A PROPOSED shake-up of Shepherd Neame would have cost hundreds of brewing jobs in Faversham, a tribunal has been told.

Jonathan Neame, chief executive of the 300-year-old family-run brewery, denounced the plan put forward by former vice-chairman Stewart Neame, just before his sudden resignation last October, as a “crazy idea’’.

Stewart Neame, who claims constructive dismissal by Shepherd Neame, had complained that the structure of the company - brewing and running pubs - was not profitable and wanted property assets hived off into a separate company. Such a move, he said, would enhance share holder value.

He alleged that the brewery’s operations were unprofitable and the 2003 report and accounts that claimed that they were, was therefore misleading.

Jonathan Neame, Stewart’s cousin once removed, told an employment tribunal at Ashford that he was “surprised and irritated" to received Mr Neame’s proposals just before the annual meeting last October.

They would overturn 300 years of tradition and contained “wholly unreliable and irresponsible demands". One was for the removal of company chairman Robert Neame, Stewart’s first cousin, and Jonathan’s father. Stewart claimed that Robert was too old at 70 to introduce the radical changes he thought were essential.

Jonathan Neame said that the proposals would have “enormous repercussions for the future of Shepherd Neame and its shareholders and employees".

In effect, Shepherd Neame would become a property management company which “could have led to the closure of the brewery with the devastating effect that would have on our employees, causing massive redundancies."

Jonathan accused his cousin of wanting to cause “maximum embarrassment to the board and in particular to the Chairman Robert Neame".

He added: “I believe that there was considerable antipathy on the part of Stewart Neame towards the chairman, particularly over recent months."

He described Stewart’s actions as bizarre, especially as he had earlier agreed with fellow director Martin Bunting to discuss the proposals after the annual meeting on October 30.

“I was also very annoyed because I thought Stewart was trying to destabilise Shepherd Neame and its shareholders at the eleventh hour before the AGM and felt that his tactics and behaviour was wholly unreasonable.’’

The tribunal heard that Stewart Neame and Mr Bunting had a blazing row over the telephone following the circulation of Mr Neame’s proposals to the board which Mr Bunting called a “flagrant breach’’ of an earlier agreement.

Jonathan Neame said he was surprised and shocked to hear of Stewart’s sudden resignation. Director’s discussed the issue and were about to ask Stewart to reconsider before a second a resignation letter “changed the mood.’’

Jonathan Neame said “I believe that it is extremely sad that someone who has given so much to Shepherd Neame for nearly 30 years should have chosen to resign in this pre meditated manner with the intention of doing as much damage as possible to Shepherd Neame and in particular to it’s chairman.’’

Jonathan Neame described Stewart’s tribunal claim as unreasonable, vexatious, frivolous and scandalous and utterly misconceived.’’

Because Jonathan feared that Stewart was about to embark on a “campaign of destruction’’ after his resignation. He ordered the confiscation of his laptop computer which stored confidential documents.

The laptop was dramatically brought into the hearing by Shepherd Neame’s IT manager Michael Procyshyn.

He told the tribunal it had been locked in his filing cabinet but admitted that Jonathan Neame had removed it recently.

After examining his old computer, Stewart Neame said “I am absolutely convinced this computer has been substantially altered. It’s not in the state in which you got it from me.’’

The hearing is due to end at lunchtime on Wednesday (28), with a ruling expected within a week.