Suspended for Gross Misconduct. Meeting with Investigating officer tomorrow. HELP please

[honeybee13]

I agree with madari. I'm sure this is covered on the directgov or ACAS websites, can find you a link if you need it.

 

HB x

[goldie66]

Thanks, my union rep thought that was the case too but the Investigating Officer believes otherwise so not sure how this'll go now . . . .

 

My mitigating circumstances rely heavily on my grievance so I don't see how they could be looked at as separate issues.

Thanks again HB and Madari

G66

[honeybee13]

Hi Goldie. From what we've seen of your employer so far, this isn't necessarily surprising, but is very sad to note. Could the IO have been nobbled, or is this more cock up than conspiracy, would you say?

 

HB x

[honeybee13]

Me again Goldie.

 

Methinks the procedure is the opposite of what the IO said, if I read this right. Do people at your employer know what they're doing? This is copied from the ACAS website.

 

Overlapping grievance and disciplinary cases44 Where an employee raises a grievance during a disciplinary process the disciplinary process may be temporarily suspended in order to deal with the grievance. Where the grievance and disciplinary cases are related it may be appropriate to deal with both issues concurrently.

 

 

Actually, re-reading that it says 'may' a lot, does anyone know for sure please?

 

 

 

HB x

[madari]

If you are dismissed then your grievance automatically is dismissal ,so your employer has to run both the disciplinary procedure and your current grievance concurrently.

 

They cannot dismiss you without hearing your grievance first

[goldie66]

Thanks again HB and madari. It's just as I thought! I think it's more cock up than conspiracy this time . . . .

 

My rep should be able to sort that bit out for me.

 

Thanks yet again!

G66

[goldie66]

Hi

 

I've just arrived back from my holiday in Spain and have received details that I must attend a Disciplinary Hearing on 30/07. The investigating officer has submitted his report to HR at Head Office and, on the basis of that, I have been charged with Gross Misconduct. I knew that this may happen but I had hoped that someone 'sensible' would have made the decision and recognised my misdemeanors for what they are. My union rep thinks that the outcome is predetermined and that I will be dismissed. I am totally devastated-I never really believed it could come to this.

 

Can anyone offer advice on how to deal with the Hearing? I have been told that my bullying allegations cannot be taken into account as they are not relevant to IT policy?!

 

Thanks in advance,

Goldie

[honeybee13]

I'm really sorry to hear that, goldie. Can hardly believe it myself, what were they thinking. Do you think the process was impartial and have you or your rep seen any paperwork?

 

I'm sure the guys will have plenty of thoughts for you.

 

HB x

[goldie66]

Hi HB,

I have seen the Investigating Officer's report which was quite brief and fair-the report he wrote about one of my suspended colleagues wasn't particularly fair so at least I'm happy with that. He did mention my mitigating circs etc but the decision to discipline has been made by an HR Professional so I'm quite surprised.

To make matters worse, a 2 week amnesty has been declared at work so everyone has been told to rid their PC of anything which is against IT policy-if only I'd been given that opportunity? It shows that they were well aware of what was common practice but unfortunately it doesn't help me!

 

Thanks

G66

[honeybee13]

This sounds unduly harsh to me, and not necessarily logical. Let's hope the guys can come up with something. What you've just posted makes it look as if you've been singled out for unequal treatment, for want of a better word.

 

HB x

[goldie66]

Hi

I'm back apologise for not updating sooner! I had a disciplinary hearing and was given a written warning so immediately went back to work which involved a heavy travel diary and no lap top hence long absence.

 

I am now facing a new difficulty and not sure whether to start a new post or not? I am now being investigated for submitting a malicious grievance which is the one I was asked to submit by the original Investigating Officer in relation to my manager and to show mitigation re the comments made in one of the offending emails! I cannot believe that they are taking further action against me in light of what happened last summer.

 

Can any one advise re 'malicious grievances', my union have never dealt with anything like it before as generally speaking, a grievance is either upheld or not without discipline for the victim??

 

Thanks

G66

[honeybee13]

Hello goldie, I was only thinking about you the other day and wondering how it all went last year.

 

Sorry to hear this is ongoing for you. It sounds personal on someone's part, doesn't it? I hope we can help.

 

HB x

[goldie66]

Hi HB!

I know-you'd think the last thing they'd do is victimise me AGAIN! My current predicament makes last year's investigation seem remarkably fair? It's as if the longer it goes on the more justification and evidence is produced which supports my original victimisation claim-bizarre? Do you think I should start a new thread seeking advice purely on 'malicious' grievances? It would save everyone reading through this one?

 

Nice to 'see' you again HB!

[honeybee13]

I'm not sure about whether a new thread is a good idea or not tbh, goldie. How about you leave it for now and see if one of the site team suggest it? People who reply to you may not feel the need to read everything, just the most recent posts.

 

HB x

[mariefab]

Did the investigating officer mention, in his report, that he'd suggested that you should submit a grievance?

 

Surely you would have raised the matters in the grievance as part of your defence/mitigation at the disciplinary hearing and so it should have been taken into consideration by whoever conducted the disciplinary when deciding what action to take.

Is there anything in the documentation regarding the disciplinary mentioning any of this?

 

Are they now suggesting that everything in your grievance was untrue?

 

What happened to J?

