Jump to content

PashConscious

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About PashConscious

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Yet you jump in on that assumption, I made no reference to quitting before this is seen through. I mention this to explain my sensitivity to the responses I have had and to clarify that I'm feeling quite low today/yesterday. I wouldn't expect them to not take action because it's my birthday because I'm not 6 years old. I appreciate all input and please don't take me saying this as an affront to this forum but BazzaS, please take your advice somewhere else. I really don't need a lecture right now. Thanks
  2. I haven't resigned yet and will only have the choice to resign if I am not dismissed. I was suspended yesterday (on my birthday) so you'll understand my feeling a little sensitive.
  3. Sorry for the barrage of replies. The trainer did say that "to drive the vehicles we have a zero tolerance policy and you will be required to show 0,00 in order to drive the cars. In a pre-training video it said that "not being able to drive as a result of this will have serious consequences". The consequences were clarified to me as being a fine in the form of a percentage of the training cost being charged back to the dealership £500 which I would expect to pay. Bringing the company into disrepute has not been mentioned at all and this was a strictly closed (company nam) event on
  4. I have been accused of: - serious breach of company policy through failing a breathalyser test at a global training event - wilful failure to carry out a reasonable instruction I should note that in my handbook there is no reference to a specific policy covering this incident except "serious incapability through alcohol or drug abuse". Also given my fair amount of caution (I was surrounding by people who have been on many of these training events and were still drinking) I don't think I can be accused of wilful failure. Also passing a test which is this subject to confoundin
  5. Also, I have now accepted that my time hee is over, either by my hand or theirs. I'm not going to resign until this is blown over and I am going to dispute anything more than a written warning. Perhaps making an offer resignation with pay for notice? A few people I have explained this to me (including a Master's student in employment law) have said this will likely fall in my favour at tribunal but I don't want that noise.
  6. Thank you again for your reply. This event has been held regularly for 15 years or so and the breathalyser element is a fairly recent introduction. My argument is simply that it's a a little unfair to actually dismiss me purely purely out of principle. I wasn't the only employee there from my "company" but as all the delegates were from the group or franchises under the same banner, the lines are a little blurred. There were no delegates or staff there that did not represent the same brand and so it was considered a closed event for (company name) only. My issue really is tha
  7. In answer to your original question, the director is only the director of the department. The organisers were based in Europe and were co-ordonating 15,000 delegates from 9 countries. In short my director did not organise it so wasn't his to determine the procedure. Hence my double checking. Please don't interpret this situation as me being reckless and trying to weasel out of anything. Short of a staining completely (which no-one, even the manager who suspended me did) I behaved cautiously and conservatively and RESPONSIBLY with the alcohol I consumed the night before and even so,
  8. Have you ever been to a work-organised party? I appreciate the objectivity but definitely not the tone. I came on here for help not Internet-judgement.
  9. Thanks for the replies. In answer to both questions I was not inebriated at all at the time, both by my behaviour and actions and also by the legal/medical definition of impaired which 0.04+ They don't have a policy in place for breathalyzer tests, only that relating to legally driving (0.35%) or being impaired due to alcohol consumption which I wasn't. And I can't drive because I don't have a license and have never had one, so me driving a car for them under any circumstances is a worse offense. Thanks again.
  10. I should also note that the company does not routinely breathalyze staff, the only reference to alcohol in my handbook is "serious incapability at work brought on by alcohol" and due to my inability to drive there was no reduction in my capacity to learn or experience anything different than I would have anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...