Reinstated employee but job has been filled by a new person.

studentphil

dmg24 wrote: »

Yes, I agree on both points.

No one really has a chance in life in that case.

hazeyjewel

Is Phil work obsessed or is it just me?

studentphil

Idiophreak wrote: »

You don't need someone to be useless in order to make them redundant...

But you have to make out they are useless to get rid of them in the first year.

surreysaver

studentphil wrote: »

What happens if someone is reinstated to a job but they have filled their job with someone else? I just wondered what an employer would do.

Their job should not have been filled in the first place until the grievence proceedure, appeals proceedure and tribunal had been completed.

studentphil

surreysaver wrote: »

Their job should not have been filled in the first place until the grievence proceedure, appeals proceedure and tribunal had been completed.

So if the company fills the job it is saying it doesn't want reinstatement to happen very interesting.

surreysaver

studentphil wrote: »

So if the company fills the job it is saying it doesn't want reinstatement to happen very interesting.

A company can still refuse to re-instate. But it would be stupid to fill the job until the various proceedures had been completed. If the job has been filled before an appeal against dismissal, for example, then basically they are pre-empting the decision of the appeal, which would basically mean the ex-employee would then win a tribunal on the basis a decision about the sacking had been made before all the hearings and company proceedures had been carried out.

floss2

How're you getting on in your job search, Phil? (She says, in an effort to refocus him...)

dmg24

studentphil wrote: »

So if the company fills the job it is saying it doesn't want reinstatement to happen very interesting.

No, not really. It would fill the job to fulfil the needs of the business, but as I said, they would be more likely to do it on a temporary basis.

So what have you found out for me about dismissal in the first year of employment?

studentphil

dmg24 wrote: »

No, not really. It would fill the job to fulfil the needs of the business, but as I said, they would be more likely to do it on a temporary basis.

So what have you found out for me about dismissal in the first year of employment?

You have about zero employment rights. Your employer can do what they want to you.

dmg24

studentphil wrote: »

You have about zero employment rights. Your employer can do what they want to you.

Limited, but certainly not zero. On what grounds could a person still claim for unfair/ constructive dismissal in the first year of employment?

If you are still online by 9pm, I want an answer!

(BTW I know the answer, I'm not asking the question to anyone in general, it is Phil's task for the day!)