Hi All, Newbie here.... I have read a lot regarding ET's and people representing themselves. I am one of them and I'm due my CMD in a few weeks. I am currently due to see my MD tomorrow regarding a "without Prejudice" meeting and just wondered if anyone has done this and if anyone has gone all the way with self representation..? I read recently a thread from 2010 from davuck and just wondered if your still here and if so how did you get on..? Also honeybee13 wrote a lot of replies and if poss I'd like to here from you and Madari if your both still on. I have a fewv questions I need answering but obviously a chronology would help, but I will post later. So first and foremost has anyone had a "WP" meeting and if so how did you plan/deal with and get on...? Rgds.....Spike

I don't know if this info has been posted before but it's particularly relevant to anyone who keeps getting sent on CV courses by their provider. Here http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/employment-related-courses/

Hi just wondering if anyone can offer me any advice on what to do about unfair conditions been forced on me by employer? I have been working for approx. 18 months, as a manager for a company that has its HQ in the Midlands, when I joined the company I took on a national role for which the company paid my accommodation and meal expenses via a Business account they hold with a National chain of Hotels. Approx. 12 months ago the company offered me a promotion for which I would be required to work at their head office 2-3 days a week and continue to pay my accommodation costs and expenses, when working at HQ and visiting the companies other UK sites. I live approx. 120 miles away from HQ office. It was also agreed that I could work from home 1 - 2 days a week when not visiting other sites. There has been a recent change in management and I now have a new Boss who called me in last week to say that the company would not allow me to work from home anymore so I have to be at the HQ office when not visiting other sites and they will not pay my Accommodation / Expenses when working at HQ. My new boss also suggested that I permanently relocate my family to live near HQ (which is not possible) I have an e-mail from my previous manager who has now left the company outlining that the company would agree to pay all my business accommodation costs (and a copy of this agreement is on my HR file). I cannot afford to pay accommodation and expenses of this proportion, do I have a case to issue a grievance against the company? Any advice on what to do next will be gratefully received? Regards Zohan

So I have a job 'interview' next Thursday afternoon. Job is being advertised by an employment agency - i'm told it will take about 2 hours and will be a group thing. As whilst we're there we will be undertaking health & safety or food safety training (can't remember which now). This seems strange. More like an induction than an interview. Anybody come across this?

Good afternoon, I am approaching the (new) date of my ET, the first date was cancelled just before the hearing due to the lack of a judge. However 3 day's before the cancelled hearing the respondent's solicitor added documents to the bundle, until then I was not aware of their existence or been provided with copies of them. This I have no doubt was an attempt to mislead the court and disadvantage me, as the documents were dated 2011 and were available to be included in the Bundle at it's inception last year. I believe he (the solicitor) is behaving in a way that appears to contravene the ET regulations by both not providing me with copies within a reasonable time and including documents in the bundle less than 7 days before hearing. Reading some of the info on this site, that is not uncommon .... I am obviously very naïve and certainly disappointed with his professional conduct but would like any advice on what I can 'sensibly' do about it and more importantly prevent it from happening again. I sadly do not think the ET are concerned about failure to comply with Orders, as the Respondent has failed to adhere to most deadlines without providing reason. Does anyone have any experience of what to do with solicitors who blatantly disregard judiciary orders? I'm sure it breaches their Code of Conduct etc. I have never attended an Employment Tribunal before and am unable to fund legal advice or representation which is why I am acting as Litigant in Person, I hope the Judge will be tolerant of this too. Thank you for any advice you can offer, it will be gratefully received.

