I disagree. I believe her communications were deliberately aggressive, and continued to be so after I politely pointed it out to her. Honeybee's irony was not appreciated either, nor the mobbing that has followed. I would be grateful if you would please remove my account from your forum. I suggest you review the manner in which you correspond with members of the public.

No reason to apologise HB. Genuine help is appreciated. Best wishes

Hi HB I'm not sure you understand the difficulty, either with SarEl or my tribunal case, but thanks for contacting me. Regardless of how people treat each other at work or at tribunal, it's not in anybody's interest to be aggressive on a web forum. It costs nothing to be nice. Free legal advice is excellent as long as it's good advice. It can be dangerous if it comes from someone in an aggressive knee jerk response to a question they haven't read properly or that they just don't understand. Would you agree? My protected disclosure came after I was bullied. However, bullying is not something that tribunals have jurisdiction on. There are a number of activities that you can blow the whistle on, and they are described here: direct. gov. uk (I'm not allowed to post links) My disclosures qualify for protection due to more than one type of malpractice. Best wishes

So would you recommend I drop the Protected Disclosure part of my case, even if, as stated, it's stronger than the successful one I referred you to? Do you know of any legal precedent or law that prohibits the use of protected disclosures in this way? Would you have recommended Sangha withdraw her protected disclosure claim which proved successful, given that she was employed for less than a year? In relation to the FACTS I've referrred to. I don't understand what your objection is here. My guess is that you may not have read what I'm talking about and are jumping to yet another conclusion. Or possibly this is a topic that is new to you, and outwith your comfort zone. Clearly with 30 years experience, you must have a massive amount of knowledge. There is a subject that I have a lot of knowledge of too, but before I answer a question about it, I would have to make sure I understood the question first, otherwise my answer would be wrong, regardless of how much knowledge I have. Please demonstrate that you understand the question, and why I've asked it, and then how your answer relates to that understanding. You are obviously one for straight talking, so you will no doubt appreciate it when I say that I do indeed find you aggressive.

SarEl Sangha v Weetabix. Case No. 1900702/2008

Hi Honeybee Yes that's what it is; whisteblowing.

SarEL, I feel you need to take a deep breath, and perhaps chill for a while before you post any more. I am grateful for any advice that forum users can provide, but I feel you may be coming across slightly agressive. I'm sorry if I've said something to cause this, but I genuinely don't know what it could possibly be. What I'm referring to is my employers' Grievance Procedure which states that the decision will be based on the facts made available to the chairperson. To my knowledge there is no facts that support the decision that I am a bully. However, I lodged lots of evidence that my boss bullied me. If my employer was to produce a video of me hitting my boss with a baseball bat a few times, that would be a fact, in my view. As the decision was made that I was a bully, then it surely follows that there were facts to support that decision, and facts that support the decision not to uphold my grievance even though I had submitted irrefutable proof. I would add tthat if such a video was to be produced, I would have to seriously consider withtdrawing my claim. So it is surely in the interest of my employer to provide these facts.

Hi SarEl I can confirm that I submitted a grievance of bullying against my boss before he did. I hope that means you and the tribunal will see this as being in my favour, since you felt it went against me when you thought my boss submitted a grievance first. Better yet, I had also submitted a grievance against my co-worker long before he did. How does that make you feel now? Am I in with a shout? Regarding protected disclosures, there has indeed been a successful use of it in court, and it was for behaviour that seems fairly mild compared with what I received. Some awards go above a million pounds. I'm not suggesting mine will, I would quickly add. I realise you have a lot of knowledge of ETs. How have you acquired that knowledge? Have you represented employees/employers at tribunals, or have you represented yourself? Sorry if this is well known to the forum users. As I said, I'm very new here.

Another question, would it be useful for me to ask the tribunal to order my employers to procuce the facts on which tey based their decision to dismiss my grievance, and to uphold my boss's? Ideally I'd like this information before having to decide what witnesses to call.

