Status whilst suspended pending a disciplinary hearing

woody01

terra_ferma wrote: »

Honey, don't take it personally, this forum is meant to be a friendly, welcoming place where people exchange information and tips.
But some people just don't get it, I'm afraid....

and others mask the honest facts in cotton wool (however misleading) :wall:

Hannah_10

Even if you Dad is guilty (not saying he is, just working from the worst case scenario) his employer has behaved very unfairly. If they are prepared to lie to clients and access a personal email (the part about the tape is one word against another I'm affraid) then they're probably also prepared to play a very very dirty game at the tribunal. You need to think again about a proper solicitor, if on a good long rethink you are sure you really can't afford it try applying to Bar Pro Bono. Thier applications process is not for the faint hearted, however neither is thier defence.

And DVardysShadow is right about it not being a great idea to put your defence on a public forum.

HONEYMONSTER

Well Guys, thanks for the comments, blunt or swaddled in cotton wool. My dad is innocent but who knows who is on this site and I don't want to cause any more issues for him than he already has.

Out of the last 12 months he only got paid for 6 of them, voluntarily agreeing not to take a wage along with others given cash flow problems, then when there was just enough money to take wages the shareholders called in loans. Its all very complicated but basically he asked for one months pay when 6 were due, a director said yes to him on the shop floor, so he wrote out a cheque for one months pay (not the 6 he was due). They subsequently stopped it saying he was making himself a preferential creditor without agreement and the director who said he could get paid denied the conversation. Dad was a counter signatory to the account and it was countersigned by the accounts manager who was his subordinate, who also got sacked. There is lots more to it obviously.

The email account - it was his personal email account, not work related and they have logged into it some three months after he left and copied certain emails which show he is now working for a competitor.

We have applied to an empoyment tribunal for unlawful deduction of wages and unfair dismissal but can't afford a lawyer.

Surely writing out to suppliers before the investigation has even begun telling them that he was under investigation for fraud and that the police froze the bank account but not to worry they are under new management now so basically stating that they had no intention to find in my dads favour and putting him in an irretrievable position client wise. Don't forget they put this inwriting to all suppliers when they suspended him but before the investigation or disciplinary process has started!

Another issue is that he was told to do something which appeared totally inoccent by the MD, whcih the MD admits but they have stated that he did not act in the shareholders best interests and should have queried it with them. But surely that is up to the MD to make those decsions because as a mere employee my dad, who has nothing to do with the shareholders (they do not work within the company), only knows of the shareholders wishes via the MD, who told him to do what he did! So if the MD tells him to do something (unless illegal or otherwise stated in his contract - which does not exist) then surely he must act on those instructions.

They suspended him for a month and refused to say whether it would be with pay....but then didn't even pay him his outstanding pay and when he had an initial investigation meeting, a neutral friend that attended with the employer, later turned out to be a fraud investigator!

Thanks

HONEYMONSTER

Judas wrote: »

The fact you don't seem to be defending him on the grounds of innocence and instead technicalities would say a lot to me. Furthermore how do you know what the police had or had not done?
They would not necessarily disclose this to the suspect.

Thats becasue I didn't feel the need to state the obvious. He has been naive and trusting and has tried to prop up a company which he has been at for over 20 years because he loved the place and went without a lot to keep it going and this is how they repay him!

I know you will think I am a bleeding heart but I think what they have done to him, without even first asking him his side is amoral, they have totally decimated his trust in people and he had a spotless employment record, never having been disciplined or anything.