Thread: reopening a COT3 agreement

Help
I need some advice
In 2002 I settled a case under a COT3 agreement, part of which was to move me away from the part of the organisation I was working in because my immediate line manager was harassing me at that time,for a period of four years, by being overly critical - like changing every single piece of work for minor and inconsequential 'errors' - and excessive monitoring. (I also got a small amount of money as well)

In 2006 my employer then decided to move my harasser to my new section, although now I am his line manager. A few months later I was suspended pending investigations of some made up charge. I have been on suspension for over 18 months now!

When my harasser came to work under me, I tried very hard to treat him fairly and was careful to give him the respect he did not afford me.

I have now discovered that they had been monitoring my emails (although it was not the previous harasser) and that since my suspension, my previous harasses has been acting up into my job.

I seem to recall that my COT3 agreement did not specifically mention the harasser, but the intention was to not work with him.

I have made the grievance and now have an ET case. I am now preparing a further statement of particulars and just thought that bringing up the previous harassment, particualrly the notes the harasser made would help me demonstrate a continuing act.

Can anyone please advise if that would cause a problem, even though the previous harassment issues were covered by the COT3 and is subject to a confidentiality clause.

Thank you very much in anticipation

Similar Threads:

• Verbal agreement instead of tenancy agreement with council tax included in the rent.
• agreement
• HP agreement vs credit agreement hellp
• Help - HP agreement
• Reopening old wounds (accounts)

I was under the impression that once an action was compromised via a COT3 then it could never be re-opened.

As ACAS are instrumental in the negotiating of COT3 agreements you should either contact the local ACAS office who helped negotiate the previous COT3 or ring their helpline 08457-474747.

In any event if the actions were from 2002 you would be likely statute barred to do anything about them as they are well over 3 months ago!

I appreciate they may be background to your current issue but I would have thought that suspension for 18 months (a ridiculous length of time) alone is sufficent to give you a greater than 50% chance of proving constructive dismissal

Che

Thanks

I have spoken to ACAS but they wont give any advice on this issue. So any help still appreciated.

I personally don't think it can be re-opened - although I'm happy to be corrected on this.

If they could be re-opened what incentive would there be for parties involved in litigation to use them?

As stated earlier I'm not sure what relevance it would have beyond background info, as time limits would likely make it all irrelevant.

I suppose you could always try and get it in the Tribunal bundle and if the respondents rep's object the Tribunal will likely rule that element of the bundle in-admissable at a Directions Hearing.

I believe it would be akin to genuine w/o prejudice discussions and thus likely in-admissable

Sorry can't be more helpful. Perhaps other cagger's have other thoughts

Che

NB Thanks for the rep comment

Thanks Elche
I do get your point but the thing is it is the other side who have breached the terms of the COT3. Surely such agreements have a some form of 'penalty' if breached, or an incentive not to be brocken if you like, however many years later the breach may occur.

I will try to get it in even as background info, but of course it will be much more beneficial if I could bring all the issues forward as primary facts!

Originally Posted by monkeychicken

Surely such agreements have a some form of 'penalty' if breached, or an incentive not to be brocken if you like, however many years later the breach may occur.

Fair point, perhaps if one party breaches the agreement then that party loses their right to 'hide behind it' and thus cannot argue for it to be in-admissable?

I'm really not sure, as I've never known any one breach one before. Normally, ACAS mediate the COT3, the money is paid, the employee walks away all rep's get paid and that the end.

When I'm back in work, I'm going to look at the Compromise Agreements we use to see if they have a penalty for breach clause, as obviously CA's and COT3 essentially achieve the same thing.

Have you read the COT3 carefully to see if makes provision for breach?

I can't believe ACAS have not been more help, as it is their Conciliation Officer who negotiates the damn thing in the first place!

Please let me know what the ET does when you try to include it.

Best of luck

Che