Jump to content

CONCILLIATOR

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

51 Excellent
  1. You were suspended for failing to turn up for a shift. How many shifts did you miss? Does your employer have an absence notification procedure, ie, are you supposed to ring in and inform them of your intended absence and if so, when? Was your suspension the result of not keeping your employer informed? You say that you were suspended by the manager verbally. Was this face to face when you returned to work or was it over the phone? Was the length of the suspension mentioned at all? Does your employment contract or terms and conditions statement specify the length of suspensions? This implies that your disciplinary hearing was scheduled for a date roughly two weeks after the event. Did it not occur to you to get in touch with your employer for two weeks to enquire about your position? To answer your questions: Any information sent by mail and not received, therefore not acted upon, can’t be held against you. Your scant indifference in failing to keep in touch in order to keep yourself informed of your employer’s handling of your predicament can be held against you. Your silence and indifference speaks volumes It’s up to you whether or not you turn up for the second meeting. Considering you plead problems with the mail as justification for failing to attend the first meeting it would be difficult to justify your failure to attend the second meeting when you have been told verbally. You can’t claim that you do not know the reason for your suspension. You have explained why here. You can’t claim that you are unaware that problems with the mail prevented you having the written confirmations you seek. You can’t claim that you were reliant on that same mail despite being told verbally of the proposed meeting. Where do you stand? You have the opportunity of attending that meeting after 3 weeks of inactivity to put your case. Concentrate on justifying your failure to follow company procedure and minimising the consequences. If your manager did what he claims to have done its difficult to see what more he could do. The senders of recorded delivery letters are given receipts; you could ask to see those if you suspect deception.
  2. The point you underline Squadie means that one can move away from a specific work area, like desk, or machine, or production line, to a rest area or canteen etc but still on the employers premises. It does not mean one can leave the premises completely. Like Miki says, this is not unusual but most managers or supervisors will give permission to leave the premises as long as its a reasonable request and they know where you are.
  3. Are you saying a family member has handed in her notice? If so, is she presently working her notice? What is this notice pay that she is expecting? How come she owes them four days holiday? What does she expect the final packet to contain?
  4. Thanks for the clarification. This stinks (pardon the pun). The witness who made the statement was in there for over 20 minutes. If you exclude the time prospective culprits 1, 2, 3 and 4 were in there he would have been in there on his own for a total of 18.5 minutes approximately. I think it sounds more than a bit strange that anyone intent on causing damage would not have checked to ensure that there were no witnesses before he started causing the damage. I think it also sounds more than a bit strange that the so-called witness did not call out or come out when he heard the din, and that having noticed the damage as he was leaving he did not mention anything about what he had heard and what he was seeing to the only other person in there (prospective culprit 4). It sounds to me like the witness who made the statements is making them up, that he is trying to drop you in it (pardon the pun) to deflect suspicion from himself. Perhaps you might think of some reason why the manager should take his word for it rather than yours, because, based on what you have said so far about his statements, I can’t see why he should be believed. If I were manager I would also be questioning why he spends so much time in there. It is also peculiar that he did not bother washing his hands but went straight out. Could it be that he was not using the toilet for its intended purpose, or was he in such a hurry to get out because he did not want to be confronted and possibly quizzed about the damage by prospective culprit 4 who had just come in? Seems like very furtive behaviour to me. You say that toilets have been damaged again since the incident in question and despite claims that the culprits of those incidents can be discovered no action is being taken. Would I be right in assuming that if they had any evidence that could link those incidents to you they would link them to you? Can the ‘witness’ account for his movements when those other incidents occurred? I would be demanding that his toilet breaks were totted up to see if there is a possible link.
  5. Having a bit of a problem unscrambling the sequence of events, perhaps you could clarify. The first prospective culprit went in, stayed 7 seconds then came back out. Would it be fair to assume that he did not do the damage as he had little time to do anything much? The second prospective culprit went in, stayed just short of 4 minutes and then came back out. Would it be fair to say that he had plenty of time to cause the damage? The third prospective culprit went in, that was you. You went in some 15 minutes after the first prospective culprit left, and presumably the second prospective culprit had left as well by then. You do not specify the length of time you spent in there, or if you noticed anything amiss, or anyone else in there. If the urinals were damaged, would you not have noticed? The fourth prospective culprit went in after you had come out, how long after? How long was he in for? Did he notice anything amiss, or any damage? Did he report anything? Would it be correct to conclude from what you say that the witness who wrote the statement had been in the toilet for about 20 minutes and that this 20 minutes covered the time period in which prospective culprits 1, 2 and 3 came and went, and prospective culprit 4 was still in there when he left? Would he have been perhaps in one of the toilet cubicles? Would anyone wishing to cause damage not have made sure that nobody was around to witness his actions? Would he not have noticed that there was a potential witness in there? From what you appear to be saying the same witness wrote two statements. In the first he says that prospective culprit 2 caused the damage and in his second statement he is saying that prospective culprit 3, you, did it. Is there any reason why his second statement should be believed and not his first? Is there any reason why prospective culprit 4 and the witness who wrote the statements should conspire against you? Could, for example, the witness be too scared of prospective culprit 4 to implicate him?
