Unfair, Wrongful or Constructive dismissal?

[jackieandwayne]

Have you had a go at getting your subs back? All 32 years of them? Official complaint, elevate it as high as you can and see. There is actually a case you can look at where a guy did just this. It was against Unison, and because they let him down he argued he wanted his subs back. If you google Unison v Mr Carl Jervis, it makes interesting reading. Didn't necessarily go all Mr Jervis's way but the Judge sure summed up the truth about Unison.

 

I'm going to have a go at getting mine back, all 30 years in my case, formerly with NALGO. I'm currently just about to put in a Stage 3 complaint and it is being dealt with by the Head office in London. I'm putting it forward as a suggestion as to how they can go some way for making up for the appalling treatment i suffered from them. Clearly they won';t see it my way, but for the price of a hearing in the small claims court, I think I might enjoy a day out, and you never know your luck do you?

 

Makes you feel much better too, throwing stones for no other reason than "just because i can!" Since I became unable to work again I've enjoyed becoming a serial complainer, I don't let anyone get away with anything, Is your hubby affected like this as well? Because I know that this is definitely a side effect of my PTSD, makes you like a terrier with a rat! Before PTSD I was so laid back I could almost fall over.

[lindyhop]

Hi

a quickie

 

a respondent has 56 days to reply once the a copy of the claimants questionaire has been issued against them.

 

but is this 56 days from the date the respondent recieves it, or 56 days from the date that the claimant has sent it?

 

also. the respondent has 28 days to respond to the claimants ET1. same question, is it 28 days from the date of reciept or 28 days from the date that the ET have sent it.

 

Regards

[lindyhop]

Hi All

 

i am really surprised to hear that you guys have been let down by a union. but how come? i thought the unions were there to help and provide a level of protection and assistance, what are you paying subs for if otherwise. have i misunderstood?

 

surely your unions provided the support you needed with your ET submissions, even if they felt the case had less than 51 per cent chance of winning surely your shop steward stepped in and provided help and support to some degree? even if it was not at the hearing itself, but surely leading up to it? helping with paperwork and such?

 

surely it cannot be the case that the union advise you have less than 51 per cent then withdraw and let the sub payer flaunder in isolation? where was your shop steward?

 

 

sorry if this all sounds naive.

 

Regards

[lindyhop]

quick question for Pappa.

 

you mentioned that to Max that there would be positives from the experience, having now made the decision not to proceed with a PI claim which i totally respect. you will understand if i cant quite grasp what positives could have come from suffering such an experience.

 

from your point of view, would you mind clarifying what positives there could be? i do not intend to challenge your view - we each have a right to hold a view after all. i would just like some clarity.

 

thanks

[lindyhop]

J&W

excellent suggestion about contacting the Uni for last year student. i will give this a go. i have been trying to get to a ET case as an observer - to familiarise myself a bit with the process. i will keep going with this, also i am hoping that as an observer, if i witness a solicitor or whatever they are called doing a good job for a claimant at the ET, i am hoping to contact them once the hearing is over and ask that if they would consider representing me at mine - i dont know if this is ethical but surely it cannot hurt, has anyone else tried this?

 

J&D i am intrigued what was your bit of good luck? can it be of any use to the rest of us?

 

Sorry Pappa i am nowhere near ready to give up my fight yet - and i do have a lot to lose.

 

Regards

[papasmurf1cx]

I am not suggesting to anyone to give up. The whole point I was alluding to was the journey that we all have been on. Anyone that has got to the point of taking their case to a court or Tribunal will know how tenacious you have to be to overcome the hurdles. Even with a solicitor (a decent one that actually helps rather than hinders the process) it can be very difficult. One is left with the impression that you do all the work in any event and wonder what they are being paid for. Anyway, getting to a conclusion whether one wins or loses one can be proud that you took a stand against an unfair set of circumstances. The triumph is getting to the end of the process and looking back and thinking, I stood for justice and made the defendant (employer) have to eat their words and look me in the eye and lie and perjure themselves. I told the truth.

 

We suffer because of that, it was the hard road but we took it and our integrity is intact. What better outcome can there be than to be true to oneself?

 

Unfortunately, you have to get to that end to say that and many will fall by the wayside and never get there. One's health suffers and the cost can almost be unbearable. I always tell people on the start of their journey that there is no loss of face by not starting it, because by the end we can feel that the cost was too much.

