Can employer sack husband for being injured

olias

incensicle wrote: »

To clarify, the accident was at work, and there is a compensation claim ongoing through a solicitor supplied by the union. It was due to negligence on their part and they do not seem to be disputing this although who knows what goes on behind closed solicitor doors. I have no idea the size of payout expected, and you can't live on a money that might turn up in the future. He also has lost his work license as he couldnt pass the medical for renewal, so if he gets dismissed he will not even have that to try to get another job when he is fit. BtW his solicitor is concerned only with the compensation claim, not my husbands job proscpects.

Then he needs to be taking advice from his solicitor on what has been discussed by his employer and what course of action his solicitor reccommends he takes. He does not want to do anything that would jeopordise his compensation claim.

Olias

incensicle

He did manage to talk to one of the union reps on friday. When he is off work after the operation he should apparently be on full pay because it is an industrial injury.
The company may try to sack him for being incapable, in which case the union would get involved. It would also impact on his compensation.

I'm not sure about the period between now and the operation. As far as I can inderstand the union is saying he should have been kept on full pay as it was an industrial injury, although I can't see where this is written down in the Information leaflet supplied by the union. It was the letter sent saying his sick pay had run out hat paniced him into returning to work.

He is going to contact his solicitor on Tuesday. It seems unlikely to me that the company will want to pay him for another six months of doing nothing.

jdturk

incensicle wrote: »

He did manage to talk to one of the union reps on friday. When he is off work after the operation he should apparently be on full pay because it is an industrial injury.
The company may try to sack him for being incapable, in which case the union would get involved. It would also impact on his compensation.

I'm not sure about the period between now and the operation. As far as I can inderstand the union is saying he should have been kept on full pay as it was an industrial injury, although I can't see where this is written down in the Information leaflet supplied by the union. It was the letter sent saying his sick pay had run out hat paniced him into returning to work.

He is going to contact his solicitor on Tuesday. It seems unlikely to me that the company will want to pay him for another six months of doing nothing.

As you say the company may just want to cut their losses and take whatever fine they have to pay if there is no sign of your husband returning to work

jdturk

also does your husbands company acknowledge the union? If not then there is little they can do in pressurising the company except talk to them and even then the company could disregard the union easily

Anihilator

Leave it to the solicitor and there advice. You could quite easily compromise your legal case inadvertently.

For example if the solicitor is stating you have long term disability or will never work again and he fights his dismissal stating he will he may give them a defence.

ohreally

incensicle wrote: »

He is going to contact his solicitor on Tuesday. It seems unlikely to me that the company will want to pay him for another six months of doing nothing.

He needs to contact the union full time officer in addition to the solicitor as there are issues to address that are little to do with the solicitor i.e. the state of play re rate of pay he is on , to have conformation it was indeed an industrial accident and the employer is treating it as such and where both parties go from here.

incensicle

Anihilator wrote: »

Leave it to the solicitor and there advice. You could quite easily compromise your legal case inadvertently.

For example if the solicitor is stating you have long term disability or will never work again and he fights his dismissal stating he will he may give them a defence.

This is what worries me. My husband has a legitimate injury and a legitimate claim. He did not want to get into a situation where he is acting and making descisions simply in order to make his claim look good. He just wanted to be truthfull about his capabilities.

Is he capable of doing the job he was employed to do - No, they have taken away his license.
Is he capable of his new job - only if he doesnt take his medication
Is he capable of any employment - He could work in the office, but there is no work available.

The best course seems to be to say he can't work until after his op. If they sack him his comp goes up. If they don't he will be on full pay (I still cant believe thats correct) And our worst case senario self employed plan goes into action if he ends up unemployed.
How does that sound? We shall put it to solicitor on Tuesday.
Do you find that half the problem is trying to work out what questions you need answers to !

incensicle

ohreally wrote: »

He needs to contact the union full time officer in addition to the solicitor as there are issues to address that are little to do with the solicitor i.e. the state of play re rate of pay he is on , to have conformation it was indeed an industrial accident and the employer is treating it as such and where both parties go from here.

Yes Yes exactly! If it was me I'd go in with a list and say I need to know this and this etc, but my husband just gets fobbed of with vague reassurance. For example. The officer is meant to be there on Tuesday. I would have made an appointment but they just said to him, turn up it'll be right. Now I bet in reallity the office will be locked up and it will be, oh he's just gone out, or, he had to work at a different depot today etc. I would like to with him and make a fuss but I don't know if thats the done thing!
Sorry for rant

Indie_Kid

incensicle wrote: »

The company may try to sack him for being incapable.

If no reasonable adjustments can be made, they can do this and it's not discrimination.

rupee99

There are two separate issues, firstly incapacity (not incapability, that implies lack of skill for the job not the physical incapacity that the OP's husband has). The employer can, after going through the correct procedure dismiss the husband but in view of the second issue, negligence, it would not be very wise for them to do so. It is quite correct for the union solicitor not to be concerned with the second matter as it would give him/her a potential conflict of interest.

The second matter is far more serious from the employers point of view, if they are to be found negligent then they will have to pay damages on an indemnity basis, i.e. make up the financial loss, including loss of past and future earnings, to the OP's husband as a consequence of their negligence. Should they dismiss him that will not go down well with the court and, in any event they will later have to make up that loss to him (although they may be insured for that eventuality).

The husband should take detailled legal advice, from separate lawyers, on the full circumstances of both potential cases and then, possibly in conjunction with the union, decide what the best course of action is.

DO NOT RELY ON OPINIONS EXPRESSED ON THIS FORUM (INCLUDING THIS ONE), however well intentioned, other than as a general guide, take proper advice from someone who can be told and ascertain the full circumstances.