Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Atlas01

  1. If your wife is depressed the best thing you can do is look at how to help her in that area, forget employment and issues at work, if you were to discuss relevant issues with her whist she was under the control of depression your help would be counter productive, look at the bars below my muscle chiselled avatar, my kung fu in employment issues is strong, my experience with depression of your other half is bigger ! She will never fix her work issues until she fixes the depression As far as this being a trolling thread from a neutral poster's perspective (who's been away for a while)
  2. I'm quite apathetic in this area now It is unjust and deflates the industry for all the other low (insert several profanities here) paid workers out there, but we all want to pay as little as possible, even us employee loving stalwarts It can also be a pyrrhic victory as the employer just cuts more staff to balance the bills and people lose work For me if i was certain there would be no loss to the people i was trying to help i would report them (No idea if the taxman/NMW bods cares about anon reports though) If there was i chance i'd hurt the people i was trying to help i
  3. See above for best answer to Yes/No In respect of what it will do for you, your employer can easily (because it's true) state these are two wholly separate incidents and continue with the disciplinary and also take action for the breach of confidence separately (or fob you off and continue taking action) If your lucky (assuming the employer has a case against you) you can sometimes use it as a way of damage control in defending your case All depends on what it is, what you have done (or not done) and the ability of your employer in managing this fairly and reasonably in the eye
  4. They should have to give him owing days leave calculated on his part time basis, he won't get a pay off unless he leaves, he will need to take the days They won't advertise it so i suggest he raises it formally. He may also get a formal warning for time off at the same time but that may be coming anyway.
  5. Why anyone has a probationary period in a contract these days is beyond me as they are totally meaningless with the 2 year qualifying period legally set out to bring any claim unless worded by the worlds supreme moron of a HR officer. Just lazy copy and pasting of old contracts when employees were treated like staff instead of cattle. Just ignore it, it carries as much weight as a bag full of virtual feathers Under 2 years - Do as they like
  6. Well this thread wins the monthly "How to get help on a forum" award for me "My question is, what can I do as an employee who works alone, and is not in a union to get a resolution to this issue?" Step 1. Raise another grievance with a higher level manager. "Surely I am entitled to have my grievance heard within ten motnhs, which is my original question" Yes you are correct, you should have, they didn't (in your opinion), go back to step one above or put up and shut up, there's you two choices. "It has taken ten months for him to do nothing and then ignore me (which i
  7. There are two separate entities here. 1. The original complaint by the OP 2. Their subsequent suspension for the MOP complaint. For 1 the OP needs to concentrate on that on it's own for now, he may feel that they have brought this in because he complained but this really means little right now, if an MOP has complained they are fully able to investigate it. Mitigation and such around it being a month and they have only thrown it in now does seem suspicious but suspicion is all it is unless they are stupid enough to admit it. For 2 which is the most important issue currently
  8. You have 2 options engage a personal injury solicitor or go in work and say "i want you to offer me some money as i'm leaving because of the incident" To be honest using the terms of this guessing game i'd lean on most solicitors considering it so they can make 10k while you make 1k but in the eyes of negligence law the employer may argue it was not foreseeable and if a judge agrees, you get zip.
  9. Off what i can see above if they have a letter stating the work is for 37.5 hrs and it can be read as the hours contractually then they can claim for at least the hours they can evidence they have worked, however i smell zero hours contract to be honest (if they argue it) and it revolves around non payment of wages. the missing sums for hours worked may be claimable. I see nothing around unlawful deduction (they just did not pay), protected disclosers (not relevant here) so i would send you back to the sheep's post above for best course of action.
  10. http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/8/6/Varying-a-contract-of-employment-accessible-version.pdf A better guide on how to deal with contractual change and the rights and pitfalls if you say no. I'm not against people going to the media or MP but in my experience they won't give a dam and it is beyond pointless.
  11. In the past (4-5 years ago) i would have said approx 12 months from start of absence to dismissal was the norm for sickness which was clearly backed up by medical advice and genuine reasons for the person being unable to work. Some went higher, some lower but i'd call that a fair average. With the last and current governments i would not be surprised if tribunals were allowing less time between commencement of sickness and dismissal but this is guesswork from me, semi-confident guesswork seeing how many other employee rights have started to deteriorate. As long as your aware that no
  12. As its hot and i've had a few "sherries" my reply must be read or sung to the tune of Mr Tom Jones It's not unusual to be shafted in this way It's not unusual for your boss, not to say ok but when I see them legally withholding your.... salaried pay It's not unusual to see me cry, oh I wanna' die
  13. let me be blunt here so you don't get wrapped up in the magical world of "how I think these things should be handled". I do not mean this sarcastically, I'm just trying to bring your feet back down to the ground Good luck but in my experience the key to these cases is getting yourself back in work as quickly as you can and showing this during formal meetings. Anything else leaves you open without clear medical reports that back your position and offer a timeline where you will be able to go back to work.