 

Our personal journey started in 2000 when I lost my leg in a RTA. 5 years of battling having sacked one solicitor for incompetence all had its toll on us and at the end the union that backed us did the dirty and made us, forced us, to accept a payment in to court or risk ruin. (We / I still very well, I am not complaining.) A year of calm followed and a discriminatory action by my wife's employer started us down the ET route for her. Her Union discriminated against her by not representing her, it went right to the top. At one stage we had 1 county court action, and 2 ET actions going against employer and union. There were ancillary battles also which I don't need to mention but that all took another 5 years to sort out. They ALL paid out in the end.

 

We are no lovers of unions, as I believe they do not look after the interests of their members especially in relation to discrimination matters and their own action in dealing with employers and discrimination grievances also are discriminatory by not representing the member. That is why I also say where unions have reneged on representing their members then to take them to the ET too. Always get long adjournments though whilst the main event against the employer is settled because you can't get double compensation.... but of course Injury to feeling is payable for ALL discriminatory actions and can be considerable. My wife's union settled in a 5 figure sum NOT to be bothered to take it to trial. We would not settle any cheaper because we were making a point... and it worked because not budging just made their attempts to settle cheaply seem pathetic.... the strength of the evidence always makes lawyers think about the economic reality for their client.

 

What are the positives of abandoning a claim ??? .... well I think it is to do with being true to oneself but also to be settled that you did your best, and if unsuccessful, at least you can draw a line under it. If you are the type of person that HAS to fight, your mental state will be far better having fought and lost than never fought at all. Mental status is so important for the rest of your life. That is what my wife said to me before we embarked on her journey. We won all her battles except one we still have to get her confidence and health back to what it was and I am not sure at this point in time whether we will win it, but she and I would not have had it any other way because the other way would have eaten us up. It helps that you have a spouse or partner to help you through the process because at least one of you will be able at any time. There weren't many times in the last 12 years where we both depressed at the same time, we certainly have been on a journey!!!

 

Keep up the fight if you still need and have to, it is right to do. Do recognise there is an end time and no case is settled at the very top of what it is worth... we all compromise at the end game. If you have done your best don't ruin the rest of your life with a wasted effort. Rationalise you did your best but lost and try and move on... you did well to get to that point and if you did it on your own then even better, Lawyers and barristers train for years to still lose cases !!

[jackieandwayne]

Lindihop, I'm not allowed to put precise details of what happened to me on here as I signed a confidentiality clause. I am shortly to be in quite a good place financially, but ONLY because I had an amazing stroke of luck. I didn't get to Court. Last summer I helped a mentally ill neighbour keep his home, and it was his solicitor, an old boy with Higher Rights, who helped me out when he didn;t have to - as he put it "one good turn deserves another". Without that stroke of luck I doubt if I could have been successful, but I was determined.

 

Well, I'll tell you what happened with Unison. I can prove this if necessary so hopefully they don;t have a go at the Site for libel! I joined NALGO when I was 18 it later changed to Unison. Paid full subs right up until I was 47, never needed them. Then in 2009 the things that I cannot go in to detail about happened and I became very ill with PTSD. Unison were good to start with, they got me a salary replacement up until retirement. The rep also encouraged me to make a PPI.

 

He received all my forms late in 2009, and e-mailed me to say they had been passed on to the solicitors they use. I felt comfortable enough with my lovely kind rep, and was happy to let him deal with things whilst I was so ill. We kept in touch, he asked me questions, I provided information. Always for the solicitor he said, who would be contacting me soon.

 

To cut it short he never passed my paperwork over until June 2011 ( i asked the solicitor to confirm this in writing). Far from the open and shut case he assured me for 2.5 years that I had, sure enough the solicitors decided on October 2011 that I only had 51% chance of success. I found out when a copy of their letter was shoved in an envelope to me in the post with not so much as a note from Unison! What a shock. And the guy still led me up the garden path by then telling me to start private court action at my own expense and he would help me! From November 2011 he has been unavailable to me, and I then put in a complaint against Unison in January 2012.

 

There's a whole new chapter about the debacle of the complaint to Unison, its just at Stage 3 level now, so when I get their final response I'm happy to post up on here about it then.

