I really need some help with this

SueC_2

donnaessex wrote: »

None of it adds up - this isnt a back street two-bob company, this is a multi million turnover company. I dont understand why he thinks he can get away with this.

I used to work for a multi million turnover company who worked in exactly the same way. I think there was a combination of reasons:

a/ Ignorance - company grew very quickly from small roots and didn't have the interest or level of expertise internally to keep on top of legal requirements in 'non-core' areas - and contracted those out, which is all well and good so long as someone picks up the phone and asks the question BEFORE acting.

b/ Arrogance - working on the assumption that individual employees would feel too intimated by the 'big scary important execs' and not challenge their behaviour.

Luckily, from where you're looking at it, in law ignorance is no defence, and you are not too intimidated to challenge their behaviour and take action!

Uncertain

donnaessex wrote: »

None of it adds up - this isnt a back street two-bob company, this is a multi million turnover company. I dont understand why he thinks he can get away with this.

It depends what you mean by "get away with this".

The sad fact is that most employment laws are little deterrent to companies acting as you have described. As I have said many times on here, many employers take the view "Hire who we like, sack who we don't and, if all else fails, pay up"!

From what you have said I have little doubt that, if you dig your heels in, you will get some compensation. Most likely there will be some kind of settlement offered after some initial posturing. Sadly though, at best, this will be a few thousand pounds.

I'm afraid this is the hard truth as to how the system works - it stinks!

Sorry!

donnaessex

Thanks Uncertain. I wholly agree with everything you have said.

If it does come to tribunal, its me against him which is the annoying part. I have no doubt he will play dirty and I'm terrified of him falsifying evidence of any sort (which I have seen him do, not in an HR capacity, but in business).

You say a few thousand pounds compensation - where would I even start coming up with a figure? I'm not on a bad salary, but not great either - £25k but I dont know what the right amount would be to start with for a compromise agreement - 3 months salary? 6 months? Gross or net? I have no clue.

fred7777

SueC wrote: »

I would expect them to declare a conflict of interests.

Even if they don't, it is the company that they are contracted to, not individual employees, and any advice they gave would be that way inclined.

There is no conflict of interest they are on retainer specifically to handle HR matters and this is a HR matter. They should be dealing with this on behalf of the company rather than the boss who obviously has not got a clue.

Googlewhacker

Uncertain wrote: »

It depends what you mean by "get away with this".

The sad fact is that most employment laws are little deterrent to companies acting as you have described. As I have said many times on here, many employers take the view "Hire who we like, sack who we don't and, if all else fails, pay up"!

From what you have said I have little doubt that, if you dig your heels in, you will get some compensation. Most likely there will be some kind of settlement offered after some initial posturing. Sadly though, at best, this will be a few thousand pounds.

I'm afraid this is the hard truth as to how the system works - it stinks!

Sorry!

To be fair the whole employment side of things are cack for both sides in differant areas.

SueC_2

fred7777 wrote: »

There is no conflict of interest they are on retainer specifically to handle HR matters and this is a HR matter. They should be dealing with this on behalf of the company rather than the boss who obviously has not got a clue.

I disagree. They are on a retainer to advise the company on how they should (ie. before the event) handle HR matters. Not to advise individual employees on how to respond to a situation where the company has not sought or taken this advice (ie. after the event).

What could they possibly say to the OP? "Our client, the people who retain us and pay for our services, have acted completely inappropriately and you should pursue them for compensation. Here, let us draft some letters for you..."? They would be advising her to take action against their client, which their client would then ask them to respond to, and defend, on their behalf. They would therefore be representing both the 'accuser' and the 'accused'. I think that's fairly clearly a conflict of interest.

In any case, the OP's employment has been terminated, she no longer represents the company, therefore she cannot seek advice from a company resource.

fred7777

donnaessex wrote: »

I dont have access to the daily passwords etc anymore.

He hasn't confirmed either way.