  14. read this https://www.gov.uk/sunday-working read it again then read it again then read it again and do your damned hardest to pick a hole in your position from your employers side, spin it, cheat, try all sort of spurious arguments you think they might try If it's still watertight print it off and hand it to them (sooner rather than later) If not come back for more advice. Expect them to either a) huff puff and do nothing to change your terms b) tell you tough c) come back with a counter argument (may be valid or rhubarb) Your at the start of a game, a game pla
  15. Basically it's up to you. Check the policy and see if it allows for them to increase a sanction on appeal (most don't) as this will be a major part of your decision making. if they can't do more than uphold the original warning then it's a case of "speak now or forever hold......" If you do not raise it within their procedures then they have every right to say you missed the boat if you later wish to rely on it. Personally i think i would get something in so it's on the books as they say. Bluntly : No Appeal means you've accepted their warning without rebuttal.
  16. Correct me if i'm wrong but the only thing an employer can do with bank details is pay in, not take out? Therefore unless they intend breach the DPA by giving access to others (excluding the Vatman etc.) i see nothing to worry about whatsoever in them having them. There may even be a requirement to hold this data for a period of time but this is a guess.
  17. "As an alternative approach : is your employer's fleet fitted with "black boxes", and if so : is it worth asking if your metrics show an increase in sudden breaking / swerving than the "normal" drivers - as if not on what basis do your employers base their concerns?" I would never in a million years invite anyone to look through tracking generated data, i'd put my house on it everyone here who drives would see many bad readings on it and unless you remembered every occasion "oh that was where i car stopped suddenly, a car pulled out, i swerved as kids were messing etc." it will only ma
  18. Goodwill payments are usually when the employer thinks "hmn, could i be found to have unfairly dismissed this employee if i just dismissed them" or when the employer thinks the time cost effort of defending a claim isn't worth the hassle. I suppose there are employers out there who think, "this chaps given us 30 years of his life so lets say thank you", you tend not to come across them in our line of advice as not many people post saying "i'm too ill to work and my employer has offered a generous package, woo ho!" Looking at what you have put i doubt you have a company pension which c
  19. I can't see anything in this thread where the injured person is an appointed safety rep or has one representing him, therefore the srsc regs are probably a red herring here (have not checked but would expect every one of those sections you referenced to start along the lines of "safety reps must be.....") The employer probably will on request put up the documents as they would need to be disclosed under legal privileged once a claim went in anyway. In most cases as soon as they are requested, My point was and remains, it is very dangerous to say "you are legally obliged to give me this"
  20. Indeed, although there is case law where employee's have covertly recorded a hearing and it has been accepted by the tribunal, i only have to count the fingers on my right hand for the amount of times it's fallen in the employees favour and i'll have a couple left to count! A couple of things i noted, RA's and SSOW's do not need to be updated every 12 mths unless this is the companies policy via their own H&S policy. It is advised by the HSE "periodically" but of course the longer you leave them not reviewed the less chance you have of showing good safety systems. The management
  21. This would not be the first time i've seen an employer think blaming a member of staff is the correct way to deal with a breach of H&S and think this is what the HSE expect or that it will get them off the hook. The last one the employee i was with was told by the manager they were being disciplined, the HSE inspector took a very dim view of this due to the circumstances and took enforcement action on the firm, the employee sued and won for personal injury. He needs to curb any anger, lose your temper, lose your argument. If i was him i'd be asking what the findings of the invest
  22. Potential dismissal and re-engagement as some people may not be able to work the hours. Will depend on if your hours are set or "flexible" in your contract. They should be formally consulting and issuing letters of change. If not grievance and you will get up to 90 days to decide if you can do the new hours or not. If you have genuine problems you need to respond in writing and ask them to set out their position, consultation time frame and intention as to when they wish to change your contract. If the manager is trying it on expect the brakes to be applied. If there is something we
  23. I'd rather be an intern than sent to a pound shop to stack shelves for free, we are nearly back to the old YTS schemes, the government (all just as bad whichever party) just got coy and didn't give the schemes a name. I was in a pound bakery the other day and saw an advert for "apprentice" shop assistants, no disrespect but you take cash or put food in an oven and check the temperature when the buzzer beeps (the overjoyed minimum wage till assistants own words). Up the street the local chippy has just taken on an apprentice - I genuinely worry for kids these days trying to get
  24. The problem i see here pension wise is we all know this must be a nightmare for the person but rules are clinical. Is it possible that the person could work fully if there wasn't a chilli in the vicinity?, yes That's the problem, no chilli, nothing wrong with them, when your back or knees pack up, your pretty stuffed whatever you do, when it's a triggered condition removing the trigger removes the problem, how you could do that i've no idea but i doubt any pension rules would care. Strangely enough i thought about this thread in the office last week when i asked what the bowl of what
  • Create New...