Jump to content

Weird Al Yankovic

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    1,380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Weird Al Yankovic

  1. Hi What does your contract of employment state regarding extra hours that may need to be worked?
  2. I had always believed in unions and having some protection for the working man but, in my opinion from experience, unions are a complete waste of time and I would never join one again and waste my time or money. Rather than pay my weekly subs I would prefer to put that toward a comprehensive home insurance policy where work placed disputes are covered and representation would be from a properly qualified lawyer within the employment field rather than some numpty I would happen to work with who doesn't know his arse from his elbow.
  3. C'mon Conniff, some people watch Sky movies so it is still a cunning little plan demonstrated by the OP for them!
  4. Hello there Yes, they can summon you to work, sick or not, but within reason. For instance, should one be on the critical list in hospital then that would be unreasonable to be called into a meeting in work. However, a builder with a broken arm maybe signed off work but that wouldn't really prevent him from attending a meeting in work. I'd be careful especially as the OH feel you are able to attend.
  5. Hello This is a fairly standard clause in an employment contract. Of course, you are free to negotiate this clause to have it removed. Or to remain on your old contract provided the old contract has no clause allowing your employer to amend the terms of it in the future, which they appear to be doing now.
  6. Hi This is basically a contractual issue. Do you have anything regarding this bonus system in writing?
  7. Hi daveycrocket, sorry about your lean times. I guess you were/are self-employed? If so, are you up to date with your stamp? In any case, sign on as soon as you can. Good luck ps By the way, where do you live? Could help you out with some kind of related work, pm me if you want to.
  8. To make a claim for unfair dismissal, then yes, correct. However, a dismissal can also be wrongful as well as unfair but the OP would still have remedy for the wrongful dismissal. Which is what the title of this thread is about.
  9. Incorrect. Probationary periods mean absoutely nothing in employment law. The OP has no choice but to not go into work as the law says he cannot as he is a chef with salmonella. For the OP to then be dismissed, seemingly without notice, for complying with the law regarding his job is a clear breach of contract, or, a wrongful dismissal.
  10. I was a walk postie for a while and the abuse was a very regular thing. I delivered mail years ago when giro's were sent out by the DSS and if I was in an area that was rather run down, with lots of benefit claimants, but the DSS didn't send out the giro, then there would be riots. Some people would get angry because I knocked them up to sign for a letter, deliver a parcel etc People moaned about wet mail when raining, late letters, items not what they ordered!!! etc etc Abuse was part of the job way back when.
  11. Actually, promotions like this are normally paid up front. So, Kelloggs probably paid all these swimming pools a sum of money, say £10,000 each but then the swimming pool would hope that only about £5,000 worth of vouchers would be redeemed during the offer period, thus making £5,000. However, The list of participating swimming pools remains subject to change. Please contact your chosen venue to confirm continual availability of the offer. Participating swimming pools are all contracted to participate in the free swim offer. The promoter, its agents and distributors accept no responsibility, financial or otherwise, for the misuse of the voucher and are not liable for any personal loss or injury at the participating swimming pools. Further, they cannot be held responsible for any disagreement concerning quality / availability of participating swimming pools. Obviously there is a contract between Kelloggs and the pools but subject to change. Looks like you may have to find a different pool.
  12. Yes Chancellor I'd agree it needs sorting out. It does appear, how I read it at least, that the OP is displaying an ignorance of the tax system and the situation has suddenly occurred but 14 years!!? I just don't think it would wash with the Revenue for that amount of time. I know prosecutions are fairly rare but I'd say this has the ingredients to be considered serious-14 years undeclared income, 2 years working abroad, an admittance of some assets and the threat of the Rev finding out before the OP 'comes clean' which would make the situation even worse. I'd get some really good advice if I were the OP.
  13. Hi Don't return any document to your previous employer that may be of use to your claim in future litigation. Any gagging order within a contract that details illegal activity would not be valid in any case, and neither would the contract. This is a serious situation and you should consult a solicitor as soon as. Do you have home insurance where the policy could well cover employment disputes?
  14. Forgive me but is this not a serious situation for the OP? I've been self employed for quite a few years and the communication I receive from the Rev regarding my tax affairs clearly state I could get into a lot of trouble should I not remain up to date. Or am I missing something here? Sorry if the OP finds my comment unsettling.
  15. Yes, an email exchange would be binding. However, I am confused as to what else is detailed within your post. Could you clarify please?
  16. His cleaner. That's not cleaners in general. Do you know the character of his cleaner? Just pay a visit to the police with your emails as any other route will be costly and with little chance of success.
  17. Hello Yes, I appreciate that. However, I'm responding to what has been posted initially by the OP in this particular thread rather than basing upon assumption and/or the law in general. From the OP's initial post the question is far ranging and a little vague though it would appear possibly both the landlord and the contractor/s could be liable for a piece of falling rubble causing a hazard. Yet the OP reveals more and it is quite clear that rubble and a tape measure have fallen off the scaffold which could have injured people and it appears the scaffold may not have been licenced to be put up in the first place and no sign has been displayed. We do not know if the builder hired the scaffolder as a sub-contractor for this work or if the landlord hired both seperately. This is crucially important. Also, we do not know if the landlord did or did not check the credentials of his contractor/s-equally important. What we do know is that rubble fell. What we also know is that the scaffold may not have been licenced to be erected in the first place which may be the builder's responsibility, if they were hired by them as sub-contractors, or the landlords if he had done so. As in my first post, on the face of it (what has been posted), I would be inclined to consider the contractor/s responsible as we have no evidence that the landlord has not complied with everything he should have done under H&S regs.
  18. Not strictly accurate. The contractor is the one who is issued with a licence by the council to erect the scaffold and determine the safety of the building they are working on-the landlord and shop owner have only hired the contractors. It is for the council to check their credentials before granting a licence to them to erect the scaffolding in the first place. The falling rubble has to be explained by the contractor as to why it happened and they would be responsible for any harm caused, hence, the need for them to have Public Indemnity Insurance.
  19. Hi Well, that put's a different edge to it I guess. I thought what you posted was actually the message sent to you verbatim. You are better off making a complaint to the police as it appears more of a criminal matter than anything else, regarding the above comments. Good luck.
  20. Hello Are you indicating that the above exchange by email is discriminatory and racist? Sure it's a bit rude and sarcastic but racist?
  21. You have had sound advice already from that other website by the look of it. It was not your card, it was the ltd company's card. What's the worry?
  22. I do believe that the legislation quoted within this particular thread is the Consumer Credit Act and there are differing variations for England/Wales, Scotland, N.Ireland and maybe even the Isle of Man etc. Therefore, the CCA for a N.Irish resident, for example, would refer to the N.Irish version and not English law (as heard in an English/Welsh court) as stated by you. Bookworm's original statement was accurate although technically incorrect.
×
×
  • Create New...