Dismissal what a shocker.

[sbfido]

Where to start - I work for a very well known organisation and have for ten+ years.

 

I was elected as an employee rep and until that point had no issues with my employer.

 

I was asked by staff from across my region to submit concerns around Christmas leave, in contract form we are all employed in London and across sectors. However a decision was taken that was not the one normally undertaken by the organization. They stopped all Christmas additional leave for one sector of the organisation and obviously they were very annoyed.

 

The nuts of it was I challenged it for them, was given a statement in reply to me making a formal grievance to have a regional director then tell me life would become very uncomfortable.

 

I then experienced obstructions and delays at work, staff members were told to withhold information and I had several audits and inspections 5 in total in a two week period.

 

I continued to raise the issues as they arose and also look at some policies that were not adhered to - seeking guidance from the policy manager within the organisation - the information was not clear. I also asked for support on numerous occasions - not provided.

 

Supervision is a myth, reports were written and contain lies - including one that stated i was being investigated for racial abuse added by a director of the organisation - although later he admits its wrong its stays in the report as he is unable to remove it.

 

In the end i submitted a 20 part grievance and they also tried to discipline me, i use the word try ( i also hoard paper and they were unsucessful)

 

The matter got worse in March 2009 - the chief exec of a partner agency (for housing purposes) grabbed me force-ably by the arms at a conference and finger pointing in my face told me if i raised the issues with his staff i would be sacked.

 

I instantly reported the incident to the personnel manager whom was at the venue, and was livid and actually very upset. I also emailed a complaint over.

 

The grievance was a farce - and i appealed. They also said the assault was my word against his although i gave names of two witnesses that have now given statements to confirm what had happened to me.

 

My employers has stated they had a response but were waiting for more information - still not resolved.

 

I also DSAR them - they failed to comply with the 40 day time frame and i ended up reporting them to the ICO - They stated that in there opinion the organisation had broken the DPA and was made to provide documents.

 

These documents were shocking - they clearly showed that a meeting was held to look at ways to sort me.

 

Some nasty comments including stating that i am either a thief or i run a band of thieves (yes in writing from chief exec level). Although there is no concerns in relation to this.

 

Comments form my line manager - "this is the kind of man we are dealing with" Because i take notes and keep track and records.

 

A comment that they have arranged for some additional inspections - followed by "This will test him over the next few weeks"

 

In my grievance they said the inspections had fallen that way.

 

Another comment is "We will have him dangling by a thread"

 

"we don't want him having that so he can get of the hook"

 

and one that was funny - Personal to other director "I will give you a crash course in supervision we don't want him having a room to wiggle out of this"

 

YES ALL IN WRITING

 

We met with ACAS in December - Sadly they pulled out after i showed them the emails and comments, including the meeting with the famous five as identified in emails"

 

2 weeks later I was suspended. lots more had happened on the run upto that minutes altered reports not a true reflection.

 

I was then dismissed after the first hearing i did not attend as i submitted a sicknote 2 weeks earlier for 6 weeks.

 

The minutes stated i had not been in touch i have email receipt for med 1

 

When i challenged this at the appeal hearing was told i could have attended still. I wasn't well - Well u should have said, they knew i was off sick.

 

they then explained they had instantly dimissed me for 6 reasons -

 

One was around a policy i have implemented - difficult to explain as will show organisation and i don't want that yet. But they say it was not an appropriate policy. I was suspended in December - the policy is now used by the other manager as it is effective. ( three weeks ago)

 

External agencies were told i was dismissed n feb - Not the case.

(I have a statement from them)

 

One week prior to the first meeting i didn't attend i got a nice large box from my employer - with all my personal items in off my desk and pictures that were screwed to the wall in my office. No letter nothing!

 

(mmmmm seems the decision was made)

 

They said that in December i had asked for some personal items so they were now returning them. (I did my wage slips and MP3 player that has not been sent)

 

One of the issues relates back to three years ago, my oldest son had cancer and sadly in early December my daughter died. I was off work and there was an incident at work, a manager was told by me when he called to get on with it. (they consider this gross misconduct)

 

I also asked for help after she died as my deputy had lost his wife and was not going to return - I was told "Its your responsibility to manager a reoccurring comment over the years"

 

Last year I asked for support numerous times - i got it in Feb 2010

one year later.

 

The other item that i heard was relating to 2007 2008 - not doing work in a timely manner - Gross insubordinates. I have never had any written or verbal warnings,

 

It would appear i didn't fill in a fire book then - current reports show them as up to date.

