Harassment claim at work.

To cut a long story short, I dated a colleague for 5 months. Yes, I know, it was stupid. Long story short, she said she wanted to marry me and have kids with me after a couple of weeks and that I was her soulmate and entire world, her prince, she wanted to grow old with me, etc. etc. etc. Lovebombing, basically. I still have these messages, if I reset my phone to an earlier backup. I took her to Europe after a few weeks apart, she cried every night because she was homesick, I cut the trip short (my trip, I had it planned for a year, she asked to come with me) to the financial loss of about £1500. My ex had given me £600 at the beginning. That didn't cover the additional expenses, including paying for two new flights home, missed transport, hotels, etc, train tickets. My ex told me she'd pay for her share. She broke up with me before she could.

I was diagnosed with an AVM not long before we broke up. I hadn't told her at the time. I eventually got in touch and I had sent a letter to her house telling her about it and telling her I was scheduled for brain surgery that was fairly risky because I'd been having seizures etc when we were together and had hidden everything from her trying to stay strong for her after her breakdown abroad.

She accused me of harassment at work. It was dealt with informally...I was told by my senior managers that it didn't amount to harassment, that she was considered manipulative (she dated someone else from work right before me and he tried to commit suicide after she broke up with him, she dumped him the day after he left work). She used to send him up to ask to be changed teams because her manager was 'stressing' her out. Lots of things. She also made stuff up about waiting in corridors and lurking in stairwells...no contact had ever been made at work and I have plenty of people who can provide character references and actual witnesses who can vouch that I've actually taken steps to avoid her.

It was dealt with. A plan was put in place for me and my manager said I should accept it. I took a month off due to stress because of it. The plan was quite restrictive. I had to avoid the rest area at 7:45 to 8:05, I had to meet friends from her floor away from where she was, I had to take evasive action if I saw her, I wasn't allowed to contact her in or outside of work.

In the haze after the surgery in October I e-mailed her. Prior to surgery I had talked to Citizen's Advice about getting back the money that was owed to me (to leave for my parents should something have happened during surgery) and to get back an item that she has that belongs to my deceased daughter, an item with no monetary value but with great sentimental value. My email basically stated that I wanted the item back and explained to her about my daughter and about the surgery, etc, what the item meant to me. I didn't ask for the money back. I had been told by Citizen's Advice that I wouldn't be able to claim for anything without exhausting all further options including asking for it myself. Thinking another letter a bad idea, I opted for e-mail, also because at the claims

I realised my mistake of course. I heard nothing back from her and when I recovered more I regretted sending it. I went back to work in January and heard nothing about it. Then this week I was told the SEO wanted to have a chat with me. He was fine when we went in, not at all angry or anything like that, polite, friendly. I knew going in that it was about the e-mail, my union rep told me.

He said that a plan had been put in place and that the email had contradicted that plan. He said he wanted it to be dealt with informally. He drew up a new plan that puts the emphasis on BOTH parties to avoid one another. I'm much happier with this one due to the restrictive nature of the last one, as it doesn't specifically prohibit me from being anywhere.

However, I have a feeling she won't go for it as it's much better for me than the last one and she won't see it as punitive. If she decides to go forward with a formal grievance, my question is basically...can one e-mail in the space o 7 months outside of work be considered a breach of the original plan when that e-mail was the correct legal route in terms of wanting what belongs to me back. My solicitor is aware that this is the advice that was given. I don't really care about the money anymore, but I want the item back, I really do. So if she goes forward with a formal grievance, the route I challenge it on is going to be based on that and based on the original plan being drawn up with very shaky evidence.

I work in the civil service, so it's pretty hard to get fired without doing something seriously wrong. I don't know when she lodged it, it was within the time period, and I also don't know why it's taken so long for them to do something about it.

I really, really, really don't want to lodge a grievance against her in return because...well, I still care about what happens to her, even if she hates me... but if I have to put one in based on her effectively falsifying half the original claims and based on it being a vexatious claim (I believe she got wind that I wanted to do the Comm's Forum that she does, that I used to do and was told I could return to at any time, and that's what's prompted it), to protect myself then I will do. I'm not sure also if, since she brought things from outside the workplace in, if the context of the relationship itself, how much I did for her abroad (I had a small brain bleed while I was taking care of her out there, she wasn't eating, I held her hair back as she retched into the toilet, I cooked for her, ran her baths, stood for 40 mins in a museum while she got w-fi t email home) and her prior relationship with someone in the office will be taken into account.

