Advice about dismissal - please

Floss

Amber07 wrote: »

The MD did state he was going to carry out his own investigation, so I assumed that this new statement would be allowed for that. We only have a problem with the fact that he has been allowed to see the other statements before his was made.:mad: .....

As I said, if this is the investigation report, then the investigating officer should have interviewed every witness including OH, and has probably seen the statements made by them in lieu of these interviews in order to gather evidence...... this link is to an ACAS guide for employers, which may shed some light on this (you can download a pdf):

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=890

Amber07

Floss wrote: »

As I said, if this is the investigation report, then the investigating officer should have interviewed every witness including OH, and has probably seen the statements made by them in lieu of these interviews in order to gather evidence...... this link is to an ACAS guide for employers, which may shed some light on this (you can download a pdf):

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=890

I don't think i have explained myself properly maybe?

I understand the MD having to see all the statements and notes to carry out his investigation (although he never interviewed OH) it's the new witness who the MD got a statement from as part of his investigation who was allowed to read the statements and notes BEFORE making his own statement.

So his statement was given, backing everything up - and of course it would - he knew exactly what to write to back it all up, as he had read it all rather than experiencing it first hand.




Ps Burny - OH was asking whether he should point out the procedural errors to them or now or whether he should hold off for the tribunal?

Debt_Free_Chick

Amber07 wrote: »

I don't think i have explained myself properly maybe?

I understand the MD having to see all the statements and notes to carry out his investigation (although he never interviewed OH) it's the new witness who the MD got a statement from as part of his investigation who was allowed to read the statements and notes BEFORE making his own statement.

So his statement was given, backing everything up - and of course it would - he knew exactly what to write to back it all up, as he had read it all rather than experiencing it first hand.




Ps Burny - OH was asking whether he should point out the procedural errors to them or now or whether he should hold off for the tribunal?

This is now getting very messy

Just gone back to my post #83 to remind myself of the original issue. For me, you were looking at a strong case for automatic unfair dismissal as it didn't seem as though the Company had complied with the statutory disciplinary procedure.

Assuming that you sent the appeal letter along the lines of my post #90, then these are the issues that the appeal is supposed to address. OH needs to be very focussed and ensure that he raises the issues precisely set out in the appeal letter.

This new evidence i.e. the new letter is a bit of a red herring as it doesn't support any of the matters set out in my post #90 - it simply "adds" to the "evidence" of alleged bullying, so I stand by the thoughts I set out in post #91, UNLESS there's been anything new.

It still remains odd that all of these bullying accusations have only just reared their heads; and odd that they all came at the same time; and odd that they all only appeared when your OH was supposedly accused of misappropriation of cash.

If the disciplinary is meant to be for bullying, that should have been made clear - but we already doubt that the Company properly set out its accusations in a way that complies with part one of the stat disciplinary process.

Do we now have details of specific bullying incidents, including dates and a summary of the circumstances? Or do we still have general "name-calling" letters?

It's difficult to know how to handle the appeal - but OH must raise the specific matters set out in his appeal letter. If the company sidesteps them, so be it - we'll need to wait for the letter confirming the outcome of the appeal.

If they just keep on with the bullying accusations, he should ask - politely - for details of specific incidents, so he can explain his behaviour at those times. Again, if the company sidesteps this, just let it rest - but get it on record that OH has asked about specific incidents.

It does rather seem as though the company are going for bullying - but as I previously said, I'm not convinced that this would amount to Gross Misconduct. Did we get the Company's policy on bullying & harrassment?

If the appeal goes the way we think it will - more bullying accusations and confirmation that he's being dismissed for Gross Misconduct - I think you will need to get advice then. It's terribly difficult to deal with this in a forum and you need someone to look at all the written evidence, notes of meetings, policies etc.

But let's wait & see what happens next.

