Colleague issue

MrRedundant

whitewing wrote: »

I find it amazing that if someone approaches you at work and says X exposed himself to me, and here's an email from him that does not deny it, you would let him stay in the office.

Where I worked a man got arrested (at home) for child pornography downloading (at home) and that was in the paper. Work suspended him immediately. Half the staff would have walked out otherwise. Yes, innocent until proven guilty but suspension to protect everybody involved.

I didnt say I would allow him to stay in the work place. I would however not let her stay and suspend him.

I would start by asking them both to take annual leave/unpaid leave. If they didnt agree to this I would suspend both.

At this stage there is absolutely no proof of wrongdoing and suspending one party could be considered contrary to his rights.

As for the next bit possibly but the evidence is lacking at the moment. The employer have an admission which is fair enough but the police would have to prove that his exposure wasnt accidental. Without a confession I think they would struggle.

MrRedundant

SueC wrote: »

I don't understand this. If the guy had exposed himself in the park / on a bus / walking down the street / in the pub / anywhere else, it would clearly be a police matter. Are you saying that they are not interested because the (alleged) offence happened in the workplace and so is covered by employment law not criminal law?

By an extension of that, is it also okay for me to steal from / assault / be abusive towards / blackmail, my colleagues safe in the knowledge that the law of the land won't care and I may lose my job but I won't be prosecuted?

Sounds a bit off to me.

No I am saying that the police need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he exposed himself with intent and this is going to be very difficult thus its unlikely the police or CPS would proceed with an investigation.

Sacking him with the e-mail situation as well should be fairly easy although if they have any sense they will disclipline the OP too (minorly) for the IT breach to avoid any unfair dismissal claim or similar due to unfair treatment.

MrRedundant

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Suspend the OP unpaid? You are off your rocker mate.

Once you do that sort of thing, it begins to look like Springtime for Flashers. Nobody in their right mind will report a flasher and risk going unpaid, possibly for several months. Because for something like this, it is unlikely to be a quick investigation.

No I would both ask yo take annual leave or unpaid leave voluntary until it was resolved - Neither would be suspension they would be leave.

If they didnt both agree, Both would be suspended.

I would be very concerned about treating him any differently to her at this stage whilst the allegations are just that.

If the allegations where to be later disproven he would have a rock solid grievance against the organisation and the OP.

Suspension may be billed as neutruel but in reality it isnt and once someone is suspended very few return to work unaffected.

What exactly would you do if you go and suspend the alleged flasher and it later transpires its all a silly crush on him and malicous behaviour yet you treated him as guilty - this does happen.

HR need to remain independent until the investigation is undertaken and conclusions drawn and action entered into.

My personal decision right now would be to ask both parties to take annual leave until after the new year and have the investigation completed by the time they where due to return to work and aim to commence any discliplinary behaviours the week staff are due back. At that point the investigation would be near complete and the likiehood of discliplinary action known thus making suspension far more justified for just one party.

MrRedundant

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Unpaid suspension is unpaid suspension. "Go unpaid or lose your annual leave or else you'll be suspended unpaid" is unpaid suspension. The OP will lose her summer holiday over making a complaint.

This is not acceptable. I take your point that there is a small possibility that a woman could take such a complaint as a cheap way to destroy a man. But at the same time, you must recognise that an investigation of something like this could go on for 6 weeks easily. To make a complainant go that amount of time unpaid is totally unacceptable - it would deter about 999 out of 1000 complainants. Although I would be one of the first to say that nayone accused should be paid on suspension while the matter is investigated.

Only if your a crap manager. Asking both to take leave can be done. You wouldnt attach the suspension threat or unpaid to it. If they turn it down to take leave then you would follow your proper suspension process for both of them.

The fact is no one would take unpaid leave (but you could offer it) so you would end up with either both on annual leave or both suspended.

The time of year lends itself to annual leave though as its going to be very hard to quickly complete an investigation and most people would enjoy annual leave at Xmas time.

Ultimately this is a side issue. I think HR have screwed up by allowing her to sit at work as normal discussing with anyone outwith HR the allegations which at this stage are unfounded.

gwen80

MrRedundant - There is no concrete proof that the guy in question did indecently expose himself. However, there are a number of inappropriate emails and emails where he is challenged about the exposure and fails to deny it.

I'm aware the chap in question may remain working here. However, if that is the case, I will insist that he works in a different building and is not to contact or approach me in any circumstances. At least this incident will be on record. I have no doubt, he'll sexually harrass more women in the future, then there will be a track record and more than one witness to his behaviour.

I am still seriously considering going to the police. In fact, I am 99.9% certain that tomorrow evening after work, I will be visiting my local police station.