Hi SarEl Thanks for your reply. Don't worry about appearing unpopular. There's no point in painting a rosy picture if it's not representative of what happens at a tribunal. I'm a little surprised that you think my story smacks of paranoia and desperation, or that a tribunal might see it that way. Since this happened to me, I've become aware that it's fairly typical behaviour for a bully tolerant employer to act in this way to get rid of the target, and that witnesses will be reluctant to come forward for fear that they will be next. Worse than that, some witnesses will willingly give false evidence in order to curry favour with the bully who, for selfish reasons, is someone they want on their side. I'm sure the website that Honeybee referred to talks about this behaviour. I think it might come under 'Mobbing'. I can see how it may raise a few eyebrows that I am accusing so many people of lying. It's far easier to think that one person might lie; namely me! I am hoping that the tribunal will take this into account when they consider the compensation I should receive after such an oppressive experience. It's not unknown for people to commit suicide when subjected to this type of treatment. I think you may have forgotten an important part of my application; that of my protected disclosure. It's not just sufficient that my employers won't be able to prove that they acted fairly in dismissing me. I think if it was just a case of unfair dismissal, they would just have to show that they followed the correct procedure, that they had a fair and reasonable investigation, and that they believed, on the balance of probabilities, that I had done something worthy of dismissal. However, I also need to demonstrate that I suffered detriment due to having made a protected disclosure. I believe there is an onus on me, not just to demonstrate that my dismissal was unfair, but also to show that immediately after I made my disclosure, my employers subjected me firstly to a flawed grievance procedure, and then to a flawed disciplinary procedure. I think therefore that it is for me to present my case first. I believe that when my employers dismissed me, they realised that a tribunal would most likely find it to be unfair. That wasn't their main concern. It was to get rid of me; not because they think I am a bully, but because they see me as someone who was putting pressure on management to deal with a problem that they preferred not to deal with. There's a limit to what a tribunal can award under unfair dismissal, and my employers would have seen that as a bargain. However, there is no limit for claims under the Public Interest Disclosures Act. Honeybee, I have written proof of a lot of what I am saying.

Thanks everyone for your responses. This has been very helpful. Here's what I have planned. Please give me your views on whether or not I will be using court time for a purpose that will be of no value to the tribunal. I intend to call my boss (MB) to show evidence that he harassed me over time, and to refute his claims that I harassed him Also to show he lied at grievance. I intend to call the person (GH) who conducted the grievances to show that his decision was not based on the facts available. I intend to call the person (GA) who dismissed my grievance appeal despite there being evidence that the procedure was very flawed. I intend to call my co-worker (CW) to show evidence that shows he lied during disciplinary investigation. I shall ask why he lied,and suggest that it was MB who had told him to lie. I intend to call the Investigation Officer (IO) who failed to carry out the disciplinary investigation properly, by ignoring evidence I had referred him to. I intend to call the person (DH) who conducted the disciplinary hearing, to show that he was aware that the investigation was flawed, and that he also ignored evidence. I intend to call the person (DA) who dismissed my disciplinary appeal despite there being evidence that the procedure was very flawed. Please note that I have no witnesses to support me because the workers fear they would be next for the sack if they spoke up in my behalf.

Hi I just joined the forum recently and have read some things that worry me a bit. I recently submitted an ET1 after being unfairly dismissed. Here's my story. I was harassed by my boss for over two years and submitted a formal grievance against him. I said in my grievance that the harassment had been making me ill with stress. He knew I was about to file my grievance, so he submitted a malicious grievance against me, claiming that I harassed him. My employers decided, despite all the evidence, to dismiss my grievance and uphold his. Then a co-worker immediately made a malicious complaint saying that I harassed him too. I was suspended while an investigation took place. Then a hearing took place, and I was sacked. I have no doubt that my employers know that the accusations are false, but they see it as an easy option to get rid of me, even if it means they lose an unfair dismissal case at tribunal. They did it before with someone who won unfair dismisal at tribunal. It's a public authority, so it's not their money they're losing, and there's a limit to what you can be awarded for unfair dismissal. I've made a claim for unfair dismissal, as well as a claim that I received unfavourable treatment because I made a protected disclosure. There's no limit for awards for claims of unfair treatment due to making a protected disclosure. Should I ask the tribunal to order my boss and co-worker to attend as witnesses so that I can cross examine them to demonstrate to the tribunal that they were lying. I'm confident I can do that. I'm also confident that I could show that the person who conducted the grievances deliberately made the wrong decision. Should I cross examine him too? Shoud I also cross examine the person who dismissed me if none of them are called by my employers as witnesses?

In the interest of fairness, It should be "in its own right". Please don't anyone cheeck my speeling! As said earlier, sacking someone for bad spelling, while spelling badly yourself would be laughed out of court surely; and it's the type of thing the press might enjoy reporting on too.

Hi Bignick It really annoys me when I hear of people being victimised for raising grievances. It's something that employees should receive protection from. However, they are only protected if their grievance can also be considered to be a protected disclosure. It is possible to make a protected disclosure unknowingly. For example, if your wife stated that a supervisor's treatment was damaging her health, or that the supervisor ws acting unlawfully, then that could be considered a protected disclosure. Good luck!

My understanding is that, with only 8 months service, an Employment Tribunal could only consider a case of discrimination or, possibly more appropriate to your case, whistleblowing, ie making a protected disclosure to your company expressing your concerns that they may not be complying with their legal obligations. This is covered by the Public Interest Disclosure Act which you can look up to see if your disclosure would qualify for protection from any detriment, including unfair dismissal. Can you think of any reason why the two employees would falsely accuse you of having and smelling of alcohol?