Sexual discrimination/equal pay issue

michmark

Go to the tribunal, i took my employer to court after i was let go after maternity leave, i used a no win no fee advisor and won! if you think you have a case or think you are being treated unfairly it is always worth it.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

letter of offer received in the post this morning and contacted yday by another company about attending an interview next week :beer:
fair play to the new employer for giving my wife the chance to defend herself and then believing her (i reckon hes delved further into it and asked other senior people in the previous company)

So thats that bit of the IT out the way then.

Would you still reject a 5-10k offer to go away?

hundredk

hundredk wrote: »

woody01 wrote: »

hundredk wrote: »

The new employer should be able to demonstrate a robust selection process was undertaken and why your wife was (prior to taking references) the preferred candidate. If something changed their mind after taking up references, it must be pertinent to the selection process and/or the job description.

If she doesn't receive the offer (and while you're taking everyone to court), consider whether the new employer could be taken to court as there's nothing more to lose.

Ask for written feedback on selection criteria (in which your wife knows she was preferred candiate due to pending offer letter). Also the reasons why she is not now the preferred candidate (only the reference could have changed this). If the reasons for withdrawing the offer are based on lies and/or not relevant to the selection process and/or the job description you may have a chance.

I'm sure some legal bod may come along and pick the bones out of this but I've certainly seen offers withdrawn at reference stage, challenged and subsequently either confirmed the offer or got away with a marginal call.

Of course, if others aren't involved in the interview process, the old boss and new boss could collude to present "facts" that suits both their their causes.

What a strange post!
All of the things that you suggest to ask a prospective employer for, they are under no obligation to give.
When i employ someone, i do not have to give reasons to candidates as to why they were unsucessful.

Not so strange.

As I said, I've seen several situations where applicants have challenged the selection process and changed the outcome from a no to a yes, often, but not always on the grounds of discrimination in one form or another. Similarly I've seen offers made subject to reference, subsequently withdrawn only to be challenged and the offer reinstated. This frequently happens in the public sector but can and does happen in large private sector companies.

Discrimination is illegal and in the case of small companies, whilst the same principles apply it is more difficult to prove because often only one person is involved in selection. However, in larger companies where more than one person is involved in the selection, this is more difficult to cover up. See this thread which relates to discimination/selection.

As a shop steward I would have thought you would be aware of such defences through experience, even if you are not able to cite the legal perspective.

hedger wrote: »

letter of offer received in the post this morning and contacted yday by another company about attending an interview next week :beer:
fair play to the new employer for giving my wife the chance to defend herself and then believing her (i reckon hes delved further into it and asked other senior people in the previous company)

Where you believe you have a good case with nothing to lose and plenty to gain, keep at it and you'll often win (or receive an offer to go away). I would expect such an approach from any TU rep who knows their stuff.

Seems my post was not so strange after all. QED

Puts the IT in a favourable light too. I'd present the re-instated offer to IT to demonstrate the dodgy practices of the old company.

hedger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

So thats that bit of the IT out the way then.

Would you still reject a 5-10k offer to go away?

why wud it be "out of the way"? we believe its now a fundamental point, proving (with now 2 witnesses) that the ex director told blatant lies (and trust me there is no doubt about that now) to falsely discredit my wife. so on the contrary there is a very definite 4th tribunal winging its way to the ex employer. as ive said all along, if they want to try and be smart or devious then we dont have anything to lose

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

why wud it be "out of the way"? we believe its now a fundamental point, proving (with now 2 witnesses) that the ex director told blatant lies (and trust me there is no doubt about that now) to falsely discredit my wife. so on the contrary there is a very definite 4th tribunal winging its way to the ex employer. as ive said all along, if they want to try and be smart or devious then we dont have anything to lose

I cant wait....

Its the most interesting thread on the whole site.

As she hasnt been inhibited & she received the offer, have you considered you may be reading to much into this?

Just a thought as its not often I come across one professional (new employer) speaking to someone they have known for years (old employer) about someone they dont know (your wife) & asking for their thoughts on her... Then obviously taking the word of the total stranger & going against the persons comments & employing someone reportedly hell bent on financially destorying a recession suffering business by calling the sexist card. Then promising to put all this bad ex-employers private dicussions in writing to an IT.

