Thanks for the replys. It is the regional union rep that has basically told them to bugger off!! We think the union are / were in fact more on the side of the employer than their members. She sent an email saying that she is not prepared to answer any more emails unless new evidence comes to light! Why the union can't or won't answer the question as to why the 7 people investigated all for same allegations yet only 4 were charged with falsifying time sheets , and why the union din't pickup on the anomaly is what is leaving a sour taste at the moment. OH used computer at lunch time, to plan work, check industry sites, produce reports etc. Their manager has no qualifications to be in the role, therefore making OH job harder . So tracker logged that it parked up longer than the allowed lunch time.

HI, I wish I had found this site about 6 moths ago. Here goes - I will try to make it as short as possible. My OH has ( had!) over 30 unblemished years service with a local authority as a craft tradesman. Approximately 18 months the management ( 3rd party run local authority services) made veiled comments about losing staff, but also had their favourites they wanted to keep. However all staff would have to go through competitive interviews, sickness records etc and their favourites would not make it. So they had a problem. There has been a succession of brought in line managers do not have the necessary qualifications, experience to run / understand the department. Staff of 8 in department. All work vans are fitted with a GPS tracker system About 8 months ago, 2 employees found using a GPS jammer device, suspended on spot, subsequently investigated and dismissed without paid notice. Couple of weeks after jammer discovered all 6 other employees received a letter asking them to attend an interview re: "an incident" that had occurred in dept. Obviously all took this to be about the GPS jammer. However when OH goes in for interview, by investigating manager ( who doesn't understand OH job/role) and HR he is presented with 4 months worth of his tracker information), and is questioned about his lunch time activities. OH accused of having too long for lunch. Lots of mitigating factors - no computer access at work, planning work, planning reports etc etc. Union were very ineffective in meeting and HR seemed to be more vocal and leading investigation. All 6 employees interviewed - one none driver therefore no tracker info - but regularly seen leaving work 30 -45 mins early by senior management. The remaining 5 were deemed to have been having too long for lunch Couple of weeks later 4 of the 6 suspended - the non driver and a worker who "makes" the management house a lot of money were not suspended. - He was however investigated and given a 2nd written warning - but not charged with falsifying time sheets yet allegedly owed 4 hours. The 4 who were suspended have been through disciplinary hearing and an appeal hearing - both of which did not take mitigating factors into consideration. All were dismissed under gross misconduct with paid notice. ACAS are now issuing certificate as management won't budge , but did acknowledge that the paid notice was due to "managerial shortcomings" and union have refused to support members as they have been charged with 'falsifying time sheets". HR are aware that union are not supporting ( mole?!). My OH has repeatedly asked the union why only 4 of the 8 have been accused of falsifying time sheets when all 8 employees were allegedly taking too long for lunch or leaving work early. The employee leaving early was simply taken in for a quiet chat!! OH also asked union why in a separate incident ( based on tracker information ) an employee was at home for a full 8 hours during the day - but he wasn't investigated, suspended and only given another final written warning, why is there a lack of parity? The 4 are now meeting with a view to proceed privately to an ET. Union are supporting the employee who was dismissed for jammer use? Your comments and advice would be gratefully appreciated.