i am writing on behalf of my wife.

she was employed as a manager for just over 6 months, her employer phoned her up just under a week ago and told her they was terminating her contract as of immediate effect. This was done without any probation meetings and no meetings prior to raise any concerns. I don't want to go into much detail as at the moment she has just started by raising this problem with ACAS. The employer has since claimed via a letter a fictitious probation meeting took place AFTER the dismissal via phone call! This was probably done by them to distract from they acted unprofessional and possibly against employment law.

She had disclosed all her health problems at the original job interview and recently was found to have some other problems arise during her employment. She has had time off because of her disclosed health problems but these have been for hospital appointments and she was told to put them in as sometimes sick and sometimes annual leave.

Just before the phone call terminating her employment she had informed her Line manager she was going to the GP as she has been under a significant amount of stress with her job, within 10 minutes of notifying the line manage she received the call from the owner of the company terminating her contract.

The doctor who assesses her gave her a fit for work note stated work related stress.

i would like to point out that they are not going down the health route for sacking as that would be discrimination and they was made aware of that by my wife about 5 months into her employment after they was complaining about time off for appointments.

She told her employers she was going to acas as she felt she had not been treated fairly to which the owner said they have a lot of businesses and have a lot of solicitors that they can seek advice from if she chooses to go down that route.

anyway i went off course a little but i felt i needed to share a little info as a lead up to my question.

As she has already seeking advice from acas under the new data protection rules would/should she make a SAR request to see exactly what info they have or wait until it goes to tribunal?

is there a template for an SAR request with the new rules listed and also what can she ask for... also is it possible to ask for any emails, possible taped phone conversations although my wife was never told of any phone conversations that were being recorded, texts, correspondants etc which my wifes name is included in.

any info would be greatly appreciated

thank you

On what grounds do you think an ET is appropriate? They need to have acted illegally/ unlawfully, not just unfairly.

I would suggest you make a SAR.Use the old template and I believe it would be enough

Remember you have only 3 months less one day to make a Claim before the ET

Your personal data ought to be disclosed under 20 days under the new rules.

Making a SAR is more preferable than Standard Disclosure

You have more ammo with a SAR than Standard Disclosure

Regarding the authenticity of a document, you have several choices

You could ask for the metadata of the document

From my experience, if they have something to hide they wouldn't provide it.However, if you wait till they submit the document to the ET and then challenge the authenticity there

In the ET, you have the power to ask for the metadata of any document submitted.Make sure you raise the issue at the Case Management Hearing

The other side knows what a personal data means and should disclose everything that needs to be disclosed

Don't bother yourself with that, if they hide crucial documents, it would come back to bite them

I don't see how you could get any sort of win from an ET, they could give almost any reason within 2 years to get rid of your wife and there is very little that could be done.

Assuming they pay up correctly for time owed, holidays etc there is very little left you could do about the dismissal

I don't see how you could get any sort of win from an ET, they could give almost any reason within 2 years to get rid of your wife and there is very little that could be done.

Assuming they pay up correctly for time owed, holidays etc there is very little left you could do about the dismissal

Common misconception!

You don't need 2 years if your dismissal is for discriminatory reasons In short, you can't be dismissed due to your age, sex, race, sexual orientation and disability It would be an Automatic Unfair Dismissal

The OP is alleging that the wife was dismissed on health grounds Let them make a SAR and see what information is held about them Then they can make a decision on the strength of their case

I don't see how you could get any sort of win from an ET, they could give almost any reason within 2 years to get rid of your wife and there is very little that could be done.

Assuming they pay up correctly for time owed, holidays etc there is very little left you could do about the dismissal

Here is the .gov website

https://www.gov.uk/dismiss-staff/unfair-dismissals

Where do you see discrimination please, DD?

HB

ETA: I've edited your post above to have a bit less spacing and take up less room.

i would like to point out that they are not going down the health route for sacking as that would be discrimination and they was made aware of that by my wife about 5 months into her employment after they was complaining about time off for appointments.

Just in case this was missed; although if a condition is such that the job cannot be performed, a dismissal on health grounds can still be legal.

Just in case this was missed; although if a condition is such that the job cannot be performed, a dismissal on health grounds can still be legal.

https://www.gov.uk/dismiss-staff/dismissals-due-to-illness

As can be seen from the .gov website, dismissal should be the last resort

Dismissal would be illegal if reasonable adjustment could be made but was failed to be considered

Let the OP's wife make a SAR and see what information is held on her

She may or may not have a case after that

Dondada, your “ET even in the slimmest cases” stance

A) causes people stress fighting battles they have no chances if winning

B) wastes court time and money, slowing the process down for cases with a decent chance of success

Not fair to the individual, or to broader society!

HB asked you how man ETs you had taken part in and I do not think you answered?

Dondada, your “ET even in the slimmest cases” stance

A) causes people stres fighting battles they have no chances if winning

B) wastes court time and money, slowing the process down for cases with a decent chance of success

 

Not fair to the individual, or to broader society!

 

HB asked you how man ETs you had taken part in and I do not think you answered?

I really don't see how you came to the conclusion that the OP's case has no chance of winning

You have not seen the evidence!

