Disciplinary action against daughter

[philip1988]

Hi, my daughter needs some help and advice. Apologies in advance for the length of the post.

She works as a care assistant in a home for mentally challenged young men.

Two weeks ago there was an incident when she took one of the boys to his music lesson. Whilst at the lesson the boy did a poo in his pants which she had to deal with. To cut a long story short the music teacher complained to head office saying that my daughter had:

a. had refused him food and drink before he attended his class

b. refused to clean the boy up

c. shouted at him

d. left the loo door open for all to see

e. called him a "walking disease"

The first that my daughter knew that there was a problem was when she received a disciplinary letter with a copy of an unsigned/dated witness statement from the music teacher. The hearing had been arranged for the day following receipt of the letter. As it was my daughter had to postpone the meeting as it was early in the morning and she is currently suffering badly from morning sickness. When she rang on the morning to rearrange she did point out that she had intended to attend but they hadn't given her reasonable notice to prepare for the meeting/arrange for someone to attend with her. The Head Office response was basically "tough" we can arrange a disciplinary meeting whenever they want.

 

When the letter for the rearranged meeting arrived the charge had been increased to gross misconduct. When my daughter spoke to her manager she said that they had increased the charge because she hadn't attended the first meeting. Surely they can't do this can they?

At the meeting my daughter asked why the charge was now gross conduct and they said they had been advised by their employment consultants. So which is the right version? Anyway she explained what had actually happened and how the allegations against her weren't true and how the statement contradicted itself. She also pointed out that there were no safety gloves available which contravened the companies infection control policy. Interestingly the same thing happened the following day when the boy went to college (different care assistant) and he had to be taken back to the home for cleaning up. As a result of these two incidents whenever the boy now goes out the carer takes gloves and a spare set of clothes. Anyway, fast forward and she received a letter to day issuing her a final written warning stating the following reasons:

a. she broke the companies care standards by shouting at the boy, him losing his dignity etc

b. how she should have taken safety gloves/spare clothes with her, even though there is no mention of this in his care plan and no other carer had in the past. In fact the care plan has still not been updated since the incidents

My daughter feels that she has been unfairly treated and is going to appeal.

 

The points she wants to raise are:

a. How the disciplinary charge was "grossed up" unfairly

b. how they haven't taken into account about how she explained how she dealt/spoke to the boy and they are taking the side of a witness who isn't trained in how to care for the boys and whose evident can't be collaborated

c. the company failed to provide correct infection control facilities and how her manager should have advised her if a special arrangements should have followed

Incidentally she never received or was directed to the current disciplinary procedures when she joined the company over 2 years ago, the reason cited was that they were updating the staff handbook. The first time she had seen the procedures was when they were included in the SECOND letter. Also she has an exemplary disciplinary track record and hasn't had any warnings of any sort before.

 

Sorry for the length of the post, any help/advice should be gratefully appreciated

[renegadeimp]

I cant advise accurately as im not compltely up to date with Employment rules. You'd need someone who specialises in things like this, such as Emmzzi.

 

My gut feeling is that it sounds like one of the dodgy care homes we hear so much about on the news lately.

[philip1988]

I cant advise accurately as im not compltely up to date with Employment rules. You'd need someone who specialises in things like this, such as Emmzzi.

 

My gut feeling is that it sounds like one of the dodgy care homes we hear so much about on the news lately.

 

Thank you for your reply. Dodgy is exactly how I would describe the care home. As her manager says, "you are guilty until you can prove otherwise"

[caro]

Have the home followed their own disciplinary procedure properly?

[philip1988]

Have the home followed their own disciplinary procedure properly?