 

The whole meeting was emotive and personally insulting - they even had the cheek to accuse me of leaving a safe open. Sadly they are not the kind that you can leave open if you take the key the door has to be locked.

 

(YES you guess sacked me for misconduct)

 

I was given instant dismissal no notice -

 

ACAS pulled out and they have stated that the grivance is resolved and i am not permitted to discuss acas with them! (IN WRITING)

 

They then say there is no outstanding matter and totally ignoring the concerns i raised.

 

The investigating officer is the one that i raised the grievances against - In an email he states he is not happy that i got off scot free at the first hearing. (But they assure me its not personal)

 

Thats why he told by staff that they face redundancies - yet they didn't

He told another staff member not to disclose essential information to me - that came out in an inspection and the emails show how they tried to cover it up.

 

The place of work has been horrid and oppressive with constant threats of job losses - one member of staff supported my line manager - he made a statement - and amazingly his son in law got a job as did his daughter at the centre where they are making people redundant.

 

and finally the asst to the director that has had ago approached me at a public meeting took me to one side and said " we know you are not happy now how much will it take for you to go and i can sort it" The response from the grievance was - " she was acting in a personal capacity and not representing the organization" no way she is an asst director.

 

that is a brief snippet of my year of hell -your thoughts are welcomed!8)

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

This, indeed, reads like hell...

 

(a) When you say that you were an employee representative, were you so for the purpose of ICE Regulations?

 

(b) Did you, or do you intend to consult an employment law firm over your case?

 

© Do you think that the difficulties you are enumerating in your post stem from the fact that you were an employee representative?

[sbfido]

YES it was under ICE regulations and i was elected as the representative for the Yorkshire region.

 

I aim to have legal advice but 10000 costs are a serious concern unless anyone knows a no win no fee.

[sbfido]

All these matters and concerns happened after i was warned not to rock the boat or life would be made difficult, one comment by a regional director in writing was "I stand by my words to you-it is your right to make any decisions regarding your own future".

 

Sadly i think they were unaware that they had to give me the information when i dsar'd them.

 

The grievence appeal i had clearly shows they mislead the investigation i raised this and we went to acas, acas pulled out for obvious reasons. Now they refuse to resolve it and say nothing is outstanding - its a joke. They also state i can discuss the acas matter with them as its confidential.

[madari]

Hi,

Your experiance is not uncommon,once your face does not fit in the work place then i am afraid you will be shown the door,regardless of who you are.[as in your case]

 

I would not even think of approaching a `No win no fee` firm of solicitors unless you want to add to your problems.

 

Find out if there are any[by googling]` community law centres`within your county and approach them asap.

 

When were you dissmissed? you have three months from the date of your dismissal to lodge a claim to the employment tribunal.

 

If you cant find anyone to assist you right now then it is worth paying a solicitor just to assist you with filling out and submitting a claim to the Employment tribunal.

 

Worry about representation later.....remember you have this forum to assist you from now on.

 

Your priority is to sue them asap otherwise you can foget it once the three month time limit has lapsed.

 

Good luck...

[Allwood]

Hi,

 

I would not even think of approaching a `No win no fee` firm of solicitors unless you want to add to your problems.

 

Why would having a solicitors on a no win, no fee basis (that is if you can find one) would add to problems.

 

I am aware of unions been a problem but how can a solicitor be a problem as well, if they take the case on that is....

[madari]

All they are interested in is `YOUR` winnings, I speak from experiance.

 

Often they want 70% of any compensation, that in laymans terms ,is £70 for them an £30 for you out of every £100 of your winnings.[assuming you win]

 

But before they even take your case on they will make sure that they think that your case has a more than 50% chance of winning.....in otherwords you are wasting prestious time while they are coming to any conclusions.

 

Like i said i speak from experiane and experiances of others too.

Edited June 26, 2010 by madari

[Allwood]

All they are interested in is `YOUR` winnings, I speak from experiance.

 

Often they want 70% of any compensation, that in laymans terms ,is £70 for them an £30 for you out of every £100 of your winnings.[assuming you win]

 

But before they even take your case on they will make sure that they think that your case has a more than 50% chance of winning.....in otherwords you are wasting prestious time while they are coming to any conclusions.

 

Like i said i speak from experiane and experiances of others too.

 

Why not agree before they take on your case what they percentage will be. However, 50% is good compared to the unions they want 70 to 80% change they will win. Them percentage were given to me last week by a union rep. I have been paying my subs by direct debit to them and they will not even answere an email to me as I have tried to get a legal opinion from one of the solictors.

