Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
    • Simon Case was at the Covid inquiry yesterday. Finally. ‘Eat out to help out’ launched without telling official in charge, Covid inquiry hears | Covid inquiry | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Simon Case, who was responsible for Covid policy at time, calls Boris Johnson’s Downing Street the ‘worst governing ever seen’  
    • I think for the moment you will have to wait for the return of the dress to you And then take some decent photographs which will show the damage very clearly. You will have to provide these to parcel to go but also you will need them as evidence for the court if that's the way this matter goes . Let us know when you get the dress and you have the photographs. It would be helpful to see the photographs here. In the meantime I suggest that you start reading as many of the stories on the subforum as you can manage in 2 or 3 days and that means quite a lot. In particular read the pinned posts at the top of the subforum which will explain the principles involved which you will probably have to use if you bring the matter to court. When you have done the reading, when you have received the dress and when you have the photographs then come back here and we can go to the next step      
    • Solid blocks of text are very difficult for people to follow and especially when they are using small screens such as telephones. This discourages people from giving you the kind of help that you need. Please will you make sure that your posts are properly spaced and punctuated in future.  I have done this one for you on this occasion
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

confused! help!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5245 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

HELP!! I've turned my schedule of loss into the respondent, who have come back and said the ET will not award for the following:

 

-loss of holiday pay

-loss of bank holiday pay

-loss of work (days in between last day after 4 week gardening leave and starting new contract, calculated at old pay rate)

 

Also, since I went from being a permanent employee to a contractor, I've also claimed for the following:

 

-Employer's NI (because as a contractor, this comes out of my pocket now)

-Payroll Company fees (to process my payroll)

 

Of course, they have said these too are not claimable.

 

Can anyone shed some light on what I can claim, and if I am claiming incorrectly?? I feel that a schedule of loss should include any loss that resulted from me not being in permanent employment any longer. Credit crunch being what it is, I took the first offer of any kind of work came my way to help mitigate my costs (as I needed a job!!).

 

They have also (once again) threatened to come after me for costs as well. :-(

 

Any help would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there. This is not my area of expertise, but hopefully an expert will be along soon.

 

I don't quite understand though. You've sent your schedule of loss to the respondent. Is that the company you're in dispute with, or a solicitor, for instance?

 

I have heard about shedules of losses on this forum and thought they went to the tribunal, but could be wrong about that. If it's your ex-employer, are they qualified to judge what the tribunal will or won't allow?

 

Sorry if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but good luck with this.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi honeybee,

 

Thanks for your reply! Sorry, should have been a bit clearer, but I'm really stressing out with all this....

 

I sent my schedule of loss to the ACAS Conciliator, who sent it on to the respondent. The respondent sent the reply back to ACAS, who in turn sent it to me.

 

I don't know what's allowed and what's not anymore! I just thought that I should put any loss/extra expense at the difference between my old job and my current contract.

 

Ex-employer have said they have had legal advice and I can't claim for anything on my schedule other than my loss of earnings, loss of employment rights (max £350) and another piddly little benefit I got while I was there.

 

I am confused.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds awfully convenient for them, doesn't it? I won't say anything but my own opinion, as I'm a newbie myself, but are they in danger of being judge and jury here? Have you seen their legal opinion in writing?

 

Don't worry about stressing, you're perfectly normal.

 

Any thoughts please guys?

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite simply, Stinky - The Respondant would say that, wouldn't they!?

They're going to rattle their sabre as loudly as possible.

Ignore them. Ask for whatever you have lost by them (presumably) dismissing you, holiday pay, Bank holidays, that pint that your employer used to buy you at the end of your shift, anything.

Just concentrate on making sure you can display that you've done everything possible to mitigate your loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for your help, I just don't have any experience with any of this and can't afford a solicitor. I've called ACAS and they've advised me to call the Tribunals office tomorrow for further advice.

 

I'm just really worried about them going after me for costs because knowing them, they would try. :-(

 

but I really appreciate all the advice, makes me feel a bit calmer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for your help, I just don't have any experience with any of this and can't afford a solicitor. I've called ACAS and they've advised me to call the Tribunals office tomorrow for further advice.

 

I'm just really worried about them going after me for costs because knowing them, they would try. :-(

 

but I really appreciate all the advice, makes me feel a bit calmer.

Is your application a great big load of crap?

Is it completely without any foundation?

If not, I wouldn't worry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stinky. I've read other posts on this forum that recommend ringing the tribunals office, so I think that's the way to go.

