Ms Mason remained agitated about my reason for resigning when phoning the following day, 24 June, to say things might be moving with WPHS. I discussed CN Clench’s apathy towards my resignation and footwear restriction which she had claimed to know nothing about.
Even though I suspected, I was shocked when Ms Mason told me the WPHS restriction was the result of an objection to my footwear which had come from Sandgate.
Everything became clear as I listened to the admission Ms Mason withheld in March when I had asked "why now?"
I couldn't understand why Ms Mason had agreed with CN Clench to suddenly have my footwear restricted from the workplace, and felt too discouraged and depleted at that time to ask why.
The following day, 25 June, Ms Mason rang again saying she thought things might be moving with WPHS.
With only five days leave remaining I failed to see just how Ms Mason could finally get WPHS to revoke their restriction.
Ever more depleted I told Ms Mason that even if, at such a late stage, the restriction was revoked, her condition of a 6 month trial placed me in a very vulnerable position with CN Clench who, with her agreement, had sought to make it physically impossible for me to return.
Ms Mason reiterated her deep concern for the wording on my resignation, saying I should resign for the right reason; adding she would send a letter once she received an answer from WPHS.
She said she would let CN Clench know she was processing my resignation.
On 27 June Ms Clench rang to check my resignation was final as she had not heard from Ms Mason.
On 29 June I received the foreshadowed letter from Ms Mason, dated 25 June, indicating WPHS had agreed to revoke their restriction and allow my required footwear, she added that my resignation had been processed: