Help please. Husband suspended from work. **Updated**

bendix

SarEl wrote: »

It is therefore a crying shame that biblical law isn't applied in the UK

Can't you offer him a job, if he gets fired?

You have form in this area, don't you?

DebtHater

bendix wrote: »

If he's an HGV driver, is it safe to assume that he took the crisps from a box that was destined to go to a customer? In that case, he's not just stealing a packet of crisps from his workplace - he's stealing it from a customer too and, more importantly, exposing his employer to issues around short-supplying on an order.

There are significant issues here that go beyong a 40p bag of crisps.

Exactly. And this is the reason why it would be deemed to be gross misconduct.

Most companies gross misconduct policy is for a dismissal. Although, I think that best case in this instance would be a final written warning.

SarEl

bendix wrote: »

You have form in this area, don't you?

I have no criminal record, no. Why - do you?

bendix

SarEl wrote: »

I have no criminal record, no. Why - do you?

As a kid, of course. I was a right little !!!!!!.

Sadly I've mellowed with age to the charm machine you see on MSE today.

TwistedPsycho

Someone has already mentioned the union, so I have thought back to when my colleagues in the companies union have been investigated, etc.

I am not going to condone theft, however what action has the company taken against members of staff for this offence in the past? Proportionality would come into effect, albeit not in the manner mentioned previously, because if previous "small value" thefts have been dealt with by the company by way of a warning/few days suspension/few days without pay; then to go and sack this man would actually risk being accused of being discriminatory in their application of the disciplinary policy.

An example of this in my employer recently was involving two employees; one of which was off for compassionate reasons, one due to injury.

Because of the nature of the work, the person with the injury was only willing to return to work if he was permenantly on one of three shifts (we rotate the shifts on a regular basis). This was declined due to business needs and he remained on the sick in line with company policy.

The other person asked to be considered to come back but only on the two daytime shifts (the third being nights) due to the same reason as he went off for. Although this was more amenable to my employer because of the staff reductions that took place overnight anyway, was still declined because it opened up many lines of discrimination appeals.

My advice therefore: Talk to the union if there is one in your workplace. They will be able to help you with this.

ega95jch

bendix wrote: »

If he's an HGV driver, is it safe to assume that he took the crisps from a box that was destined to go to a customer? In that case, he's not just stealing a packet of crisps from his workplace - he's stealing it from a customer too and, more importantly, exposing his employer to issues around short-supplying on an order.

There are significant issues here that go beyong a 40p bag of crisps.

How is he stealing from a customer? He may have made one packet of crisps unavailable to a prospective customer, but the only party that's being stolen from is the supermarket (i.e. the employer). There may indeed be 'significant issues' at stake, but stealing from a customer isn't one of them

Zazen999

DebtHater wrote: »

I would say it wouldnt matter regarding using them as a reference. They cant provide a bad reference, but they can refuse. A refused reference would look quite bad, so my personal advice would be to not tell any new employers that he had worked there, and remove it from his CV etc.

They can say he was dismissed for Gross Misconduct, which is the truth. Where do you get the idea that they cannot provide a bad reference?

ega95jch

TwistedPsycho wrote: »

I am not going to condone theft, however what action has the company taken against members of staff for this offence in the past? Proportionality would come into effect, albeit not in the manner mentioned previously, because if previous "small value" thefts have been dealt with by the company by way of a warning/few days suspension/few days without pay; then to go and sack this man would actually risk being accused of being discriminatory in their application of the disciplinary policy.

Good point.

Uncertain

ega95jch wrote: »

How is he stealing from a customer? He may have made one packet of crisps unavailable to a prospective customer, but the only party that's being stolen from is the supermarket (i.e. the employer). There may indeed be 'significant issues' at stake, but stealing from a customer isn't one of them

I agree.

Unless the packet of crisps was jointly owned the only person it can have been stolen from was its owner at the time!!

I suspect somewhere in the supplier's terms and conditions will be a line saying that title to the goods doesn't transfer until the invoice is paid.

SarEl

TwistedPsycho wrote: »

... would actually risk being accused of being discriminatory in their application of the disciplinary policy.
.

Unfortunately, this is not unlawful discrimination and is much more about employer policy. So yes, it might help a mitigation, but it would be highly unlikley to have any bearing on a dismissal. Occasionally employees make arguments to tribunal that there has been inconsistency in the application of outcomes. Whilst this may occasionally have some bearing, in 98% of cases it doesn't because the employee cannot evidence other cases (they are not in the purview of the tribunal) and because other cases are seldom exactly the same as the one being considered. This argument is strongest (although still not always a clincher) where there are two people accused of the same (exactly the same) offence at the same time. But as I said, it's fair game to argue it in mitigation. Anything goes in mitigation (well, perhaps not threats!) - crying has been known to work!