Sacked for Theft then re-instated 6 mths later!

bigsooze

OK, fair enough. It's probably sensible to accept + move on as a tribunal would probably regard it as unreasonable for him to turn down their offer, as he wouldn't then have suffered any loss (this is why they're backdating everything).

It's a pretty good result for him though.

Larry22

bigsooze wrote: »

OK, fair enough. It's probably sensible to accept + move on as a tribunal would probably regard it as unreasonable for him to turn down their offer, as he wouldn't then have suffered any loss (this is why they're backdating everything).

It's a pretty good result for him though.

Yeah I do agree & I am well chuffed for him because I know it's been a long & stressful period for him.

zzzLazyDaisy

I agree, if he wants his job back, then this is a good result.

If he settles 'out of court', the back pay should be paid in a lump sum as part of the settlement agreement. This does not normally result in a benefit clawback as the money is not subject to the same rules as a formal tribunal award, but he should check that out with his solicitor/union/acas officer.

Larry22

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

I agree, if he wants his job back, then this is a good result.

If he settles 'out of court', the back pay should be paid in a lump sum as part of the settlement agreement. This does not normally result in a benefit clawback as the money is not subject to the same rules as a formal tribunal award, but he should check that out with his solicitor/union/acas officer.

Anyone got a reference for this as the dwp ain't got a clue.
Thanks

zzzLazyDaisy

Larry22 wrote: »

Anyone got a reference for this as the dwp ain't got a clue.
Thanks

No, the DWP won't know as this is governed by tribunal rules. Some payments are subject to the claw back rule, and some are not. This is why I suggested speaking to ACAS. There should be a concilliation officer involved if the case has got as far as settlement negotiations, so s/he is probably the best point of contact.