Subject Access Request following dismissal

[Guest weegirl]

Weegirl I was wondering what lead you to the conclusion that

 

2. In the case of serious discrimination that an ET will extend the time limit by 3 months

 

I think I answered your questions perfectly fine. To explain your point 2 again, it seems you misunderstood me by thinking that there was a set time extension of 3 months, there is not. I did not say by 3 months, I said that they may extend the time to the 3 month period and the period was discretionary but the tribunal would expect it done in a timely manner. This answers your question very well.

 

My information comes from personal experience, and training on the subject. This particular subject was dealt with last year when I was lucky enough to be on a training course with some of the best employment law solicitors in the country and has been used in my place of work to drag out grievances so that IT1's are rejected by the tribunal. Personnel has managed to successfully use this tactic 4 times in the past year alone.

 

If you wish to verify any of this information yourself, I suggest you refer to the HARVEY guide to Employment Law plus the numerus case judgements available at any tribunal office, as I would recommend anyone to do before taking a claim. Unfortunately bad or misleading advice can come from any source, which includes citizens advice, union reps, sites like this and even solicitors however well intentioned the advice is.

 

PS Statutory grievance procedures and internal grievance procedures are the same thing. I have no idea why you would think them to be any different.

[inline66]

Thank you for your response I hope you are enjoying your Easter break.

 

I am glad to hear you have been on an employment training course. I do hope you enjoyed it.

 

There is confusion in the number system being used on these points.

 

In my post of the 19th March 2008 15:56 I raised two points and numbered the points 1 and 2. In your post of 19th March 2008 16:24 you answered the two points but did not number them and answered them in reverse order to which I raised them. In my post of 19th March 2008, 19:42 I confirmed that I agreed, for the most part, with your first point (which was in fact my point 2 of my post).

 

You have already answered your first point (which was in fact my point 2 of my post) and as I said for the most part I agree. However, it is also irrelevant to my original post

 

It is your second point (which was in fact my point 1 of my post) which you have not addressed meaningfully.

 

I will repeat the outstanding point:

 

I was wondering how you came to the conclusion that in the case of a constructive dismissal there can be no extension in time in bringing a claim to the ET from the normal 3 month period to a 6 month period.

 

For me, a general reference to an employment law book or attending a course does not answer this specific question.

 

You mentioned that your employer unconscionably drags out disputes with the sole purpose of preventing employees bringing a complaint to the ET. The extension of time applies here too, if there is a dispute resolution procedure ongoing (SGP or DDP) at the time of the 3 month watershed then the time limit is extended by a further 3 months to 6 months, automatically.

 

There is a difference between statutory grievance procedures and internal grievance procedures. Statutory grievance procedures are on statute in fact the Employment Act 2002 Schedule 2 and internal grievance procedures are typically codified into company standards. They are not required by law to be the same. The employer and employee are required by statute as a minimum to comply with Statutory grievance procedures. If the internal grievance procedure equals or exceed the statutory grievance procedures all well and good because in complying with their internal procedures they also as a matter of course comply with the Statutory grievance procedures. If the internal grievance procedures fall below the Statutory grievance procedures then the Statutory grievance procedures still apply and the employer will not be able to rely on inferior internal grievance procedures. The terms "Statutory grievance procedures" and "internal grievance procedures" cannot be used interchangeable as you seem to suggest.

 

By the way what is an IT1 ?

[Ragdog]

Erm, statutory grievance procedures are internal. It doesn't matter one jot whether the firm chooses the mininum statutory standards or their own. You're confusing the issue big time. They are still internal.

 

Also, there is confusion about dates here, you are supposed to claim from tribual within 3 months of the ACT. In this case, this was not done, so the person quite rightfully left as their grievance was not dealt with. They then had a further 3 months from resignation not 6 as you say.

 

That is providing the employers admitted the grievance and disciplinary had not been dealt with. It is amazing how things can turn up in personnel files after an emplolyee has left.