15-05-2025
Edinburgh charity hits back at 'claims' as former employee sues organisation
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info
An Edinburgh charity manager has denied her former employee's claims she tried to 'cover up' concerns made over child safety.
The Edinburgh Employment Tribunal is hearing the case of Hakima Taqafi, 54, who alleges her former manager at the Shakti Women's Aid tried to protect her close friends, who also worked at the charity, when complaints were made.
Ms Taqafi is suing on the grounds of public interest disclosure and unfair dismissal.
She previously alleged two of her colleagues abandoned their post, leaving her to watch over a group of families alone at the Botanics in Edinburgh. She claims Ms Rezk repeatedly downplayed the incident when it was reported because she is "very close friends" with the two colleagues.
The tribunal heard on Wednesday, May 14, from Ms Noha Rezk, the children and young people team leader.
Ms Rezk told the court that she believed issues raised by Ms Taqafi were not health and safety related, but concerns over 'team conflict'.
On the day in question, Ms Taqafi and two of her colleagues took a group of families to the Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh. At this time, Ms Rezk was working on paperwork in the office, but says she was supervising the excursion from the WhatsApp group the employees shared.
Ms Taqafi previously told the court that during this time, a four-year old boy ran away from the group and was temporarily missing.
But Ms Rezk refutes these claims, saying there was "no risk" to anyone at the event, because "the boy would have got lost anyway," even if the two colleagues were there with Ms Taqafi.
She said: "She was panicking and she was stressed. I told her it was not her responsibility, it was the mums, but she needed to be there to support her.
'That child has been at risk, not because they were not there.'
At around 4:20pm that day, Ms Taqifi called her manager, Ms Rezk, to raise concerns over this incident, and two others, saying that her colleagues often leave her alone.
Ms Rezk told the court there is no policy against this as risk is assessed on a case by case basis. She also told how photographs of the day in question showed Ms Taqafi with four families which fits into the charities ratio of one adult for every five children.
She went on to say how this ratio counts the children's mothers as responsible adults and that risk assessments signed by the parents disclose that mothers are responsible for their children during outings, not the charity's staff.
Ms Taqafi claims that after this incident, Ms Rezk's attitude towards her changed and she tried to "force" her to file an incident report which made it seem as if her co-workers had been present throughout the incident.
But Ms Rezk argued this was not the case and that after the incident, Ms Taqafi sent her notes on the incident, but not a "comprehensive timeline" of events. She claims she sent an example of an incident report to Ms Taqafi, with sections of the report filled in to show her how to do it, not to "force her narrative."
Ms Rezk's also said her treatment of Ms Taqafi was not "micromanagement" but was supervision put in place as a result of new policies implemented after their latest visit from the Care Inspectorate, and how she had been receiving complaints about Ms Taqafi's conduct in the office.
She continued: "She was discussing a lot of personal things in the office, she was stressed.'
The court heard how she was trying to convince a colleague to swap houses with her.
Ms Rezk said: 'Another colleague, maybe she complained that during Ramadan [that Hakima] made offensive comments about someone fasting.'
'It made me thing there was something not normal happening with her personal life.'
There were also complaints made about Ms Taqifi taking personal calls and unauthorised meetings in the office, disrupting other members of staff.
Eventually, a meeting was held about the events which occurred at the Botanic Gardens, after the meeting Ms Taqafi confronted Ms Rezk, saying that the minutes for the meeting were not accurate.
Ms Rezk told the court how she felt "intimidated" by her employee.
She said: "'I got scared at that point. She was denying what was in her minutes.
"The way she was speaking to me was not okay.'
She went on to say that throughout Ms Taqafi's time at the charity, she offered her support and encouraged her to take time off and rest and when Ms Taqafi was signed off due to "work-related stress" she told her her mental health was a priority.
She added: "We are working in a stressful field. I was begging her please take rest. I confirmed that her mental health was a priority."
Employment Judge Sangster presides over the proceedings which began on Monday, May 12.
The tribunal continues
