help. Xmas do... suspected of doing DRUGS!!!!!!

blue_monkey_2

robredz wrote: »

On the flimsy tittle tattle evidence the manager could give, he would probably have his own collar felt by the old bill for wasting police time, mind you, one troll-like or possibly orcish contributor to this thread would have any OP bang to rights and stitched up like a kipper for merely asking advice.

Same on this one too.... http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1620163

Sublime_2

This didn't happen in company time though. The fact that this stemmed from him being heard "sniffing" is what makes it ludicrous.

The aggression from the OP came after what was said, and done by his colleagues. Perhaps that is the reaction they wanted.

Anihilator

Sublime wrote: »

This didn't happen in company time though. The fact that this stemmed from him being heard "sniffing" is what makes it ludicrous.

The aggression from the OP came after what was said, and done by his colleagues. Perhaps that is the reaction they wanted.

Sorry but there is plenty of case law and regular legal advice to beware at office functions as you can still be dismissed as a result.

The OP's discliplinary is based on 2 different charges

1) The sniffing/drugs
2) The sustained aggressive and threatening behaviour.

These are two different charges and the OP could be dismissed for one regardless of guilt on the other.

The OP has slight mitigation however this does not justify sustained aggressive and threatening behaviourr. If this is proven on the balance of probabilities. i.e 2 managers state he was then the OP is gone.

The fact he "jokingly" offered colleagues drugs means even the 1st one is probably provable

The OP is going to be extremely lucky to keep his job here and if he goes in ranting and raving about a fit up etc he will not help his cause.

Its quite clear from his posts the OP is now reeping what he has sown during his time at the organisation.

aj2703

Anihilator wrote: »

Sorry but there is plenty of case law and regular legal advice to beware at office functions as you can still be dismissed as a result.

The OP's discliplinary is based on 2 different charges

1) The sniffing/drugs
2) The sustained aggressive and threatening behaviour.

These are two different charges and the OP could be dismissed for one regardless of guilt on the other.

The OP has slight mitigation however this does not justify sustained aggressive and threatening behaviourr. If this is proven on the balance of probabilities. i.e 2 managers state he was then the OP is gone.

The fact he "jokingly" offered colleagues drugs means even the 1st one is probably provable

The OP is going to be extremely lucky to keep his job here and if he goes in ranting and raving about a fit up etc he will not help his cause.

Its quite clear from his posts the OP is now reeping what he has sown during his time at the organisation.

You are such a prat. Have a nice day.:D

robredz

Anihilator wrote: »

Sorry but there is plenty of case law and regular legal advice to beware at office functions as you can still be dismissed as a result.

The OP's discliplinary is based on 2 different charges

1) The sniffing/drugs
2) The sustained aggressive and threatening behaviour.

These are two different charges and the OP could be dismissed for one regardless of guilt on the other.

The OP has slight mitigation however this does not justify sustained aggressive and threatening behaviourr. If this is proven on the balance of probabilities. i.e 2 managers state he was then the OP is gone.

The fact he "jokingly" offered colleagues drugs means even the 1st one is probably provable

The OP is going to be extremely lucky to keep his job here and if he goes in ranting and raving about a fit up etc he will not help his cause.

Its quite clear from his posts the OP is now reeping what he has sown during his time at the organisation.

But as the police were not called, and people were drunk, the best thing would be for HR to conclude no case to answer, if they had been called perhaps the managers would have been arrested for a public order offence, as when things get out of hand they will arrest first and sort it out down the station. Had this happenned, and no drugs were found where would it leave the managers? Police were not involved, and nothing is provable beyond tittle tattle, sorry the word of 2 managers who were p****d.

Are you trying to even the score regarding the link in the post
by blue monkey? also does your name imply that you are a member of the Troll and Orc clans of the Horde, sworn to defend the crossroads at Ogremor?

Surely we are here to help, not gloat and worry an OP with extremely negative posts.

Princess_Jane

gozaimasu wrote: »

'Fraid not; I got sacked. When a company has it in for you, they throw you out the door as fast they can.

Merry Christmas

I'm sorry that happened to you but it doesn't always turn out like that.

I was landed in the disciplinary process by a unpleasant former manager used to bullying young kids who didn't understand employment law.

Luckily I'm a union member, so I got my rep involved, stuck to my guns and an official hearing with a company solicitor ruled he was in the wrong.

My colleagues were all delighted someone stood up to him and I even got a cheer when I returned to work.

Things were much better after that and work no longer felt like a battleground.

OP you may have more supporters than you think, but I can't emphasise enough how vital the support of the union was to me.

The look of shock and horror on his face as my union rep calmly shot down his accusations in the initial hearing I will treasure for ever.

Zazen999

robredz wrote: »

Surely we are here to help, not gloat and worry an OP with extremely negative posts.

Sorry, but it would be better would it not to prepare the OP to answer potential queries and point out different angles that might come up over the course of this affair; rather than all just tell him that the sales manager is an ar.se and give him a false sense of security.

Employers do not have to have proof - the only have to have a genuine belief that the OP had committed 'gross misconduct'; not proof. So the OP would have been wise to try and clear their name rather than wait for the employer to prove that the OP had committed GM.

robredz

Zazen999 wrote: »

Sorry, but it would be better would it not to prepare the OP to answer potential queries and point out different angles that might come up over the course of this affair; rather than all just tell him that the sales manager is an ar.se and give him a false sense of security.

Employers do not have to have proof - the only have to have a genuine belief that the OP had committed 'gross misconduct'; not proof. So the OP would have been wise to try and clear their name rather than wait for the employer to prove that the OP had committed GM.

You have a good point, but Anihilator takes things to extreme sometimes, in a manner befitting the Spanish Inquisition. On the other hand as you point out he may be of service, because dealing with the problem may be easier than dealing with the Anihiliator

Zazen999

robredz wrote: »

You have a good point, but Anihilator takes things to extreme sometimes, in a manner befitting the Spanish Inquisition. On the other hand as you point out he may be of service, because dealing with the problem may be easier than dealing with the Anihiliator

Exactly. Think of him/her as Devil's Advocate. :eek:

robredz

Zazen999 wrote: »

Exactly. Think of him/her as Devil's Advocate. :eek:

Problem is he upsets many, and is regarded as a troll by some, end of, even though he has his uses sometimes he goes just that little bit too far.