Suspension

[altobelli]

I found out today who the commissioning manager is, does that mean the allegation was made directly to this person, or is she just being used as a tool to launch the investigation?

 

I ask because when I was told of the suspension the divisional manager said that the allegation had been made to him and the commissioning manager was stood in the room at the time and I was told, I could contact either her or my divisional manager, is that right?

 

I think that sounds ok, they've probably passed the matter on to an independent person to investigate, that seems quite proper. I would say though that the employer has no right to tell you not to contact employees, and its important that if you have any work colleagues who are also friends, that you stay in touch with them at this time.

[Serendipity 42]

Yes I have the name of the investigating manager, but I was more interested in why after telling me the allegation was made to him, he then got another manager involved to commission the investigation.

 

To me it seems like a deliberate attempt to distance himself, and my manager who is still at work, so the allegation has been levelled at me although she is instrumental in the interpretation of the guidelines and was called aliar the week before by the person I now suspect of kicking off this allegation.

 

I know I am beginning to sound like a bad movie, just i am obsessed with this at the moment and even looking at job options to try and salvage something now.

[altobelli]

No, I think that's fine, the divisional manager may be involved in the process, potentially as a witness, so it wouln't be appropriate for him to be in charge of the investigation. What was the context of the investigating manager being called a liar - was it related to the matter for which you are being investigated?

 

Don't resign at this point - wait and see what happens as if you resign at the moment the employer may reflect the fact in your references.

[Serendipity 42]

Thanks again AB, yes, I don't know the whole conversation but only that she had spoken to her about how the information should be reflected, I am clutching at straws at the moment'.

[Serendipity 42]

• Hi, quick update took some advice today from someone with a bit of knowledge over these sort of issues, they said that an investigatory meeting is a nonsense, be in no doubt this will be a disciplinary meeting and to go prepared that the terminology they use is to fool you, unfortunately with only one overarching sentence and no real detail, how do you go prepared?
  

[Emmzzi]

• Hi, quick update took some advice today from someone with a bit of knowledge over these sort of issues, they said that an investigatory meeting is a nonsense, be in no doubt this will be a disciplinary meeting and to go prepared that the terminology they use is to fool you, unfortunately with only one overarching sentence and no real detail, how do you go prepared?
  

 

 

What "bit of knowledge" was that then?

 

Ask at the beginning for clarification. "Is this an investigatory or a disciplinary meeting?" If the latter say you were unaware and ask for a postponement so you can prepare.

[Serendipity 42]

Hi Emmzzi, said they had been through something similar, told it was investigation, but turned out to be disciplinary.

 

Thanks for your advice much appreciated.

[altobelli]

Yes, I would do as Emmzzi advises.

 

Your aim going into any meeting, I would say, is to demonstrate that you are innocent of gross misconduct. Write a list of what you want to cover going into the meeting to make sure that you bring up all the points you wish to discuss. Prepare responses to likely questions from the investigators, and if any new evidence or surprises are sprung at the meeting take your time answering these, and be prepared to request adjournment or advise that you will come back with a response if necessary, so don't be put on the spot to give an answer to a question you weren't prepared for. Take notes at the meeting, and consider preparing an email summarising the meeting and sending it to the relevant people after the meeting.

 

You should be trying to, as part of your defence, place sufficient doubt in the minds of the investigators as to whether you are guilty of gross misconduct to the extent that they cannot reasonably believe you to be innocent. So you need to emphasise the mitigating points - what you are accused of was generally accepted practice and took place with the knowledge and encouragement of the management, and the timing of the accusation is suspicious. In the worst case, if they dismiss you and it becomes a tribunal case, you need to demonstrate that flaws took place in the investigation and show that in the circumstances the employer took an unreasonable course of action regarding disciplinary measures. If the outcome of this investigation/disciplinary has been decided in advance, it will help your case if the investigation doesn't address any relevant points you raise, in particular if they press on purely with the allegations against you and don't acknowledge your concerns about the timing of the investigation or your other mitigating factors.

[Serendipity 42]

Thank you A/B, I am so grateful for all your advice. All makes so much sense but when you are in the situation all your reason seems to fly out the window.

 

I had a call from the investigating manager this morning, I was at Docs and missed the call, have rang all day at intervals and left messages and still no one came back to me, I just want to get the statement back they requested, because it may delay things. There is no point sending it to divisional manager he has gone on holiday, so will spend another week sitting on his desk. It makes more sense to send to the investigating manager, do you agree?

[Emmzzi]

I'd email and ask him.

[Serendipity 42]

will do, thanks Emmzzi.

[Serendipity 42]

Hi spoke to investigating manager this morning, she is proposing a meeting next Tuesday and said she is sending an e-mail to speed things up. She suggested that my defence/statement should be based on this letter and not on the other letter that asked for a statement to what is an overarching sentence, without specifics.

 

My question is, should I keep coming back to my main points, which is any changes alterations are as per management interpretation of guidelines and all changes are always run past people with more knowledge.

 

This person knows th system well has worked closely with the manager, over the last 5 years, to make changes which up to now apparently is accepted practice.

