Advice needed please - Interview with police on Tuesday

sexyeyes83

ohreally wrote: »

Why didn't you join a trade union back in May?

All of this started back in April. Would have been too late to join a union after all of this had started. Plus we dont have a union at work, and i wasnt aware there was any unions I could join until someone mentioned it on here.

unluckyone

sexyeyes83 wrote: »

All of this started back in April. Would have been too late to join a union after all of this had started. Plus we dont have a union at work, and i wasnt aware there was any unions I could join until someone mentioned it on here.

hi,

why would this be labelled as indirect sexual discrimination?
i don't think that is correct - same sex couples (male or female) with children may have the same problem meeting the hours.
constructive dismissal prehaps, forcing you to resign because of unreasonable behaviuor but not sexual, i wouldn't have thought anyway.

what is the sitaution with the police?

unluckyone

unluckyone wrote: »

hi,

why would this be labelled as indirect sexual discrimination?
i don't think that is correct - same sex couples (male or female) with children may have the same problem meeting the hours.
constructive dismissal prehaps, forcing you to resign because of unreasonable behaviuor but not sexual, i wouldn't have thought anyway.

what is the sitaution with the police?

if you are already involved in a dispute, i don't think you are allowed to join and ask for support concerning the current dispute.
you would have had to be an existing member.

your best best, is to research facts and research more.
there are some excellent books you can read from the libary, regarding employment issues, business link is a good one to, it will show you what remit of responsibility the employer has.

in my experience, things like this, especially in care, where as soon as your crediability comes into question it is hard to shake it off, very hard indeed.

have you thought about just leaving this fight with your employer and moving on?

unluckyone

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

Woohoo I was right.....

you really are a piece of work aren't you.

the op is looking for advice and support, she doesn't need your rubbish on top of everything else.

go away.

sexyeyes83

unluckyone wrote: »

hi,

why would this be labelled as indirect sexual discrimination?
i don't think that is correct - same sex couples (male or female) with children may have the same problem meeting the hours.
constructive dismissal prehaps, forcing you to resign because of unreasonable behaviuor but not sexual, i wouldn't have thought anyway.

what is the sitaution with the police?

Rebailed 6 times I believe now. Due back on the 9th October. Everytime ive attended ive been advised theres no update and just rebailed.

I had a look into it after someone mentioned indirect sexual discrimination. Ive found a few bits online, but this is probably why I would be best seeking legal advice.

The Sex Discrimination Act enables men and women to challenge a refusal to allow them to work family friendly hours which would enable them to manage family responsibilities. This does not mean that there is an automatic right to change your working pattern. It does mean that you can challenge the refusal, or an imposed change of hours, if you can show that you have been a victim of unlawful sex or marriage discrimination.
Because of the way the law is constructed, men and women have to go about this in different ways:

• A woman could claim indirect sex or marriage discrimination if she wants some form of flexibility for her family responsibilities, and this is unjustifiably refused.

Source

I also found the below article

SACKED FOR REFUSING TO WORK WEEKEND SHIFT


AS A single mother with a two-year-old child Kelly McGoldrick could never have worked 12-hour shifts at weekends.


The 25-year-old had explained her predicament before she started at Priory Park Nursing Home in Paisley, and her boss was happy to take her on. But just three weeks into the job a new manager took over and told her to work the extra hours or face the sack.


"They actually sacked me over the phone," said Ms McGoldrick. "When I said I couldn't work the unsociable hours you could have cut the atmosphere with a knife.
"They made it very difficult for me, but I wasn't prepared to put up with it."
Ms McGoldrick, originally from Glasgow, complained to her union, the GMB, which agreed to sponsor her case.


The young mother claimed she was the victim of sex discrimination and was awarded GBP 13,000 compensation at an employment tribunal last year.
She told the tribunal she had explained at her interview that she could not work weekends as she had no-one to care for her son, Aaron.


"They said we had to cover a 24-hour day, seven days a week," she said.
"They just weren't interested in hearing that I had to balance my work and home life."


The tribunal ruled that Ms McGoldrick had a contractual right to work an agreed shift that enabled her to fulfil her childcare commitments.
George Livie, the tribunal chairman, said: "It is evident that the claimant was put at a particular disadvantage compared to men.


"The tribunal is unable to accept that imposing a unilateral change to the claimant's hours and dismissing her was a justified, proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."


The tribunal concluded she was a victim of indirect sex discrimination as it was common knowledge more women than men had childcare responsibilities
Source

sexyeyes83

unluckyone wrote: »

have you thought about just leaving this fight with your employer and moving on?

Ive thought about it a few times, but not anymore. The way he has handled the whole situation has been very poor. My appeal letter contained 40 points regarding inaccuracies in the investigation, breaches of company policy etc.

Ive done absolutely nothing wrong, and will fight to clear my name.

DON79

Good luck with it all sexyeyes, hope that this gets sorted out for you soon.

BTW have you noticed this??

LinasPilibaitisisbatman
PPR
Serious MoneySaving Fan


Posting Privilieges Restricted!! perhaps has finally overstepped the mark?? About time he was ppr'd! (just my opinion of course! )

ohreally

DON79 wrote: »

BTW have you noticed this??

LinasPilibaitisisbatman
PPR
Serious MoneySaving Fan


Posting Privilieges Restricted!! perhaps has finally overstepped the mark?? About time he was ppr'd! (just my opinion of course! )

Perhaps s/he simply posts under a different user name, perhaps even posting to this very thread.

DON79

ohreally wrote: »

Perhaps s/he simply posts under a different user name, perhaps even posting to this very thread.

And....... so? will still need to watch his step if he is otherwise will just end up the same - ppr'd! :rolleyes:

patman99

As far as I know, if you were reinstated less than 12 weeks after your initial dismissal, it counts as continuation of employment & they have to pay you the same salary you were originally on.