Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About PlainOldMe

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I'm trying to clear the air a bit here. I appreciate what you're saying. I appreciate what some said on the other post too. Irrespective of those comments, and as I said, some are very pertinent... All I'm trying to do is find out about this "Capability" meeting and it's "official" format... As said (No fabrication, no distortion, or anything like that..) I was invited to a Capability Meeting on the 3rd May. Union Rep was there, HR was there, Line Manager was there, I was there, a recorder was there. WE discussed the "reasonable adjustments" requested. It went back and forth,
  2. Hi. Was wondering if there is a way to block / report / stop people trolling me? On a couple of posts I've made two people in particular have taken personal stances on questions I've asked, and instead of answering, simply slag me off. Is there a block / report function on this site? Thanks.
  3. We're not retreading ground? I asked a specific question about the form this interview took. I was not notified it was a capability meeting, I asked about that "meeting" and the form it took. Not about disability, not about anything else. Same response as to Sgt - if you can't answer the question I asked, don't bother commenting...
  4. I've got to ask why you even responded to this post then? I asked a specific question, it's not been answered by you, so why are you referring to another post? I'm confused about your reference to Sangie on the other post, as there are two comments from him on it, and I've taken them on board, so I don't see what that's about from you. For the record.... Asked for recess for legal advice? - I have on file, a specific email from them REFUSING ME THE RIGHT TO TAKE ANY FORM OF LEGAL ADVICE. Walking out? How could I? That would have been taken as a resignation. They refused to s
  5. From a "capability" point of view, I am fine to do the same work as any of my colleagues. In fact, let's get off the fence. I am BETTER than they are. More qualifications, more experience, more positive customer feedback, etc. However, since my work learned about my disability (Which they caused, btw - and they've admitted liability on that score.) - they've suddenly increased my mileages to the point I am doing 50% more than my colleagues. BUT. Can we stay on point as to the question? Are they allowed to do am official "capability meeting," with HR, Union, etc., and deem me fit to
  6. It's under Disability. Don't really want to go much into it, but it's not significant enough to much, just the amount of driving I should be doing...
  7. Hi. As some of you may know, I'm having problems with my employer. Their latest "trick" was to call for a capability meeting (I have a "protected characteristic) So far, ok. I have no problem with that... We (Union Rep and I) went through. We discussed it, we all agreed on a slight amendment to my work. Basically, they agreed to curtail the amount I drive. The agreement was three days a week, I would be limited to under 200 mile, and I would agree that the other two days, I could do over that amount, but not over 300. The people there were: Head of HR. My Line M
  8. Thanks for the reply. I think the latest thing I've picked up on is the fact how much discrimination has occurred. The: Engineer 1: 80% Role1,2,3 – 20% Tickets. Engineer 2: 71% Role1,2,3 – 29% Tickets. Engineer 3: 94% Role1,2,3 – 6% Tickets. Me: 0% Role1,2,3 – 100% Tickets. Clearly shows that there's discrimination going on. I also have a whole lot of ammunition for (I'm trying to think of the technical terms for it....) LIES? For instance: They claimed I had sped 133 times in the space of a month (What they had actually done was take my tracker information,
  9. Right. Here goes…. To the point of me being able to do the job, is yes. In fact, from the latest “data” that my employer has supplied, it would appear I don’t actually require “reasonable adjustments” to do my job. Just a stop to the harassment and discrimination. To explain. I am part of a team of engineers. The job description says we do four “roles”. I’ll call them Role1, Role2, Role3, and “tickets” for sake of argument. We are, by definition, supposed to be doing a proportion of all these mixes of jobs. From the data supplied by my work, it clearly shows that I am being excluded f
  10. Damn, I had a huge reply written out, and got logged off.... I'll reply later, but the bottom line is YES to both.
  11. Hiya, not had news on this for quite a while... I can confirm that I AM covered by Equality Act 2010 according to: The Equality Advisory and Support Service, ACAS, two independent doctors and a counselor. Things have got rather dirty and personal since my last post... They've made personal attacks against me and my wife (Don't know what my wife had to do with things) in front of other employees and my Union Rep. They've falsified documents in an attempt to get grounds to fire me (They took my data from my tracker in my car, multiplied the speed by 20% and "presented it" to
  12. Hi again. While I can see what you're saying, you still seem to be missing the point about them changing the job in a specific manner to (for want of a better word) "inconvenience" me. I have even surreptitiously got a job description from them, and I CAN do every single thing they ask on it. They're clearly asking extra of me, and ONLY me. There is also the discrimination of sending me (In Weston Super Mare) to ridiculously long distance calls when they have lesser qualified (but more suited) engineers nearby, in the full knowledge that it was causing physical injury to me, as conf
  13. Hiya. Thanks for the reply. I see three points there, so I'll have a crack at them. Regarding the kind of work... Their Doctor has confirmed that the "intricate" work, as we'll call it, is physically damaging to my neck. I'll be honest. I don't know where he got that from, but I'm happy to accept that. It wasn't something I specifically asked him to put in, he just did. So, to my mind, there is a causality between my neck injury and the type of work involved and that's been verified by their own doctor. Also, it's not simply a "dislike" - it's an inability. I'm always trying to fi
  14. Hi. Once again, thanks for the reply. You mention "adjustments" and that is quite interesting. In June(ish) last year, they accepted "adjustments" based on my neck injury. This was based on negotiations between my GP and the Company. He wanted much less than 200, they wanted much more. Eventually they settled on 200 miles per day. They agreed (In email correspondence, after a grievance meeting) to limit my driving to 200 miles per day. I have repeated emails from them that they've complied with this, but, clearly, they haven't. They have repeatedly broken this agreement / adjustment.
  15. Hi. Here is the "contract of Employment" they say I signed. I would point out that they can't actually supply the one I allegedly signed, but this is what they claim. I've also edited out specific points for confidentiality purposes. CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT This document forms your contract of employment in accordance with current legislation with XXXXX Name of Employee: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Date of commencement: 29th July 2015 Continuous Service date: As Above Normal place of work: Home based Position title: Mobile Engineer The company reserves the right, upo
  • Create New...