 

They have in terms of informing of the disciplinary charge, included the witness statement with the disciplinary letter. However they are relying on a statement which is untrue. They have clearly not taken on board anything that my daughter said at the hearing and decided that it should go straight to final warning. She has also been told that she has 5 days to appeal

[fletch70]

To be honest , as she is in a postion with vulnerable people the charge should have been gross misconduct to start with. IMHO

[philip1988]

To be honest , as she is in a postion with vulnerable people the charge should have been gross misconduct to start with. IMHO

 

How can you say that. She followed all the correct procedures (which are clearly lacking) as well as telephoning her manager for advice. The company have only listened to the report from a teacher who doesn't have to deal with this boy on a day to day basis

[topcat1802]

In your message you said she has morning sickness so I assume that she is pregnant! Could this be the reason they are pursuing the case in this way. If she is permanent staff rather than session staff then they could be looking at a way to get rid of her rather than pay any maternity pay! If she is dismissed for gross misconduct then they do not have to pay any SMP!!!!

[philip1988]

In your message you said she has morning sickness so I assume that she is pregnant! Could this be the reason they are pursuing the case in this way. If she is permanent staff rather than session staff then they could be looking at a way to get rid of her rather than pay any maternity pay! If she is dismissed for gross misconduct then they do not have to pay any SMP!!!!

 

That is exactly what they have done before with other girls saying that they aren't needed anymore. My daughter is only 11 weeks gone so have a long way to go yet.

[fletch70]

Philip

I wasn't saying that what she did was gross misconduct as I do not know all the details however the investigation should have been based around alleged gross misconduct. In jobs such as hers the standards have to be seen to be high otherwise people will lose face. If the boy had been your son you would only want the best for him wouldn't you

[philip1988]

Philip

I wasn't saying that what she did was gross misconduct as I do not know all the details however the investigation should have been based around alleged gross misconduct. In jobs such as hers the standards have to be seen to be high otherwise people will lose face. If the boy had been your son you would only want the best for him wouldn't you

 

Hello Fletch

OK take your point. I agree if it was my son I would want the best for him. The issue is that my daughter did in a difficult situation handle the situation in a caring and professional way. The boy concerned is very difficult to handle (can be violent at times) and his care plan has clear guidelines how the carers must deal with him caringly but firmly. It is this which the music teacher has miss-interpreted and the company sided with the teacher. Anyway it is all the other stuff such as refusing to clean him up which she also got all wrong

[Atlas01]

......................

a. had refused him food and drink before he attended his class Misconduct potentially gross misconduct

b. refused to clean the boy up Misconduct potentially gross misconduct

c. shouted at him gross misconduct

d. left the loo door open for all to see Misconduct potentially gross misconduct

e. called him a "walking disease" gross misconduct with ease

 

The first that my daughter knew that there was a problem was when she received a disciplinary letter with a copy of an unsigned/dated witness statement from the music teacher. The hearing had been arranged for the day following receipt of the letter. As it was my daughter had to postpone the meeting as it was early in the morning and she is currently suffering badly from morning sickness. When she rang on the morning to rearrange she did point out that she had intended to attend but they hadn't given her reasonable notice to prepare for the meeting/arrange for someone to attend with her. The Head Office response was basically "tough" we can arrange a disciplinary meeting whenever they want.

 

is postpone a red herring here, postpone indicates employer agreement, did she refuse or not turn up because if that is the case they could add that on to make it GM

 

i'll not quote anymore, you need to step away as dad and tell your daughter to get her head down while the warning is active, yes sir, no sir, pass me those gloves sir

 

I've dealt with many disciplinary investigations and hearings in this area, 2 of the above would have been enough on their own to dismiss regardless of availability of gloves. Your daughter should not appeal unless she can get the employer to believe the music teacher has taken it upon herself to fabricate all the above. Taking your daughter out of the equasion tell me which is the more likely chain of events if it's two people you do not know.....

 

Sending her in to appeal on technical points of law, guidance and policy will result in her being mauled by any HR/Manager who has not been lobotomised.

 

Best advice, back her off any keep her head down.

 

 

 

..

[Emmzzi]

I would have a review of the witness statement to see *what the teacher saw* versus *what the boy told the teacher.*

 

If the teacher saw and heard everything first hand, advice per Atlas above.

[renegadeimp]

One question. Did your daughter actually do and say what she is accused of?

[philip1988]

One question. Did your daughter actually do and say what she is accused of?