 

Even though I have outright proof that I was misled , and because of that almost ran out of time to get private help, and worst of all this happened at a time was I was disabled with mental illness, Unison have twice decided they have done nothing wrong! So I await the outcome of Stage 3 with interest. Clearly they all look after themselves first, and will once again decide they have acted righteously. Not sure what can be done after that, but papasmurf mentioned something about being able to take a Union to an Et so I'm off to google that now!

 

I heartily agree with what papasmurf has to say about letting it go. For some its a must. But for others, and especially if you now suffer with something like PTSD, having resolution is a must. And at least knowing that you have been heard, and had a go at protecting yourself can go a way towards getting that resolution. For others letting go is the resolution. And we have to remember too, that sadly its very difficult to win these cases, so the outcome may not feel like resolution - but whatever way it goes, when you wake up the next day and know that it is all over there is a weight off your shoulders.

 

I support anyone going through a situation like this - if they want encouragement to fight they have it, and if they want to know if its ok to give up - then they get my support in that as well. Its all down to the individual person. We can't all be fire brands, after all!

Edited May 17, 2012 by citizenB
formatted for easier reading

[rebel11]

Hi Lindy

 

Keep to this thread to ask your questions.

[papasmurf1cx]

J&W..... try here.... http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/57

[lindyhop]

Hi Papa

 

i was sorry to hear of your own suffering. thank you for taking the time to explain, i appreciate it. i am pleased for you, having 'moved on' and feeling better for it. this may not be achievable for all of us, and/or may take quite some time for some of us to get to that point.

 

J&W

thank you for sharing a bit more about your own case. you are right, life is funny sometimes the way things work out - your own case, lifted my spirits. i believe that what is meant to be will be. your road was meant to lead to that solicitor.

 

Max

do what you feel you are able. if that means nothing more, as has been said before, at least you know you have tried. you will be supported by other Caggers on this forum no matter what course of action you decide to take.

 

HB

my apologies, will follow your instruction.

 

ET1 and Questionaire timelines

i did find out the answer to this question. if i read the info booklet correctly - ET is 28 days from the date the ET office send the ET1 to the respondent, however for the questionaire its 56 days from the date the respondent receives it.

 

however another query

 

whats the position with issuing a second questionaire if it transpires that you missed an important or relevant question in the first questionaire?

 

Regards to all

[lindyhop]

Managed today to get to a 1 day hearing. a dismissal case. not the same as mine, but a least i got to witness the basics. unfortunately the claimant lost his unfair dismissal case.

 

however what was clear was that the judge relied entirely on the law when concluding his deliberations. basis - the claimant had failed to disclose on his job application the fact that he prior convictions for fraud and a suspended sentance. part of the contact warned that failure to disclose etc etc.

 

the judge made clear he understood the reason why the claimant thought that he had grounds to bring the claim. whilst working for the employer for 4 years his work had been excellent and he had met all and exceeded his targets. however becasue he handled or had access to customers money he was considered a risk and dismissed ' gross misconduct'

 

how did his employers find out - someone who knew about his past outed him, 4 years into his employment. the claimant advised that he didnt realise he had to declare the conviction his understanding from the close of the conviction hearing that the matter would be closed after a year or 12 months) it was over 2 years later that he started employment with the new employer. it reminded me of that old saying that ignorance is no defence. the respondent and their solicitor pressed that if he was not sure at the close of the conviction hearing what the consequences would be the onus was on him to find out. the judge agreed in the end that the onus was indeed on him and he should have disclosed the information even if it meant that he would not have got the job.

 

the solicitor wanted costs. the judge made it clear he would not award costs.

 

lesson learnt. be damned sure you have a legal point to go on. best if that legal point can not be misinterpreted! ie the disclosure part of a job contract. it would appear the moral element has little or no regard without the basis of a legal point.

 

i noted that the solicitor tried all sorts of tricks to muddy the water, but the judge who was on his own, was having non of it. i also noted the badgering by the solicitor of the claimant, this was concerning, but to counter this just stick to your guns, no matter how many different ways the respondents solicitor tries to trip you up with the same basis question.

 

the whole buisness was a great shame really - it appeared that his employers actually liked him and had got on well with him, but felt they couldnt have him continue in the job due to his history. my question - why not consider offering him another role in the organisation, up the supervision. why sack him if they acknowledge he was doing a really good job for them???

