Advice about dismissal - please

Horace

As an aside - someone has suggested a compromise agreement but has only said to claim for 12 months' salary. A compromise agreement means that they don't necessarily accept that they are at fault, it also shuts the door so that your OH cannot go take his case to an employment tribunal. He also cannot discuss any settlement with anyone because if it gets out that he has then he has to pay back any settlement figure.

Amber07

Horace wrote: »

As an aside - someone has suggested a compromise agreement but has only said to claim for 12 months' salary. A compromise agreement means that they don't necessarily accept that they are at fault, it also shuts the door so that your OH cannot go take his case to an employment tribunal. He also cannot discuss any settlement with anyone because if it gets out that he has then he has to pay back any settlement figure.

Thanks for that advice.

Tbh, he would be happy for a compensation sum to tide us over till he finds a new job and a reference. We really don't want to go down the tribunal route if we don't have to.

He is desperately trying to find work already while he is suspended as benefits isn't an option for us. (Mortgage payments to make)

Liz_the_Whizz

Amber,

I second what chrissy says about a compromise agreement - it offers the least painful and most certain way forward if it's achievable. Depends how hell bent they are on dismissal.

The dilemma is when and how to bring the possibility of a compromise agreement to the table. Too soon - they sense weakness, and go full throttle on the disciplinary. Too late - they are so far down the disciplinary track that they are willing to gamble on an ET.

Your DH's trusted friend may have a useful part to play here if he is prepared to act as an intermediary in brokering a deal. Depends where it leaves him as he has to live with the work situation afterwards.

For the time being, your DH should probably just play it straight, respond to their moves, let their mistakes pile up and watch for an opportunity. And anything he can unearth on the motivation behind all this will help enormously in knowing how to play it.

BW, LtW x

Amber07

Liz_the_Whizz wrote: »

Amber,

I second what chrissy says about a compromise agreement - it offers the least painful and most certain way forward if it's achievable. Depends how hell bent they are on dismissal.

The dilemma is when and how to bring the possibility of a compromise agreement to the table. Too soon - they sense weakness, and go full throttle on the disciplinary. Too late - they are so far down the disciplinary track that they are willing to gamble on an ET.

Your DH's trusted friend may have a useful part to play here if he is prepared to act as an intermediary in brokering a deal. Depends where it leaves him as he has to live with the work situation afterwards.

For the time being, your DH should probably just play it straight, respond to their moves, let their mistakes pile up and watch for an opportunity. And anything he can unearth on the motivation behind all this will help enormously in knowing how to play it.

BW, LtW x

Well we are waiting the results of their 'investigation' (I use that word lightly) before we make our next move. We know he will be sacked, he has seen it happen to many people before him. I don't want him to let them know we are seeking legal advice until the hearing - last thing I want now if for them to take him back, make his life a misery (as I know they can!) and then go about getting rid of him the correct way.

His friend doesn't work for the same company, it was their last job they worked together (fiend was hubby's boss) and he is happy to help in any way he can.

We have a person willing to write and sign a statement in his favour to help out with things, also some of his employees will as well, but I want to wait until after the hearing before contacting any of them.

Thank you

Liz_the_Whizz

Amber07 wrote: »

His friend doesn't work for the same company, it was their last job they worked together (fiend was hubby's boss) and he is happy to help in any way he can.

hi amber,

Just a point on this - most disciplinary procedures would only allow your DH to be accompanied by a trade union rep or work colleague at any internal meetings/hearings. This is to prevent someone taking in a lawyer or relative.

Check the procedure but you may need to re-think this bit.

LtW x

Zazen999

Liz_the_Whizz wrote: »

hi amber,

Just a point on this - most disciplinary procedures would only allow your DH to be accompanied by a trade union rep or work colleague at any internal meetings/hearings. This is to prevent someone taking in a lawyer or relative.

Check the procedure but you may need to re-think this bit.

LtW x

Which is why you need the copy of the procedures...so that you know this.

They don't make it easy do they?

Torby

From what I have seen and heard over the last few months, this is the new process that firms use to cut down on staff levels during a recession...sacking/suspension based on any reason in the contract/handbook that allows....Health and Safety, complaints in the workplace sexual/racial, poor accounting.....the list goes on....its not fair, its not right but I think people are starting to realise this

I hope it goes well for you...

