Yes, sorry, my iPad keyboard has a mind of its own. (B)!

I've changed that to 'visiting' for you, Sangie, to avoid misunderstandings. I hope that's OK.

HB

Yes, sorry, my iPad keyboard has a mind of its own. (B)!

Yes i have the same problem with my Ipad. It takes me to sites that don't match my moral standards.

No doubt CAG had more unique visitors to the site since your posting, after it appeared in their searches.

I've changed that to 'visiting' for you, Sangie, to avoid misunderstandings. I hope that's OK.

 

HB

Absolutely. I sometimes wonder how autocorrect gets from one word to another. It's like there is no obvious connection at all!

Absolutely. I sometimes wonder how autocorrect gets from one word to another. It's like there is no obvious connection at all!

From my experience ('fumble fingers' and rampant 'typo-itis') :

Might you have accidentally typed 'visting' instead of 'visiting'?

Then it decided that 'f' is close to 'v' on the keypad, and substituting the' f' it then becomes a recognized 'dictionary' word (it makes you wonder "which dictionary", though!) ....... even if the meaning did get changed somewhat by the auto-correct.

http://www.damnyouautocorrect.com/ ...... you are not alone! (That site is NSFW for some employers, though)

I'm hesitant to say I was 'tickled' by the substitution ......... if only because some might then wonder why it merely tickled.........

Going back to the subject of the thread, I think the the OP is being entirely unrealistic in their aspirations, and echo the point made by Emmzzi. It feels like the OP had become so invested in this that they are throwing all sense of proportion, and their friend, to the dogs. If we set aside everything else, there is still one thing that hasn't been considered. Being performance managed had led to the person being to sick to work. Being contacted by the employer had led to worsening mental health and self harm. What do you think "holding the employer accountable" will cost them? Remember, putting the employer on the stand also means putting the employee on the stand. And I know which one of those is going to survive that experience.

Orbiter dictum - this is a very close friend or a very close relative. You are thinking with your revenge hat on, not your sensible hat. But you won't be the one paying the price for this. There are times, unfortunately, when the only reasonable advice is to walk away. Even when you are right. And that is by no means certain. A case that starts off "my employer put me on performance management so I went off sick" starts with very obvious disadvantages. It's like "i'm too sick to go to the disciplinary" - it wrong foots you, and the longer it goes on the worse it gets. These things aren't "normal" so you would expect some amount of stress. But, as you have already found, the length of time it goes on makes things worse, not better.

Something has got to give, and just make sure it isn't your friend. Which is the most likely outcome now. No job is worth that. No principle is worth that. Life isn't fair, and one of the survival tactics is to know when to simply accept it isn't fair and walk away. There are times you cannot win.

For the record do not do revenge. Look at all issues objectively and come to a balanced conclusion on all facts presented with statutory and/or contractual obligation.

Revenge or personal opinions always ends up with egg on face

Not going to say too much for obvious reasons but throwing out for general comments. That is instigating a criminal action against the employer.

 

Employee has been off now for three months caused by Management Bullying with performance management. Trade Union? Do not even go there

 

Occupational health has confirmed this with severe depression and anxeity and currently unfit for work.

Contractual sick pay stopped by this manager for not agreeing to a management face to face even though no contractual obligation within the attendance procedure.

 

Full Grievance procedure now exhausted with usual manager covering manager whitewash and corporate sensitivity. Saying a lot but in reality saying nothing.

 

Tribunal claim submitted under section 13 Employment Rights Act.

Employer settled so claim withdrawn as no cause of action.

Management insisted on another face to face which the employer stated not well enough to attend.

Management yet again stopped contractual sick pay entitlement with no contractual right.

Employee now on Statutory Sick Pay

 

Management are continuing bullying with impunity with demands to attend a face to face, so the question to be asked, can the Crown Prosecution Service be contacted direct to consider a prosecution if a full case file is sent?

 

That is Protection from Harassment Act or psychological damage under offence against the person Act etc?

 

 

 

Criminal Action has a very high threshold it is bound to fail.

CPS would never get involved even if there is a good case!

You gave little info so it would be unfair to expect us to give good advice.

But you seem determined so maybe you have a case.

Give it a go at the Employment Tribunal, and if you are right then the Judge might ask the CPS to get involve.

Like I said earlier you gave us little info so we really don't have any good advice.

Employees historically have a very low rate of success at the Tribunal so it is easy to say a case will fail

But cases do turn at the discovery of seemingly little and/or "irrelevant" documents.