 

How is that for stress...you are paying them and they will not even return a email. Save your money and do not join a UNION they are crooks.

[madari]

Unions and solicitors all have financial targets to meet and i wouldn`t trust any one of them.

 

I agree that they are all crooks,solicitors included, many claim to be employment lawyers but are far from employment experts, believe me.

 

The best advice is free advice......and again i speak from experiance and there is plenty out there,[free advice] you`ve just got to go and find it.

 

Good luck....

[madari]

Why not agree before they take on your case what they percentage will be. However, 50% is good compared to the unions they want 70 to 80% change they will win. Them percentage were given to me last week by a union rep. I have been paying my subs by direct debit to them and they will not even answere an email to me as I have tried to get a legal opinion from one of the solictors.

 

How is that for stress...you are paying them and they will not even return a email. Save your money and do not join a UNION they are crooks.

 

I said 70% not 50% of your winnings.....dont be a fool and steer clear from `No win No fee`Cowboys.

[Allwood]

I said 70% not 50% of your winnings.....dont be a fool and steer clear from `No win No fee`Cowboys.

 

I relalised that, but you said that they got to be 50% sure tof winning compared to unions, they have got to be 70 to 80% sure that they will win before they will take will take a menber case on despite paying your subscription every month of £x.

 

Did you get a break down of the work your solicitor did for you, I think they charge about £300 an hr. they are obliged to give you a break down of how they came to their final bill. If they attended a tribunal and it went for a couple of days that would be a hell of amount of money plus their cost of telephone calls, I think they charge £10 for picking up the phone and dialing it, if there stay on the phone for for less then that 1 minutes they will still charge you £10. They have set cost for their fees. So much for letters sent out on your behalf. Hopefully someone will come with a bit more knowledge and assist with this stickly subject.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

I have found solicitors to be up front with their charges, and helpful with their advice.

 

I went to find one and got the free half hour. In that half hour he talked through the law, what he could do, what he advised me to do on my own as he would be too expensive, and he told me exactly how to do my bits, including what law to use, etc.

 

He explained his charges, did the work he promised within 24 hours, wrote to me 4 times explaining what was happening, and then also talked me through the rest of the process which he felt I was better off doing on my own (on the phone, at the end of his bit).

 

Total cost... £100.

 

Not bad value, in my opinion, and yes, this solicitor does also do no win no fee jobs.

[Allwood]

Solicitors do vary in fees and services just like every other business. I contacted one last week from the internet one that you fill in your details such name, tel and email address, got a phone call immediately and was advised that the first half hr fee would be £150 and after that they would charge accordingly. I told him I would get back to him but have not done so.

 

I know it is a matter of looking for one that charge differently it depends on their seniority.

 

It was good that you got good value for money. I feel it also depends on the complexity of the case involved that they base their charges and obviously how much time they spend on the case. I have been told that they have set cost for telephone, letters etc.

[Bigredbus]

You may want to have a look at 'The Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2004', s30

 

The Information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2004

[Bigredbus]

In the meantime, could you separate, in your initial post, incidents related to your mandate (Employee representative) from personal issues related to your employer?... Thanks...

[sbfido]

In the meantime, could you separate, in your initial post, incidents related to your mandate (Employee representative) from personal issues related to your employer?... Thanks...

 

Still trying to get my head around all of this -

 

I was elected as the ICE representative -

 

Some staff from the region raised concerns with me over pay and Xmas Leave. As we worked 24/7 356 a year in one section of the organisation and some only work business hours. Xmas leave was always a contentious issue. Previously prior to 2008 all staff were given equal lieu days if other areas were closed for example Head offices shops ect closed) Social staff were given same amount of time back in lieu of working.

 

In 2008 without consultation only social staff were not permitted the additional leave.

 

I was asked formally to raise this. I did to no avail they did not want to discuss the matter and bounced it back with message that it would have to be personal grievance. So i raised it, they did not reply until two months later when i attended the ICE meeting again and i reminded them that it was coming on any other business. I got a letter stating in future would be discussed through ICE. We got to the meeting and the chairman stated that this could not be discussed and i had been misinformed.

 

Yet again I bounced it back, Mean while all social centre staff at manager grade had all overtime stopped with wording added in the handbook - that was not normally there.

 

So again I raised the concern. I had my hand squeezed hard at a photo shoot and told that "Your rather outspoken" This being by the 2nd most senior person in the organisation.