 

i would strongly advise anyone thinking of taking this action to take the time and go as an observer to a hearing it is well worth it to familiarise yourself with the procedures etc. i plan on going to one that is more in line with my own case, and take even more notes! another thing i noted today was that there were quite a few claimants dealing with their own cases - no representation! i spoke with the claimant for the claim i witnessed. he was in agreement with a lot of what has been said on this forum about representation at the hearing.

 

considering he was a lay person, he did a reasonable job - the judge helped him out quite a bit too, but with the failure to disclose on his job application without mitigating circumstances i guess, he was on a loser from the off.

 

i dont know if im allowed to include all this as part of my blog, but i hope so, part of why this forum works so well in my experience is the sharing of information. what i've written here may help someone else.

 

now i just have to go over the legal basis(s) for my own claim the moral rights and wrongs are icing.

 

too close. although todays claimant lost his case, he also won. his employers were MADE to answer and explain why, they took the action they did - something they had failed to fully disclose to him before - maynow for him closure can start to be achieved.

 

Regards

[lindyhop]

i am absolutely astounded.

 

i have today built up the courage to read through the mountain of paperwork connected to my current employment following my SARs request.

 

a very worry thing has come to light. during a recent formal meeting lead by my company's assistant COE a statement was made to my former co workers by one of the managers in attendance that i had made the allegations i had made because of my mental illness!!

 

this is incredible. i was not aware that any of my (former managers) had a history of medical training to qualify making such a statement. this particular manager stated '... condition did not mean the allegations were not right, but it is a FACT that this type of illness leads to the type of behaviour that xxx has exhibited'

 

surely as a minimum this is a breach of confidentiality? what right to the managers have to discuss any medical condition related to me with my co workers without my permission. as well has having no foundation is this not slander or something?

 

i have not been told by any of my medical professionals that i have a mental illness. i have been told that i have depression.

 

advice anyone?

 

Regards

[lindyhop]

Help! i am even more overwhelmed. i have had a letter today from my employers solicitors stating that they have applied to the ET for a pre hearing on the grounds that events prior to January this year are out of time and i quote

 

'.... an order in theterms requested would assist the tribunal in delain with the proceedings efficiently and fairly and in accordance with the overriding objective because the extent o the the evidence and witnesses required for the hearing will be substantialy reduce in the event that those matter relating to the claims prior to January will not be subject to determination'

 

Ok, but i contend that the acts were and are continous, and as an example my earlier post where one of the managers defamed my character stating as 'fact' during a meeting with my work colleagues that my 'mental illness' is the cause for my making my complaints - infering that its all in my imagination - surely this is a prime example of victimisation and discrimination prior to the January 2012, which their solicitors are claiming.

 

i have 7 days to lodge an objection from yesterday, according to my employers solicitors. i definately want to take this action and need the help to formulate the letter.

 

is there case law for example where due to ill health a claimant had to wait until they were able to before starting proceedings - can ill health not be considered as mitigating circumstances? also what of the defamation can i include this as an example. as stated earlier i found out about this meeting (which originally i knew nothing about) from a SARs request.

 

can someone please help/ advise

 

im numb at the moment

 

Regards

[lbruk]

Hi,

 

yes there is case law that backs up your ability to make the decisions to proceed to tribunal, give me a bit of time and i will try to find it.

[lbruk]

6 June 2000: an employment tribunal in Ashford, Kent, is hearing a case of serious sexual harassment and sex discrimination five years after the event. The time limit for a application to tribunal is 12 weeks and limits, determined in the early 1970's when most tribunals were for manual employees unfairly dismissed, are normally strictly enforced. Former mortgage adviser Monica Sheridan described a year-long campaign of sexual harassment, exposure and indecency committed by financial director Robert Allen in her presence which resulted in severe psychiatric injury. Miss Sheridan is claiming harassment, discrimination and personal injury against her former employer estate agents Ward and Partners in Chatham, Kent.

 

2002: in Somjee v. United Kingdom the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) agreed with Ms Somjee that the ten years of adjournments, delays, changes of venue and appeals she endured constituted a breach of her human rights whereby people have a right to expect a fair trial within a reasonable period of time. In 1988 Ms Somjee brought complaints of racial discrimination, victimisation and unfair dismissal against Mersey Regional Health Authority following an adverse performance appraisal.