Amber07

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

This is now getting very messy

Isn't it just, my head is fizzing

Just gone back to my post #83 to remind myself of the original issue. For me, you were looking at a strong case for automatic unfair dismissal as it didn't seem as though the Company had complied with the statutory disciplinary procedure.

I think we still are - they are chucking in loads of other stuff to pad it out

Assuming that you sent the appeal letter along the lines of my post #90, then these are the issues that the appeal is supposed to address. OH needs to be very focussed and ensure that he raises the issues precisely set out in the appeal letter.

We will - I am also writing him up stuff to back up anything else they have mentioned in case they bring it up unexpectedly - don't want him caught short

This new evidence i.e. the new letter is a bit of a red herring as it doesn't support any of the matters set out in my post #90 - it simply "adds" to the "evidence" of alleged bullying, so I stand by the thoughts I set out in post #91, UNLESS there's been anything new.

It still remains odd that all of these bullying accusations have only just reared their heads; and odd that they all came at the same time; and odd that they all only appeared when your OH was supposedly accused of misappropriation of cash.

I know - as I said, they are just throwing as much at him as they can

If the disciplinary is meant to be for bullying, that should have been made clear - but we already doubt that the Company properly set out its accusations in a way that complies with part one of the stat disciplinary process.

I know - but they keep listing other stuff, which he has explanations for and thought were sorted

Do we now have details of specific bullying incidents, including dates and a summary of the circumstances? Or do we still have general "name-calling" letters?

No, just general things - no exact dates or incidents recorded. No prior warnings or discussions before the day of his suspension

It's difficult to know how to handle the appeal - but OH must raise the specific matters set out in his appeal letter. If the company sidesteps them, so be it - we'll need to wait for the letter confirming the outcome of the appeal.

If they just keep on with the bullying accusations, he should ask - politely - for details of specific incidents, so he can explain his behaviour at those times. Again, if the company sidesteps this, just let it rest - but get it on record that OH has asked about specific incidents.

Will do

It does rather seem as though the company are going for bullying - but as I previously said, I'm not convinced that this would amount to Gross Misconduct. Did we get the Company's policy on bullying & harrassment?

It lists a lot of items, 'bullying' isn't among them - but it does state 'this list is not exhaustive' so could be extended to cover anything I guess.

If the appeal goes the way we think it will - more bullying accusations and confirmation that he's being dismissed for Gross Misconduct - I think you will need to get advice then. It's terribly difficult to deal with this in a forum and you need someone to look at all the written evidence, notes of meetings, policies etc.

We are seeing a CAB advisor asap to lodge a tribunal application

But let's wait & see what happens next.

Thanks for your advice DFC

Amber07

I'm currently compiling a list of procedural irregularities:

PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITIES

I believe that the proper dismissal procedure has not been followed for the following reasons:

-Investigatory Meeting held on 14.02.09 - No prior awareness of any points. One to One meeting on 05.02.09 had gone well, nothing raised.

-No notes were taken at the investigatory meeting. I made my owns of notes after the meeting as a result. (These are available to view)

-I was not provide any copies of information which had come out of the investigation

-I did not have reasonable time to prepare to answer the case against me or seek advice (Phone call on Friday afternoon at 3pm for a Tuesday HEaring at 10am)

-I was notified of the disciplinary hearing by telephone call, not in writing from the Operations Director who took the hearing.

-The letter dated 16th Feb from Mr *** stated that it was ‘some but not all’ matters against me, again this left me unable to prepare.

-I should have been entitled to be notified in writing of a statement by my employer setting out reasons and containing an invitation to meet and discuss the matter.

The fact that I did not receive this STEP 1 letter is both a breach of my contractual right, as per my T&C’s of employment (Section 23a General)
‘At all stages of the disciplinary procedure an Employee will be advised (in writing) of the complaint against them’
-It is also a failure by employer to follow first step in statutory minimum procedure - see attached form.

Amber07

Well, this has got more interesting.

OH went in to the appeal this morning, armed to the teeth with his defence paperwork. I went through all the evidence until 5am this morning and typed up all his replies, comments and questions (15 pages of it!)