 

A few days later a got a visit from my supervisor. No other reason except he had been told to have a word with me about not pursuing the matters through ICE or grievance as this would have a detrimental affect on me and my centre.

 

Sadly I do not like bullies! I raised this discussion formally at a local event with senior directors. Pursuing the matter.

 

A few weeks later i had numerous inspections 5 in two weeks, work was obstructed, i was mislead about new policies (Had that upheld in grievence)

 

I raised a 20 part grievance.

 

I was required to look at some policies and ensure we worked in an open manner (that is a joke) My supervisor was not happy to initial that he had seen some information, he raised a complaint about me

 

I was invited to an investigation meeting - none upheld one item pending

 

We held a managers conference - 1 week long

 

I was a manager also - During the conference i was grabbed by the arm and frog marched into a corridor and told if i discuss it with any staff I would be dismissed. (Cheif exec) To say i was livid was an understatement.

 

So lots of inspection - stress pressure and no support although requested.

 

Assaulted as i considered it

 

(Grievance answer my word against his) I had two witnesses they never interviewed them or took statements, sadly I have statements now.

 

On complaining about the inspections was informed it was normal process just it had fallen in one time period for me. I didn't believe it.

 

DSAR -

 

ICO confirmed they broke DPA and made them release info.

 

Now the shocker

 

Senior staff held a meeting to look at ways to remove me in Feb 2009, Although told by HR not a good idea.

 

Head of social uk - Stated that some policies may not be written down but are fundemental. - really. Feb 2009

 

A senior manager says that i operated a thiefdom - (Wikepedia Band of theives) (Yes i was bloody furious)

 

In response Head states looks like we are opening that proverbial can of worms!

 

Same day again

 

My direct line manager in response to not backing down on ICE matter asked for several Audits to "Gauge his reactions"

 

I raised concerns re information that is confidential - Line manager emails others and states "I am not aware of the processes"

 

HR manager emails and tells others she will advise but not officially as she will be involved later (Conspiring she has good hindsight) Feb 2009

 

Regional HR - Stated he will sort the disciplinary hearing - (Not even investigated anything yet"

 

Line Manager email to others "Do not provide me with anything that will allow me to get of the hook"

 

April - Recommend famous five to resolve this ( as a manager this is the term used for 5 senior persons that sort out dismissal)

 

Investigation Hearing held - Sadly I hoard paper! was ready too.

 

Supervisor - Not happy and expressed personal opinion of process and the biased outcome for me.

 

HR regional - suggests they set up monitoring and aim to make as uncomfortable as possible beyond a couple of weeks (Constructive springs to mind)

 

HR regional in response to line manager - Have him "hanging by a thread"

 

Supervisors wife offers me pay off - in a public meeting when i was having chat with other agency - Told her not to question my integrity and asked how she dare approach me in such a manner, she went and told my line manager i was being deliberate obstructive

 

Line manager emailed HR instantly and stated he wanted me suspended and dealt with as this is the kind of man we are dealing with.

 

HR Regional - Don't worry the processes put in place will now really test him.

 

6 months later i was suspended - My work was obstructed throughout there is loads more on email -

 

Before you ask all the above is in emails obtained through DSAR

 

June 2010 dismissed - didnt attend hearing as was certified off - opening statement was no contact from SB

 

Yet they had acknowledge my sicknote two weeks earlier for 6 weeks.

 

I also asked them not to contact while signed off with stress as u can imagine It has been hard.

 

Staff were told not to give me essential information, informed they were looking for redundancies yet - when raised they denied this.

 

The new investigation was conducted by my supervisor - Yes the one that doesn't like it being biased and yes the ones that put me under pressure and miss-advised me on policies not once, not twice four times -

 

Yes the one that told everyone two months after suspension i would be back as I was dismissed.

 

He was write

 

I appealed - was too much and left an emotional wreck. Challenged why i wasn't given chance at hearing they stated in minutes no contact but amazingly he then stated he was informed - why did they continue - they wanted me to tell them I defo wasn't going to be there!

 

"So my statement to HR while off sick - Please do not contact as i want time to get myself together and have counselling I will stay in touch with occ health"

 

Hey all my fault i was ill!

 

The final part being - Initial answer to the fact i feel under pressure constantly - He is under no more pressure than anyone else.

 

By the way - I worked for a charity well known to you all!

[honeybee13]

Hello. I really feel for you, this sounds a dreadful ordeal.

 

Are you planning to take this any further?

