Help! Does this warrant disciplinary action? Railway Equipment Loss

[looby1003]

Hi all, new to the forum so forgive me if I make any mistakes or post in the wrong place (and apologise in advance for the long post!)

My husband is facing disciplinary action at work for negligence which I think is unfair. He is a Train Manager for a large company and back in February he was dealing with a group of lads who had no tickets and were refusing to pay. After alot of persistence from my husband (and after he'd received alot of abuse!) they reluctantly agreed to pay. A couple of them paid by card and afterwards my husband mistakenly left the chip and pin pad on their table. After a while he noticed it was missing (and rememebered it was on their table) but they sid they hadn't seen it. He searched all over the train including the bins, but it was never found so can only assume they took it (no doubt "for a laugh" )

 

He immediately reported the incident to the Transport Police and made a report out for his employers. They told him to leave it with them. He was obviously very upset and angry about the situation, not to mention worried. On the 5th of March (over 3 weeks after it happened) one of his managers told him they wanted a word about it. THey said to him "you can have someone present if you want" but he declined as he said he hadn't done anything wrong and didnt realise the seriousness of the situation at the time. He was thn lead into an office where a member of HR was there taking notes. It dawned on him that he was in trouble and thinks he should have been given more warning. Anyway, whenever he's asked his manager about the incident since hes been told "Its nothing to worry about" and thats it.

 

Yesterday, he was told to collect a letter about the incident after his shift (they wouldn't give it to him before his shift as its company procedure) The letter states that "On the 16th of February 2013 your lack of diligence caused the loss of ... property to the value of £700 of which you were personally responsible for. This is a breach of your responsibilities as a Train Manager" Fisr of all, he didnt "lose" the item, it was stolen. They told him they would be checking cctv on the train, whether they have or not he doesn't know.

 

One other thing, the letter he got yesterday is dated 3rd of May 2013 and it states that he has to sign and return it with a written reply to the communcation within 3 days, which is today! He didnt finish his shift until 19.30 last night and is working this morning at 11.30 so hes had less than 24 hours to reply, even though its taken them nearly 3 months!!!!

 

Am I being biased because its my husband or does any one else think this is unfair? He's going to be getting in touch with a union rep now (told him to before but he thought the matter would be dropped) Any advice would be gratefully received.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

[Emmzzi]

you are biased because it's your husband. I'd certainly do an investigation for this, which I think was the first meeting. And him not clocking he should take someone with him was a wee bit daft...

 

What is the letter? Is it an invitation to a formal procedure of some kind?

[chiefengineer]

Hi Looby,

 

Sorry to hear about your husband's issue. This doesn't seem right to me. My employers issue staff with a Company Handbook that details (amongst other things) the disciplinary procedure. At this point, it seems you can't be sure whether disciplinary action or not. Does he have a document (perhaps detailed as part of his contract of employment) that details the companies disciplinary procedure?

 

Usually a notice of disciplinary procedure should be given in writing, and he certainly has the right to have someone there with him. Is he a member of a trade union? If so, a union rep would be favourite. If he's a union member he should notify them immediately.

 

What was the conclusion of the letter? You said they advised him that the loss was of property he was responsible for, but was there any clue as to what further action (if any) they plan to take?

 

Jeremy

[Conniff]

Hi all, new to the forum so forgive me if I make any mistakes or post in the wrong place (and apologise in advance for the long post!)

My husband is facing disciplinary action at work for negligence which I think is unfair. He is a Train Manager for a large company and back in February he was dealing with a group of lads who had no tickets and were refusing to pay. After alot of persistence from my husband (and after he'd received alot of abuse!) they reluctantly agreed to pay. A couple of them paid by card and afterwards my husband mistakenly left the chip and pin pad on their table. After a while he noticed it was missing (and rememebered it was on their table) but they sid they hadn't seen it. He searched all over the train including the bins, but it was never found so can only assume they took it (no doubt "for a laugh" )

 

He immediately reported the incident to the Transport Police and made a report out for his employers. They told him to leave it with them. He was obviously very upset and angry about the situation, not to mention worried. On the 5th of March (over 3 weeks after it happened) one of his managers told him they wanted a word about it. THey said to him "you can have someone present if you want" but he declined as he said he hadn't done anything wrong and didnt realise the seriousness of the situation at the time. He was thn lead into an office where a member of HR was there taking notes. It dawned on him that he was in trouble and thinks he should have been given more warning. Anyway, whenever he's asked his manager about the incident since hes been told "Its nothing to worry about" and thats it.