I know a lot of people in that office to vouch for my character. The fact that I asked to be put on a different floor to her when I came back, that I actually resigned,(it got sent through to HR but I thought I made the decision too hastily) shows just how much I don't want anything to do with this girl on a personal level.
«13

Comments

  • annandale
    annandale Posts: 1,469 Forumite
    I'm sorry, how can an employer have the right to dictate who you contact out of work? That is ridiculous.

    The money she owes you and the item she has of yours has nothing to do with your employer.

    Why did you contact her directly about these matters if you have a solicitor?
  • CitizenBell
    CitizenBell Posts: 8 Forumite
    edited 18 February 2017 at 11:12PM
    I guess duty of care extends to contact outside of work? I know that there can be punishment for misuse of social media. I'm not sure on the rules in terms of contact outside of work. Maybe if it was criminal I'd understand.

    Either way, any contact that I did have with her after the relationship was quite sporadic and never threatening. Hell, even when we broke up, I was the one that ended up having to dry her tears and she was sat there saying "Even now you just want to look after me." I suspect that getting into a new relationship (with someone that used to work in the same place, that's 3 in 9 months) was the catalyst for her shifting.

    That's what my argument is going to be. The original time I'd contacted her about the AVM and the brain surgery was what led to the first plan to be put in place. EVERY interaction I've had with her bar a quick 30 second chat on the way into the building at one time has been out of the workplace and never face to face and it actually isn't really all that much.

    All the while my HEO is telling me "nobody thinks this is a good idea" and "this says much more about her than it does you, I don't understand the girl at all." I had held off on telling her about the AVM, the minor bleed and the seizures etc right after the break-up because back then she seemed to feel guilty enough about her. She had ruined my trip after all, then dumped me not long after. I had, mistakenly, thought that since we'd been friends that she would have cared about something as serious as that...especially given we were still colleagues. I kind of wanted to protect her from people asking about it and have her aware before it became common knowledge. I know what workplace offices are like in terms of gossip...to them, when the story came out (I wrote an article about my AVM to raise awareness/money for a charity walk in October)...it would look like I got my AVM diagnosis and then she dumped me because of it. It doesn't matter what the truth was, that's how it was going to look to others.

    I was just in a bit of a haze after the surgery which is why I emailed instead of using the solicitor. I don't remember in great detail the weeks following it. Probably I didn't want to spook her with an official letter and cause her family stress. Even now I am still on meds that make me a bit woozy. I suppose my judgement was impaired. Not that it's an excuse. I was assuming that there was some good left in her and that when she read the full story she might appreciate the strength it took to push through abroad to look after her. I thought she'd be able to step back and put things into perspective given the seriousness of the condition.

    Whether it's her way of dealing with it or she's just callous, I don't know, I don't care anymore, I want nothing to do with her bar sorting out what's rightfully mine and that's said...in much kinder words...within the e-mail. It literally says that I just want to get the item, that I want to go into work and just be able to get on with things, that I wish her well in the future but that I'd rather forget that the trip and everything else ever happened. Now that this has come up I don't even think I can be bothered doing that right now despite the significance of the toy that she has, because my recovery is paramount at the moment and this extra stress doesn't help.
  • annandale
    annandale Posts: 1,469 Forumite
    Misuse of social media and being prevented from contacting someone you used to date outside working hours isn't the same thing.

    I think legally your employer don't have the right to insist that you cannot contact this girl out of work

    I'd take proper legal advice on this.
  • The new plan just says "Neither party is to contact the other in-person, via e-mail or in person." The new plan works for me. None of it say "I can't go here, I can't go there." It all says 'neither party' or 'both parties have to respect each other's space and show consideration in regards to breaks.'

    I suspect the employer doesn't want this to be a grievance but they have to act regardless. My worry is more about her claims going to the next stage. I could understand if I was turning up at her house or following her or something like that. But it's really a mountain out of a molehill. This is the girl who cried because she didn't know my middle name so she is pretty extreme.