 

July 2003: in Defer-Wyatt v Williams (EAT 24/7/03) HHJ Peter Clark adjudged that if an employee reasonably holds a mistaken belief as to the correct EDT (resulting in late submission of the IT1), and it is not reasonably practicable for him to present his claim for unfair dismissal within time, an extension of time should be granted.

[lbruk]

something taken from equality Human Rights webpage

 

Time limits

 

One of the most important issues for any adviser to consider is whether a complaint can be brought in time or whether it has been brought in time. If a claim is out of time then a Tribunal will not have jurisdiction to hear the complaint unless the complainant can invoke one of the specific ‘escape clauses’ in the legislation. However, whether or not a party raises the question of limitation, a Tribunal is entitled to consider this issue of its own motion and may, for example, order a pre-hearing review to determine whether a claim is in time without consulting either party. It is not open to the parties to agree a point of jurisdiction to bind the Tribunal.

 

In taking a history of the complaints made, an adviser should be careful to note the relevant dates of any acts or omissions complained of as well as looking to see whether any grievances have been raised. From a respondent’s perspective, any points to be taken in relation to time limits ought to be taken as early as possible before significant costs are incurred on either side.

 

Time limits broadly break down into two categories. In employment claims the time limit is normally three months with an escape clause which relates to whether it was reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented in time. In discrimination cases, however, the primary time limit is usually three months from the act complained of, or in the case of an act extending over a period of time (or a continuing act as it is often referred to) the end of that period.

 

In discrimination cases, the escape clause provisions where a claim has been presented outside the usual time limit ask whether it is “just and equitable” to allow the complaint to proceed out of time by effectively extending time. While this is a wide formulation, Tribunals will be astute to look for a good reason on the part of the complainant for the late presentation of the complaint and will examine the question of delay carefully with particular regard to any prejudice it may cause to the respondent. The late presentation of the complaint may be entirely or partly due to fault on the part of the legal advisers. There can be no question that Tribunals will look at this carefully, but whereas it used to be considered that so long as the fault was the adviser’s and the complainant could seek redress against the adviser there could be no extension of time, it is now the case that the question of adviser fault will be one of many considerations a Tribunal should take into account.

[lindyhop]

Hi Ibruk. you are excellent. thank you for the information. from your prompt i have gone on and found out even more. sometimes its about an inkling of just knowing where to start looking. its like trying to get the correct spelling of word, going to the dictionary but not being able to find the word because you re not getting the begining of the spelling right!

 

anyway once i have calmed down a bit (with your help) i have come with the following, as a response. any comment will be welcomed. i have a few days before i have to send it so time for tinkering. i presume i will be allowed to send it by email?

 

Employment tribunal

Dear Sir Madam

Case Number………………………………...

Objection to Pre Hearing Review Respondents Request

I understand that the respondents in this case have made a request for a Pre Hearing Review. on the grounds that,

a) I, as the claimant am not entitled to bring the proceedings set out in my ET1 which have arisen prior to 2012,

b) and possibly inferred that a full trial hearing would be exhaustive of the courts time due to the extend of the evidence and witnesses required.

 

I would contend that because my claim is one of continuous and ongoing Discrimination - that there are just and equitable arguments as to why my claim should be fully heard.

 

 

I would therefore beg the court to exercise its discretion and extend the timescales, and would draw the courts attention to the following case.

 

(Robertson v Bexley Community Centre [2003] EWCA Civ 567).

 

I would also beg the courts discretion to consider

 

1. The conduct of the respondent subsequent to the act of which the complaint I made, up to the date of the application;

 

2. My medical condition. Illness lead to a prolonged period of absence from work which prevented an earlier submission and inhibited my ability to progress the matter.

 

3. The presence of an ongoing internal grievance procedures, which I was advised I would need to exhaust prior to proceeding if dissatisfied with the outcome.

 

I wish to beg the Courts permission to include at this point information of an additional act of discrimination, harassment and victimisation following my protected act. In that during a meeting on the 2011 held for the purpose of my work colleagues and without my notification and/or presence, the following unqualified statement was stated as ‘fact’ by the Human Resources Manger XXXX

‘XXXX said that XXXX’s condition did not mean the allegations* were right, but it is a ‘fact’ that this type of illness leads to the type of behaviour that XXXX has exhibited’

I am not aware of XXXX medical expertise of my condition. Neither am I aware that any medical professional connected to my case has released this information as ‘fact’ to my employers.

