Few H&S queries

SarEl

Lexxi wrote: »

I have just spoken with acas, they have suggested I appeal.
Work has admitted, in writing, that they are negligent, I've not seen the report and I'm not sure if I'm allowed?
Minutes at a meeting are usually sent arond to ensure that they are an acurate record of what happened, so others can dispute or make amendments

I'm not sure what to do about negligence, the matter was referred to health and safety executive, I read somewhere that they can get fined by them, is this right?

By all means appeal, but I don't think that you are understanding what I am trying to explain. Your employer may well have admitted that they have been negligent (and yes, they could get fined - but equally they may not). But the HSE will not act on your behalf and you won't see a penny from them. If you are to get anywhere with this you will have to instruct your own representatives or take legal action yourself.

You have not been dismissed (or at least this is what your employers will say) for having an accident at work, for reporting the accident, or for being off sick because of the accident. You have been dismissed (and please forgive me, but I am going to put this very bluntly so you get it) for being a liar who has claimed to be unable to work due to a claimed injury which happened at work, which you say is preventing you from even the smallest amount of activity, whilst simultaneously pulling pints down the local. In other words, they are calling you a fraud and a liar. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that if you attempt to make a legal claim that is exactly what they are going to say about you, and they have a witness to this point. For all that you say it was just once and for a short period, it calls into question everything you have said - what are the chances that someone from your company happened to turn up the only time that you ever worked in the pub? That is what they will say - that it wasn't the only time, it was just the only time you got caught. And it's credible - it may be believed. Even if they only limit the damage in terms of costs to them, it will be worthwhile for them.

That is why you really do need to get legal advice now - before you blow any chance you may have.

T800

I have to agree with SarEl here. Not meaning to cast aspersions on your character, but you have to think about how a tribunal judge will think - as a reasonable minded person - about you reporting yourself as sick, yet caught able to do work in a bar.

Lexxi

I thought their negligence wold go to another court, not a tribunal?

I'm sure it does look bad to you but had the colleague not knocked on the door the door would have stayed locked and the pub closed until staff came on. What about the drinks I had to get myself? There are no means elsewhere in the building to brew up or any cups or glasses anywhere else to get even tap water

T800

Lexxi wrote: »

I thought their negligence wold go to another court, not a tribunal?

I'm sure it does look bad to you but had the colleague not knocked on the door the door would have stayed locked and the pub closed until staff came on. What about the drinks I had to get myself? There are no means elsewhere in the building to brew up or any cups or glasses anywhere else to get even tap water

if the doors were locked then you werent actually working?

Lexxi

I said that and they jumped on me 'in no way was this entrapment in anyway you need to get your words right and look up the definition' and so on, they really went overboard with it. seemed rather agressive.

They've also saiid the person who would be responsible for the accident is not going to get disciplined, I thought that if they're not doing their job they would discipline them?

T800

Lexxi wrote: »

I said that last night and they jumped on me 'in no way was this entrapment in anyway you need to get your words right and look up the definition' and so on, they really went overboard with it. seemed rather agressive.

They've also saiid the person who would be responsible for the accident is not going to get disciplined, I thought that if they're not doing their job they would discipline them?

It is not entrapment.

you could have stuck with the fact that they werent actually able to prove you were, in fact, working.

Lexxi

T800 wrote: »

It is not entrapment.

you could have stuck with the fact that they werent actually able to prove you were, in fact, working.

How isn't it? I don't understand?
Do they need to prove it? Can they not just take the word of whoever has reported me?

T800

Lexxi wrote: »

How isn't it? I don't understand?
Do they need to prove it? Can they not just take the word of whoever has reported me?

one witness is just their word against yours.

Entrapment is something totally different and need not concern yourself with it - too many people been watching American films and TV has made it a much well known, yet equally misunderstood legal concept.

SarEl

Lexxi wrote: »

I thought their negligence wold go to another court, not a tribunal?

I'm sure it does look bad to you but had the colleague not knocked on the door the door would have stayed locked and the pub closed until staff came on. What about the drinks I had to get myself? There are no means elsewhere in the building to brew up or any cups or glasses anywhere else to get even tap water

It does go to another court - but any evidence at all is admissable! And evidence that you were working somewhere else whilst off sick and saying that you were unable to carry out your work duties is certianly admissable - that's the point I have been trying to make. They are certainly going to bring this all up if you make a legal claim. And I am sorry but I have to agree with the employer on one thing. This isn't entrapment - not that there is anything wrong with doing that anyway. I told you before that employers and insurers are known to employ detectives to follow people making claims against them - you'd be surprised how often someone with a bad back is photographed gardening (the heavy stuff) or careering across a dance floor doing a John Travolta impression. Entrapment, as you call it, is permitted!

But how can this be entrapment? You agreed to work an hour in the pub - they didn't ask you to do that and they certainly didn't make it happen. They didn't know it was happening - and your collegaue from work couldn't have known about your working in the pub at precisley that time when it was a "one-off". The only way that someone from work could have deliberately called into the pub in order to catch you working there was if this had been a regular occurence and the employer knew this and determined to set out to catch you - or a completely fluke and very bad luck for you. So you are either not telling the truth about it being a one-off, or you were very unlucky. It can only be one of the two. And whichever one it was, you were caught and the circumstances look bad on you, because even in courts, people are people, and they may not be inclined to believe that this was a one-off.

So as I said before, this is certainly relevant to any claim you may make, and only a legal adviser looking at all the facts, and the full facts - including the employers version of events - can really assess what chances you have here.

Zazen999

As far as they are concerned; you were in a pub and got drinks for them.

If you hadn't opened the door, if you hadn't been alone, if you hadn't got drinks; then possibly they might have had doubts that you were there to work or couldn't work because of your injuries.

However, you did all the above; and there were no other people about thus it is entirely feasible that you could have opened the pub later and served customers.

Ergo; that is their conclusion - that you were swinging the lead.