He has told me that he will be hiring a CIPD qualified candidate.

They are transferring it until such time they get a qualified person in.

None of it adds up - this isnt a back street two-bob company, this is a multi million turnover company. I don't understand why he thinks he can get away with this.

OK, what puzzles me is that you say they have a HR company on retainer but that HR company isn't handling this. Are they a proper HR consultancy or some sort of recruitment agency?

If they are replacing you with a CIPD qualified person then it looks like they are actually dismissing you on the grounds of capability.

Sorry to say that as you are the in house HR person and you don't know what is happening or what to do then they may have a case. However it's not as simple as them suddenly deciding you can't do the job and "letting you go" there are specific ways of doing things and an ET won't be happy if they haven't been done.

According to your posts you have over one year's continuous employment (your contract says so) so you qualify for unfair dismissal protection under the law. At an ET they would have to prove that they had followed company procedures and the law, that you were not capable of doing the job and only a CIPD qualified person would be.

Also your willingness to undertake the training stands in your favour.

The following link has the procedure a company should use for dismissal on capability grounds:
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1073793720&type=RESOURCES

It appears that there are several steps which your employer has missed and would have given you a chance to keep your job.

donnaessex

OK, what puzzles me is that you say they have a HR company on retainer but that HR company isn't handling this. Are they a proper HR consultancy or some sort of recruitment agency?

If they are replacing you with a CIPD qualified person then it looks like they are actually dismissing you on the grounds of capability.

They are an advisory service, which I use regularly to discuss future HR matters which are on the horizon - redundancies, grievances etc. I was the main contact but my boss obviously has access to our online account. I have no idea if he has called them for advice on this matter as I no longer have access.

If I were to have called them or emailed for advice then there would be a record of it on our account so there was no way that I would have been able to use that resource for my benefit.

On another smaller issue - every single redundancy we have implemented here has resulted on the person being put on garden leave immediately and they have all been paid their notice period tax free. Does that mean that they have set a precedent with this? Should I also be able to get my payment tax free? They are making me work only a week of the months notice which I am grateful for, but the tax free payment would be a nice bonus.

SueC_2

fred7777 wrote: »

OK, what puzzles me is that you say they have a HR company on retainer but that HR company isn't handling this. Are they a proper HR consultancy or some sort of recruitment agency?

Generally these type of companies are used when there is no dedicated in-house HR function. They are there to advise managers on the correct way to handle situations, not to handle them for them.

So, manager calls up retained HR company and says:

"I've just been told to sack my PA because I was unaware of a directive that was issued several years before I joined the company and I have therefore recruited someone who on paper wasn't qualified to do the job she has now been successfully doing for the last two years. How do I go about this so I don't end up in a tribunal"?

Retained HR company then say:

"Well, you're on a bit of a sticky wickett there, but there are options....". They then outline what those options might be, and talk through the possible consequences with the manager, advising him/her of the correct and legal way to handle the situation.

Manager then goes away and takes the relevant actions. So long as what he/she does is completely in line with what the retained company have advised him to do, should the employee decide to take further action, the retained HR company will provide legal cover/advice/representation for the company.

Obviously, this whole system is only as good as the people using it. ie. the manager can go his own sweet way and do whatever he wants to do without first checking out the legalities with the HR advice service. In which case, the first they will know of it will be when he contacts them and says he's just had the paperwork for a tribunal land on his desk and could they advise him on how to handle it.

At which point I imagine there will be much head-shaking and sighing at their end.....

WeakHeart

donnaessex wrote: »

I do have legal cover. I am certain of it.

Donna. You have had some very good advice on here but it sounds like you have an insurance policy. So, call the legal helpline available on your policy asap and you will get fast, free personal advice whether or not you have legal cover. In the meantime check whether you do have legal cover asap because if you do need formal representation in due course it can take a while to make a claim and get representation so you have nothing to lose by starting the process now. Good luck.