Time Theft

[CHIPPY RAY]

I would be very grateful for some advise with regards to a situation at work. I have been accused of time theft (three quarters of an hour) I was asked to go up to the head office for a totally unrelated reason regarding some grievances I had raised at work. When I arrived, I reported to the chap who was going to hear my grievances and who I had spoked to at length a few days before. I was taken to another room where two guys where sitting, I thought it was part of the hearing. There was a tape machine which was used in the interview. I was asked if it was ok and I agreed to the taped interview. I was still unaware of the allegations that had been made at this point. Not until after the interview had started that the allegation came out. I was compliant throughout the interview and answered the questions put to me. Following the interview which also raised issues with my performance I was suspended from work. At no point prior to my visit to head office that day was I informed of these allegations or that this interview would take place. All I was told by phone that the chap that was dealing with the grievances had some more questions he wanted to ask.

Are the company in the wrong? As I believe I asked to attend head office on false pretenses. I had no one with me and was never asked if I wanted someone with me. Comments appreciated.

[Rooster-UK]

Hi Chippy.

It appears to me that the company have slipped up very badly.

I'll ask our HR expert to have a look and advise you.

Also there are a number of regular users who are pretty genned up on this sort of situation, so advice won't be long in coming.

Regards, Rooster.

[389shell]

Subscribing

[colgate01]

Hi there,

I am not a HR expert but just wanted you to know I am in the same boat. I raised grievances and when I went to the grievance meeting was told they wouldn't be heard until the complaints against me had been investigated....I didn't believe that companies could act in this way but it appears it is much more common than I thought.

As I understand things, they should have given you a written statement outlining the complaints and invited you to a hearing but will let more knowledgible people in this forum advise you on this.

keep your chin up...

[Ell-enn]

Hi there, it certainly seems as if your employer had not followed the correct process. If there is to be a disciplinary hearing you should be advised in writing what the allegations are in order for you to prepare a defence and you have the right to be accompanied at the meeting.

 

A grievance hearing can only deal with the issues you are bringing to the table. You should not have to answer a disciplinary matter at a meeting to hear your grievances.

 

Have you been advised in writing regarding your suspension and what is going to happen next?

 

Are you in a union?

 

Kind Regards

 

Ell-enn

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi Ell-enn thanks for the reply. I was told that the meeting I had was an investigation interview and that I was not entitled to have anyone in attendance at the time. BUT this was afterwards. The disciplinary process started after I was suspended. Is this correct? I was never told about this interview and I went up to head office for totally different reasons, and that was to answer some further questions on the grievances I had raised. At no time had I been informed about the allegations made against me or any investigation being carried out.

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi again Ell-enn at the interview work sheets and time sheets where produced and also a statement from an independent witness as to the standard of my work on 6 jobs.(who just happens to work for the company and is big mates with my line manager and contracts manager) and coincidently just happens to be the two people I raised the grievances about. I have been invited to a disciplinary hearing on the 14th of July.

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi I have been given some advise today but I could do with someone (in the know) to verify. I should have been informed not only that an interview was to take place but the nature of the interview. I should of been informed of the allegations against me. I should also been informed that I could take a workmate or union official in with me to the interview. All this should of been in writing.

Also I have been told that anything that I said at the interview cannot be used. Again is this right?

Thanks

[Sidewinder]

Hi I have been given some advise today but I could do with someone (in the know) to verify. I should have been informed not only that an interview was to take place but the nature of the interview. I should of been informed of the allegations against me. I should also been informed that I could take a workmate or union official in with me to the interview. All this should of been in writing.

Also I have been told that anything that I said at the interview cannot be used. Again is this right?

Thanks

 

Absolutely correct. You would have been within your rights to terminate the hearing at the time as you had not been afforded your rights under the Employment Act. For the same reason, should you be dismissed as a result, a Tribunal would rule that the dismissal was 'automatically unfair' due to a breach of the statutory minimum procedure. If this was purely an investigative meeting then you should have been advised that it was not a disciplinary hearing, and no disciplinary sanctions should have resulted.

 

 

Any hearing resulting or likely to result in a disciplinary sanction is subject to a minimum three stage procedure.

• You must be given written details in advance of the interview, outlining the allegation and any evidence against you. The letter must also state what the outcome of the meeting may be if it is believed that you are guilty of whatever you are accused of.
  
• You must be given the right to have a work colleague or Trade Union Representative present at the meeting.
  
• You must be given written details of the outcome and the right to appeal against any action taken against you.
  

The main 'however' involved is that the employer may in exceptionally serious cases use only a two stage procedure. If the misdemeanour is so serious to warrant dismissal without further investigation he need not hold a disciplinary hearing but instead provide you with written reasons for dismissal, and offer you the right to appeal - you do still have a right to be accompanied at an appeal hearing. Interesting that your employer has ruled this to be 'theft' rather than lateness or falsification of timesheets for example (I don't know the circumstances of the alleged 'theft'). Does your contract or company handbook cover examples of what may be considered Gross Misconduct - any matter involving theft or falsification of records would almost always be considered Gross Misconduct but nevertheless, certain procedures have to be adopted in order to make the disciplinary action 'fair'.