On Friday 12th July I was suspended from work at about 3pm. The reason I was given is that a customer is disputing a transaction which I did, and I was the unlucky person who served them (I work in a bank). The main reason being they couldn't find the relevant withdrawal forms, which the customer would of signed. I rang my union, she said not to worry, enjoy the sunshine. I rang ACAS, they basically said the same thing. On Wednesday 17th July I got a phone call from a fraud investigator with the bank, asking me to an investigation meeting on the following Monday. Just to point out, he wouldn't give me any further information. I asked my union rep to come along, which she agreed. So on Monday 22nd July I traveled an hour to meet this guy and let me tell you, it was a very long 3 hours of interrogation. Interrogation would be the only suitable word as he used to be a police officer and was basically a bully, trying to trick me into answering things incorrectly. During the interview he showed me CCTV footage of the transaction, but due to the placements of the cameras, you couldn't actually see anything! It also came to light that 2 other customers are disputing transactions. Honestly, disputed transactions are quite a regular occurrence, apparently people have more money then sense. At the very end he asked me loads of questions about my immigration status, I am a Canadian here on a marriage visa. Then about my husbands business, as he's self employed. It might be the Canadian in me, but I was quite offended by the questions - I answered honestly and politely anyway. After the interview my union rep said that it might be worth it to just resign. Because it's coming down to my word against the customers, I will loose. And because this particular company has been in the news quite a bit, trying to hold on to their ethical status, they don't want the publicity. Anyway, I was offered another job a couple days later, a posted off my resignation letter. The decision wasn't easy, however, it was apparent that the accusations against me had been spread to not only the employees in my branch, but other branches as well! I didn't see a way which I could return to work there and be happy, let alone trusted. Today I received a letter dated the 24th July from the financial crime department, it basically says, investigations have revealed that you have made such and such withdrawals adding up to ££. Having examined the information, unless you can satisfy us that the conclusions we have reached in our investigations are incorrect, it is our intention to record on the fraud prevention databases relevant details to your theft from customer accounts. Now I've never been through anything like this, and frankly I couldn't risk a theft which would put my immigration status at jeopardy. But how in the hell am I supposed to prove that I haven't stolen when I've told them everything that I knew already. My husband seems to think that the fraud investigator has a bully complex and once he's got the idea in his head, he won't stop. Please, if anyone has any input, I am all ears.

I work for a global company, I am contracted to 32.5 hours per week, since starting my employment I have worked on average 46 hours per week, basically I am not allowed to leave until all the work is done, this could be 3-4 hours after my 6.5 hours are done I am constantly told I will be sacked if I leave early as my contact states I am required to work over time. To be honest I am quite happy doing the extra hours but when I come to take a week off holiday or am off sick I am only paid my contracted hours 32.5. since working for this company for 18 months now I have discovered there are many workers on different rates of pay I am on £7.50 around 50 are on £13.70 and 150 on £11.79 but we are all doing the same work except I work 5 hours more a week. I have raised this with the union rep, but she says that's how the company works and then tells me to keep quiet about this or don't rock the boat. Is there any thing I can do about this, as this seems really unfair?

Please can anyone help or point me in the right direction?- in a nutshell: 19 year old son gets apprenticeship following student of the year award at college. He has never been late or had a day off 2 weeks ago he tells training provider that he feels that he is not learning while at work, he is just a labourer and is n't taught anything at all and is concerned that he may be just cheap labour and may never be able to do the job as he has n't been taught except by training provider He has almost completed first year having got a distinction from skills solutions. He gets a text today saying that he ( and the other apprentice) has been warned several times about mobile phone use- He has never been spoken to. says he has been given several verbal warnings- he has not Mobile phone us is a sack able offence and there will be a disciplinary hearing with their legal advisor. I suspect that they never keep an apprentice more than a year due to costs its cheaper to keep them for a year then get rid. To the best of our knowledge he does n't keep them longer than a year) There may be some retaliation by employer for the disclosure that my son made to his training provider He feels he is about to be sacked ( he's been there almost a year ) I have spent most of the afternoon on the phone being passed from pillar to post-acas, legal aid, the bottom line is he can't get any legal advice, my local law centre now charge £168. Is there anywhere that he could get any pro bona legal advice or can any of you help? Thanks

Hi, I started working for a large energy supplier on the 3rd June 2013, on the 3rd July I received an email asking me to complete some pre-employment checks, which I found strange considering both myself and the company signed my contract of employment in May. I have a poor credit history and can almost guarantee that I will fail a Credit Check, which they are carrying out on me. Where do I stand on this if I do indeed fail the check and I lose my job? I am still in my probationary period with the company, but whilst there has been no performance issues, I feel they may use the credit check result to terminate my employment. Cheers Gary

As a novice in this area, I would be grateful if you would give me the benefit of your advice and list the most common mistakes made when pursuing a claim. Apologies if a similar query has already been posted. Many thanks