  6. First of all you are saying that you and your colleagues are in some sort of staff evaluation scheme? Secondly, being as you are employed in the public sector, it would be reasonable to assume that some public sector Union has negotiated this scheme and that you and your colleagues, or a majority of the employees in your work place, accept it? Your manager or Union Representative should be able to provide you with details of that scheme. Those details should provide information on what criteria is considered or taken into account when moving to a higher grade and progressing through any one grade. You say promotion can get you into a higher grade. Is that the only way you can move to a higher grade? You say length of service determines your progression through any one grade. Is that the only way you can progress within a grade? Has your continuity of employment been affected by your promotion? The next point to consider is how many of the skills, and how much of the knowledge and experience gained in your previous position are relevant to your new position? Could it be argued that length of service in the lower grade might still be relevant and have a valid or significant bearing on performance in the new position? Could a totally new employee expect to start at your place of work in your present higher grade or would she/he have to start in a lower grade and work their way up?
  7. Scooby66,The short answer to your question is NO.If it is your actual job that is being advertised before the disciplinary or grievance procedure is concluded or exhausted this would suggest that the decision to dismiss is a foregone conclusion irrespective of the strength of your appeal.The reason for dismissal, your employment contract and your length of service will have a bearing on what steps you could now take.By the way, did you ask your employer for an explanation of their actions?
  8. Bonnygirl, You do not say whether or not your friend is still in his job. If his employment ended, why, when and how was this done? If he is still working then he should list his grievances and lodge them according to recognised procedures. If his written statement of terms and conditions of employment don't show a procedure for dealing with grievances then the ACAS Codes of Practice are the standard guide. ET usually require that internal grievance procedures are exhausted before they take it on, for obvious reasons. I believe the 3 month time limit begins from the date that the internal procedures have been exhausted or break down. Perhaps Sidewinder could confirm the veracity of this point.
  9. I presume that the reason you have accumulated TOIL entitlement was that you were prepared to help ease ‘operation demand’ and fill in for the ‘shortfalls on station’ in the first place. Your supervisor seems to be under the impression that your statutory rights can be flouted now because of his failure to manage operational demand and shortfall in the cover he is obliged in his position to provide. Unless it states in your contract that you must arrange for your own cover if you want a day off he are adding a condition that you had not agreed to. This unilateral action on his part could be construed as a breach of contract. You have given him sufficient notice and you have quoted ACAS and the relevant ERAs chapter and verse which support your stance. It seems that he is quite prepared to brow-beat you into accepting his decision to deny your fair request. If I were advising myself I would call his bluff. I would respond to his email by saying something along the following lines: “Despite several requests for time off the response is always the same, request denied on grounds of operational demands and shortfalls, and the invitation to fulfil the management functions myself if my request is ever to be considered. Consequently, and having given the required notice, I am insisting on my statutory rights being honoured and will be taking the stated time off. Managing rosters and cover is a supervisory or management duty, not my responsibility.” If you are then threatened with suspension, or even dismissal, you would be in a position to argue that consideration of operational demands and shortfalls don’t seem to enter the equation when he threatens disciplinary action for claiming a statutory right but are sufficient grounds on which to deny your requests for one day off.
  10. Your own response would appear to be a reasonable assessment of the legal position re TOIL. Their answer should be interesting. If they continue to deny you TOIL as is your entitlement if you are due it, they are liable to be in breach of contract.
  11. Of course you should appeal. Be sure to enclose a sick note from your doctor advising your ex-employer of the life-threatening consequences of their actions in forcing you to deal with all this in your condition.