Burny_Sweetwater_Glasgow

Hi Amber,
You mention a reference, following this type of situation an employer will probably just give confirmation of dates that hubby was employed by them which is all that is required by law, new employers will read into this what they will so be warned. The important issue here is- have they followed the minimum required procedure and from what you have stated I would think not. Any tribunal will determine if the due process has been followed and if not will find any dismissal automatically unfair. So as hard as it would be to stomach, I would not let them know that you have taken legal advice at any point in this affair, if they are in breach of their own disciplinary procedures or the minimum laid down by ACAS, they will not have a leg to stand on. Let them sack your hubby and take them to the cleaners. From the point of view of being an employer and sacking an employee having followed the correct processes, then being taken to tribunal it made commercial sense to settle prior to the hearing due to the fact that legal costs are not reclaimable against the person taking you to tribunal and in our case the demands of the ex employee were less than the legal costs. From that view it was disheartening to think that we had paid a bad employee to go away, but it made commercial sense (we are a very small charity with little funds). So unless this company is a vast organisation with its own legal team its going to cost them for representation and if you can get it over to them that they are in breach of their contractual terms in relation to their disciplinary procedures and / or the minimum requirements as laid down by ACAS you are in a strong position to negotiate terms. Don't be disheartened if they stall take them all the way, they can still settle on the day of the tribunal. Facts are so important in a case like this and are a powerful weapon in your defence, remember it is they that have to prove that they followed the correct procedure.

Best of luck

Confusedconsumer_2

Sounds like you might need professional help. If you have home/car insurance, or with a credit card, you may have access to free legal help. It is worth finding out and if you have legal help you can ask for an employment specialist.

Another site worth looking at, under employment is www.adviceguide.org.uk

Good luck

Amber07

Burny_Sweetwater_Glasgow wrote: »

Hi Amber,
You mention a reference, following this type of situation an employer will probably just give confirmation of dates that hubby was employed by them which is all that is required by law, new employers will read into this what they will so be warned. The important issue here is- have they followed the minimum required procedure and from what you have stated I would think not. Any tribunal will determine if the due process has been followed and if not will find any dismissal automatically unfair. So as hard as it would be to stomach, I would not let them know that you have taken legal advice at any point in this affair, if they are in breach of their own disciplinary procedures or the minimum laid down by ACAS, they will not have a leg to stand on. Let them sack your hubby and take them to the cleaners. From the point of view of being an employer and sacking an employee having followed the correct processes, then being taken to tribunal it made commercial sense to settle prior to the hearing due to the fact that legal costs are not reclaimable against the person taking you to tribunal and in our case the demands of the ex employee were less than the legal costs. From that view it was disheartening to think that we had paid a bad employee to go away, but it made commercial sense (we are a very small charity with little funds). So unless this company is a vast organisation with its own legal team its going to cost them for representation and if you can get it over to them that they are in breach of their contractual terms in relation to their disciplinary procedures and / or the minimum requirements as laid down by ACAS you are in a strong position to negotiate terms. Don't be disheartened if they stall take them all the way, they can still settle on the day of the tribunal. Facts are so important in a case like this and are a powerful weapon in your defence, remember it is they that have to prove that they followed the correct procedure.

Best of luck

Thank you for all that. I have to admit I am getting panicky now.

he got a letter on Thurs detailing his suspension and it looks like they are going to try for gross misconduct - they haven't detailed in what way exactly.

ACAS were no good - first time we phoned the woman was saying it counds like they havent followed procedure, phone us back when you get the suspension letter, then when we phoned back a different woman said it sounded like they HAD followed procedure. I dunno what to think now. I personally don't think they did, but what would I know.

A friend of a freind is a lawyer and he is going to have a look at things, speak to an employment law expert and let us know how things will stand. A relative works for social security, she said don't let him resign - nothing can be claimed for 3 months if he resigns. He doesn't want to claim anything though and has applied for 4 jobs already this week.

I have said to DH that we need to sit tight and let him be sacked now. He got a phone call to say his hearing os on Tues. It's disheartening to see someone who has done so much to increase profits for that company be brought so low. Still, he will get through it - he has me.;)