16yr old's right to be accompanied

glossgal

Contrary to what some have inferred based on my earlier comment I am a strong advocate of employees rights BUT I am also a realist. If you are guilty of theft and you get sacked your credibility is gone-you won't get your job back, you won't get a good reference and you won't get compensation (you can't be wrongfully dismissed if guilty of gross misconduct). These are the only viable reasons for appealing a dismissal.

As for rights, a 16 yr old can legally enter into a contract so long as it doesnt disadvantage them and they don't work over 8 hours a day. They have no right to be accompanied by a friend or relative as applies to any worker, they can ask but as as is the consesus here the employer is unlikely to approve it.

HO87

glossgal wrote: »

you can't be wrongfully dismissed if guilty of gross misconduct.

As it is entirely likely that the disciplinary procedures - set out in a handbook, for example, - form an integral part of the contract of employment then if that procedure is not followed then it may well constitute a breach of that contract and thereby be "wrongful". The process by which "guilt" was established (based on a "reasonable belief") would, nevertheless, still have to be "reasonable" and this includes the appeals process set out in the overall procedure.

glossgal wrote: »

As for rights, a 16 yr old can legally enter into a contract so long as it doesnt disadvantage them and they don't work over 8 hours a day. They have no right to be accompanied by a friend or relative as applies to any worker, they can ask but as as is the consesus here the employer is unlikely to approve it.

I basically agree but there is absolutely nothing wrong in the employee asking the question. Each case should, after all, be examined on its merits.

In the case I referred to the allegations against the member of staff were serious and, to a degree, complicated. It was entirely proper that they were accompanied - if only to be able to manage the amount of paperwork that had to be examined - during a number of fact-finding interviews and disciplinary meeting. The staff member concerned's workplace colleagues were all involved to a greater or lesser degree in the paperwork chain and they felt unable to accompany the staff member. The staff member was not in the union and rather than leave them unaccompanied it was considered appropriate in that case for them to be accompanied by their father. The staff member was somewhat older than 16.

In the instant case the employer may be persuaded in the same direction and if the request is not made may not go through that thought process.

Mothermoo_2

Uncertain wrote: »

Once again this forum is being spoilt by by people rushing to judgement and "answering" question that have not been asked!

The OP asked a perfectly reasonable factual question which a couple of people have taken the trouble to answer.

The others have formed seewping judgements that were not asked for, without the benefit of the facts!

Thanks all for your replies, much obliged. Yes, Uncertain is right, I was asked my opinion by his Mum and had no idea as to the legal side, so wondered what the 'right' answer was, privately I admit to thinking he did it, mainly because he has stolen before from his last employer, also because he thinks it's all hilarious :rolleyes: and I personally believe anyone who steals deserves to be sacked - however, I am pretty sure the Tribunal wouldn't care what I thought, so it seemed irrelevant