 

While you're talking to them, try to get clarification on costs and your worries. I'm not clued up on this, but your employers could just be threatening that as part of their argument to get you to give up.

 

You don't say what costs are worrying you, but if they're talking about a legal rep, they wouldn't need one if the case is as clear cut as they're saying, would they?

 

Please let us know what happens.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stinky,

Dont get stressed, dont listen to what the respondents say.

Noone is going to as you put it..."go after costs".

 

You have done your statement of loss, and if there is anything wrong or right with it the tribunal will inform you [at the hearing]and direct you accordingly.you are not an expert and the tribunal know this.

 

Remember at a tribunal you are on an `equal footing` so dont worry about a thing other then winning your claim.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi again everyone!

 

Just a quick update... I've called the Tribunals office and they have said that its up to a judge to make the decision on what the award might be, so to not pay attention to what the respondent says.

 

I'm also going to write a letter to the Tribunal expressing my concern that the respondent keeps mentioning them going after me for costs as well (that bit worries me the most to be honest). I realise its a tactic to scare me off, and its working I must admit. But I will plug onwards.

 

I keep going from being petrified and emotional to being really peed off to be honest. To top it off, I've had to take snow days because I can't get into work, which means I won't get paid (2 days last week and hopefully only today, but tomorrow's not looking good either at this point), and after my work being shut for 7 working days over Christmas means I am horribly skint.

 

Sorry for the moan. And thanks again for all the advice and well wishes, it's really been a great help and comfort and I'm most grateful. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi again everyone!

 

Just a quick update... I've called the Tribunals office and they have said that its up to a judge to make the decision on what the award might be, so to not pay attention to what the respondent says.

 

I'm also going to write a letter to the Tribunal expressing my concern that the respondent keeps mentioning them going after me for costs as well (that bit worries me the most to be honest). I realise its a tactic to scare me off, and its working I must admit. But I will plug onwards.

 

I keep going from being petrified and emotional to being really peed off to be honest. To top it off, I've had to take snow days because I can't get into work, which means I won't get paid (2 days last week and hopefully only today, but tomorrow's not looking good either at this point), and after my work being shut for 7 working days over Christmas means I am horribly skint.

 

Sorry for the moan. And thanks again for all the advice and well wishes, it's really been a great help and comfort and I'm most grateful. :-)

In your letter to the tribunal tell the tribunal that the tribunal make an order for you to put down a deposit of £500 if the ET thinks that your claim has no reasonable chance of success, [also tell the ET] that way you will know whether to proceed with the claim or not.

 

You have nothing to worry about regarding costs order against you,believe me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your letter to the tribunal tell the tribunal that the tribunal make an order for you to put down a deposit of £500 if the ET thinks that your claim has no reasonable chance of success, [also tell the ET] that way you will know whether to proceed with the claim or not.

 

You have nothing to worry about regarding costs order against you,believe me.

Why tell the tribunal to do that?:-o

The tribunal might order that you make a deposit, you don't suggest they do so!?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No i can assure you that the tribunal will not make this order, i will put my house on it.

 

I will go as far as to say that if the tribunal make this order then i will put down the DEPOSIT myself......hows that?[i promise]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tribunals do sometimes order that a deposit be made.......

Only when one party has behaved in a vextious manner [i suggest you read the `Tribunal rules and procedure`.the ET`s are bound by this and if an order is made [and i Know it wont] then it can be construed as an `error of law' which one can appeal against.......and as keeping costs down is also one of the rules, no tribunal is going to go down that road.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only when one party has behaved in a vextious manner [i suggest you read the `Tribunal rules and procedure`.the ET`s are bound by this and if an order is made [and i Know it wont] then it can be construed as an `error of law' which one can appeal against.......and as keeping costs down is also one of the rules, no tribunal is going to go down that road.

I agree, Madari. But I don't understand why one would 'offer' to pay a deposit?

It would be like standing up in a criminal court, when being charged with an offence, and saying, "well, if you think I'm gulity of something, I suggest you remand me in custody!".

It does happen, at PHR, that one party's case is only allowed to proceed on the understanding that they will be liable for the other party's costs. Often, particularly if the applicant is evidently not someone of means, they are required to pay a deposit.

The reason the incidences of costs being awarded at ET are as low as they are is because in the majority of these circumstances, the Applicant withdraws their claim at that point.

There's no purpose in the Applicant offering. Let the Respondant argue for it if they so wish.

You'll notice that I've reassured the OP that they would only be liable for costs if their claim was wholly vexatious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...