Me thinks you definately have, or are presenting, the wrong end of the stick.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

if they want to try and be smart or devious then we dont have anything to lose

You have been looking to go the Sexual IT route since before redundancy. They done the right thing for everyone (including your wife) by getting rid of her in a redundancy situation.

It may be fortunate for you that they could of made mistakes in the process. We have only your side.

But, I think its probably you that thinks your being smart not them.

hedger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

You have been looking to go the Sexual IT route since before redundancy. They done the right thing for everyone (including your wife) by getting rid of her in a redundancy situation.

It may be fortunate for you that they could of made mistakes in the process. We have only your side.

But, I think its probably you that thinks your being smart not them.

no harm to you but u are talkin pure keek - i know its hard to digest all the goings on but there was only one man who wanted rid of my wife - the real company reps know she was very very good at her job -you may say "u wud say that" but once again we have envidence of that, right to the top of the company.....

hedger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

I cant wait....

Its the most interesting thread on the whole site.

As she hasnt been inhibited & she received the offer, have you considered you may be reading to much into this?

Just a thought as its not often I come across one professional (new employer) speaking to someone they have known for years (old employer) about someone they dont know (your wife) & asking for their thoughts on her... Then obviously taking the word of the total stranger & going against the persons comments & employing someone reportedly hell bent on financially destorying a recession suffering business by calling the sexist card. Then promising to put all this bad ex-employers private dicussions in writing to an IT.

Me thinks you definately have, or are presenting, the wrong end of the stick.

u didnt see this one coming did u 1984? no end of the stick here my friend - just telling the truth.
we are not "hell bent" on anything. for the 1000th time, my wife was shafted during all of this (a plethora of managers/directors will confirm). it will go to tribunal imo and they can weigh up the facts - she has nothing to hide and trust me the company has plenty to hide.

woody01

Pete111 wrote: »

Please don't try to get Woody PPR'd. His posts re employment law issues provide a genuinely useful perspective for potential claimants/grievances. (No bull, I actually mean that)

Basically if the employer is going to fight/wriggle/throw the kitchen sink at the employee then woody will provide exactly the type of thought processes that the employer will be having within his posts.

Sometimes I even agree with his views. (Other times I do not!) but although he can be extremely harsh and personal, it's very useful nevertheless.

P

Zazen999 wrote: »

I agree. I very rarely agree with Woody however, he will always play the equivalent of 'devil's advocate'.

At times he is spot on, though.....

At last realisation....
I play the 'devils advocate' on purpose to show the other side of the coin.
this is NOT how i would treat my employees, but i have seen alot of the things here many times before.
Also, Pete/Zara, i have toned it down considerably for both of your benefits as it became quickly obvious that you are reasonable and intelligent people. So, in that case, deserving of respectful responses.

As for Never-In-Doubt.........he is all hot air and deserves nothing.
The idiot flexes some kind of E-Peen here and assumes people are interested.
All he manages to do is swear and make himself look more stupid (if that is at all possible.....he is also a special kind of keyboard warrior which is also highly amusing.
I would have my next ten years wages on it that he:
a). Lives with his mum/sister (though likely to be the same person)
b). Stands in front of the mirror in her clothes when she is out
c). Keeps his curtains closed all day (know what i mean)?
d). Has a girlfriend with staples through her middle

and with alll this 'nob' talk it makes me wonder what is on his mind all day....suspect don't you think?

The more he retorts...the more you know you get to him...this is why the swearing starts..........im happy to let him post 4-5 of his 'hissy-fit' nob posts and then respond with something his mind doesn't grasp) (which is amazingly easy....it's so amusing....c'mon N-I-D, can you get more pathetic....(of course he can)

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

u didnt see this one coming did u 1984? no end of the stick here my friend - just telling the truth.
we are not "hell bent" on anything. for the 1000th time, my wife was shafted during all of this (a plethora of managers/directors will confirm). it will go to tribunal imo and they can weigh up the facts - she has nothing to hide and trust me the company has plenty to hide.

Like I said before.

You need to think of a figure that you would be happy to take off them.

Please quote & put that figure here >>> <<< for all to see.


Your wife, following your misguided advice & understanding of the law, made noises about unfair pay & sexual discrimination at the worst possible time in the worst possible manner.

They got rid of her & it was the best thing to do for everyone. Its just a matter of cash & you moving on & even before she was made redundant you were after a case. These are the repercussions of your actions, like it or lump it, this is what happens.

Prior to her redundancy you had no case.