Just be ready to do a lot of work on your own as you can't give much info out.

Give what "a go" at employment tribunal.

In employment law,

even assuming that asking someone to attend a sickness review meeting and stopping their sick pay when they refuse is harassment,

harassment is an adjunct to unlawful discrimination,

and nothing the OP has said suggests any such thing.

The advice may have been different if that had been suggested, but it wasn't.

And employment tribunals only refer to the CPS for one thing - perjury.

And seldom even then because they would need evidence.

If an alleged act is criminal, then the route is to talk to the police.

I don't see any way in which this would even nudge their threshold of a criminal case.

Just to add my two cents ... I'm afraid I don't agree that requesting a face-to-face could be considered to be harassment. Harassment requires a course of action specifically intended to cause distress and I don't see how you can prove that.

If the employee has mental health problems that's really unfortunate and I hope he or she gets help, but I don't think you can prove its the employer's fault.

If the sick pay is truly contractual, a court claim can be brought to get the sick pay. But additional sick pay is often discretionary. If the contract terms provide for it to be discretionary, the employer is probably entitled to withdraw it and just pay SSP.

Give what "a go" at employment tribunal.

Like I said, the OP gave very little information.

Nobody can give him a good advice based on the little info.

So to tell him that his case has no merit when I have little information is just plain laziness.

To tell him that his case has no merit when I know so little is just stupid arrogance.

He strongly believes in his case but unwilling to give more information

He should give it a go

but he is not going to get any good advice from any reasonable person.

Absolutely nobody has said that the "case" has no merit,

so suggesting people are being lazy or arrogant in saying so is unacceptable and inaccurate.

But telling someone to "give it a go" when you don't even know there is a case at all

- and there is no evidence that there currently is a case - is unsound.

A "case" costs money.

A lot of it.

And being precipitative can cost you a case that might arise in the future.

The OP wanted to take criminal proceedings against an employer for harassment - not an employment tribunal.

That is simply not possible based on what the OP has said.

And going to an employment tribunal with no substantive breach of the law will not achieve anything.

There is no wisdom in telling someone to give it a go simply because they want to, when there is no evidence there is anything to give it a go for.

. There is no wisdom in telling someone to give it a go simply because they want to, when there is no evidence there is anything to give it a go for.

We don't know if there is NO evidence.

The OP gave little information.

He might have the evidence.

We simply don't know.

I told him not to expect any good advice.

He has a common law Right to access to the Court

I'm not going to discourage him from exercising that Right when I have little information.

Anyone giving advice on such little info would be misleading the OP

Anyone discouraging him based on such little advice would be unfair to the OP

He has a simple choice; give more info and get good advice or do it on your own!

The advice given is based on the information given.

It would be foolish iof anyone to say yes, go for it based on what we have here and it should be borne in mind that ET's can slap heavy costs orders on people who make hopeless claims and even a county court can decide on a costs order if the claim has no merit and is malicious. Caution under such circumstances is prudent but I wouldnt agree that it is any way unfair.

Originally OD was looking at seeking to get the matter considered as a criminal action when it then became clearer that this would not really be an appropriate prospect. Even starting such a venture wouild damage any civil action subsequently taken so I again disagree that good advice hasnt been given, it has focussed the attention on the more salient arguments.

.

We don't know if there is NO evidence.

 

The OP gave little information.

 

He might have the evidence.

 

We simply don't know.

 

I told him not to expect any good advice.

 

He has a common law Right to access to the Court

 

I'm not going to discourage him from exercising that Right when I have little information.

 

Anyone giving advice on such little info would be misleading the OP

 

Anyone discouraging him based on such little advice would be unfair to the OP

 

He has a simple choice; give more info and get good advice or do it on your own!

The advice given is based on the information given.

It would be foolish iof anyone to say yes, go for it based on what we have here and it should be borne in mind that ET's can slap heavy costs orders on people who make hopeless claims and even a county court can decide on a costs order if the claim has no merit and is malicious. Caution under such circumstances is prudent but I wouldnt agree that it is any way unfair.

Originally OD was looking at seeking to get the matter considered as a criminal action when it then became clearer that this would not really be an appropriate prospect. Even starting such a venture wouild damage any civil action subsequently taken so I again disagree that good advice hasnt been given, it has focussed the attention on the more salient arguments.

.

Please note, I didn't say yes, go for it

I made it clear that he gave little info

My exact words were;

But you seem determined so maybe you have a case.

