Hi, I was wondering if anyone can help regarding whistleblowing and subsequent victimisation? I am asking on behalf of someone else. Due to the sensitive nature of the situation, I need to be a little vague, I apologise. The person complained at work about a situation that is definitely unethical and probably fraudulent. It involves vulnerable people and a high profile national organisation's name. The person was as a result bullied quite badly and the CEO made barely veiled threats about their job. About 2 weeks after the complaint, a whistleblowing policy retroactively appeared saying workers have a right to whistleblow and they support that, despite it not being the case when the person complained to management. The bullying involved being excluded from decisions/meetings relating to the persons job, being shouted at several times publically for no reasonable reason (causing the person to break down in tears) and various other nasty behaviours including being excluded from talking to anyone as the issue was being concealed and they specified that they were worried the person would talk about it. The person has now, 4-6 weeks on, been handed a reduced hours letter. This will put the person in a financial position of possibly having to reject the new hours, dismissal and possible claim. So to my question: does this sound like a constructive process to you? I feel the timing of the reduced hours is rather pointed given what has been happening recently and a desire to either force the person to resign or get a new contract in to dismiss (the person has been there 11-12 years.) And I am frustrated that this person is in tears daily about how they are being treated just for speaking out against an injustice. I am not even joking that if any of this was given to the media they would have a field day (even just the bullying, if we were to take out the other thing, would make an amazing headline given who they are and where they work). Is that too vague to even understand? I'm sorry, I guess just venting it all out helps. Thanks.

Hi, I am on JSA and am currently with a work programme provider. I have two issues I hope someone can help me with. First I have been told that I need to attend their (the work programme provider) site for regular jobsearching on their system, but I was also told I need to leave a written record of jobs I have applied for with them at the end of the session (telling me this is mandated for everyone with them on JSA by the DWP). I am sure I have read in this forum somewhere that I do not have to leave this written record for data protection and other reasons, does anyone know where I can find this information, preferably with some sort of evidence/proof that I can take along to my next jobsearch? Second I suffer from anxiety and have brought either my partner or a family member with me to many of my meetings. I am also sure I have seen other clients doing the same thing. My current advisor (like previous advisors I have had with them) appeared to be understanding with this and even put me on a self help course. However literally only minutes after I tried to defend what I believe to be my rights concerning the written record, I was told for health and safety, blah blah, insurance, blah blah etc that I cannot bring anyone along who is not a registered carer with me from now on. This is already very stressful for me even with bringing someone along, does anyone have any advice on this. I feel a little victimised considering the timing of this sudden change and feel they are trying to punish me for standing up for my rights. Thanks in advance for any Help.

Hello. I've got a CMD coming up very soon in relation to a disability discrimination claim with harassment and victimisation. I know probably most people believe whatever they have been put through is scandalous and they have plenty of good evidence and my case is no exception. My employer has told some big lies in their ET3 and I already have evidence enough to show that very clearly. The internal investigation has been a cover up and so they were never held to account by that and thought they could pull the same stunt when it came to their ET3. In other words, having lied to the internal investigation and got away with it due to managers investigating each other, they have written the same crap in their ET3 and there is a whole heap of evidence against them. I won't go into the details just now. My question relates to covert recordings. I have about 40 hours of recordings both prior to and after I initially submitted my grievance. It's sufficient to show that they have lied in a number of ways. What is the coo with covert recordings? There seems to be a lot of misinformation around. Will the Tribunal accept them with a transcript from a court scribe or is it not worth it if I have lots of other good evidence? Might I win the ET but lose my job anyway on account of the recordings? Of course no matter how good I think my case is (and I have been given advice on liability at great expense from a specialist barrister) I know it ain't over till the fat lady sings and I might lose the case and my job on account of the recordings if I chose to disclose them? I have to make a decision on whether to use them in order to prove certain events or just keep my gob shut and go with the evidence I've got and the knowledge that I'm telling the truth and my employers aren't and there is already heaps of good documentary evidence to show that? Initially I only recorded them so that I could jog my memory in relation to every conversation which occurred over about 6 months. I didn't think they would be admissible but since then I've heard that in some circumstances they are. Question is, is it worth me taking the chance bearing in mind I still have my job and hope to win in any case? I've read SAR El's opinions on this and she clearly knows what she is talking about. Any further advice would be appreciated very much. Need to make decision on this very soon. Thank you for reading.

Hi all, I'm preparing an ET1 for my wife who's been unfairly dismissed. I've read a fair bit of stuff on the web, but not sure how much info to put on the form. There's a lot of things happened and I don't want it to end up as a long "witness statement". I've started with a basic timeline of events and think I now need to put down the reasons I believe the investigation was flawed/biased, etc. I'm worried that I might miss something vital out and be prevented from using it later. Bottom line is how much detail should I put in? Many thanks for any advice. Nick.