Hi there, I have been asked to sign a very inconcise and ambiguous vary to my contract of employment in order to receive ill health income protection payments. Not only is the document contradictory ,and foggy but it has come to my attention that no other colleagues in a similar position, and on the same scheme, have been asked to sign any such document...the catch all sentence in the document states that the company reserve the right to modify or terminate the scheme at any time. Any help appreciated ....oh and before anyone asks yes I am in a union..but they are in the pockets of management...suprise suprise ...so no confidence is going down that route...a good employment law gunslinger would perhaps be the best route...any Ideas ( northwest liverpool area).

Hi everyone, back in March last year I had an ET hearing for constructive unfair dismissal breach of contract disability discrimination. The case failed on grounds of no discrimination having taken place even though I was found to be disabled! I then applied for review of judgement (not granted) An appeal was submitted to the Employment Appeals tribunal, from a solicitor (not granted) I now have 1 hour, oral hearing in front of the EAT judge (respondent not present) in London early next year (to persuade the judge to allow the appeal in) I have been advised that I need prepare a bundle (much shorter than the previous ET bundle) and prepare a skeleton argument. I have until mid December to get all the paperwork into the EAT. I am not too sure as to the process and preparation of the case and am handling it myself. I would be very grateful for any help from the more experienced Caggers. Many thanks Best wishes BB

Hi All, I am in Northern Ireland and I currently have a case against a previous employer for 3rd Party Harassment. I was working in a nightclub and was sexually assaulted (penetrated) by a customer, the last in a long line of harassment issues by customers, against not only myself, but also other staff members. In their ET3, the employer has defended their position by arguing that 'it took all reasonably practicable steps to prevent staff being harassed, and as such cannot be held liable', because of adequate security presence etc.... However, during the course of discovery, I have received security check sheets from the Respondent showing that security checks (conducted every 20 minutes according to their records), were missed for 1hour 20minutes, totalling 4 checks, on the night in question. My Question is would I be worth my time to request a pre-hearing review to get this response, or at least this part of their defence struck out, and say that their claim has little or no prospect of success? They have made the assertion that they had done everything they could, and cant be liable. However even their own evidence suggests that this is a blatant lie, and by the same logic they would then be liable. Is this something a pre hearing review would consider or would I just bring this up when they argue it at the hearing? Below is a copy of the letter I have drafted to the tribunal, but I don't know if I should send it or they would consider it. ================================================================= 'I, beingthe claimant in the above matter, would like at this time to requesta pre-hearing review to consider the veracity of the Respondent'sdefence of this tribunal claim. The main reason for doing so is thatI believe that the Respondent's claim has little or no chance ofsuccess and I believe it should be partly, or wholly struck out. There area number of issues outlined below which I believe should beconsidered. The Respondent has stated in their ET3 form that, 'Without prejudice to the foregoing even if accepted that the assault took place the Respondent does not accept that it has any liability in respect of this and further contends that it took all such reasonably practicable measures to prevent such an assault from occurring as evidenced by both the number of security personnel in place...'. However, during the course of discovery, it has come to the attention that on the nights of the main incidents, namely the 18th and 19th of January 2013 (incidents mentioned in the claimants ET1 form), security checks which the company claim are conducted every 20 minutes, and had always been done so before this weekend, ceased on the toilets in question at 1.40am while the club remained open until 3.00am, on both evenings, even though checks were still carried out on the other areas of the premises up until 3.00am. This point also raises another issue in the ET3 when the Respondent stated that 'It is denied that the toilets within the premises are not secure'. Clearly in their own written reports they have proven that the toilets were not secured on the nights in question by a member of security. The Respondent has also argued in their ET3 form that, 'Without prejudice to the foregoing even if accepted that the assault took place the Respondent does not accept that it has any liability in respect of this and further contends that it took all such reasonably practicable measures to prevent such an assault from occurring as evidenced by..., procedures and risk assessments in place and adhered to...'. However, according to the Respondent themselves, on the 2 incidents involving xxx, incidents involving xxx and xxx, no incident report forms were filled in by security or management, and with regards to my incident on the 19th January 2013 (incident of sexual assault), the Respondent freely acknowledges that the Assault was reported to and investigated by xxx, Club Manager (even though no incident report or notes are said to exist). However, in the Door Supervisor Summary Job Description, Main Duties, point number 7, clearly states that 'all incidents that occur are fully documented using incident reports, on the same night that the incident occurs'. Therefore, the Respondent cannot argue release from Liability for its procedures in place, when the procedures have clearly been shown not to be adhered to at all times. It is forthe reasons outlined above that the Claimant believes there may be aneed for a Pre-Hearing review, so as to get either this part of thedefence, or the defence by the Respondent in its entirety struck out,as the Respondent has little reasonable prospect of success in thedefence of this claim. The Respondent cannot argue that they cannotbe liable because they took all such reasonably practicable measuresto prevent this type of incident when it can be so easily proven thattheir reasonably practicable measures were not always adhered to assuggested within their own policies. By the same logic, as it can beso easily proven that the security presence and procedures wereinadequate or not adhered to, and therefore they did not take allreasonably practicable measures to protect staff, they are whollyliable, and the Claimant feels that this part of the defence cannotbe allowed to stand, in my opinion. ' Thanks