[altobelli]

Wait for the email to arrive and see what is mentioned there. Then your response should address the letter either admitting, denying, or admitting with mitigating circumstances each point. But if they're not mentioned in the email, mention any other points you want taken into consideration, e.g. your actions followed accepted guidelines and were taken with the approval of the manager, and you are sceptical of the timing of the accusations. Its important to mention all points you want considered while addressing all the points raised in the email, otherwise if the decision goes against you and you then bring up other points, the employer may try and say you only mentioned them because you're unhappy with the decision.

[Serendipity 42]

there is 3 specific record and it says I altered them in various ways to avoid them showing as breaches, I have given reasons why they may have been changed in line with accepted practice. I have outlined the history, I.e. when I took over validation and this being common practice. the timing of the allegation etc.

 

I have then added the statement making it clear that although this might avoid breaches in these 3 records, I am strongly denying that this process is purely to avoid breaches.

the process is to make corrections which may also add to the breaches.

 

do u think I should offer any apologies, I don't want to come across too higher than mighty, after all we all make mistakes, be grateful for your thoughts?

[altobelli]

It might be worth apologising, although be careful it doesn't come across that you're apologising for hiding breaches, any apology should be fairly broad-based - 'apologise for any inconvenience caused' or 'apologise that this situation has arisen', its difficult for you to apologise because you were acting in good faith based on accepted practice, your knowledge of procedures, and what management told you to do. If you can give them some examples of alterations you made which added to breaches then this would be useful.

[Serendipity 42]

Thanks Altobelli, that makes sense, just when your job is under threat the last thing you want to do is antagonise them any more.

 

Now they have sent out these 3 cases are they still likely to throw further stuff into the mix when I go to the meeting, the letter says they still have 30 days to investigate.

 

That brings us to late April! Next week is my 3rd week suspended, this is making me crazy with worry, its all I can think about.

[altobelli]

There shouldn't be further points unless the investigation genuinely uncovers anything else. They shouldn't be digging for things to bring up as the investigation must only focus on the initial accusations. It does seem a ridiculous amount of time for a relatively strightforward investigation.

 

But in the meantime, just concentrate on the points which have already been raised and the points you want to bring up in the meeting. If any surprises come up at the meeting you should be entitled to take time to respond or adjourn the meeting.

[Serendipity 42]

Thanks, Altobelli, I am working on this all weekend. I will mention the length of time also and hopefully get them to reconsider.

 

I have recalled a number of incidents where my manager has interpreted guidelines and given direct instructions to me and others, is it advisable to just be direct with this information at the meeting?

 

Even though I have been dropped in this mess without consideration, it just never feels right to reciprocate.

[Emmzzi]

You are not dropping anyone in it. You are merely explaining why you took the action you did. Do it as bald fact with no emotion.

[Serendipity 42]

Thanks Emmzzi,

[Serendipity 42]

Hi all, have my meeting tomorrow AM. Just remembered thet person who updates the main system asked for back up of any locally made changes via e-mail. This was some time ago and before I became directly involved.

 

Surely this should be enough to convince them any changes were accepted practice?

[altobelli]

Hi all, have my meeting tomorrow AM. Just remembered thet person who updates the main system asked for back up of any locally made changes via e-mail. This was some time ago and before I became directly involved.

 

Surely this should be enough to convince them any changes were accepted practice?

 

This would definitely be a point in your favour, and should be brought up at the meeting. Certainly its a point the employer will need to consider as part of a fair and reasonable investigation.

 

Good luck tomorrow - stay calm and focussed, make sure you bring up all the points you want covered and give full answers to any points the employer brings up. If any matters are raised which haven't been brought up before or are not relevant, don't be afraid to query why they are being brought up, and/or to request that you are given time to reply to them, adjourning the meeting if necessary. Be clear what the next step is, and ask whether you will receive correspondence after the meeting summarising what took place during the meeting.

[Serendipity 42]

Thanks Altobelli, will definitely give it my best shot. But can't help thinking they ain't going to like what they hear and that will give them just cause to escalate to the next level.

[altobelli]

Sure, it isn't easy, it can be intimidating and can be difficult going into a meeting and making an accusation that a Disciplinary has not been brought in good faith. But I think it needs to be done - the investigators then reasonably have to look at whether this is a possibility. If you don't bring it up at the meeting and the employer finds against you and you then bring it up at a later date, the employer will query why it wasn't raised before.

 

Don't be aggressive at the meeting, try and be as diplomatic as possible, and if you feel that any bias is being shown against you or undue pressure being exerted, then mention this.

[Serendipity 42]

Hi Atobelli, had meeting this morning, went on for some time. I answered questions and pointed out that a lack of clarity around interpretation of guidelines is a problem, not just for me.

 

I stuck to my points accepted practice, this is how it has been done, I very rarely act alone without running by people who have made changes in the past and still continue to do so.

 

Also mentioned the shock of having this turned on me after flagging up inconsistencies by another team which was causing a problem for the deadline that week.

 

They did ask me about policy if it was written etc, I explained only word of mouth, as is training on system.

 

Just hope I have managed to make them understand. was also asked about manager and relationship, as I said not good to say the least, so do not expect corroboration of what I am saying.

 

Although they do have option of checking other lists over some time, when I actually had nothing to do with changes.

 

Hope this is enough for someone to see the light.