134 annual report 2011 20-2. Revocation of decision that complaint about employee would have no consequences A local authority received a verbal complaint that an employee had acted in­ appropriately towards a colleague. The local authority informed the employee that the complaint would have no consequences for him. A written complaint was subsequently lodged which led to the local authority obtaining witness statements about the incident. The local authority then revoked the favourable decision that no further action would be taken in the matter and gave the employee a reprimand. The Ombudsman stated that the revocation was based on a reassessment of the information already available and that there were no considerations sufficiently weighty to justify a revocation of the decision. The local authority had also ­neglected its duty to take notes by not taking notes about the verbal complaint and the verbal witness statements. The Ombudsman recommended that the ­local authority reopen the case. (Case No. 2009-3418-812) 20-3. Summary dismissal due to criminal conviction A doctor complained to the Ombudsman because he had been summarily dismissed from a hospital position due to a previous criminal conviction. The Ombudsman could not criticise the Region’s view that the doctor did not fulfil the decorum requirement for the position as doctor at the hospital. However, the Ombudsman did criticise several elements of the Region’s decision and recommended that the Region reopen the case in order to decide whether the Region could dismiss the doctor summarily or whether he should have been dismissed with the usual notice. (Case No. 2009-3690-810) 20-4. Local authority’s actions in relation to appointment of previously convicted persons and in relation to requesting and registering criminal record certificates A newspaper article wrote of a man who had applied for jobs with the local public swimming baths and as a substitute teacher at the local schools. The article