Hello, I am a first time user of the site and I have been looking for answers to my problem. If you do read this thread I thank you in advance for taking time to do so. I also apologise as my spelling and grammer isn't the best and my memory on specific words and probably important information is hazy at best. My situation at the moment is: - I currently work for company ABC as a Driver / LBO (Loading Bay Operative), I work a constant night shift and have done so since starting in February 2007. Our work consists of collecting, sorting and delivering internal mail for a large customer. Although not hard the job is basically one that takes time to master, knowing what goes where.....etc (if they could train monkeys to read we'd be redundant by now!) The work is based over two shifts - back shift 15:30 - 00:00 and night shift 00:00 - 08:30. The staff are one supervisor on the back shift with two LBO's and on night shift we have three LBO's (two of which are LBO/Drivers - of which I am one). On May 31st we where called into a meeting at midnight (start of our shift - end of back shifts) to say that the company are following a model set out over the country (ABC is an Internationally recognised company) and the internal mail was being outsourced to company XXX. Our contracts where to be TUPE'd over although they didn't need all the staff to go over. As a result the way the operation was to be run was 1 supervisor (15:30 - 00:00) and 1 LBO (16:00 - 22:00) on back shift and one LBO (03:00 - 09:00) and one LBO/Driver (03:00 - 11:00 - 30 min break unpaid); basically reducing the staff by two and the other jobs having hours cut. The way the work was going meant a change like this was inevitable although I still think personally the new structure may not work due to the nature of the work and the lack of employees to cover sickness and holidays etc. Our leaflet that the powers that be read to us stated that ABC would offer alternative vacencies to all staff who didn't wish to change over. The changeover was going to take place on June 29th (today!) The following Tuesday we where asked if we had any ideas for what we wished to do. I stated quite clearly that I needed night-shift due to family issues (childcare, partners work, etc) and 3am til 11am really didn't suit as it would cost me 1 hour childcare a day plus a reduction in five hours of my pay made it financially not really an option. Both my collegues stated that they did not wish to TUPE over either only because they didn't want to work for company XXX (who I may add are in charge of the self-employed drivers who cover the various deliveries) The back-shift have it worked out at this stage, all parties are happy to make the change. Only two vacencies for comapny ABC, however after a bit of change they work out they have three - one back-shift and two night-shift (02-00 - 09:30) however due to a process they do have to interview for the vacancies. Cue massive hold up for three weeks............... ..............................during the three weeks the due diligence is taking place, there is disasters over sending our contracts for the solicitors to look through, loads of excuses and a delay in the transfer until July 13th. During the past week, after repeatedly being told not to worry, it'll be ok, we have our interviews - Thursday, as I say it seems quite informal I'm relaxed and happy to answer the questions put to me. The people interviewing are taking phone-calls during the interview and twice the room is interupted by people coming in. I was first in, my collegues went after. Thursday I am offered a back-shift, impossible for me to do and my two collegues get the night-shifts (although both stated they could, if needed, do back-shiftfs). This leaves me pretty ***ked (apologies) but I think my best alternative at the moment is to take the transfer. However the company XXX are pretty small time - two knucklehead owners - who I don't think have any nous or reasoning in them for me to explain my situatuion. But basically I can say it here I want out and am doing my best to find alternative employment. Although we still have not heard from them I've heard that XXX are looking to pay around £7.00 an hour (standard for this type of work I know) but I am paid £10.79 an hour currently and don't know where I stand due to the complexities of the situation. My contract DOES NOT state any hours of employment. I have asked for a copy of my contract too which has not arrived either. So I am basically resigning from ABC if I refuse the job on back-shift???? I hope I've covered enough to give you some idea of my predicament, I thank you again if you've made it this far. If I need to supply any further info or anything for someone to assist me let me know. Regards and thanks, BriR

