that an employee’s basic human rights are not infringed, including Article 8, which is to the right to private and family life, his home and correspondence?

Personally, I think Waterstones have gone too far. If Gordon was posting to his blog in working hours, thus preventing him from doing the work he was paid to, then they *might* have a reason to dismiss him, but all posts were made outside working hours. Go figure.

I will be keeping my eye on this case, to see whether Gordon takes Waterstones to an employment tribunal. At present, an appeal was held on 25 January 2005, and Gordon is awaiting a decision.