 

There is nothing to say that any evidence gathered at the meeting (a confession for instance) cannot be used later, but if the disciplinary process is fundamentally flawed by a breach of the minimum procedures then the action taken against you is automatically unfair. You would certainly have a very strong case for unfair dismissal at a Tribunal, however any award could be reduced if it were proved that although procedure was not followed, the dismissal itself was a fair course of action in the circumstances.

 

Have you been given written details of the case aganst you ahead of the meeting due for 14th July? Have you been given the right to be accompanied at that meeting?

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi Sidewinder, Thanks for the sound advise. I have been given a copy of some time sheets and job sheets and a written copy of the taped interview. But these are more to do with performance (the standard of work). A statement that says the work is not up to standard and excessive hours booked.They are saying the hours booked against the jobs are excessive for the work completed but this is for the whole job. Others have booked hours to the jobs in most cases more that me, but its only me on the disciplinary. Say 19 hours where booked against a job I booked 4 hours it looks like I am being held responsible for the full 19 hours. In the two years I have worked there I have never been told my work is not up to scratch QUITE THE OPPOSITE. Since the new line manager took over back in October things have took a turn for the worse. It has become very clear he is not what he says he is. He says he is a carpenter but I know he is not. His skills and materials base knowledge is very limited and I have caught him out on several occasions when ordering materials or explaining jobs to him. He just does not know.This has been the base for quite a few arguments with him. I have been a carpenter for 37 years he is some 15 years my junior, and he has called into question my qualifications and my experience. I am gutted. Hence my grievances

Thanks

[Sidewinder]

That explains how this has come about, and it all seems a bit much to class it as Gross Misconduct.

 

Worth pointing out that correct procedure dictates that a grievance raised prior to, or during a disciplinary procedure should result in the disciplinary process being suspended whilst the grievance is being investigated.

 

Make sure that you write everything down in bullet point format so that you can explain a breakdown of the hours and coupled with the breach of procedure you should be able to knock down their allegation anyway!

[tiglet]

subbing

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi Thanks again for all the sound advise. As the disciplinary hearing is for alleged time theft, can the company use the issue of performance as part of the hearing? I am also concerned that I am being held responsible for all the hours booked against the jobs not just my hours booked. This surely can not be right. Thanks

[CHIPPY RAY]

Bump

[CHIPPY RAY]

What a farce!!!!! Disciplinary was scheduled for today at 11.00am HR woman turns up over half an hour late. My union rep had another appointment for 1.00pm an told her he was unable to continue with the hearing. HR woman then tears into my union Rep for using delay tactics.

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi can anyone shed some light on the meaning of time theft.

[ukaviator]

Hi Chippy Ray

 

The definition of time theft was once largely limited to employees having coworkers clock in for them before they actually arrived at work, or having coworkers clock out for them after they had already left. Technology is helping employers address this problem, however. For example, biometric time and attendance systems,which recognize fingerprints or eye retinas, require the actual employee to clock him or herself in and out. Other options include badge readers and bar code scanners.

 

Such technology only scratches the surface of the real problem with time theft, though. Today, many employees are "stealing time" from employers by taking longer than scheduled meal and coffee breaks, engaging in personal phone calls and e-mails, engaging in personal conversations with coworkers, playing games or daydreaming and/or surfing the Internet for personal reasons. Some employees even steal full days by taking unwarranted sick days. My company had issues a few years ago, when they should be doing running handovers, the staff left their posts early, so production was lost.

[MARTIN3030]

Off topic topic a little but to show it happens everywhere....I watched the US news last night where one of the banks has gonr to the wall....it showed huge queues round the block (rather like Northern Rocks)

The reporter said he knew many had thrown sickies from work...its a case of weighing up when it HAS to be done-I reckon there were hundreds away from work here too when they wanted to get their money out quickly. !!!

[ukaviator]

Reading and posting on this forum during working hours is Time Theft.

[heartopp]

Reading and posting on this forum during working hours is Time Theft.

 

I think that thst something that many of us are guilty of!

[CHIPPY RAY]

Hi thanks for the replies. My situation is , it is alleged I took to long to do some jobs. There is no performance schedule in place to say how long a specific type of job should or should not take. In the building trade it is not always easy to put a specific time to a job especially in maintenace work. For instance changing a lock, if it is a like for like change over I could do that job in say 15 minutes, but I would book an hour to that job. This time would include traveling to the job, sourcing the lock from stock, testing, clearing up, ect. Now if I did not have a similar lock in the stores or could not get a similar one I would have to cut the door to fit the new lock and travel to get the new lock. This time, the hours on my job sheet would be say 2 hours. Yet both the sheets would read say "repair faulty lock" The job sheet would show I used a new lock but nowhere would it show how the time difference occurred. Auditor looks at the two job sheets looks at the two jobs, sees a new lock fitted to both jobs but one took one hour the other two hours. HA! HA! he thinks Time theft.

Edited July 15, 2008 by CHIPPY RAY

[ukaviator]

I see, maybe the boss would like you to break the speed limit as well getting to the jobs more efficiently. At the end of the day if you can do the job safely, to a high standard, he may have to look at the way the job cards are written, also see if the times given to do the jobs are reasonable.

 

Your boss could hire a time study expert for a couple of days. This way he will get independant advice, as long as you have nothing to hide, it maybe to your advantage.

[MARTIN3030]

2 threads merged please try to keep together.