Only recently I had Reed look to pay me below the bottom of what they's quoted to get me to attend the interview for a job and then try to skim additional margin for paying me on Ltd Co. basis rather than PAYE. Now I have Randstad who have decided they got the pay rate wrong on a job I started after signing a contract at that rate and they've looked to cut the rate by 20% - they even attempted to backdate this and claim that I had to pay them back (something they've now backed down from). - are insisting that they had the right to make such changes immediately and without agreement (even backdating for time worked prior to notification). Whilst there are contract terms allowing them to move me to other assignments or to terminate an assignment, they did not explicitly do so, despite being asked several times if they were going to do so (to which they did not respond), It looks like I may need to go down the legal action route, although the amounts to gain are relatively small compared to the time and costs involved in pursuing such action. In the meantime, I'm working under protest and looking for another job; I hate the fact that I'm making the agency money until then. Any advice beyond avoiding dodgy agencies and consultants appreciated.

Hi all, I took my previous employer to tribunal. I won the case and was awarded quite a large amount of money. However my previous employer appealed but thankfully failed. The company is a limited company and should have paid the award by 25th february. After a lot of correspondence with their representative they have now offered to pay the award in installments because they claim they can't pay in full.I don't trust them at all and would like the payment made in full. I am thinking about getting the award via the fast track system but I'm really worried that this is all going to go wrong and I'll end up with nothing. Does anybody have advise as to what to do? I have represented myself throughout but I'm stuck on this one.

