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

mikey72

rupee99 wrote: »

I'd still fancy Denning, in his current state even tough he's been dead more than 10 years, against Anihilator. :rotfl:

Quote from a different thread about Anihilator, well worth repeating.

smcaul wrote: »

I do look forward to reading your posts, what wonderful works of complete fiction they are.

But just out of interest, do your replies just come naturally, or do you actually go away and research your replies, just make sure that you are offering complete utter nonsense? because if it is the former, then there is the real possibility that one of these days, completely by accident, you might actually be giving advice that is correct!!!

robredz

mikey72 wrote: »

Quote from a different thread about Anihilator, well worth repeating.

He has actually posted a couple of useful contributions on this thread along with the bile.

jaffacakes82

I find it a bit odd HR are asking you to see someone in Occupational Health whilst suspended during a Disciplinary. Perhaps they're seeing if you attend that meeting, and if you do, will wonder why you couldn't have made Mondays meeting.

Are they insisting you go or is it another 'suggestion' from them?

mikey72

robredz wrote: »

He has actually posted a couple of useful contributions on this thread along with the bile.

"former" option then.

gilligansyle

Hi, having seen this thread in its early days, I had not realised it was still going on.

Without getting into the rights and wrongs of the case, this is definitely a case of your card being marked with the company now and are probably better off out of it.
I was in a situation at work and long story short, most of it not relevant, but I eventually claimed harassment against a manager, so the company terminated my contract.
Fortunately I was in a Union who paid for legal advice, and the way it was explained to me about taking them to a tribunal was that they could and would bring up every single petty little thing that had happened over the 12 years I had been there. Even though I had a very good case and would probably win, the eventual compensation was limited by law and would take into account anything that could be construed as 'contributing factors'. Comments that were part of normal office banter could be relayed as fact etc. Sometimes its just not worth the fight and depending on what happens at the meeting, it may be worth thinking about.

Hope it all works out ok anyway.

robredz

mikey72 wrote: »

"former" option then.

Mostly, I would say he is not of the Denning school of common sense where someone who comes to a nuisance is at fault, I think he subscribes to the banker buying house by farm and complains about the cockerel so council order farmer to neck the cockerel or be done for causing and permitting a nuisance scenario.

daska

Actually Anihilator is incorrect. If the OP were a 'smackhead' or indeed indulged regularly in coke or many other substances, a hair strand test would provide evidence of this, or alternatively prove that the accusation has no foundation. Given that Family Courts rely on them to decide whether parents might be putting their children at risk I would have thought the reliability of the test should satisfy an employer. The only problem is the cost.

rosered1963

jaffacakes82 wrote: »

I find it a bit odd HR are asking you to see someone in Occupational Health whilst suspended during a Disciplinary. Perhaps they're seeing if you attend that meeting, and if you do, will wonder why you couldn't have made Mondays meeting.

Are they insisting you go or is it another 'suggestion' from them?

Hi OP - I have been following your thread. I agree with what Jaffacakes has said above. Also, the OH person will become aware that 1. you were on ADs before this trouble happened and 2. were drinking on the night out while taking them. Agree with the others who have said to be very careful what you say to the OH person.

I am no Employment law expert myself, but I did work for a well known and supposedly well-respected employer for ten years, and I'm afraid I saw many people railroaded out who had done nothing wrong because someone took a dislike to them. It was disgraceful, but if they wanted someone out, they always found a way.

I just wanted to say that before you decide to fight this to the bitter end, think of yourself, your wife, your mental health and your future career and think what the desired ideal outcome of all this would be for you. What do you want to happen? Your employer is fighting very dirty. Would you want to work for them anyway now? Is a good reference from them critical for you to move on to another job? If you decide to fight on, you need expert help and fast. BTW, Annilator is rather a good devil's advocate, IMO - I think he has made some useful points.

Just some thoughts and good luck to you

DirectDebacle

rosered1963 wrote: »

Hi OP - I have been following your thread. I agree with what Jaffacakes has said above. Also, the OH person will become aware that 1. you were on ADs before this trouble happened and 2. were drinking on the night out while taking them. Agree with the others who have said to be very careful what you say to the OH person.

We are just speculating ( I include myself) as to HR/OH motives.

I don't think this is a 'turn up' test. The OP is off with acute anxiety not a sprained ankle. There is a world of difference between attending a medical appointment where you may be seeing a friendly face and receiving advice and assistance to help you through a difficult time than to attending a meeting with the accusers you perceive to be the cause of your distress.

In my speculative opinion I think if the motive is not the genuine welfare of the OP then it is HR belatedly trying to cover themselves.

They should have treated this as a welfare issue from the outset and not pursued a discipline after such an inadequate investigation. Maybe they are looking down the road and thinking 'tribunal'.

If OH are not aware of previous AD prescription then the OP, as you rightly point out, needs to be careful with the info he gives.

pitkin2020

They really have in it for you don't they. They have gone so far with this there is no way back now and all they can do is follow it through to the end. Like I said before it looks like they want you gone for what ever reason. They can't sack you just for the drugs, just for the stress, just for the quailty of your work, but they can when they look at the whole picture and all these problems are brought together.
Agression in the workplace and the standard of your work is going to be their opening lines, they will then add in the allegations of drugs use, threatening behaviour to a manager and now your time off for stress.
They have got occupational health in so they can get a clearer picture of your health, which they can dismiss you for under the capability at work act, they are not obliged to help you through your problems like they maybe with the other member of staff you mentioned.

To be honest the way this has gone I very much doubt the company is going to back down now as they just appear to be getting more and more on you to make the case larger and not actually dismiss you for a single reason but several smaller reasons.

As already mentioned be very careful with what you say to OH, I don't think its going to save your job but it could make a very big difference if it gets to a tribunal. Keep all correspondance from the company aswell as I suspect that they haven't actually followed their prodcedures throughout this whole saga and it will trip them up at a tribunal.

It's hard to look at this from the outside as at the end of the day it comes down to the manager taking the disciplinary and he may decide thats it's far easier to make this all go away as a lot of it is just tit for tat, draw a line under it and move on. It could go either way.

Best of luck.