Neither have the OP

I only suggested to him that he should do a SAR to get more information

You are NOT a lawyer and have no legal training

Yet you have concluded that this case has no chance of winning

That is unfair to the OP!

Let him do the SAR and see if he has a case

I have never told anyone the merit of their case

I have only provided tips and advice if they wish to take it further

You, on the other hand, have been drawing conclusion on the merit of cases

You, on the other hand, have been drawing conclusion on the merit of cases

Yes, because that is really important on deciding upon a course of action

Yes, because that is really important on deciding upon a course of action

The OP knows the facts of the case

You don't!

Let them make the SAR and get more information

I believe they are intelligent enough to make a decision

But you don't know the facts either, dondada?

HB

The OP knows the facts of the case

You don't!

Let them make the SAR and get more information

I believe they are intelligent enough to make a decision

If you could retain your advice for the OP instead of constantly derailing threads by disagreeing with others...IM sure the OP will listen to both sides and opinions and take into account the level of experience and knowledge.....let the OP decide....if they ever return and not fed up of bickering.

But you don't know the facts either, dondada?

 

HB

You are right!

I don't know the facts hence I never make conclusion on the merit of a case

I always trust the OP to make that decision

I only offer tips and advice when I can

If you could retain your advice for the OP instead of constantly derailing threads by disagreeing with others...IM sure the OP will listen to both sides and opinions and take into account the level of experience and knowledge.....let the OP decide....if they ever return and not fed up of bickering.

I try to stick to the issue at hand but I always get accused of encouraging people to take legal action

People are smart and know when to take action or not

I just point out the law and relevant case laws

If they decide to take it further, I offer tips and advice

I also warn them that I'm not a lawyer and I haven't seen the full details of their cases

I get accused falsely

When you are falsely accused then you instinctively rise to protect yourself

Well as you state your not a Lawyer so cant really offer Legal advice...tips and advice and case law are not really helpful when your pressuring a poster to take a very serious legal decision.

Advice must be sound and legally accurate.

Advice must be sound and legally accurate.

My suggestions have always been accurate

Emmzzi said "dismissal on health grounds can still be legal"

The .gov website shows that isn't correct when the employer fails to consider reasonable adjustment

Emmzzi said "On what grounds do you think an ET is appropriate? They need to have acted illegally/ unlawfully, not just unfairly."

Case Law shows that there is the need to follow procedures in dismissing a staff

See Molloy v Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust

Any employer that fails to follow procedure would definitely be exposing itself

I can give you more case law but this makes a strong point of procedures

I have always backed my statement with either case laws or relevant documents

So I don't see the basis for your accusation that my suggestions are not legally accurate

No harm in making the SAR but on the face of it the case doesn't look the strongest.

Maybe it would help if the OP can give a little bit more on the nature of the illnesses and time off work?

No harm in making the SAR but on the face of it the case doesn't look the strongest.

 

Maybe it would help if the OP can give a little bit more on the nature of the illnesses and time off work?

That has been my point all along!

Maybe there are materials that would assist the OP

Maybe not!

Although there seems to be a failure on the part of the employer to follow proper procedure

However, procedural unfairness attract very small compensation

The common exception to that rule is the Sharon Shoesmith case when she received a substantial amount

No harm in making the SAR but on the face of it the case doesn't look the strongest.

 

Maybe it would help if the OP can give a little bit more on the nature of the illnesses and time off work?

Here is a quote from Megarry J in John v Rees [1970] 1 Ch 345, 402

"As everybody who has anything to do with the law well knows, the path of the law is strewn with examples of open and shut cases which, somehow, were not; of unanswerable charges which, in the event, were completely answered; of inexplicable conduct which was fully explained; of fixed and unalterable determinations that, by discussion, suffered a change"

Cases turn on small details

So it will be unfair to conclude that a case has no prospect of winning when you don't have ALL the facts

Here is a quote from Megarry J in John v Rees [1970] 1 Ch 345, 402

 

"As everybody who has anything to do with the law well knows, the path of the law is strewn with examples of open and shut cases which, somehow, were not; of unanswerable charges which, in the event, were completely answered; of inexplicable conduct which was fully explained; of fixed and unalterable determinations that, by discussion, suffered a change"

 

Cases turn on small details

So it will be unfair to conclude that a case has no prospect of winning when you don't have ALL the facts

I never claimed to have all the facts.

But based on the very limited information provided so far the prospects of success don't look great.

That may change with more details from the OP or further disclosure.

And you don't need to teach me how to suck eggs, thanks.

Case Law shows that there is the need to follow procedures in dismissing a staff

See Molloy v Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust

28 years service, versus the 6 months in this case, so the internal procedures to be followed are completely different.

Next spurious case law please?

28 years service, versus the 6 months in this case, so the internal procedures to be followed are completely different.

 

 

Next spurious case law please?

On what legal point have you made this conclusion

Can you provide relevant information?

Can you provide concrete evidence to back your statement?

Proper procedure is covered under the Burchell Test and adopted for all aspect of dismissal

You spend more time attacking me rather than providing concrete information

You forgot how you tried to mislead the OP by saying dismissal on health grounds can still be legal?

I caught you on that

Later you will attack the OP by saying he has no intelligence to make a decision