    Thanks for your help, though. It's a strange one and I guess they can argue that they have a duty of care to both of us and if something has a negative effect on an employee's performance...I don't know how it's justified, but I will consult my solicitor about it again if it does get to the formal stage. I have great performance reviews, was ranked in the top part last year, the only sickness I had was due to the stress of those original claims (brain surgery was doing the time-off, I work part year), I have thank-you cards from colleagues and one from a client, great training feedback from trainees and a host of people in the office who can vouch for me so I'm hoping that either way, I'm OK.
  • Bogalot
    Bogalot Posts: 1,102 Forumite
    If you were told not to contact her and you did, even once, then you've breached the original agreement. Your reasons may be valid, but nonetheless they were not what you agreed. The time to complain about the initial agreement was when it was made, not now you have breached it.

    The duty of care in cases such as this does apply beyond working hours. If you felt the need to contact her you should have spoken to your HO to get their advice as to how to handle it.

    Going forward, you need to acknowledge that you breached the agreement and explain your reasons - you didn't understand that you were in fact breaching it, you felt your reasons for contact were valid.

    She does have valid complaint about the new agreement. She has not done anything wrong yet they are attempting to limit her movements, to do so is effectively punishing the complainant when they have done nothing wrong. You may have to accept an agreement closer to the original (and stick to it) in order to make this go away.

    I appreciate this is not what you want to hear but HR has to be seen to deal with this fairly, and the current agreement leaves them open to a sex discrimination claim. That's what they'll really be looking at, minimising a legal claim.

    I don't think you'll be dismissed for this, assuming you acknowledge your unintentional mistake and don't do it in future. However I would not suggest that it's pretty hard to get fired from the CS, times are changing and it's exactly this situation that *could* lead to dismissal if not resolved quickly.
  • CitizenBell
    CitizenBell Posts: 8 Forumite
    edited 19 February 2017 at 3:19PM
    "She has not done anything wrong."

    She lied to get the original plan put in place. And exaggerated the stuff that was true. Although that agreement had already been put in place and I didn't challenge it at the time, I consider that an attempt to get rid of me from my job and consider this one to be too. Lying to get somebody fired or into trouble, to me, is gross misconduct and it's stated so in policy. Even though duty of care extends outside the workplace...I barely had any contact with her outside of work bar a few instances, and she hadn't said "Don't contact me." and it wasn't like I was abusive in the relationship or that it ended acrimoniously.

    The original plan infringes on my ability to actually do my job since I need to go down to her floor for work-related purposes.

    I think in terms of 'sex discrimination...she used to slap me for no reason and it was a controlling and abusive relationship in other ways. If it was the other way around that'd be handled completely differently. I've said to my HEO that it was abusive. My HEO knows because it was written down that she said she 'thought her Dad might do something to me' which sounds pretty threatening to me. It was that that led me to agree with it through fear.

    This new plan doesn't really limit anyone's movements. It's about being considerate more than anything.

    I had rang ACAS who told me that employers can't do anything in when it comes for asking for money/items back and that it was a personal matter. If I'd brought it up with them in terms of contacting her I suspect they'd have just said that it wasn't anything to do with them.

    Thanks for being honest though. Obviously, I'm aware that it was a stupid thing to do.

    "Going forward, you need to acknowledge that you breached the agreement and explain your reasons - you didn't understand that you were in fact breaching it, you felt your reasons for contact were valid."

    I have done this.

    I haven't told them yet that her claims led me to try and commit suicide.
  • Bogalot
    Bogalot Posts: 1,102 Forumite
    "She has not done anything wrong."

    She lied to get the original plan put in place. And exaggerated the stuff that was true. Although that agreement had already been put in place and I didn't challenge it at the time, I consider that an attempt to get rid of me from my job and consider this one to be too. Lying to get somebody fired or into trouble, to me, is gross misconduct and it's stated so in policy. Even though duty of care extends outside the workplace...I barely had any contact with her outside of work bar a few instances, and she hadn't said "Don't contact me." and it wasn't like I was abusive in the relationship or that it ended acrimoniously.