Hi all I'm new to posting on here, it will probably be quite a lengthy post too so apologies in advance, and if you do read it all, thank you for your time. I'm looking for a bit of advice on what to do next or who to speak to or any info you think may be of help. My old company lost the lease on our office and were to make us redundant, I was sent a letter to be put at risk, we were consulted on what would happen next. A week or so later my old company advised of a possible role to prevent me being made redundant, the other 4 guys affected were not interested but I was. Another week later one of our contracts served notice on the company, my company then served them a shorter (1 month) notice back leaving us all with less time to be consulted on what would happen next etc.... because of this the new role was taken off the table, they then advised 4 of us that we worked mainly on this contract and so we would TUPE across to the new contract. I was customer service Team Leader working in central Manchester, easy access to work by car or public transport, 30 mins away by tram. I worked on all contracts, invoicing customers, quoting etc and this was not a role specific to the contract or set up to service the contract that was lost either. We had a basic 121 with the new providers, to get to know each other (even though the new providers had not yet signed any deals with the customer we lost) I spoke of all the work I did and did not specifically speak of this contract so at this point the old company decided my other colleague worked on the contract too making it 5 to transfer, they told the new company that actually there were 2 admin people working on it! My old company 2 days before transfer (earlier this month) asked us to sign statements advising what amount of work we did on this contract, I replied to advise I wasn't happy to do this, instead I emailed a statement advising my role was never set up for this contract and that being Team Leader I was second port of call for all customers, I advised I invoiced and quoted this contract because I was the only one in the north responsible for ALL invoicing and quotes, it just happened to be the biggest contract. The new company decided to take 3 staff, the contract account manager, a service engineer and an install engineer, they couldn't understand 2 admin to be used on such a small contract, the old company pushed the new company again for a decision on me and my colleague and the next day they decided they would take me (the last remaining person is now being made redundant as the office in Manchester closed when we left - convenient!). I was advised by email from HR that I should report to the new company the next week at their HQ near Huddersfield for discussions on what was to happen next (transfer was the previous Saturday) half hour after this email I was sent an email from the new company also advising the same, the email from the new company also advised that there was only a position available for a service engineer and that risks of redundancies may be applicable, no further correspondence from either and no mention of my new place of work. So next week I attended in Huddersfield and was told that that would be my new place of work, the following day I attended again but wrote a letter of resignation based on relocation and advised the new company that no one had told me I would have to start travelling 80 miles a day (in total there and back) My points are that I was not informed correctly of my new place of work (simple failure to consult/inform of changes), I and the team were never set up to service this contract and therefore TUPE should never have applied to me (Stobart, Seawell, Argyll), and relocation causing detrimental changes directly associated to the transfer causing me to resign which was unfair (Tapere, Abellio). The new company called me recently advising they wanted me to keep them out of any tribunal and offered a sum of £1500 (this sum I've lost this month in pay anyway so I do not see it as being a sufficient amount of compensation) also I've lost 10 days holiday, 5 weeks' notice and redundancy pay of £1500, the new company say that those costs should be down to the old company to pay as the transfer should never have happened, Now I'm confused as to whether to pursue a tribunal or what I should be expecting to happen next, taking the new company's offer would mean not bringing them up in tribunal which may affect the outcome? The old company I have not been in touch with, I see them as bullies and would prefer not to be the one to let them know I want to take this further and do not agree with it. I've engaged ACAS and Workrep, Workrep haven't yet been in touch (although just found a fault with my landline so they could have!) A guy from ACAS called and advised they don't represent, they can't give advice on what to do regarding what is a reasonable amount to be offered as a compromise agreement and that I have to call them back with a figure I would be happy with! He just kept saying "I've seen this before, I know what is going to happen, one will say it's them and the other will say it's them" what he basically was saying is "you tell me what you want and I'll ring them and say it" ........ I wanted to hear a strong voice, someone to tell me "It's OK, you don't have to worry, we can do this" ... Now I'm as stressed as ever!

I have had a letter which claims to be from the court saying that if i dont fill it in (N55) and send it back they will send me to prison for 12 days. Is this correct because i am sure the finance company cannot go for an attachment of earnings if you are self employed. Also on the n55 form there is no court stamp and the back of the form has not been filled in by the court. Any advice would be appreciated. Regards Santos

Hello I am looking for some advice. I am employed by a company and they provide a product and then follow up services to other companies which it is my job to help deliver. If one of the customers they provide the service to advertises for additional people to help in the process which I am involved in delivering, is there any reason why i would not be allowed to apply to work directly for the customer if the position is better suited to me and my personal needs. I have checked in my contract and there is nothing which specifically states this is not allowed as far as I can see

I've been working for one employment agency on one of the construction sites at central London for several weeks. Today's morning me and another guy from the same agency came on site, changed our clothes and were ready to start working. The director of the construction company was very surprised to see us there today and he told us that we were not supposed to come today... he said that he had called our agency last week(!!) and told them that Friday would be our last day... The director didn't even know that we had been on site yesterday (on Monday), and he said that the company will not pay us for Monday. I called the agent straight away and asked him what was going on. He said it was his mistake(he said he phoned and texted us, but we have neither missed calles from him nor any text messages) and the agency will pay us for Monday. While composing this message I received a phone call from the agent. He told me that the payment for this Monday will be made this Friday together with the last week's wages. I didn't object to that, but I asked him if the agency was going to compensate me my today's travel expenses(£10), and he said NO... I believe that it is the agency who MUST compensate at least today's travel expenses to say nothing but the lost time since last Friday which I could spend searching for another job. I'm going to wait until my wages are into my bank account this Friday and then I'm planning to demand them to pay my travel expenses, but I need to know the correct way to do so. Could anyone please tell me what is the best way to claim that money from the agency? Thank you.