  12. Caroline, I would hazard that there is nobody on this site who is qualified to re-try your case however much of your personal affairs you care to divulge. The conviction that turned up on the last CRB was not the actual conviction on your record. In that sense it is the ‘wrong’ conviction. Haggling over the terminology will not alter that basic fact. The object, what you asked for, was to help you to find a way to rectify serious clerical errors in your records by the authorities. One would suppose from the last post that we were hearing an appeal by one of the Great Train Robbers. I realise it might seem laughable in some quarters but have you considered contacting your Member of Parliament? Politicians generally are not held in high regard these days but they can be invaluable, in this sort of situation, in spurring stuffy officialdom into getting their finger out. If I read right the clue as to your location here are the details of your local MP, Nicholas Dakin, Labour MP for S****horpe: Nicholas Dakin, MP 18a Ethel Court, S****horpe. DN15 6RP S****horpe Office Tel. No: 01724 842000 Email: [email protected] I suggest it would do no harm to send an email along the following lines straight away. Copy in the form of a letter to your local Labour Party Office. (Change name obviously if I have the name wrong) [Your name, address and email address] Dear Mr Dakin, I really need some help as I have no idea what to do next. I hope that through your good offices you will be able to assist in hurrying up the process by which officialdom can correct a mistake that has the likely outcome of costing me my job. Here, basically, is the problem: In August 2011 my CRB check was returned to me with a conviction on it. The crime for which it asserts I was convicted, and served time for, is..... [Give a description here of what that alleged crime was] I was not accused of, charged with or convicted of this crime. I was convicted of a crime on the same day in 1993, and was fined £250, but this was different from the conviction that is now being accredited to me. My conviction was for.... [Give a description here of what your actual conviction was for] I have pointed out and disputed this mistake with CRB, they wrote to Nottingham Police who have said: 1. We don’t have those records we need the microfilm. 2. We have the microfilm the records are not clear we have to get the Court documents. 3. We have the court papers; what we say still stands, and we will not change it. I have contacted Nottingham Crown Court and asked about having a copy of my original charge sheet, they have confirmed that I can. I faxed them this morning all the details that I can remember. I also contacted the Magistrates Court form which my case was referred to the Crown Court and where I paid the £250 fine for records relating to my case. As you will appreciate, cutting through red tape is not easy at the best of times for the average citizen. The wheels grind exceeding slow and I suspect that if I involve the Independent Police Complaints Commission it could take years. In the meantime, although my employers accept my innocence and sympathise, their hands are tied. My job is on the line and my son and I have been compelled to live on £54 a week for the past 3 months. Any guidance and help in righting this wrong and speeding up the process would be gratefully welcomed and appreciated, and I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Yours faithfully, Etc. Etc.
  13. His length of service + a minimum of one weeks' notice + accrued holiday entitlements will have got him safely over the one year threshold. Dismissing him without following any sort of recognised disciplinary procedure is breach of contract, therefore unfair dismissal. Failure to take account of his situation, especially when they were aware of it, would be discriminatory.
  14. Length of service at this stage is immaterial. Some statutory rights take effect immediately on accepting the offer of employment. For example you say that the letter notifying you of the alleged disciplinary matter and the date and time of the hearing was read out to you. You should have been given a copy of that letter, properly signed and dated. Failure to do so leaves your employer already in breach of contract by failing to follow the statutory codes of practice re disciplinary procedures that are legally required to be a part of the statement of terms and conditions of employment of all employees unless otherwise specifically stated. Very short notice period, leaving you little or no time to prepare. You could suggest an adjournment until you had an opportunity to investigate the matter. By all means emphasise this point. Emphasise this point, training ongoing. Has the whole 2 weeks been devoted exclusively to training the particular member of staff involved? Do other commitments affect the time you spend with this member of staff or the time he/she spends with you? Perhaps the whole training programme requires looking at afresh. You have a statutory right to appeal against any disciplinary action taken against you. Insist on getting written copies of all decisions or conclusions reached.
  15. When you say ‘present position’ does this mean that the date of termination has not been reached yet? When does your new role begin? In a valid offer of alternative work: Employees who accept an offer of alternative work are allowed a four-week trial period to see if the work is suitable. The suitability of the work depends on a number of factors, including pay, job status, location, working environment and hours of work. Have you discussed or agreed with your employer that accepting the four week trial period in the new job would not affect your right to Statutory Redundancy Pay should it turn out to be unsuitable? You could argue that it was an implied term of your new contract and was instrumental in your readiness to accept it.
×
×
  • Create New...