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

firesidemaid

just re-found this thread that i had replied to a while back - i really can't believe it is all still happening!?

i have just read back through a few pages. it seems to me that anyone in your company could accuse anyone else of drug use and it would have to go through all this? o/wise you are being discriminated against. they seem to have no evidence whatsoever and have not tried to obtain any either ie. drug testing.

has anyone else in your company ever been disciplined before for drug or alcohol abuse? or are you aware of anyone in the company abusing these substances? rememer, that info i linked to a while back that even if you were a drug user they would have to see it as a medical condition etc? so, if you are not a drug user how can that make it worse?

i agree with ACAS re. it being a strange situation - what has happened re. their legal aid? this has got way out of hand as another poster has said.

definitely add the info re. what the manager said to you re. your wife - that is racism and has got to be in breach of your company equality and diversity policy.

have they advised you that you are entitled to be accompanied at any disciplinary meeting and who are you taking with you?

what have your most recent appraisals etc been like? i assume nobody discussed drug use at these?! if all these people are coming out of the 'statement' woodwork re. drug use, why did they not mention it earlier if they thought it was so bad.

please try not to stress too much - let us know how it goes/how you are.

pitkin2020

As I said a before there is absoulty no point in seeking a lawyers advice until dismissal, they will not give you the time of day until that point as until the OP is dismissed there is no case!! Yes some may give you a 30 mins free consultation but what ever they tell you will be of no use, they could clearly say to the OP what they have on you legally is of no use you they can't sack you. The company can still sack him if they see fit and they can sack him for any reason they choose.
It would then be upto the op (or any other person for that matter) to decide was it unfair dismissal or not, if yes you then take them to a tribunal where the case will be heard.

Its hilarious how some of you think a company can not sack anyone they like when in reality they can, obviously there will be concesquences to an unfair dismissal but some companies may think its easier to just get rid of a nuisance even though they know it will go to a tribunal. Most of the time they will make an offering of a settlement figure before the case is even heard and its done and dealt with for a few K.

If the company is smart in dealing with this (from their side) the drugs issue will be a side issue, a contributing factor into the dismissal where the main reason will be the other problems the OP has pointed out about his work standard and aggression in the workplace. Anyone with half a brain will know that if he got sacked for "speculation of drug taking out side of company time" the tribunal would wipe the floor with the OP's company.

jaffacakes82

I agree with the Lawyer advice, they won't really be interested in hearing about a case unless an Employee has been officially dismissed. Lawyers will be fully aware that during a Disciplinary period, Employees WILL return to work... they won't want to have wasted 30/60 minutes with them when they could have been seeing clients who actually need a Lawyer asap.

Good Luck with the OH meeting tomorrow OP, don't forget to take along your prescription for you AD's and your sick note if you haven't already handed it in.

andygb

jaffacakes82 wrote: »

I agree with the Lawyer advice, they won't really be interested in hearing about a case unless an Employee has been officially dismissed. Lawyers will be fully aware that during a Disciplinary period, Employees WILL return to work... they won't want to have wasted 30/60 minutes with them when they could have been seeing clients who actually need a Lawyer asap.

Good Luck with the OH meeting tomorrow OP, don't forget to take along your prescription for you AD's and your sick note if you haven't already handed it in.

I went to an employment lawyer ten years ago, when I was being bullied at work (not to this extent though). I did not have to pay for the initial meeting, it was a half hour free consultation (there was no legal aid involved either). Many law firms are finding the present economic situation hard, so they will judge each case on its merits.
I would think that a good solicitor would start a case based on constructive dismissal, where your diary of events, starting with the outrageous original incident, will be seen as the catalyst for everything which happened afterwards.
People like this manager, and the firm who seem to stand by him, need to be shown that not everyone will be happy to take this kind of abuse.
You may need to take some more legal advice, and I would suggest going on to the Law Society website, to see which firms in your area specialise in employment law.
Please PM me if you need any more advice, I am not a lawyer but have worked in the legal field for nearly twenty years.
Andy

bristol_pilot

The company might be concerned that the OP is about to resign and claim constructive dismissal. Submitting his own grievance, followed by the sick note would fit with that. The company would be keen to get him to OH asap as they might suspect such a resignation to be imminent. Humiliating a colleague in front of a group of colleagues and unwarranted disciplinary action are both standard reasons for successful claims of constructive dismissal.