[goldie66]

Hi Mariefab

 

Yes, my grievance is documented in my disciplinary. The IO states in his report that there was an allegation of bullying which has not been investigated and it is in the 'mitigation' paragraph. The notes from my original fact finding meeting state that 'had I not been promoted and moved I would have taken out a grievance' and the IO states 'are you prepared to submit this grievance as part of this investigation?' and I respond 'yes'. They are saying that my grievance that it's completely unsubstantiated and that they have serious concerns that it is a malicious attack on an experienced and highly valued manager. They believe that the events in the grievance have been manufactured as a result of disciplinary action taken against me.

 

J got a warning and his back at work too, her grievance was Not Upheld but no threat of discipline for her.

 

Thanks

[elpulpo]

Why do they believe that it was malicious? OK, this is employment law, they don't have to prove things 'beyong all reasonable doubt', but their 'serious concerns' must be based upon some evidence, not just opinion.

[goldie66]

Hi Elpulpo

 

I had a meeting yesterday-it lasted 4 hours without a Union Rep and what they have basically said is that 'had I not been disciplined I would not have submitted the grievance and therefore the motivation behind it is viewed as retaliationary'. The Investigating Officer's report is not based on fact- he has exaggerated the contents of the interviews conducted and in some cases completely made it up! ie One manager states that I missed a deadline and his report states that I 'consistently' missed deadlines and was about to be put on an 'improvement plan had I not been promoted' This is a bit contradictory as I've never heard of anyone being recommended for promotion when there are performance issues!? and it is his opinion, he hasn't investigated it properly and because the manager has denied events he has believed her account even though I did produce some supporting evidence.

 

Thanks

[mariefab]

Hold on. Are we talking about a grievance that you put in last June? (at the suggestion of the IO in preparation for the displinary held last July)

 

Has that grievance been dealt with and not upheld?

Or is the current process 9 months later their idea of dealing with it?

[goldie66]

Hi Mariefab

 

Yes-same grievance and put in last June! It was investigated in December and the meeting yesterday was with the Determining Officer following the Investigation Report.

 

Thanks

G66

[mariefab]

I suggest that you prepare a written statement in anticipation of the next meeting.

I'd take a couple of copies and get your own copy signed and dated to prove it's receipt.

Comb through the latest report and tackle all the issues you can including:

 

On receipt of a written grievance I would have thought that the absolute minimum action required of an employer is to read it.

So, given that must have done so, I'd be asking them to justify taking 9 months to decide/bring to your attention that they felt it's contents were malicious.

 

They have put an incorrect construction on the motive for your grievance.

You informed the IO that you had intended to submit a grievance about your former line manager before the opportunity of your temp promotion arose. However, you decided not to follow this course because the promotion had the effect of removing you from the problem.

 

The grievance that you submitted (in June) was not in retaliation but complying with the express request of the Investigating Officer.

[goldie66]

Thanks mariefab-that is really helpful. It is fairly complicated as when my grievance was submitted in June I was employed by a government dept which has no recourse or policy in force to deal with malicious grievances. In November last year my organisation was transferred to a different government dept which does have clear policy and guidance on 'malicious grievances' so I think that could explain the delay in the investigation and perhaps why I was not told that the possible outcome could be disciplinary action when my grievance was originally submitted? Hope that makes sense.

G66

[mariefab]

Well it makes sense only inasmuch as I understand what you've written.

Is this the explanation that was given to you?

Because it makes no sense as a reason for your current situation.

 

Have I understood this correctly?

You submitted the grievance in June after the IO said, 'are you prepared to submit this grievance as part of this investigation?'

In June you worked in a department where there was no process for dealing with malicious grievances and no-one suggested then or during the rest of the disciplinary process that they considered your grievance to be malicious or retaliatory.

Instead of suspending the disciplinary until the grievance was dealt with or dealing with it concurrently they did neither.

 

Once you were transferred to a different dept (that does have a process for dealing with malicious grievances) you didn't submit another grievance did you? Or remind them that the June one was still outstanding?

If not, do you know why, after 6 months, they decided to investigate an old grievance that had been submitted to a different dept and ignored?

 

Are they trawling through every grievance that anyone ever had with your old dept to see whether they consider any of them to be malicious? Surely not.

 

You pointed out earlier that although, in July, they declared a 2 week amnesty to remove breaches of the IT policy they still disciplined you for your breach.

Do you know why you are being singled out again?

[goldie66]

Hi Mariefab

 

The change in department issue hasn't been pointed out to me as an explanation for the delay in any investigation or reason behind my current predicament, it's my assumption and, if I was being paranoid, I would believe that they deliberately delayed my grievance process in order to come back at me with the threat of discipline action.

 

I have not made any further grievances and nor have I reminded them of the outstanding one from June but that is not to say that my Union Rep has not-he has now resigned!

 

I have tried to think about why I'm being singled out again and can't come up with anything. I've been a civil servant for 5 years, unblemished history until last summer, good appraisals and no sick leave. It really concerns me as I would probably describe myself as pretty non-descript and can't imagine being a threat to the organisation or anything. I have no personal history with anyone and have always got on well with my managers and staff until the period of 5 months when I worked in the team with the manager who I made the allegation of bullying against.

 

I really can't understand the rationale behind this as, if I am being investigated again, certain aspects of last summer will become apparent which will show that the investigation was seriously flawed from the start and a clear case of victimisation. I have also considered whether this could be part of the bigger picture in getting rid of civil servants as a cost saving measure but again, I am only middle management and if that was the case it would have been easier to sack me last summer when I was investigated for Gross Misconduct?

 

Am I confused about the grievance process? I would have thought that any single grievance could be viewed as retaliationary as, presumably, the person submitting it would be feeling 'aggrieved' about something?