 

HB

[R&J]

All they are interested in is `YOUR` winnings, I speak from experiance.

 

Often they want 70% of any compensation, that in laymans terms ,is £70 for them an £30 for you out of every £100 of your winnings.[assuming you win]

 

 

The maximum I have ever known anyone charge is 40%, and that was last year. If anyone is charging 70% this is horrific, and I would be surpised if it was still happening, the reasons being:

 

New regulations were introduced in April of this year. The maximum any Solicitor can charge on a NWNF for an Employment Law matter is 35% including VAT.

 

If Solicitors are still charging 70% then the contract is probably legally unenforcable. Send me a PM with their details and I will investigate. If you, or anyone you know, has paid 70% you may be able to claw back some of the compensation.

 

Since anyone can appear as a 'representative' in the Employment Tribunal there are lots of companies calling themselves 'employment law experts' having a go, using people with no legal qualifications whatsoever. These people are not Solicitors, and as such are not regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, and can basically charge what they want.

 

A good Solicitor will be totally upfront about their NWNF rates, which should not exceed 35% including VAT.

Edited July 27, 2010 by R&J

[sbfido]

Hello. I really feel for you, this sounds a dreadful ordeal.

 

Are you planning to take this any further?

 

HB

 

Yes just working out which is best approach for tribunal service.

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

Thanks for your detailed info.

 

(a) Pursuant to the ICE Regulations 2004, Unfair dismissal

s30. - (1) An employee who is dismissed and to whom paragraph (2) or (5) applies shall be regarded, if the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for the dismissal is a reason specified in, respectively, paragraph (3) or (6), as unfairly dismissed for the purposes of Part 10 of the 1996 Act.

 

(2) This paragraph applies to an employee who is -

 

 

• (a) an employees' representative;
   
  (b) a negotiating representative;
   
  © an information and consultation representative; or
   
  (d) a candidate in an election in which any person elected will, on being elected, be such a representative.
   
  

(3) The reasons are that -

 

• (a) the employee performed or proposed to perform any functions or activities as such a representative or candidate;
   
  (b) the employee exercised or proposed to exercise an entitlement conferred on the employee by regulation 27 or 28; or
   
  © the employee (or a person acting on his behalf) made or proposed to make a request to exercise such an entitlement.
   
  

(4) Paragraph (1) does not apply in the circumstances set out in paragraph (3)(a) where the reason (or principal reason) for the dismissal is that in the performance, or purported performance, of the employee's functions or activities he has disclosed any information or document in breach of the duty in regulation 25, unless the employee reasonably believed the disclosure to be a "protected disclosure" within the meaning given to that expression by section 43A of the 1996 Act.

 

(5) This paragraph applies to any employee whether or not he is an employee to whom paragraph (2) applies.

 

(6) The reasons are that the employee -

 

• (a) took, or proposed to take, any proceedings before an employment tribunal to enforce a right or secure an entitlement conferred on him by these Regulations;
   
  (b) exercised, or proposed to exercise, any entitlement to apply or complain to the CAC or the Appeal Tribunal conferred by these Regulations or to exercise the right to appeal in connection with any rights conferred by these Regulations;
   
  © requested, or proposed to request, data in accordance with regulation 5;
   
  (d) acted with a view to securing that an agreement was or was not negotiated or that the standard information and consultation provisions did or did not become applicable;
   
  (e) indicated that he supported or did not support the coming into existence of a negotiated agreement or the application of the standard information and consultation provisions;
   
  (f) stood as a candidate in an election in which any person elected would, on being elected, be a negotiating representative or an information and consultation representative;
   
  (g) influenced or sought to influence by lawful means the way in which votes were to be cast by other employees in a ballot arranged under these Regulations;
   
  (h) voted in such a ballot;
   
  (i) expressed doubts, whether to a ballot supervisor or otherwise, as to whether such a ballot had been properly conducted; or
   
  (j) proposed to do, failed to do, or proposed to decline to do, any of the things mentioned in sub-paragraphs (d) to (i).
   
  

(7) It is immaterial for the purpose of paragraph (6)(a) -

 

• (a) whether or not the employee has the right or entitlement; or
   
  (b) whether or not the right has been infringed;
   
  

but for that sub-paragraph to apply, the claim to the right and, if applicable, the claim that it has been infringed must be made in good faith.

(a) You should separate any fact arising from your mandate from any other incident.

 

(b) If you can demonstrate that any other incident which has occured stemmed from your ICE mandate then you could raise a claim for unfair dismissal...