I have my meeting with HR and investigating manager today. I wanted to get it done before Christmas. Hopefully I'll be able to think about other things over the Christmas break and relax a bit, I hope so anyway. I was looking forward to a Christmas break of days out, reading books and watching films, not worrying about a sexual harassment case at work and a police investigation.

I understand the debate that this issue has sparked, but at the moment it isn't helpful to me. I'm going to leave this thread until there has been some resolution to the issue.

If I were outside of this situation, I would certainly find it interesting aswell. I imagine it's a very unusual situation, I only wish I weren't in the middle of it

Gwenx

gwen80

MrRedundant wrote: »

Only if your a crap manager. Asking both to take leave can be done. You wouldnt attach the suspension threat or unpaid to it. If they turn it down to take leave then you would follow your proper suspension process for both of them.

The fact is no one would take unpaid leave (but you could offer it) so you would end up with either both on annual leave or both suspended.

The time of year lends itself to annual leave though as its going to be very hard to quickly complete an investigation and most people would enjoy annual leave at Xmas time.

Ultimately this is a side issue. I think HR have screwed up by allowing her to sit at work as normal discussing with anyone outwith HR the allegations which at this stage are unfounded.

MrRedundant - If I had been asked to take annual leave as a result of making a complaint, I'd currently be using my annual leave to consult an employment solicitor...

The guy has been suspended on full pay as far as I am aware, which is only fair and I'm quite sure he'd have a case against the company if he was suspended without pay.

My annual leave year runs July-June and I have family abroad that I intend to visit in April. I would not enjoy taking annual leave at this time of year, as it would mean I'd be unable to visit my family.

Finally, I have already pointed out that I am keeping this issue confidential. HR have stated in my meeting letter that this issue is to be kept strictly confidential and I am following their advice. The last thing I want is a bullying case against me, that would totally detract from the issue that I am trying to raise, which is the inappropriate behaviour of my colleague.

wuckfit

MrRedundant wrote: »

Only if your a crap manager. Asking both to take leave can be done. You wouldnt attach the suspension threat or unpaid to it. If they turn it down to take leave then you would follow your proper suspension process for both of them.

The fact is no one would take unpaid leave (but you could offer it) so you would end up with either both on annual leave or both suspended.

The time of year lends itself to annual leave though as its going to be very hard to quickly complete an investigation and most people would enjoy annual leave at Xmas time.

Ultimately this is a side issue. I think HR have screwed up by allowing her to sit at work as normal discussing with anyone outwith HR the allegations which at this stage are unfounded.

Only a truly inept and clueless manager would dare to suggest employees use their annual leave, or take unpaid leave. The correct and legal procedure is to suspend on Full Pay during any investigation. Which is why there are HR departments to stop bad managers making costly employment law faux-pas.
The only exception would be for an act of Gross Misconduct, such as being caught stealing or assaulting another employee, which should normally result in Instant Dismissal.


The difficulty is that in this case there are no third party witnesses to the offence, so evidence has to be gathered and due process must be followed.
The suspension is to ensure that the alleged offender does not attempt to hinder or tamper with the investigation. Yes the allegations may be at this stage 'unfounded', but once the allegation is made, HR have an obligation to investigate.
If an investigation were to find that there is no case to answer, then an employee comes back with an unblemished record.
However, the emails that the OP has mentioned sound as if she has given the colleague enough rope to hang himself.

AbbieCadabra

Gwen - i think it wise you leave this thread be for now

yes there's been a lot of very helpful comments, but you really don't need to get any more stressed out by some of the recent less than helpful posts that have been made - i do believe Mr R is way off the mark & a lot of what he has suggested would get an employer in a lot of trouble! best to just ignore...

you know that you've done the right thing, it's for HR to deal with now.

hope you manage to enjoy your time off over Christmas.

MrRedundant

So just to clarify all the contributers to this thread think its entirely reasonable for someone to be suspended on the word of a colleague with no corroboration and that colleague to remain in post and tell people about it.

Wonder if you would think the same if it was you on suspension or if it turns out to be all malicous on behalf of the accuser.

Until an investigation has any sort of corroboration either they both should be at work or they should both not be. The fact is people are letting the type of allegation sway them here into removing all of the accused's rights to a fair and proper process.

We have got into a side issue about asking someone to take the leave and I disagree with the majority but I can't believe people don't think its unfair that he has been branded as guilty until proven innocent and is being discussed in the office with anyone before any sort of investigation has taken place.

Sambucus_Nigra

I'm totally behind investigating once a claim has been made. Which is why I said it was interesting in the first place [see previous posts].

I'd never suspend someone without having had an actual meeting with the accuser and I'd expect HR to get their butts in to deal with it as a matter of urgency. Also to ensure that the accuser does not discuss the matter.