This act of defamation has further damaged my reputation, in addition to which there would have been added weight to the statement from my co workers point of view, with the statement being made by a senior manager, and with other senior managers including the assistance COE present and failing to contradict or ‘reign in‘ such comments.

 

The evidence of this was produced following my SARs request and only recently disclosed. I would therefore beg the courts permission to add this to my claim.

 

Being unrepresentative, I would beg the Courts patience if this is not the format to introduce this further complaint and would ask the courts guidance on how to present this further complaint in the correct manner

　　

*Allegations of discrimination, victimisation and harassment

OK. that's s it so far. and i tell you what i feel a little better for getting it all out in print.

 

let me know what you think

[lbruk]

Its a good letter, If i may i'd like to adjust the following i have put the changes and things in a coloured font.:

 

Employment tribunal

Dear Sir Madam

Case Number………………………………...

Objection to Pre Hearing Review Respondents Request

I understand that the respondents in this case have made a request for a Pre Hearing Review. on the grounds that,

a) I, as the claimant am not entitled to bring the proceedings set out in my ET1 which have arisen prior to 2012,

b) and possibly inferred that a full trial hearing would be exhaustive of the courts time due to the extend of the evidence and witnesses required.

 

I would contend that because my claim is one of continuous and ongoing Discrimination - that there are just and equitable arguments as to why my claim should be fully heard.

 

 

I would therefore request the court to exercise its discretion and extend the timescales, and would draw the courts attention to the following case.

 

(Robertson v Bexley Community Centre [2003] EWCA Civ 567).

 

 

I would also request the courts discretion to consider

 

1. The conduct of the respondent subsequent to the act of which the complaint I made, up to the date of the application;

 

2. My medical condition. Illness lead to a prolonged period of absence from work which prevented an earlier submission and inhibited my ability to progress the matter. I believe this to be a fair and just reason for the late submission of my case to the tribunal, however would appreciate the tribunals judgement on this.

 

3. The presence of an ongoing internal grievance procedures, which I was advised I would need to exhaust prior to proceeding if dissatisfied with the outcome. I would remove this, as it has been stated that ongoing grievances will not be considered a valid reason for applying out of date claims

 

I wish to humbly ask the Courts permission to include at this point information of an additional act of discrimination, harassment and victimisation following my protected act. In that during a meeting on the 2011 held for the purpose of my work colleagues and without my notification and/or presence, the following unqualified statement was stated as ‘fact’ by the Human Resources Manger XXXX

‘XXXX said that XXXX’s condition did not mean the allegations* were right, but it is a ‘fact’ that this type of illness leads to the type of behaviour that XXXX has exhibited’

I am not aware of XXXX medical expertise of my condition. Neither am I aware that any medical professional connected to my case has released this information as ‘fact’ to my employers.

This act of defamation has further damaged my reputation, in addition to which there would have been added weight to the statement from my co workers point of view, with the statement being made by a senior manager, and with other senior managers including the assistance COE present and failing to contradict or ‘reign in‘ such comments.

 

The evidence of this was produced following my SARs request and only recently disclosed. I would therefore beg the courts permission to add this to my claim.

 

Being unrepresentative, I would request the Courts patience if this is not the format to introduce this further complaint and would ask the courts guidance on how to present this further complaint in the correct manner

　　

*Allegations of discrimination, victimisation and harassment

Edited May 24, 2012 by lbruk

[lbruk]

yes you can submit it by email, as long as you have ticked that box on your claim form.

 

The respondents solicitor will always try to unseat you, upset you, to provoke an emotional response, they will continue to do this right the way through the whole process and especially on the day. I believe its all about staying calm, and NOT trusting your gut reaction to panic when things are not going quite right.

Just sit down, write out what the problem is and try to find a solution, normally there will be one that you can go back to them, like your letter above, and blow them out the water.

 

Solicitors are human too, the only advantage they have is knowing the law. But you know your case and what has happened to you, just stick with that though.

[lindyhop]

Hi ibruk. i have incorporated your suggestions in my letter. Thank you so much for taking the time to reveiw the document.