When the MD started asking questions, OH was able to reply to EVERY issue raised and brought up many of his own questions about discrepancies. The MD actually nodded in agreement at some of OH's explanations (these were taken down in the notes) He had no replies to OH's questions (Asking about specific incidents, dates, why a witness was allowed to read all the statements before making his etc etc) In fact according to the meeting notes the MD wasn't able to comment on very much at all.:rotfl:

He also pointed out all the procedural errors to the MD (in fact he LISTED them all) and again the MD was pretty speechless. OH just gave him a period of silence then moved on to hitting him with another point.

Anyway, the upshot of it all is the MD has now asked for more time to carry out another investigation (this will be the third one!!)

OH said he couldn't have just sat there and pretended he was beaten. He wanted to shake them up, and according to what I have read in these notes, they are hopefully panicking a bit now.

-BA-

Amber07 wrote: »

Well, this has got more interesting.

OH went in to the appeal this morning, armed to the teeth with his defence paperwork. I went through all the evidence until 5am this morning and typed up all his replies, comments and questions (15 pages of it!)

When the MD started asking questions, OH was able to reply to EVERY issue raised and brought up many of his own questions about discrepancies. The MD actually nodded in agreement at some of OH's explanations (these were taken down in the notes) He had no replies to OH's questions (Asking about specific incidents, dates, why a witness was allowed to read all the statements before making his etc etc) In fact according to the meeting notes the MD wasn't able to comment on very much at all.:rotfl:

He also pointed out all the procedural errors to the MD (in fact he LISTED them all) and again the MD was pretty speechless. OH just gave him a period of silence then moved on to hitting him with another point.

Anyway, the upshot of it all is the MD has now asked for more time to carry out another investigation (this will be the third one!!)

OH said he couldn't have just sat there and pretended he was beaten. He wanted to shake them up, and according to what I have read in these notes, they are hopefully panicking a bit now.

Well it certainly seems you have them on the back foot which is a superb achievement, keep the pressure on them and pin them down to dates and times of when this will be finished. Currently time and hoping you will give up and go away may become their weapons of choice and time gives them the chance to, sadly, alter or create new evidence. The fact that they have asked for an extension and you have agreed needs to be documented in a letter to them and state that should a response not be received by a certain date, then tribunal proceeds will commence.

Give 'em hell

Floss

-BA- wrote: »

......should a response not be received by a certain date, then tribunal proceeds will commence.......

Check how long you have before you are timed out of a tribunal. There is a time limit of (I think) 90 days to register - but I am not sure when the clock starts ticking.

987654

You can lodge the tribunal claim even though the appeal is being progressed.

Well done to DH for remaining calm. It matters at times like this!

Amber07

I have checked - we have 3 months to register the appeal, and we are only one month in, so not worrying about time yet.

The MD did say to OH that although he was snowed under with end of year paperwork, he will personally carry out the new investigation. He said to expect a reply by the end of next week, and he will send a request for a new meeting in writing.

The thing is, we do suspect that people can now concoct times/dates etc BUT..OH has requested that the original director does not have anything to do with the investigation (He also asked who witnessed the statements being taken. Answer: no one!) Also, no matter what new evidence is uncovered they cannot undo the fact that there HAVE been procedural irregularities, and that they have now had to investigate 3 times. Surely if it was done properly the first two times there should have been no need?

The main thing is, OH did say that this time he felt as though he had been listened to, which is a first throughout this whole thing. Also, when he told the MD that at the initial interview he was told byt the Ops director that he could either 'resign, or fall on his sword' and that made him feel that the desision had already been made. The MD apparently looked quite shocked at this.:D

Anyway, we are now feeling more positive than we have done in weeks. OH has two interviews again tomorrow.

OH was telling his friend how much research I have been doing on the net about this whole situation and he said he is never going to divorce me....because I would totally stiff him in court!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: