I am not sure right now that an employer in Britain is under any obligation to give you a contract after 3 months.
a) When I say I cannot imagine such an institution acting in such an unprofessional manner - if what you say is accurately described - I mean to say that this particular institute/body, is not just any old firm, it is after all THE Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons in Glasgow, Scotland, according to what you wrote here above, therefore in relation to this specific case, I cannot imagine they arrange matters so informally and unprofessionally.
In this respect, unprofessionally means to say if they indeed do fail to inform employees, at all, of their rights, and knowingly allow people(managers) to run around dictating and treating employees poorly.
I cannot imagine that if those in charge (the manager's higher ups) knew of such matters that they simply allowed him to carry on in the way you described.
I'm not saying I do not believe you, but if what you are saying is correct, then it is a very serious matter. It is then a very serious matter for several different reasons.
You may not have been aware, or have not been MADE aware of your rights as an employee, but even if you work 1 day anywhere, you do have rights.
You do have rights in Britain even if those employing you either do not know these rules/rights and/or simply try to ignore both rules & rights.
An individual in employment with a position of authority has responsibilities towards the people working below him/her and to the people working over him/her.
He/she has a position and cannot do whatever he she likes according to whim and fancy, there are limits, if there were not, it would mean anyone could do whatever they liked, just like things were in the old days when rights were only for those with money/wealth.
This is not the situation today.
As I pointed out to make things clear, we are not living in 1703 and in times when kids were made to climb up chimneys, rules have been put into place after much struggle to do so, in order to protect people.
A person with a job, one giving him/her authority over other employees, is him.herself still an employee, just like you are.
If an individual with a position of authority does not direct you properly, within and according to the bounds of reasonable behaviour and treatment (meaning coming from or being dished out by that person when managing individuals or groups) then that is classed as misuse of power, this means to say that nobody is allowed to treat anyone in a discriminatory way, such as speaking in derogatory ways, using harassment as a tool of bullying or intimidation in any place of company business or employment.
All of these matters or factors fall under the officially defined terms of health and safety controlled first of all by national laws & acts and enforced by government and then laws & acts agreed upon by all Member States under the umbrella of the European Community or Union. Good health does not only mean physical health but mental health too; if people are made to work in terribly disturbing psychological conditions then that can never be okay for their minds and thus health.
The European Union sets out (intends) to get all Member Nations/States on one line as regards rights that employees have.
Getting Member Nations on one line is a policy that applies to many other matters, for instance, regarding standards and norms that have nothing to do with work and jobs, such as, for instance, civil rights, human rights, rights to privacy, protection from harm, in every way.
Considering the fact that the Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons is a body of high standing, it is therefore hard to imagine that they would be so arrogant, careless and unprofessional, as they would be well-aware of the rules, the rights and their own obligations.
It sounds as though the one individual was making your life hell, or he wanted you out but went about it in the wrong way (unacceptable way), others then wanted to assist you but may have been under pressure too, to an extent, and additionally some may have been afraid of endangering their own jobs/positions. This too is an incorrect way to carry on, but it happens a lot.
It stands to reason; if you have to work with or under someone and you criticise them, even though you are supposed to have the right to do so, they may at a later date work against you, which is then highly unprofessional and even childish/mean.
Here above you wrote the following.
i was off for 3 weeks.when i went back my manager was treated me really badly (obv because he knew i wouldn't be able to do what i did before)
And you wrote
she sent me to an occ health meetings hoping they would say i couldnt return to work but i said i wanted to return to work
What I'm getting is that you became ill while attending a meeting with your CEO, ended up in hospital, was off work for 3 weeks, returned to your place of employment but your manager started to behave in a difficult manner towards you.
However, you say here above that he obviously knew that you would NOT be able to do what you did before.
You go on to explain that you was sent by the ''new'' Head of Department to the Occupational Health department, and the Head of Department actually just wanted the Occupational Health Department to tell you that you would not be able to return to your job.
With this, you made it known that you did wish to return to your job.
It's here I'm seeing a conflict and a potential cause of the trouble.
I do because you said that the manager obviously knew you would not be able to do what you did before.
Am I wrong to say that it involves you not being willing to accept that situation/fact, even though you knew it was true, for you formulated it yourself and assumed that is what your manager was thinking, you did not know it for sure, you assumed that's what he had concluded.
You did not say that you thought your manager assumed you would not be able to do your job the way you had before falling ill, you said that your manager obviously KNEW that you would not be able to perform (adequately).
I do not know that this was indeed the case, I can imagine you would have wanted to hold into your work and at least have come to a reasonable solution, e.g., if you had to work less, at least remain employed, maybe do some less strenuous tasks or work a few hours less each week.
Then again, as you stated, you had no contract and they probably felt that they were under no obligation to keep you on and officially they were not under obligation. This can be looked at from various angles, was it sensible to continue working on the basis of no contract?
If you are not qualified and come to a job by means of qualification, whether technical kills or academic then to many or most employers, you are a labourer and dispensable. If they view things rthat way, and do not work according to any code of loyalty, and it is hard but most do not, then no matter how hard you work, no matter how many hours you put in, it may mean nothing to them, because the very reason they did not give you a contract is they do not want to owe anyone anything, where they can. Work or job agencies work entirely according to this principle, whee employers seek to be free of getting stuck with employees, because with a contract after a certain amount of years it gets hard to fire people and you gain lots of extra rights.
People can then remain on sick leave for ages and they cannot be fired as easily, it's for this reason employer's prefer to pay agencies a truckload of money on the short-term so that they are provided with workers whenever they want for however long they want. Sometimes companies may be doing less business and do not need as many workers so if they have everyone on contracts they ere stuck with them. If I had a business I can imagine also thinking about such things. How am I to pay them if the work dries up for some time?
Nonetheless, to treat you so unkindly, if they were in fact unwilling to work something out for you, like for reasons of simple human kindness, is not a nice way to treat you, if that is the way it was, after all, you worked hard for 4 years, never had a day off, worked long hours.
The problems start with things like this though, when you muddle up one part with another, because then it sounds like you experienced it as a kind of conspiracy against you, and that starts to stretch things a little, as mostly a company cannot get absolutely everyone to agree on the same thing or to gang up on someone.
For instance, your CEO left, and so did your Head of Department. The result of that switch, came at a bad moment for you personally, as the new people knew nothing of you. The person that sent you off to Occupational Health, according to you, simply hoped that particular department would recommend that you stop working, but you did not know that, you assumed it, maybe it was not like that, but if you desperately started suspecting others of being against you, when it was to start with, as you said, a matter concerning a nasty, inconsiderate manager, then the fact that others picked up on your stress, which is not just stress but then at that point desperation, may have worked against you. If at Occupational Health you started saying things like: The new head just wants to get rid of me!!! that very bit about it all may have been relayed back to her, at that point they would have started to think you were becoming a true problem for them, as it was about the manager according to you and they may have been able to listen at first, but at the point you started accusing all kinds of different people, if you did, then that would have concerned them if they became aware of it/heard about it being like that.
The lesson to take away, if you cannot salvage anything at all, is not to work on a permanent basis with a contract, if you do, it is for your own account.
Notwithstanding all of the above, I do still feel that there's something not right about this, if you worked hard for 4 years, loyally, and there were no problems that you've failed to mention here, then I feel you were or are owed something, if not to start with only for the reason of simple human kindness, and it is after all a medical organisation. The only way to set about finding out, is calmly and diplomatically.
However, you resigned and I reckon that was a mistake.