 

Yesterday, he was told to collect a letter about the incident after his shift (they wouldn't give it to him before his shift as its company procedure) The letter states that "On the 16th of February 2013 your lack of diligence caused the loss of ... property to the value of £700 of which you were personally responsible for. This is a breach of your responsibilities as a Train Manager" Fisr of all, he didnt "lose" the item, it was stolen. They told him they would be checking cctv on the train, whether they have or not he doesn't know.

 

One other thing, the letter he got yesterday is dated 3rd of May 2013 and it states that he has to sign and return it with a written reply to the communcation within 3 days, which is today! He didnt finish his shift until 19.30 last night and is working this morning at 11.30 so hes had less than 24 hours to reply, even though its taken them nearly 3 months!!!!

 

Am I being biased because its my husband or does any one else think this is unfair? He's going to be getting in touch with a union rep now (told him to before but he thought the matter would be dropped) Any advice would be gratefully received.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

 

It is in his care and it is his responsibility to look after it. Leaving it unattended was a silly thing to do especially in todays climate. Unless there is specifically something in his contract that says he will have to pay for losses such as this, I can't see what they hope to gain from these hearings except to exert their authority and let him know who the boss is.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Conniff

[looby1003]

Hi Jeremy and Emmzzi, thanks for the replies. The letter he collected yesterday states that it is a Disciplinary Form No.1 and says that he is "charged with the under mentioned irregularities" (as I wrote in my first post) and it formlly invites him to have someone with him at the haering. (unlike last time when it was sprung on him, and yes he was foolish for not stopping the meeting and saying he'd have a witness there once he realsied the seriousness of the situation) Hes a member of a union and will be contacting them asap now. They have enclosed a copy of there disciplinary procedure with the form. Also enclosed with the letter thouhgh is another sheet stating "I, the undersigned, am signing to acknowledge that I have received the Form one charge letter on 05/03/13." I have told him under no circumstances is he to sign that because since the first meeting in February, he hasnt received anything in writing from them, he only received it yesterday!! I think they know this matter has not been dealt with as speedily as it shoud and now they are trying to cover their backs. Hes going to get them to type a new one saying that he received it yesterday.

 

At the end of the day, he has also been a victim of crime and instead of receiving support from them he is the one being treated like hes the criminal! None of his managers will be there today as its Bank Holiday so thats anothr day its going to be unresolved

 

We've just noticed the date on the Form one letter is also the 5th of March!!! Oooh now Im angry! They must think he's fallen out of a tree!!

[Emmzzi]

Sounds like the first meeting was investigatory - no formal right to have a companion there anyway so employer was being kind, but it won't change the legality of the process.

 

They have sent him a form one, and they are now asking him to sign to say he has received a form one. Sure, don't sign the acknowledgement if you want to look like an awkward git; personally that isn't the line I'd be taking though!! I'd just change the dates intial the change and pop it back in the post.

 

Stop being angry. That isn't going to help hubby at all, he must be worried enough already. Try and calm down. Bottom line; he cocked up. He knows he did. My question would be, "what approach is going to help him keep his job", if that is what he wants.

 

If he wants a different outcome, the advice will be different.

[looby1003]

Ok, Im taking deep breathes lol. He's already changed the dates and initialled it whilst Im busy typing (just goes to show he never listens to me lol!) He's worked for them for 13 years without a blemish on his record so I doubt very much they've got grounds to sack him over leaving a chip and pin pad on a table. Just annoying that they've asked him to sign to say hes received something from the when they know full well he hasn't...Goes to show they can't be trusted. All this because of some little scroates deciding to nick a chip and pin pad :-/ Hes found out that this has happened to a coupe of other employees in the past so hes going to ask them what the outcome was (as far as he they werent given a disciplinary)

[Emmzzi]

Length of service has nothing to do with severity of offence or grounds for sacking.

 

Your husband sounds like he is dealing with this very sensibly on his own....?

[looby1003]

I want to gather as much information for him as possible.

 

No harm in that is there?

[looby1003]

It is in his care and it is his responsibility to look after it. Leaving it unattended was a silly thing to do especially in todays climate. Unless there is specifically something in his contract that says he will have to pay for losses such as this, I can't see what they hope to gain from these hearings except to exert their authority and let him know who the boss is.

 

Thank you Conniff, only just spotted your reply. Hope you're right...

[Conniff]

I'm always ok looby, but then I don't that the worry you do hanging over my head.

