Advice needed please - Interview with police on Tuesday

nexuss

blue_monkey wrote: »

'Tis true. You can be 'creative with your words' but you are not allowed to give a bad reference.

Employers can say 'he/she is a bad time keeper and was always late for work',he/she had xx amount of time sick and was not sutiable for the company',he/she does not act on instructions and cannot work on their own initiative' for example.I know of at least a dozen companies who have given terrible references over the phone to people.

horrifiedreader

Just for the record for the "trolls" who enjoy goading people and posting sarcastic, unhelpful comments.

I am a member of the CIPD which is a Professional Body for people in the Human Resources field.

Until last year, I was a HR Manager but due to my marriage breakdown, I left to give 100% attention to my son.

And yes, I am now an Avon Sales Leader (not just a Rep) because it fits in with my family - not that it is anyone's business.

A company is not allowed to give a bad reference - they can only merely comment on facts and not hearsay. If an ex employee has had disciplinary procedure invoked on them, an employer can state this but it has to be FACT.

Also where persistent absence, poor timekeeping etc is concerned, again providing there is evidence to back this up, an Employer can state this.

And as for the "joke" about wiping the floor with OP's MD - it was just that - a JOKE.

I am fully aware of Employment Legislation - I have spent 3 years completing the CIPD and have 15 years HR experience.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

horrifiedreader wrote: »

Just for the record for the "trolls" who enjoy goading people and posting sarcastic, unhelpful comments.

I am a member of the CIPD which is a Professional Body for people in the Human Resources field.

Until last year, I was a HR Manager but due to my marriage breakdown, I left to give 100% attention to my son.

And yes, I am now an Avon Sales Leader (not just a Rep) because it fits in with my family - not that it is anyone's business.

A company is not allowed to give a bad reference - they can only merely comment on facts and not hearsay. If an ex employee has had disciplinary procedure invoked on them, an employer can state this but it has to be FACT.

Also where persistent absence, poor timekeeping etc is concerned, again providing there is evidence to back this up, an Employer can state this.

And as for the "joke" about wiping the floor with OP's MD - it was just that - a JOKE.

I am fully aware of Employment Legislation - I have spent 3 years completing the CIPD and have 15 years HR experience.

Sorry but a bad reference is a bad reference whether factual or not.:rolleyes:

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

sexyeyes83 wrote: »

I thought that as well Cathryn. Why even consider looking to place a member of staff into another position within the company if they have no trust in you. I was also quite shocked about the four weeks pay in lieu of notice they are giving me.

Regarding the person that had the money stolen - This took place in January and I was suspended. The police looked into the matter and came back with this reply in the notes of the meeting


However in the original report work took, it also stated


I chased this up with work to establish if there was 1 or 2 allegations and they advised there was only one. They said



However, the police interviewed be regarding 2 allegations of theft from this womans house. The original one and also the one a few weeks previous which is where I entered the house during the four day period it went missing. I still find it confusing myself. Work say 1, police say 2 and they both state different amounts of money.
During the meeting on Friday, work stated that this lady always leaves her door open and "would invite anyone into her house, even a woman walking a dog she didnt know"

I know the next step is to appeal the decision, however makes me angry that I need to appeal to keep working for a place that have stated they have no trust in me. I will wait till I have received all the notes/decisions and then speak to an employment soliciator.

You still dont seem to understand that what the police think is entirely seperate from your employer thinks

On the balance of probabilities you have been a recurring party in 2 seperate allegations of theft from different people. Its therefore fair for them to say its not feasible to continue sending you to peoples homes due to the repercussions. I.e if it gets round an alleged thief is working for them then they may see people head to other providers

Llyllyll

sexyeyes83 wrote: »

... I will wait till I have received all the notes/decisions and then speak to an employment soliciator.

Stick with it for as long as you can - this is at best inept managment and at worst bullying. One thing I would add though is not to let this affect your health.

The morally right outcome is very rarely easy to achieve and unfortuntely sometimes has to give way to looking after yourself - as it is clear that caring for staff is not top of your employer's list.

PS - Don't forget to use the 'Ignore' option in these forums - no more posts by LinasPilibaitisisbatman - brilliant

Golden_Anemone

Sorry sexyeyes83 and good luck with the appeal.

BTW, you have to worry about the intelligence of anyone who is told they are being ignored but continues to post. What part of "they can't see you" don't they understand!

Magnolia

Sorry for the outcome sexyeyes83 - I hope you can clear your name with an appeal.

It would be interesting to see the police report from the investigation - if they found no grounds to prosecute then why are the company behaving the way they are

timbellina

Atermis wrote: »

I think you should become an hero and end it all.

only then will i say that i respect the OP.

And your respect is worth having, is it? Something like receiving a birthday card from Nick Griffin, I should imagine.

sexyeyes83

Hi,
Thanks for your replies.

Ive received the reasons for dismissal in the post, however still awaiting a copy of the notes. The dismissal reason stated

I believe that although I cannot be confident that you did not carry out these thefts, it is very unusual to receive such allegations, and the fact that we have received two complaints relating to occasions on which you were present does suggest the likelihood that you were involved. Given the nature of the industry we are involved in, and the vulnerability of the clients, we cannot take the risk of allowing you to go back to work as a carer when such suspicions exist. We have considered whether there is any non client facing work that you could do, where the risk is less, but there is nothing available in the company at the moment.

I regret to say therefore that I believe I have no choice but to dismiss you.

Edit

Reading through the letter again, I also noticed the following

You denied any of the alleged thefts, and questioned whether we could be sure it was you, given that there were possible alternative explanations that it has not been possible to rule out

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Woohoo I was right.....