Opinions Please - Angry Phonecall to Ex Assistant

dmg24

Do you normally refer to yourself in the third person?

November5th

dmg24 wrote: »

Do you normally refer to yourself in the third person

No. Just trying to keep a distance and maybe slight paranoia about public posting. But unbiased opinions are invaluable in managing expectations.

Uncertain

November5th wrote: »

No. Just trying to keep a distance and maybe slight paranoia about public posting. But unbiased opinions are invaluable in managing expectations.

Only if they are given by somebody who knows the WHOLE story - which I suspect is not the case here!

dmg24

November5th wrote: »

No. Just trying to keep a distance and maybe slight paranoia about public posting. But unbiased opinions are invaluable in managing expectations.

I defended an ET a while ago, only to find that the claimant had written all about the case on another forum, a massive bonus for me to see their plan for the hearing! Having said that they had given away far more details than you, including the type of business, location etc. It would be unlikely for someone to pick up on your case unless they were specifically looking or a regular on here.

November5th

Uncertain wrote: »

Only if they are given by somebody who knows the WHOLE story - which I suspect is not the case here!

I was trying to take it as a single issue and get opinions just on the call, but it is all interconnected. Going further just gets more revealing and specific!

The large smokescreen of other allegations have been disproved with email and diary evidence and there was no procedure followed at all, also admitted by employer.

Uncertain

November5th wrote: »

The large smokescreen of other allegations have been disproved with email and diary evidence and there was no procedure followed at all, also admitted by employer.

Well that COULD lead to a situation where you "win" but any award is reduced (perhaps even to zero) if it is felt there were good grounds to dismiss but the firm failed to follow procedure (Google Polkey).

November5th

Uncertain wrote: »

Well that COULD lead to a situation where you "win" but any award is reduced (perhaps even to zero) if it is felt there were good grounds to dismiss but the firm failed to follow procedure (Google Polkey).

How much will they take into account the amount of lies that the employer has told? Will it count for anything?
If the employer is to be shown as generally unreasonable?
The employer changed the particulars of a single allegation three times?
I have also shown a large inconsistency in disciplinary issues, again these have been admitted.
Will this be taken into account when judging the angry call?

1984ReturnsForReal_2

November5th wrote: »

How much will they take into account the amount of lies that the employer has told? Will it count for anything?
If the employer is to be shown as generally unreasonable?
The employer changed the particulars of a single allegation three times?
I have also shown a large inconsistency in disciplinary issues, again these have been admitted.
Will this be taken into account when judging the angry call?

& what exactly did you say in this "angry" call?

I bet you said stuff that you had every right to be fired for.

SarEl

I am assuming that the reason given for dismissal was that you made this angry phone call. Regardless of other allegations, you say that you disproved them, so I assume that this means that you have been able to show the employer that they are not true and that these were therefore not part of the cause for dismissal. However, either way, making an angry (for angry, let's read "abusive" - because that's what it is) phone call to someone, whether a current employee or an ex-employee, about something which is related to their employment (what they said in a meeting with the employer) is certainly the employers business and certainly grounds for dismissal if the nature of the conversation is anywhere near what I suspect it was. Any former friendship is not relevant - as a manager you used information which you obtained during the course of your employment (information about what was said in a meeting between the ex-employee and the employer) and made a, at best, very ill-judged and unseemly phone call to the ex-employee. You would not have done this to an ex-employee who was not also an ex-friend (I hope), and the fact that this person may have been an ex-friend makes it no different.

As has been observed, it is clear that there is a lot more to the story than has been said here - and the whole story is impertaive to reasoned opinions. You won't get the answer you are looking for based on a fraction of the story. Or you might get the answer you are looking for, but it won't be the right answer! For this reason, I do not see the fact that the ex-friend may have been offered "your job" (and there is a whole story in there that is missing) before you made the phone call as being as damning as you do. I can certainly envisage a range of explanations for this which would be quite convincing. And no matter what, still doesn't explain the phone call since you didn't know this fact at the time you made it.

But one thing does jump out as an inconsistency here. You say that the "assistant" made a series of complaints about the "entire company" and "you" to the MD after quitting. MD's are not usually known for their tolerant attitude when it comes to a former employee telling them home truths about their company. Quite the opposite - whether what is said is true or not. But in this case, the MD appears to have rehired the employee afterwards??? It sounds very much like the MD agreed with what was said, and therein lies the story that isn't being told. What was going so wrong that the MD, having been told about it by an ex employee, decides to take decisive action and rehire the person, rather than shrug it off as a disgruntled former employee?

williacg

November5th wrote: »

Would like to know how people would judge this situation.

A friend of six months is taken on as an assistant on a personal recommendation, the job would not have been offered without this recommendation.
The assistant starts a training period, but is not a contracted employee.
The assistant quits without explanation and refuses all contact with the senior manager that recommended this friend, but in a short meeting with the MD insults the entire company and the senior manager responsible for his hiring.
The senior manager calls this ex assistant after they have quit and after working hours in a very angry call about their behaviour (remonstrative).
The senior manager is fired for gross misconduct based on this recorded voice message alone.

Was this a personal call? Was it any business of the employer?

Have you sought consultation with your union? (if you're in one), solicitor or CAB? If so, what was their take on the matter once you had presented all of your evidence?