    The original plan infringes on my ability to actually do my job since I need to go down to her floor for work-related purposes.

    I think in terms of 'sex discrimination...she used to slap me for no reason and it was a controlling and abusive relationship in other ways. If it was the other way around that'd be handled completely differently. I've said to my HEO that it was abusive. My HEO knows because it was written down that she said she 'thought her Dad might do something to me' which sounds pretty threatening to me.

    This new plan doesn't really limit anyone's movements. It's about being considerate more than anything.

    I had rang ACAS who told me that employers can't do anything in when it comes for asking for money/items back and that it was a personal matter. If I'd brought it up with them in terms of contacting her I suspect they'd have just said that it wasn't anything to do with them.

    Thanks for being honest though. Obviously, I'm aware that it was a stupid thing to do.

    "Going forward, you need to acknowledge that you breached the agreement and explain your reasons - you didn't understand that you were in fact breaching it, you felt your reasons for contact were valid."

    I have done this.

    What happened within your relationship, prior to the first work agreement that you made no objection to, is irrelevant now. The issue now is that you breached this agreement.

    If you'd asked work about contacting her over the outstanding items and they'd said it was nothing to do with them then you'd have covered your back. Unfortunately you failed to do this.

    You need to take the emotion out of the situation. You keep going back to what happened in the relationship, for the purposes of this complaint it is irrelevant, and it is clouding your judgment.
  • Bogalot
    Bogalot Posts: 1,102 Forumite
    I haven't told them yet that her claims led me to try and commit suicide.
    Last edited by CitizenBell; Today at 3:19 PM.

    I wouldn't be telling work that. It would come across as emotional blackmail, especially as her claims are substantiated and yours are not. I'm not saying her actions are fair, but her complaints can be verified as fact.

    You need to see your doctor and arrange some counselling.
  • CitizenBell
    CitizenBell Posts: 8 Forumite
    edited 19 February 2017 at 3:57PM
    It was in the aftermath of the brain surgery, when I wasn't lucid either. I am in counselling.

    The claims of lurking/waiting around in the office can't be verified as fact.

    This e-mail can. I suppose that is the only thing that matters in the circumstances. I'm hoping the agreement is just accepted. But one of the reasons I did opt for e-mail rather than sending an official solicitor's letter to her house was due to concerns about her Dad.

    The item I want back is something that belonged to my deceased daughter. It's one of the few things that I have to remember her by.

    I was told by my HEO in November that I didn't have to adhere to the agreement, that whatever had come before wasn't his concern and that no investigation had been made with which to justify the agreement. So if one is getting set up with now, I'm more than fine with that. But I can't have management telling me one thing and then getting told that in fact I did have to adhere to it.

    But honestly, I've made it clear by resigning (before getting it stopped), trying to move to days, getting put on a different floor that I want nothing to do with her. I know that isn't what matters here. But despite what the item means to me, I don't even care about that anymore, I just want nothing to do with her.

    I'm being co-operative with work. Actually, I've no problems with management here. I think they have been and are very supportive. I've made it clear to them that I want her to feel happy and stress-free at work as well (I'd said that in the e-mail to her as well when asking for the item back).
  • Malthusian
    Malthusian Posts: 10,898
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper Photogenic
    Forumite
    annandale wrote: »
    I'm sorry, how can an employer have the right to dictate who you contact out of work? That is ridiculous.

    Because they're paying him a salary. This isn't a restraining order, this is an informal mediation plan put in by an employer to try and keep two employees away from each other's throats without having to sack one of them. They're trying to do the two of them a favour. Neither of them is forced to agree to it.

    OP - would your employer agree to a slight variation - you will have no contact with her, but your solicitor is allowed to contact her on your behalf to recover your property (the daughter's item) to whatever extent necessary? I assume from your posts that you've asked her to return it, and that she's refused. Either you now have to take her to court to force her to return it, or write it off and be content with the memories.

    Your employer can't stop you from reclaiming what's yours but they are perfectly at liberty to ask you nicely not to, and in the extreme they can give you your notice if having a court case against a fellow employee makes your position untenable. Or her hers.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards