Unlawful dismissal?

dickydonkin

toniskinner wrote: »

The 'internet' to which I was referring was websites focused solely on this very topic. (ACAS etc) Of course an 'internet forum' will supply a wealth of knowledge once the correct question is asked, and the correct person (those with the answer) have read and responded. However, I was merely commenting that it would be useful if this information was utterly 'unambiguous' from the people providing the relevant legislation rather than having to source out an extra party to clarify the situation.

OK - Point made, but what I was alluding to was before dismissing someone, I would ensure that everything had been carried out to the book and if I could not find what I was looking for, I would use forums such as this to seek people in similar circumstances or situations although professional legal advice would have eliminated the need for any internet searching in the first place.

For example, there are many sites (ACAS Included) that provide sample templates for disciplinary hearings, appeals etc. etc. and having just checked the ACAS site, the sample letters do indeed indicate the right of representation/accompaniment at a hearing
Here they are and are indeed unambiguous.

You are saying that there is no information available - but if you did check the ACAS site as you stated and indeed the letter templates all of which clearly indicate the right to be accompanied, that would certainly have suggested to me that this was a requirement and essential part of the disciplinary process.

toniskinner

dpassmore wrote: »

Certainly there would be little point from the dismissed employee as he is obviously going to come to the conclusion that the outcome will be the same - I am assuming he has been given the right to appeal against the dismissal and it would be interesting if the basis of any forthcoming appeal was that the dismissal process was potentially applied in a procedurally flawed manner.

Yes, he has been offered the right to appeal and I feel it is likely that he will appeal on the basis of 'unlawful dismissal' as he has not been with the company a full year (as I understand it, this is one of the criteria for 'unfair dismissal'. It was purely an oversight on my part to not make them aware they were 'entitled' to a companion (unsure as to whether this was a legal requirement, or just 'good business practice' - hence why I would be happy to re-do the disciplinary. But yes, the outcome would be the same and therefore, unfortunately, of little point for the employee. I feel I am going to learn quickly from this oversight.....

SarEl

lucylucky wrote: »

Normally I tend to agree with posts of yours that I have read, but are you having a bad day?

This seems to have descended into a rant.

How do you know the company makes any profit, at the moment?
How do you know that the OP is not the most outstanding employer in the land?
How do you know that the OPs question was not a pre-cursor to getting genuine legal advice?

As my next door neighbours daughters would say - chillax

I made no such assumptions and asserted no such thing - quite the contrary. On the other hand, I did not assume that people ought to sahre their "wealth of knowledge" and be grateful for the chance to do so.

I have no idea whether the dismissal was warranted or not - and since the law offers no protection to the employee in this case and all of it to the employer, we will never know. But if the OP wanted people to "share their knowldege" freely and without charge, then I would assume the OP does the same!

lucylucky

SarEl wrote: »

I made no such assumptions and asserted no such thing - quite the contrary. On the other hand, I did not assume that people ought to sahre their "wealth of knowledge" and be grateful for the chance to do so.

I have no idea whether the dismissal was warranted or not - and since the law offers no protection to the employee in this case and all of it to the employer, we will never know. But if the OP wanted people to "share their knowldege" freely and without charge, then I would assume the OP does the same!

I beg to differ, such is the way one reads things, not always with the intent with which they were typed.

toniskinner

SarEl wrote: »

I made no such assumptions and asserted no such thing - quite the contrary. On the other hand, I did not assume that people ought to sahre their "wealth of knowledge" and be grateful for the chance to do so.

I have no idea whether the dismissal was warranted or not - and since the law offers no protection to the employee in this case and all of it to the employer, we will never know. But if the OP wanted people to "share their knowldege" freely and without charge, then I would assume the OP does the same!

Are you saying you are not grateful to be able to share your knowledge to assist those who need a bit of guidance?

I am intrigued then, as to why it is that you post?

SARAH888_2

Here is a warning to everyone, Do not use Martin & Co solicitors based in Manchester. They will quote you a fixed fee and once you start using them they start adding extras, lots of them. At this stage your vulnerable as you don't want to fall out with the solicitor representing you and you have already gone through the details of the case and have no time to go elsewhere an start all over again, your to far in and they know it. For us we found out to late that they were also useless. Do not make the same mistake we did, there are plenty of other solicitors out there so you should use one of them.

SarEl

toniskinner wrote: »

Are you saying you are not grateful to be able to share your knowledge to assist those who need a bit of guidance?

I am intrigued then, as to why it is that you post?

I have no need to be grateful or otherwise for sharing my knowledge. However, I should thank you. You have demonstrated quite ably why I do not share it with employers, and I shall in future leave them to the vagaries of the internet.

Zazen999

toniskinner wrote: »

I feel I am going to learn quickly from this oversight.....

Basically, you had one thing to do which was to follow ACAS guidelines to the letter.

I have no truck with siding with employers or employees - I take each query as it comes; but it's blatantly obvious that informing an employee that they have the rights to have a colleague or union rep in attendance is bread and butter of management.....and if you are dismissing a member of staff it is crucial that you tick every single box; it's not hard - just follow the ACAS guidance if you don't have a disciplinary process of your own....

A little ironic that you have joined in order to gain information; one wonders how long you'll stick around to share your knowledge with the wider community?

Zazen999

SARAH888 wrote: »

Here is a warning to everyone, Do not use Martin & Co solicitors based in Manchester. They will quote you a fixed fee and once you start using them they start adding extras, lots of them. At this stage your vulnerable as you don't want to fall out with the solicitor representing you and you have already gone through the details of the case and have no time to go elsewhere an start all over again, your to far in and they know it. For us we found out to late that they were also useless. Do not make the same mistake we did, there are plenty of other solicitors out there so you should use one of them.

What's this got to do with owt?

lucylucky

SarEl wrote: »

I have no need to be grateful or otherwise for sharing my knowledge. However, I should thank you. You have demonstrated quite ably why I do not share it with employers, and I shall in future leave them to the vagaries of the internet.

You keep your little secrets.

Much better for everyone if we all don't know the guidelines/rules.;)