[Emmzzi]

I want to gather as much information for him as possible.

 

No harm in that is there?

 

no harm but you need to decide what the end goal is. "slagging off the employers" probably doesn't feature highly in getting to that.

 

a) what is your preferred outcome

b) what specific questions do you have?

[ericsbrother]

His employer has suffered a loss. How seriously they view that is a matter of conjecture at present but your husband needs to mitigate his actions in the way you have expressed the situation here. They will have some of the details they need to help them in a criminal investigation (CCTV, payment card records) so what he needs to show is that his action wasnt a dereliction of duty and that the behaviour of the "thieves" caused him to behave as he did (apart from the hassle they gave him I expect it caused a delay in his other duties that caused his inattention to the wherabouts of the POS machine whilst attending to these) and this is the point to make to get any disciplinary action pegged down as low as possible.

The circumstances of others in a similar position should be looked at carefully as they may not be as similar as you think. If they are practically identical then he may wish to make a comparison if the outcomes were either unexpected or could be seen as setting a norm but I wouldnt start with that but possibly use it for an appeal if the outcome of this meeting is disastrous.

[looby1003]

His employer has suffered a loss. How seriously they view that is a matter of conjecture at present but your husband needs to mitigate his actions in the way you have expressed the situation here. They will have some of the details they need to help them in a criminal investigation (CCTV, payment card records) so what he needs to show is that his action wasnt a dereliction of duty and that the behaviour of the "thieves" caused him to behave as he did (apart from the hassle they gave him I expect it caused a delay in his other duties that caused his inattention to the wherabouts of the POS machine whilst attending to these) and this is the point to make to get any disciplinary action pegged down as low as possible.

The circumstances of others in a similar position should be looked at carefully as they may not be as similar as you think. If they are practically identical then he may wish to make a comparison if the outcomes were either unexpected or could be seen as setting a norm but I wouldnt start with that but possibly use it for an appeal if the outcome of this meeting is disastrous.

 

Thank you so much for your reply! You've raised some very good points that Im sure my hubby will find really useful. I'll get him to look over this post when he gets in fom work. Thanks again.

[ScarletPimpernel]

As well as looking at the employment contract to see what it has to say about personal liability for losses, I'd be asking if the company insures its equipment, too.

[Conniff]

Have moved your thread into the Public transport (Trains, tubes and buses) section where the transport experts drink their coffee, they might be able to give you some more information looby.

[firstclassx]

I suspect that this will result in a final written warning or potentially summary dismissal.

 

The issue is that the chip and pin devices do not belong to the TOC, they are leased from an IT company called ATOS. The contractual amount will amount to millions nationally, but £700 sounds like a reasonable estimate at their value.

 

The TOC may also be concerned about their PCI DSS status. If the device gets into the wrong hands and is analysed by criminals, they may find an exploit.

 

That said, there is no evidence that it has been stolen. Quite simply, he doesn't know where it is.

 

If this is Virgin Trains, I suspect it will result in dismissal, primarily based on the attitude Virgin had for West Coast Trains Ltd (t/a Virgin Trains) v Tombling, where an onboard shop assistant was alleged to have smashed a computer screen by putting her head deliberately through it.

 

The TOC is likely to try and make out that the device was deliberately lost.

 

As long as he has been in the RMT union for a good while, never had any previous issues before etc, if he is dismissed, I suspect he will be reinstated.

 

I'd offer to pay any replacement costs.

[sailor sam]

I suspect that this will result in a final written warning or potentially summary dismissal.

 

The issue is that the chip and pin devices do not belong to the TOC, they are leased from an IT company called ATOS. The contractual amount will amount to millions nationally, but £700 sounds like a reasonable estimate at their value.

 

The TOC may also be concerned about their PCI DSS status. If the device gets into the wrong hands and is analysed by criminals, they may find an exploit.

 

That said, there is no evidence that it has been stolen. Quite simply, he doesn't know where it is.

 

If this is Virgin Trains, I suspect it will result in dismissal, primarily based on the attitude Virgin had for West Coast Trains Ltd (t/a Virgin Trains) v Tombling, where an onboard shop assistant was alleged to have smashed a computer screen by putting her head deliberately through it.

 

The TOC is likely to try and make out that the device was deliberately lost.

 

As long as he has been in the RMT union for a good while, never had any previous issues before etc, if he is dismissed, I suspect he will be reinstated.

 

I'd offer to pay any replacement costs.

 

You have more faith in them than I ever did FC!