Give it a go at the Employment Tribunal, and if you are right then the Judge might ask the CPS to get involve.

I clearly used the words maybe and if

He seem determined

He clearly has more info than we do

It is easy to say "you have no chance"

I don't take the easy route.

If he gives more info then I can give advice

But since he clearly didn't then I have no good advice to give.

I believe I said that several times.

I just want him to exercise his right (if he has one)

It is wrong to sit on the sofa and deny people who might have legit rights

The difficulty with bringing an Employment Tribunal without sound reasons is that fees apply - a £160 issue fee and £250 hearing fee at least (more for certain types of claim). Also, the Op may be ordered to pay the employer's legal costs if the claim is misconceived. It is also a massive time commitment and a stressful process to go through. I wouldn't recommend it unless the Op genuinely has a good case.

Also, I'm not sure whether an Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear straight harassment claims. That might be a type of claim that is only brought in court. Although of course harassment can also be relevant for types of claim which the ET does have jurisdiction to hear (such as unfair dismissal claims).

The difficulty with bringing an Employment Tribunal without sound reasons is that fees apply - a £160 issue fee and £250 hearing fee at least (more for certain types of claim). Also, the Op may be ordered to pay the employer's legal costs if the claim is misconceived. It is also a massive time commitment and a stressful process to go through. I wouldn't recommend it unless the Op genuinely has a good case.

.

Yes I agree with you

Just that the OP didn't give much info so we don't know if he has a case or not.

I have asked him to give us more info or go on his own!

He made it clear that he was giving us little info so technically he shouldn't expect much.

If we were paid professionals and someone came seeking advice and giving little info he would be shown the door!

I repeat it again; Give us more info and get good advice OR go on your own!

I think that is sensible

The difficulty with bringing an Employment Tribunal without sound reasons is that fees apply - a £160 issue fee and £250 hearing fee at least (more for certain types of claim). Also, the Op may be ordered to pay the employer's legal costs if the claim is misconceived. It is also a massive time commitment and a stressful process to go through. I wouldn't recommend it unless the Op genuinely has a good case.

 

Also, I'm not sure whether an Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear straight harassment claims. That might be a type of claim that is only brought in court. Although of course harassment can also be relevant for types of claim which the ET does have jurisdiction to hear (such as unfair dismissal claims).

No you cannot. Harassment, in employment law, is attached to discrimination - it is not a claim in itself. This is one of the reasons why bullying claims are so difficult - bullying is not "against" employment law. So you have to bring it as something else, or as an adjunct to something else. It is something that we have been lobbying for for a long time. But it is a very difficult area of law to legislate on anyway. Some forms of bullying are clear. But we also gets shed loads of "my manager is bullying me," which translates as "my manager is managing, and I don't like it"! The worst thing is that people don't get it - they genuinely appear to believe that telling them something they don't like is bullying. I am often reminded of my sister ( in the Forces) falling over laughing when new recruits were handed colored cards, and told that if they felt bullied by the instructors, they just had to hold up the card for it to stop! Because in normal military situations, if you feel bullied by the enemy, like they pay any notice of your card! Funnily enough, I believe anyone who used the card never passed out. But in employment law constructive unfair dismissal is usually the most relevant claim, and we all know how difficult those can be.

 

I have asked him to give us more info or go on his own!....

 

 

I repeat it again; Give us more info and get good advice OR go on your own!

 

I seriously hope that you did not intend that post to sound like this. Orbiter Dictum is a respected and long standing poster on here who came looking for some advice, and made it clear that they could not provide more information because it was not theirs to impart. This sounds arrogant and bullying - and quite unwarranted.

And for your information, as one of those professionals that you are saying would show them the door - no, I would not. It is not uncommon for people to approach me for advice on behalf of others. What I would have done is sit them down, get coffee and biscuits, and chat through what I can tell them based on what they tell me, and perhaps point out the things that I would need to know to give a better opinion. I wouldn't "show them the door", and I would not tell them to give me more info or "go on their own". I reserve "showing the door" to people who refuse to listen to the advice, who are rude or ungrateful, or are taking the proverbial. OP had been none of these things, and was understanding of the limits to the advice we could give. They do not deserve this attitude.

Please can we all take a minute to honour a postie from yate in Bristol who recently committed suicide after a long battle with depression and no support from Royal Mail

Can it be respectfully requested this thread now be closed as I will comment no more