In answer to your question

Refuse food and drink. NO, it had been agreed with her manager that he had eaten before he went to the class and shouldn't be given anything else until tea time because he has a tendency to poo himself

Shouted at him. No, as his care plan says you need to be assertive with him otherwise he can become aggressive/have tantrums. She believes this was misinterpreted by the teacher as shouting.

Left loo door open. Door was closed, the teacher opened the door to see what was happening

called a walking disease - No

Refused to help. No, she was trying to sort the boy out when the teacher walked in. She did have to leave the boy with the teacher to ring her manager to get advice as to what to do, no correct equipment, change of clothes etc. The manager said bring him back as he was. May be this was also misinterpreted.

In answer to Atlas01's question, no she didn't refuse/not turn up at the hearing. As I said in the origional post she was/still is suffering from very bad morning sickness and rang on the morning to say that she wasn't able to attend for this reason. She also suggested some alternative dates

Atlas01 and Emmzzi thank you for your advice on how to take this forward

[Emmzzi]

I think the issue here is that it's her word versus the teacher's word. The employer will tend to give more weight to the longest serving or more senior person; and in any event if evidence is equally weighted, are duty bound to assume the worst in the interests of protecting the vulnerable ie the patient.

 

I think the employer is doing what they have to do in order to survive a visit from the care commission at a future date.

[philip1988]

I think the issue here is that it's her word versus the teacher's word. The employer will tend to give more weight to the longest serving or more senior person; and in any event if evidence is equally weighted, are duty bound to assume the worst in the interests of protecting the vulnerable ie the patient.

 

I think the employer is doing what they have to do in order to survive a visit from the care commission at a future date.

 

Thank you

[caro]

Is there any history with the teacher that would make her accuse your daughter or do you think it's a misunderstanding?

 

As unpleasant as it is, such allegations would have to be investigated as emmzzi says.

[philip1988]

Is there any history with the teacher that would make her accuse your daughter or do you think it's a misunderstanding?

 

As unpleasant as it is, such allegations would have to be investigated as emmzzi says.

 

Not as far as my daughter is aware. Agree, the teacher is very "mummsy" towards the boy and as a result my daughter feels that her actions were misunderstood. The way in which the witness statement reads it is not difficult to see my they felt the need to take action. What is so distressing for my daughter (and career damaging) is their refusal to listen to her account of the incident.

[Emmzzi]

by any chance was the first meeting (the missed one) an investigatory one? (That kind of meeting requires no notice or representation, as opposed to a disciplinary)

 

For future reference I'd attend all meetings if they won't budge and vomit into the bin during if need be.

[fletch70]

I must say, I have concerns about a deliberate policy of no food or drink between meals . Unless there is a medical reason for this.

[philip1988]

by any chance was the first meeting (the missed one) an investigatory one? (That kind of meeting requires no notice or representation, as opposed to a disciplinary)

 

For future reference I'd attend all meetings if they won't budge and vomit into the bin during if need be.

 

Thank you

 

No, the letter was stated that she was invited to a disciplinary meeting. At the meeting she was given an opportunity to address the charges. The decision was communicated by letter 5 days later.

 

I agree about attending. At the 2nd meeting she took a bowl in with her which surprised them a bit

[Emmzzi]

That does sound odd, I'd expect an investigatory interview and also for the boy to be asked what happened.

 

However. I am not sure I would expect the outcome to be any different. So appealing may not be that helpful an option.

[philip1988]

I must say, I have concerns about a deliberate policy of no food or drink between meals . Unless there is a medical reason for this.

 

No it isn't quiet like that. The boy recently has had to go to the loo (hopefully) very soon after he had eaten or drunk anything. Normally when he is in the house he eats/drinks when he wants, however as he had just had his lunch and gone to the toilet the manager decided that it was best if he didn't have anything else until be had returned from his one hour class.

[philip1988]

That does sound odd, I'd expect an investigatory interview and also for the boy to be asked what happened.

 

However. I am not sure I would expect the outcome to be any different. So appealing may not be that helpful an option.

 

Thanks. The only evidence is that of the music teacher. apparently because the boys are mentally challenged they can't/won't ask the boy for his version of events.

 

Suspect there is a hidden agenda so as you say appealing won't change things