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

Sublime_2

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.

This is all unsubstantiated. There is no hard evidence.

Zazen999

Sublime wrote: »

This is all unsubstantiated. There is no hard evidence.

They don't need any - it's not a prosecution. They just have to believe that it happened.

robredz

Zazen999 wrote: »

They don't need any - it's not a prosecution. They just have to believe that it happened.

As in dismiss first, and calculate the risk of having to justify at tribunal later.

Sublime_2

TBH the OP's probably better off not working there if thats what they're like.

I hope he does take them to a tribunal.

pitkin2020

Anihilator you are a (FILL IN THE BLANK) its untrue at times, i have read many post and your name pops up way too much with useless tripe thats not constructive and is just pure (FILL IN THE BLANK) at times. GO AND GET A LIFE YOU SAD (FILL IN THE BLANK)

Anyway to the OP hope it pans out for you in the end must be an agonising wait especially when you know you are in the right, just keep telling yourself it is procedure and they have to follow it. Remain calm when you get called back in no matter the verdict, you can always appeal, remember that.
It sounds like the drugs side they know they dont have a leg to stand on so that will be a side issue, but the threatening behaviour is (Could be) classed as Gross Misconduct (not that you were), but any decent manager will see wheter its true or not its 1 persons word against another regardless of the witnesses, mainly due to everyone being under the influence.
With regards to the drugs it would be down to the company to prove it, you have made it clear you will undergo any test to prove that allegation and it should have been stated (And signed by those present) in the minutes taken at your 1st hearing. I would also take the time to go through your company handbook specifically if they an Alcohol and Drugs policy and make sure they have followed there own procedure for such complaints.

Once you return for the decision if you receive anything other than "no Further Action" you need to appeal, if it is a verbal warning, you need to get your appeal in writing sharpish. Within the appeal state any procedures from the drugs policy that were not followed to the letter!! Anything else you may feel that is also relevant, victimisation is a good one to use aswell!!

As a side note i see you mentioned you would be hard to be replaced, never think that the only person that cant be replaced in any business is the owner!! and thats only because they call the shots, no one is expendable!!

Good luck

pitkin2020

Sublime wrote: »

TBH the OP's probably better off not working there if thats what they're like.

I hope he does take them to a tribunal.

he should take them to a tribunal when this is over, he MUST not resign those as that would look like a sign of guilt.
Take them to a tribunal, you win they will make your life hell, take them to the tribunal again and they will pay you to leave!!

Zazen999

robredz wrote: »

As in dismiss first, and calculate the risk of having to justify at tribunal later.

No! I just grabbed a piece off the internet to show you what I mean....

What would a tribunal consider in deciding whether a dismissal for gross misconduct was fair?

A range of factors, including for instance:

• did you have a genuine belief in the employee's guilt
• was it reasonable to hold this belief from your investigation
• how thoroughly did you investigate the alleged offence
• was the employee given all of the information that had been gathered as part of the investigation
• did you give the employee an opportunity to state his (or her) case
• were they entitled to be accompanied by a work colleague or trade union representative
• did you hold a disciplinary hearing, chaired by someone who was impartial
• did you warn the employee they were to attend a disciplinary hearing
• did you give them time to prepare for the disciplinary hearing
• was the offence gross misconduct, as set out in your disciplinary procedures, and was the employee aware of the penalty that could be imposed as a result of that misconduct
• were there mitigating circumstances or other facts that should have been taken into account, eg health or domestic problems, provocation or ignorance
• were alternatives to dismissal considered
• to what extent was a similar penalty invoked in similar cases
• was the employee informed of his right of appeal and given an opportunity to appeal against the decision to dismiss

From what the OP says; the further they investigate the MORE they could find evidence that leads them to believe that the OP is doing drugs.

To sack someone for gross misconduct, the employer needs to believe that they did 'it'. They don't need 100% watertight evidence to prove it - as this is not a court of law. It's not 'guilty until proven innocent'; if something happens, they suspend and investigate. If the investigation shows that they are likely to have done it, or that the employer still believes that they have done it; then they can sack under gross misconduct.

I still believe that the office girl made an unofficial complaint about the OP's offering to supply; and the management have been told to keep an eye open; and the sales manager hit the big time when he followed the OP into the loos.

I know everyone here wants to berate Anihilator but he is taking the position that someone investigating this case c/would take. If the OP wants fuzzy hugs; rather than information that could perhaps help him prepare for the coming weeks; then perhaps this was not the right place for him.

poet123

I agree 100% with the above post, and also wonder why one post by a certain person was deleted for use of bad language, yet post 247 is still in situ and has been thanked by others?

Double standards?

There are always two sides to every story and human nature dictates that as the "wronged party" the OP will put his spin on the detail, I have heard enough of these types of issues to know that very rarely is it so cut and dried. The Op would do well to consder all aspects of what could be thrown at him by those who are used to dealing with such issues.

pitkin2020

poet123 wrote: »

I agree 100% with the above post, and also wonder why one post by a certain person was deleted for use of bad language, yet post 247 is still in situ and has been thanked by others?

Double standards?

There are always two sides to every story and human nature dictates that as the "wronged party" the OP will put his spin on the detail, I have heard enough of these types of issues to know that very rarely is it so cut and dried. The Op would do well to consder all aspects of what could be thrown at him by those who are used to dealing with such issues.

stop being padantic i **** mine out and it was aimed at the most unhelpful person on this forum, get a grip

EDIT:whilst my post may have 1 edited bad word it is actually finished off with some constructive words of advice!!!

poet123

I am not being pedantic, and if you knew what that meant (or how to spell it!)you would not level that charge at me. The other poster has been villified and had posts deleted for using bad language and namecalling, yet you indulge in the same behaviour and others thank you. That post also contained the venom you accused the other poster of displaying.

Those are double standards whether you acknowledge that or not.

I may not agree with how that poster frames some of his responses, but as has been said he is probably helping the OP to face up to what will be thrown at him by others who do not swallow whole any line they are fed.

With regard to your advice, it is only constructive if the OP has indeed been victimised, there is nothing constructive in advising someone to claim something which is not necessarily true.