Shock Suspension and Disciplinary Hearing Ahead - Please Help

hothothot_3

sgtpepper wrote: »

Also during the 2 month suspension i have not received payment so i wrote to the manager pointing this out but still have not got a reply.

.

Suspended for 2 months!??

Unless it is in the contract of employment that they specifically will not pay you during a suspension period, they have to pay you.

You have the same employment rights when suspended from work, and if they have not paid you, you can consider an employment tribunal claim for "unlawful deduction from wages"

DVardysShadow

Anihilator wrote: »

Word against Word isnt not allowed although its unlikely. They have to prove it on the balance of probabilities. If they have statements from staff saying you did then its not going in your gavour.

Also they have to suspend you and do a proper investigation. Its very rare for companies to just sack on the spot as the law is geared in your favour.

Ultimately if they have staff saying you drunk it you arent going to win and will only end up with a dismissal for theft against you.

Yes you may be able to take them to a tribunial for not following a proper procedure but you wouldnt get a penny as you would have been contributory due to your theft.

Do please make more of an effort to distinguish allegation from fact.

DVardysShadow

Anihilator wrote: »

Sorry but they dont need to convince staff to go on record. If a staffmember is asked to give a statement of what they witnessed the staff will need to do it. This statement may or may not suit you.

So indirect hearsay is OK? It is good enough that they say that someone said, without being put to the test of showing that someone said it?

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you mean to be helpful, but I think your kind of defeatism was very much frowned upon on the home front during the last war.

ohreally

Anihilator wrote: »

If a staffmember is asked to give a statement of what they witnessed the staff will need to do it.

They need do no such thing. If they don't wish to provide a statement they are free to politely decline any such request.

Savvy_Sue

I think the main thing is that the OP should know how things SHOULD be done (reading the ACAS site should help with this), but don't tell the employer they are doing it wrong if they are.

You've already got them on a wrong foot by not paying you during your suspension. If they decide to fire you without doing a 'proper' disciplinary, you will at least be able to take them to an ET.

Anihilator

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Do please make more of an effort to distinguish allegation from fact.

Employment law is on the probabilities. If the employer has statements - note plural - stating they drunk then it is going to be treated as fact in any legal action (other than criminal)

Anihilator

DVardysShadow wrote: »

So indirect hearsay is OK? It is good enough that they say that someone said, without being put to the test of showing that someone said it?

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you mean to be helpful, but I think your kind of defeatism was very much frowned upon on the home front during the last war.

What are you on about?

If employees present are asked to describe what they saw what part of this is hearsay?

If the employer doesnt have any more than one person saying it fair enough but if they have multiple employees stating he drunk the spirits then what part of it do you think will possibly be sucessful.

cheekychappy

From my experience of conducting discipinaries, the allegation and level of seriousness, ie conduct, gross misconduct must be stated on the initial letter. Suspension should be on full pay, but the invetsigation should be as swift as possible as it no company likes paying someone to be at home. No notice is required to attend an investigation, but at least 24hrs must be given for a discplinary hearing. Why is it taking two months to get one witness statement, which witnesses cannot be compelled to give? Again balance of probability is the deciiding factor, so if you admit to the jokey drinking, then you are making their decision easy. You can adjourn in any hearing at anytime for whatever reason you like. I have adjourned after 32 pages of notes and an aching wrist or the discussion very heated ! Take a trained colleague with you, or a union rep with you. You can't ake a union rep to an investigation hearing, but you can to the discpilinary hearing if you follow.

sgtpepper_2

Can i clear something up...

I did not drink anything, there is no missing alcohol and as far as i'm aware the few people that the jokey gesture was aimed at did not say anything about it.

sgtpepper_2

cheekychappy wrote: »

From my experience of conducting discipinaries, the allegation and level of seriousness, ie conduct, gross misconduct must be stated on the initial letter. Suspension should be on full pay, but the invetsigation should be as swift as possible as it no company likes paying someone to be at home. No notice is required to attend an investigation, but at least 24hrs must be given for a discplinary hearing. Why is it taking two months to get one witness statement, which witnesses cannot be compelled to give? Again balance of probability is the deciiding factor, so if you admit to the jokey drinking, then you are making their decision easy. You can adjourn in any hearing at anytime for whatever reason you like. I have adjourned after 32 pages of notes and an aching wrist or the discussion very heated ! Take a trained colleague with you, or a union rep with you. You can't ake a union rep to an investigation hearing, but you can to the discpilinary hearing if you follow.

2 months did seem excessive, and i'm not part of a union and don't know any union reps.
The one person i trust at work is polish with little and broken english and don't think would be of much use to argue my case with me.