Update following appeal.....

Uncertain

jdturk wrote: »

I would argue that the bit in red would put the onus on the rep to request permission to converse during the meeting.

Sorry, I don't agree.

I fully accept that the chairman of the meeting could have asked him to be quiet. However the onus in an meeting is on the chairman to run it properly and by allowing him to speak he is giving permission.

Also, the law is heavily tilted in the employer's favour. The employer could have had a solicitor present to advise them, yet the employee may not. The employer provides the "official note taker" who will be another employee so under pressure to note the points the employer wants. I hope the OP has obtained a copy of the notes before they are magically re-written!

claire0710

Uncertain wrote: »

Sorry, I don't agree.

I fully accept that the chairman of the meeting could have asked him to be quiet. However the onus in an meeting is on the chairman to run it properly and by allowing him to speak he is giving permission.

Also, the law is heavily tilted in the employer's favour. The employer could have had a solicitor present to advise them, yet the employee may not. The employer provides the "official note taker" who will be another employee so under pressure to note the points the employer wants. I hope the OP has obtained a copy of the notes before they are magically re-written!

The note taker was actual a trainee solictor for the company's legal team so I was a bit worried she would write them in their favour. However, fair play to her, the notes came through about 2 hours after the meeting and were pretty much word for word accurate including the outburst and swearing at me. Also it quite clearly stated that the director and '****' were involved in the redundancy process and that ''****' is now doing your job so it has gone' - I asked for evidence of assessment against '****' and he said there wasn't any.
It seems like a straightforward unfair dismissal to me!

claire0710

jdturk wrote: »

I agree, I think the next point is that you need to have a realistic figure in your head of what is acceptable as a CA and proceed from there.

Oh, I have no idea what this would be, how on earth do you come up with a figure that is reasonable?
My sister recently had something very similar happen to her and her employers came up with a CA which she accepted and it was 10mths pay plus she wrote her own reference for them to sign.
However, she worked for a large corp whereas its just a small company I am fighting against so there is less money in the pot if you like.

Uncertain

The fact that the note taker was a trainee solicitor probably worked in your favour. For all he / she knew you or your Dad could have been covertly tape recording the meeting. Producing fabricated "notes" would do their career no good at all and could even get them struck off before they started!

Regarding a settlement. Sadly (or not depending on your point of view) most ET awards are for relatively small amounts - not the odd headline grabbing amount you occasionally read about. The object is to compensate, not punish. You have a duty to mitigate your loss as far as possible. Obviously you can't say they have stepped out of line so they can jolly well pay my salary until I retire! Obviously, if you settle they will save on costs (but as jdturk will point out they may be covered for this depending on what deal they may have with Peninsular). However, if they are like most insurance companies they will want to settle and cut their losses. As you say, if you go down the CA route then you can probably almost write your own reference (within reason).

Most or all of any settlement will be tax free and, I think I'm correct in saying, if you claim JSA you would have to pay some of it back from an ET award but not from a compromise agreement - but take advice on this.

dickydonkin

Another interesting point in the notes is that the director states that he and '****' were involved in making the decision about my redundancy

If that indeed is the case, that Director should not have been involved with the appeal.

claire0710

dpassmore wrote: »

If that indeed is the case, that Director should not have been involved with the appeal.

But there was nobody else to do the appeal! One director did the redundancy and the other did the appeal but both were involved in the process and one now doing my job.

dickydonkin

claire0710 wrote: »

But there was nobody else to do the appeal! One director did the redundancy and the other did the appeal but both were involved in the process and one now doing my job.

A similar thing occurred during Mrs.p's appeal.

The only director of the company had been involved with the selection process and it was later pointed out to him that the appeal would be a sham if he actually decided who was being dismissed and subsequently hearing the appeal against a decision he was instrumental in making.

An external HR consultant was brought in to hear the appeal and unsurprisingly he accepted the redundancy decision was fair.

Unfortunately, my wifes Barrister decided otherwise and he was critical of this 'independant' consultant - well I state independant, but guess who was paying him!

The dispute was remedied a week prior to tribunal.

The process has to be implemented fairly and correctly to avoid redress at tribunal. It would seem by the histrionic behaviour of the Director conducting the OP's appeal, that he has realised he could have dug himself into a hole he may have to pay to extricate himself from.

claire0710

Actually I don't think the director who did the appeal will realise what a hole he has dug himself. He has no business sense whatsoever. The other director who did the redundancy will probably be hopping mad at him but I know how stubborn she is and I reckon she will do whatever she can to get out of the situation without making a CA, I am sure it will go to an ET - unless she gets legal advice about the minutes and is advised otherwise.

Uncertain

Presumably you have not yet had the result of this appeal !!!!

I suspect they will be taking some advice on Tuesday about how they get themselves out of this situation.

Have you actually left yet (as a result of the so called redundancy and had the money) or do you still have to go into work?

The worst situation of all may be if they surprised you and said "appeal allowed, you are not redundant, come back to work (and we will make your life hell)!

claire0710

Uncertain wrote: »

Presumably you have not yet had the result of this appeal !!!!

I suspect they will be taking some advice on Tuesday about how they get themselves out of this situation.

Have you actually left yet (as a result of the so called redundancy and had the money) or do you still have to go into work?

The worst situation of all may be if they surprised you and said "appeal allowed, you are not redundant, come back to work (and we will make your life hell)!

No, it was only on Friday so I was going to wait until the end of this week for any contact.
I left on 13th May and got my final payslip and payment in the bank on same day as appeal.
I asked ACAS about what I would do if they offered me my job back (highly unlikely!) and they said it would be reasonable to refuse on the grounds that the trust and working relationship has been destroyed and therefore it's an intolerable situation. It wouldn't affect my chances of claiming at an ET either.
Lets see what next week brings...!