Disciplinary Hearing

[honeybee13]

'No letter through email and no idea if it is written or not. Mind games? Bah!

 

Given I have had a meeting with minutes taken is it too late to introduce new evidence and how do I broach the subject?'

 

I've been on this thread from early on and have followed it. I may be tired tonight, but what new evidence do you mean please?

 

And the boss who seemed matey, is he part of the problem?

 

HB

[Roj47]

The history of trying to break systems is in your favour, it means that your actions are less likely to have been dishonest. Can you get someone to support you in that, or is your manager aware of it?

 

Honmeybee>> The evidence I was querying was in response to the above on having someone support my playing with systems to test and see what they can do.

 

No response again today and wondering if I can get to 7 days without word and the hearing being nulled if I am reading ACAS correctly.

 

Regards

[WelshMam2009]

It seems that this is a total over-reaction.

 

The truth of the matter is that your company's computer system is primarily at fault if it allows employees to cancel their own leave. Only line managers should have the pre-requisite authority to do this. You were merely exploring the full functionality of the system, which most curious minded individuals would do at some point or another....it's the "what happens if I press this button" mentality.

 

Did you have comprehensive training on the system and were you aware of the fact that you could cancel past leave. Do you have any training documentation?

 

I would certainly be making the point that you were not aware that the system allowed you to cancel past leave (whether taken or not) and would also be challenging why the company did not have a more secure system in place to prevent employees making adjustments in error when checking leave that has been taken.

 

As a result of the company's failure, you have been subject to undue stress for which they are largely culpable.

[honeybee13]

Interesting points, Welshmam. How do they know that other people haven't found this error on the system and taken extra holidays at a cost to the company and fellow employees?

 

As for getting into trouble for pressing every available button and seeing where it leads, my OH wouldn't have a job if people applied that!

 

HB

[Roj47]

Cheers as always and an update.

 

Met with the manager this afternoon whom did not beat around the bush and passed his verdict and what is happening -

 

I will be receiving a formal first warning which will remain on file for 12 months rather than 6 months due to it severity and I will be sent on a Code of Conduct course through work.

 

I assume this would class as a disciplinary to the same degree as a final written or misconduct charge should a marking scheme for redundancies arise (possible as work in construction).

 

Will wait for the letter for better particulars.

 

Thanks guys

[WelshMam2009]

Cheers as always and an update.

 

Met with the manager this afternoon whom did not beat around the bush and passed his verdict and what is happening -

 

I will be receiving a formal first warning which will remain on file for 12 months rather than 6 months due to it severity and I will be sent on a Code of Conduct course through work.

 

I assume this would class as a disciplinary to the same degree as a final written or misconduct charge should a marking scheme for redundancies arise (possible as work in construction).

 

Will wait for the letter for better particulars.

 

Thanks guys

 

Essentially, the disciplinary sanction you have been given is a first written warning which is to remain on your file for 12 months.

 

Just remember at the end of the 12 months to ensure this is removed as it's not something which is automatically carried out in a lot of organisations even though it should.

[honeybee13]

Good news, well done. I hope it goes well for you from now on. Any lessons learned? [if you want to tell us.]

 

My best, HB x

[griffzilla]

It seems that this is a total over-reaction.

 

The truth of the matter is that your company's computer system is primarily at fault if it allows employees to cancel their own leave. Only line managers should have the pre-requisite authority to do this. You were merely exploring the full functionality of the system, which most curious minded individuals would do at some point or another....it's the "what happens if I press this button" mentality.

 

Did you have comprehensive training on the system and were you aware of the fact that you could cancel past leave. Do you have any training documentation?

 

I would certainly be making the point that you were not aware that the system allowed you to cancel past leave (whether taken or not) and would also be challenging why the company did not have a more secure system in place to prevent employees making adjustments in error when checking leave that has been taken.

 

As a result of the company's failure, you have been subject to undue stress for which they are largely culpable.

 

I disagree. The system is hardly at fault, when it had a security protocol in place to email the line manager for confirmation, before it was fully cancelled. I imagine this is identical to how the user books leave...

 

• Employee logs onto system.
  
• Chooses dates and confirms.
  
• System emails manager.
  
• Manager confirms/rejects leave accordingly.
  
• Employee gets an email confirming response.
  

 

So I cannot see how the company is failing here, when the system is there to stop wrongful deletion of leave without authorisation - the OP was caught trying to do this action. The stress has been caused by the OP's actions - albeit without intent to 'defraud' the company.

 

Roj, I am glad that the company have realised that you were not trying to benefit from your exploration of the system.

[WelshMam2009]

I disagree. The system is hardly at fault, when it had a security protocol in place to email the line manager for confirmation, before it was fully cancelled. I imagine this is identical to how the user books leave...

 

• Employee logs onto system.
  
• Chooses dates and confirms.
  
• System emails manager.
  
• Manager confirms/rejects leave accordingly.
  
• Employee gets an email confirming response.
  

 

So I cannot see how the company is failing here, when the system is there to stop wrongful deletion of leave without authorisation - the OP was caught trying to do this action. The stress has been caused by the OP's actions - albeit without intent to 'defraud' the company.

 

Roj, I am glad that the company have realised that you were not trying to benefit from your exploration of the system.

 

Obviously we disagree Griffzilla and I respect your opinion.

 

Nonetheless, I feel compelled to reply even though the discussion is somewhat irrelevant, given the outcome.

 

My view remains that the system is at fault as it permits unauthorised activity to occur which is essentially entrapment i.e. enticing someone to commit an offence which they would not ordinarily commit.

 

The booking of leave is not the issue, it is the crediting of leave which should only be done by an authorised individual, in much the same way, I imagine as leave entitlement is entered into the system at the beginning of every new leave year.

 

I'm sure if the company had a flaw in their financial system whereby employees could write their own salary cheques every month they'd soon fix it!!

[honeybee13]

Just to add what I think, if anyone could access the system using their own username and access rights, isn't that a problem with the system?

 

HB

[Roj47]

I asked the question about an employee and manager being related or very good friends and the situation that in an agreement the employee could intentionally cancel holiday and have it authorised by the manager as a favour.

 

I think it struck a cord and no doubt my manager will investigate.

 

Thank you for walking with me and helping me to be calm and rational.

 

Kind regards