Resigning and claiming constructive dismissal might actually be the best course of action, but it may be that the OP has left it too long to resign. It is vital - I re-iterate - that the OP consults a lawyer asap. Whilst it is plain that a claim for unfair dismissal cannot be made until an employee is dismissed, there are many other matters such as possible defamation and possible constructive dismissal on which professional legal advice could be of benefit immediately. I am also concerned at the OP's apparent lack of skill in putting his case forward. The OP is quite young, has depression and advocacy may not be part of his day job. Having paid-for professional advice from someone who is experienced yet emotionally uninvolved would be invaluable, IMO.

ziggy101

Hi,

First time post - just wanted to say this sounds like a mutiny to get the OP out of the company.

We don't know both sides of the story but I'm pretty convinced by the OP's version of events and feel that he's probably not very well liked - what my friends would call a "soft c0ck".

I wish the OP all the best in his meeting to sort it out - but I would also encourage him to ask for a redundancy package if they want to get rid of him.

rupee99

bristol_pilot wrote: »

......... Having paid-for professional advice from someone who is experienced yet emotionally uninvolved would be invaluable, IMO.

Presumably you mean unemotionally involved. In my experience professionals of all types tend work better if they are detached from the matters in hand, a sort of being able to see the woods for the trees type of thing.

On the substantive point it should not do any harm seeing a lawyer, especially to have some ammunition but I get the feeling that it might be a double edged sword in the OP's hands, i.e. he may reveal something that it would not be in his best interests, such as threatening to resign and explicitly saying he will go for "constructive dismissal."

bristol_pilot

rupee99 wrote: »

On the substantive point it should not do any harm seeing a lawyer, especially to have some ammunition but I get the feeling that it might be a double edged sword in the OP's hands, i.e. he may reveal something that it would not be in his best interests, such as threatening to resign and explicitly saying he will go for "constructive dismissal."

Indeed, I share your concern. It is to be hoped that the OP would actually follow any legal advice received and would not threaten to resign.

robredz

I would concur with rupee99, and bristol_pilot, Op should not under any circumstances give any indication of thoughts or intention of resignation. Constructive dismissal is harder to prove than using anyammunition already provided gratis by manager and HR if he was to be dismissed. He should listen to what they are saying and point out that the whole situation has been brought about by manager, who is now subject to an official grievance procedure, and evidence he (manager) has presented is based on a drunken incident outside work jurisdiction, and tittle tattle, causing you undue distress, and harm, as a consequence. I'm sure other elements can be added imho.

DirectDebacle

Here are links to a couple of items that the OP may find useful.

The first is an article written by an HR professional for The Times Higher Education and deals with criminal/discipline matters.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=405028&sectioncode=26

The second is advice to managers on how to conduct discipline enquiries. It is for managers of Co-operative stores. It is a lengthy document and some of it will be peculiar only to the Co-op but much of it will apply to all disciplinary procedures as they have to follow the same rules/guidelines.

An interesting example is cited at the end. It is not identical but has similarities with the OP's predicament.

http://www.cooperatives-uk.coop/live/cme1506.htm

For your convenience here is the relevant piece.


Fighting

Fighting is another matter frequently classed as gross misconduct in disciplinary rules. Even if there is no express rule tribunals treat it as an extremely serious offence. The employer should investigate the incident thoroughly. A failure to interview all of the participants will normally be a serious error but it depends on the circumstances of the case. Relevant factors include proper procedure, the need for an opportunity to give an explanation, the safety risk (for example the presence of machinery), consistency of punishment, mitigating circumstances (e.g. provocation) and status of the employees involved.

Similar principles apply regarding fighting outside work as in the case of drink and drugs offences. One important exception is the perennial violence and overindulgence in alcohol at works' Christmas parties. There may be an express rule providing for dismissal even in these circumstances but in any event most tribunals would accept the proposition that although not within working hours there is sufficient connection with the employment relationship. Where the employee did not know of any rule that such misconduct would lead to dismissal that is a different matter. Thus in one case, the rule that the dismissal was the appropriate sanction had not been communicated to the employee and his dismissal was unfair.