 

you are right of course about keeping calm. i realise this, but my 'happy' pills only work up to a certain point:-)

 

do you think that my introduction of HR discussing my medical position during a team meeting will lead to my employers looking to want to request my full medical history as part of disclosure? and if so how would full history disclosure be relevant?

 

what are the chances of the ET court accepting my add on about the manager talking openly about my 'condition'? as this is really a DDA issue and my ET1 refers to a differenct form of discrimination.

 

should i really be doing another ET1?

 

Regards

[lbruk]

Yes, i know the restraints of happy pills as i have a cocktail of my own to take thanks to my old employer!

 

Potentially they might want medical reports, if they were sensible they would have requested them long ago, but i see no reason why they would need entire medical reports, only the ones that are relevant to your current condition.

 

Potentially the tribunal may accept the additional problems, I added a harassment part to my case and the judge at the CMD just said we will decide on the merits of it at the hearing in August.

 

Have you prepared a schedule of issues with the respondents solicitor? This isnt always done, but maybe helpful to let the tribunal know exactly what you are claiming and why.

[lindyhop]

Hi Ibruk.

 

my employers have a list of medical reports from the Occ Health doctor they employed. unfortunately for my employer it has not gone in their favour, resulting in the Occ Health reccommending in more than one letter that i leave the employer due to the enviroment and adverse conditions to any improvement to my health. the Occ Health have made clear each time that it is not a capability issue and that once fully recovered i will be able to do exactly the same job elsewhere!

 

however i have not allowed access to past medical records as i do not see the relevance, and will raise objection should my employer demand this. i will counter with my own demand that the HR manager provide and qualify what medical evidence he had back at the time of the meeting to show why he was able to state as 'fact' that my 'mental illness' was causing problems in the workplace.

 

i have done some checking and believe that becasue my disability is well over 12 months i also come under the DDA. i am wondering if i need to submit a DDA questionaire and/or submit another ET if the judge will not allow my new complaint included in the objection PHR response.

 

anyway

 

i have completed the letter objection now. i will take out identities and post. your suggestions are included - a joint effort:-) Thanks again.

 

what is a schedule of issues? and how daunting was the CMD? any pointers?

 

your case is in August? Crickey! how long did you have to wait for a hearing date?

 

Regards

[lbruk]

Hi Lindy,

 

I filed my ET1 in September last year! the CMD was fine, the judge was very good i think i came across more knowledgeable than the respondents solicitor.

 

I schedule of issues is something you can prepare in advance, or its the biggest part of the cmd, by having it ready, my CMD was 30 mins long. Basically is a document that states what your complaints are - referring to the correct parts of the law and how the respondent broke them. This was taken from the top of my schedule of issues..

 

Disability Discrimination

 

1) Is the Claimant a disabled person pursuant to Section 6(1) of the Equality Act 2010?

 

2)

a. Did the Respondent have knowledge of any such disability, constructive or otherwise?

b. If so, upon what date did/should the Respondent become aware of the disability?

 

3) Has the Claimant been subjected to less favourable treatment (direct discrimination) because of a disability contrary to Section 13(1) of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of the following allegations:

 

a. Instigating disciplinary/performance proceedings? and/or

b. Failure to investigate the claimants crying and upset demeanour in store and in disciplinary interviews in November 2010 and March 2011?

c. Ignoring signs of the illness in the claimant?

d. The Respondent’s refusal to exercise its discretion in favour of the Claimant to pay sick pay?

 

there are another 13 issues that i have listed but it gives you an idea of what mine was. As long as you know exactly what you are claiming, and why, and when it happened then the CMD will be fine.

[lindyhop]

Hi Ibruk.

 

the whole process does take a long time doesnt it:-(

 

thanks for explaining the Schedule of Issues. i will look to preparing this once i have my CM case. im keeping everything crossed for you.

 

in the meantime i have been trying to (again) find precedence/caselaw on my situation. ie

 

submitted discrimation ET1, subsequently discovered a different discrimination has taken place and whether or not i can include the new discrimination with the first and submit a second questionaire on the new discrimination arrgghh!

 

can anyone provide a link that i can look into?

[lindyhop]

Hi Caggers. ignore todays earlier post i have found the answer to my questions and have submitted a written request to the ET covering both issues. now i just have to 'cross' everything and hope that i have put my request forward well enough for the judge to consider it.

 

Regards