Hello! I work as a support worker for a well known charity for adults with learning disabilities. I work in a supported living house for 4 adults with profound and multiple learning disabilities. I have been working there for around 18 months. I have been having problems with relationships with colleagues since around January. There has been a lot of gossip/bitching/nastiness about me - I guess its bullying and harassment as I have been asked a lot of questions by staff members who use that information to continue to be nasty about me! Its predominately two members of staff. I believe these two manipulated another member of staff to go to my manager and make a complaint about me. I had a supervision and not much came of it because there were no real reasons as to why there had been a complaint about me. I expressed in my supervision that I currently did not feel part of the team, and my manager discussed the possibility of a transfer to another service and I went to look around the other service. In the meantime the nastiness was still going on, but I just dealt with it and ignored it. In the meantime my manager left and a new manager came into the service. I was told I wasn't allowed to split my contract or transfer to the other service (seemingly because they did not want to loose me from that service) so I worked on a relief basis at the new service, but working fulltime meant I did not do many shifts there. I expressed to my manager, again, in a meeting that I was really unhappy and said verbally that I wanted to transfer, and again, he pretty much said no. An allegation was then made about me and another staff member which was investigated, and not continued. Many of the staff in the house do not follow policies and procedures often not reporting things, covering peoples backs. I reported a mistake, which was investigated and also not taken any further because there was not enough evidence. It unfortunately happened to be one of the two people that have been causing problems. I was signed off sick with stress for 3 weeks as the nastiness had all got too much and I was put on anti-depressants. I was finally offered a transfer full time due to the fact I raised how unhappy I was in the formal investigation meeting with the independent investigator (which is all logged) and that was due to happen next week. On my last day an allegation was made about me and I am now suspended. I know what the allegation is and it is complete rubbish, but obviously don't know who made the allegation. It's actually quite contradictive and considering some of the behaviours I see from some of the staff its completely hypocritical. So here I am. I believe the company haven't considering my well being and duty of care and if it had been dealt with sooner then I wouldn't be in this mess now, surely? None of the nastiness has been dealt with and now I have been suspended where it has just got so nasty. I am now on anti depressents because of the stress they have caused previously, and I have told them how unhappy I am so many times and they just haven't listened. Where do I stand? It just feels like a complete mess

Hi There, I'm hoping someone with experience of how the tribunal work can advise me on this. If a key witness is unable to attend due to sickness, and doesn't provide any sick notes or letters from their doctor (after the case was listed and cancelled due to this) can the tribunal decide not to re list the case? Can the tribunal consider the case in their absence and what factors are taken into account? Thanks Jovanna x

Hello, Need to get to the bottom of this pretty quick. THe company I currently work for have identified my role as at risk due to it not being financially viable. I agree and to be honest will be happier out working for myself. When I start up my own buisiness, the company I will be leaving have a number of commissions that they really could do with me finishing and hence I have suggested the easiest thing would be to sub contract the work back to my limited company. The 'boss' is open to the idea but is not sure if he legally can. Does anyone know if this is correct? My view is: I am in agreement the full time role I am currently in is no longer viable and once my contract ends I can't see why they shouldn't sub the remaining bits of work to me - it gives me a starter for 10 meaning I have some income on day 1, and makes sure they deliver what they committed to for their clients. It seems crackers that the law would force them to give it to some other self employed person! thanks

Hi, Just a bit of background as this is for my Mum. Since 23rd July 2012 she has been working as a Practice Manager for a GP Surgery, 2 1/2 weeks ago her husband of 18 years died unexpectedly with its own issues in another thread. Since then she has had the funeral and has also been to her doctors and obtained a sick note for bereavement which lasts until next Friday. My mum contacted her boss to go in on Monday to do the wages for the employees and sort out some other bits, but the main partner of the surgery has told her he wants the keys back and a meeting in regards to her future employment. I have a funny feeling that he will terminate her employment though I do not know what the reason would be considering she turned their profits around in three months. My question what would be the recourse for my mum considering that her husband has just died, and she has a sick note which her employer is aware of as we contacted him to let him know. Thanks in advance.

Hi If a term in an employment contract states a certain % of your annual earnings will be contributed for pension purposes, then fair enough. But what if then a further term states YOU WILL pay this % whether or not you opt in or out of the pension scheme. In essence paying the employer of % of your wage to receive nothing back. I understand employment law stipulates that if a term is written into your contract then it is not illegal but how far does that stretch exactly? Surely it was never intended for employers to get away with such terms? Any advice be appreciated James