Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Don't worry for now. People will be along later with ideas of how to get around the problems. The system can be temperamental. HB
    • Meat smugglers using English vehicles to evade border checks - Farmers Weekly WWW.FWI.CO.UK Criminal gangs are buying English-registered coaches and vans to smuggle large amounts of illegal meat into the country, Farmers Weekly has learned.  
    • I've used payslip, passport, driving licence, still can't identify me, everything is upto date address etc, 1 attempt left then it blocks me H
    • Thanks for the replies and sorry, as it seems I haven't communicated my question clearly. I'm not after advice about how to deal with the situation I'm in. I'm on top of that and sent a SAR to Scottish Widows the day before I sent one to the FOS. My query was around the FOS interpretation of personal data and the extent of their obligations under GDPR, hence the original title They have said that "personal data is defined as any information relating to an [...] identifiable natural person (‘data subject’)" They then define an identifiable natural person as "one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as [...] an identification number. My view is that I have a complaint reference number, which identifies a complaint raised by me about the administration of my pension so it therefore indirectly identifies me If I'm right, then I believe that all the data related to my complaint is personal data about me, including the screen shot that purportedly establishes that I received my statements. I was hoping there might be someone with better knowledge of GDPR that can clarify whether I'm right or wrong before I react to the FOS's failure to disclose  
    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Mental Health Discrimination at Work


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3817 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I will start this off by explaining that I have bipolar disorder, anxiety and OCD, all of which I receive medication and treatment for. I also have a history of self-harm.

 

I started working for a supermarket a year and a half ago, and in my application i stated that I believed to suffer from a disability, my condition being mental health issues. I was also upfront about this in my face-to-face interview. I started off working in the clothing department of the store and my manager was great with me, understanding of my condition and knew i saw a psychiatrist and attended group therapy. I have my ups and downs in work, but last December I was overwhelmed with stress and anxiety and cut my arm during my lunch break. One of my colleagues bumped into me after I done it and noticed the blood from my arm and I was sent to the hospital to get stitches. The 'People Manager' of the store recommended I take a few days off after the incident.

 

In March, me and two others were moved to other departments due to cut backs and poor sales. I was moved to the bakery department and have struggled mentally since then. The job itself isn't hard at all, it's the amount of work that stresses me. There are 5 in on the dayshift, but only me on the back shift. There used to be two on the back shift, but they cut it down to save money, so I am doing work for two people. I always feel harassed into doing over time and during the summer I was on my own (as usual) on a busy Saturday and really struggled. One of the managers saw me and was concerned about me and I confided in her that I was really stressed and because I self-harm, it was doubly worse working unsupervised in an environment with knives etc. The manager sent me home and I was asked to see an occupational therapist a week later.

 

The occupational therapist told me that it was unacceptable that I had brandished a knife and threatened to cut myself. I told him that that never happened. He said it didn't matter and if my behaviour wouldn't change I would be out on my arse without a leg to stand on, and would struggle getting a job in this climate and without a good reference. When I spoke the 'People Manager' (head of personnel) about this, she said the occupational therapist shouldn't have used that language, but that the points he made were true. She said she has a duty to ensure I am fit for purpose and can do the job they pay me to do. She said she has to protect staff and customers from the aftermath of my self-harming as no-one should have to see that. She told me she would be monitoring me very closely for the upcoming months.

 

This happened at the end of August and ever since then it had bugged me. I have always been upfront about my illness and unfortunately one co-worker and my old manager saw my arm after I had self-harmed last December. I feel terrible that they saw that, but my fellow workers don't even know about my self-harming, and I wear long sleeved blouses that cover up my scars. I am very hard-working and polite, but I have told my manager repeatedly that I struggle on my own and I never get any help. When I wanted to move to a different department my manager wouldn't let me as she says I'm one of her best workers. I am also annoyed at how they added me "brandishing a knife and threatening to cut myself" on that busy Saturday during the summer. Am I being discriminated against or are they right and I just can't see it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a bit of both.... certainly cutting yourself at work is unacceptable.

 

 

A "reasonable adjustment" for you may be to not work alone as you seem to do better with people around you. Did you discuss this with Occ Therapist?

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I did discuss this with him, but he said that's something to take up with my manager which I have done, but to no avail. After I cut myself at work, I was told to immediately tell a manager if I felt that stressed again and I did. I never threatened to do it, just told her I'm struggling to do the amount of work on my own, and struggling with myself trying not to self harm, which was making me more upset.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I am trying to make, which I should have done with my original post (my apologies for not doing so) is that if I has a physical disability, I would be treated differently. Everyone is meant to be till trained, but the make allowances for people with arthritis or similar conditions. It's rightly so that they make adjustments for those people, so why can't they help me when I ask them?

A woman who cancer in my department and was off for 9 months retuned to have her shifts reduced to suit her needs. She also works back shift and they get me in to help her. It's completely right that they provide this help for that woman, she truly deserves it, but why can't they help me?

I am not comparing myself to someone with an illness like cancer, but though it may be less severe, I have an illness too.I have uncontrollable mood swings, anxiety which causes me to take panic attacks and they still have me working on my own. I feel I am being punished for confiding in that manager that I was stressed to the point where I am having to fight with myself not to self harm. They told me to ask for help, but when i do I'm told I'll be out on my arse!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So things to note

1) they can let you go for an y non discriminatory reason in the first 2 years. Now we know it would be for a discriminatory reason but they can make up a performance issue if they really want to. So if you can keep your head down for another 6 months it'd be helpful. Depends how extreme your condition is just now.

2) I think you need a re-referral to occ health. They should be making recommendations, not leaving it up to you to argue your case!

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for replying.

 

If I'm honest, I think it was an empty threat/ kick up the backside. I don't take issue with them having a problem self-harming at work. I won't go into unpleasant detail, but it's something I usually do and keep private, but couldn't on that occasion as I had cut myself so deep.

My issue was with the way the occupational therapist spoke to me and the fact they had made up a story about me brandishing a knife. I do also know that the manager who dealt with me that day was upset at having her words twisted and told the head of personnel that was not what happened and was appalled at how I had been treated. I was just worried I has made myself an enemy of the head of personnel by speaking up about how I had been treated. I was polite and calm when i told her my grievance though, so I suppose it would be different if I'd approached her like a raging bull.

I just wanted to know what was right and wrong in this situation incase she made my life hell like she has done/does with employees she has problems with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I think a bit of both.... certainly cutting yourself at work is unacceptable."

 

This is pretty unhelpful, and really not understanding of mental health issues. For example, would you say "having a heart attack/going into anaphalctic shock at work is unacceptable"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Beardy, if you think my post is inappropriate, the best thing to do is use the report symbol to get the forum team to have a look at it.

 

I generally try and be honest, as I think that gives people the soundest basis to make decisions on. I can't see any employer liking that behavior, and I do hope OP can get to see occupational health again for proper guidance and suggestions her manager can implement, that may prevent her feeling like this at work again.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is pretty unhelpful, and really not understanding of mental health issues. For example, would you say "having a heart attack/going into anaphalctic shock at work is unacceptable"?

 

I believe it to be relevant, and the OP has not complained.

 

Rightly or wrongly, employers will see a difference between an employee who has a heart attack in the workplace and one who self-harms in the workplace. Cutting may be be compulsive behaviour, but it's not involuntary.

 

In the same way, an employer may recognise that alcoholism is a mental health issue while still insisting that an employee may not drink vodka on duty. Said employers would do well to be sympathetic where possible, but there are things they simply cannot permit.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...