Employee stealing from work - advice?

BodyElectric

yinhong wrote: »

I did say to him that from then on ANY money short from the till will be taken out of his wages.

This would constitute an unlawful deduction from salary unless the employee agreed to it. As would not paying for work already completed.

Frankly you sound like a very dodgy employer.

maninthestreet

Dismiss him, as others have said - and then have a serious review of your cash handling procedures.

Pee

Googlewhacker wrote: »

I'll beat Uncertain to it....

You are wrong in saying that you cannot give a bad referance, you ARE allowed to give a bad referance if it is factual and truthful.

You are just not allowed to make things up.

On the information given here, I would refuse to give the employee a reference to avoid any problems. I would not give him a bad reference.

DVardysShadow

cassie55 wrote: »

So, because my contract doesn't specifically state that I shouldn't steal from my employer, I can assume that if I do it wouldn't be gross miconduct :think:.

A 17 year old doesn't (shouldn't) need it spelt out that they shouldn't steal.

You are totally missing the point. The OP said there was no contract in relation to not paying the employee. SN was making it totally clear that if you employ someone, there is de facto a contract. Just no written contract - but as employer you could make a very big mistake if you assumed that because there is no written contract, there is no contract at all.

Premier_2

Googlewhacker wrote: »

I'll beat Uncertain to it....

You are wrong in saying that you cannot give a bad referance, you ARE allowed to give a bad referance if it is factual and truthful.

You are just not allowed to make things up.

Whilst you are legally allowed to give any reference you want (which may become the subject of libel if unable to be proven true), the general understanding is not to provide any reference if you cannot provide a good reference.

If I, as a prospective employer, sought a reference for a prospective employee and it came back anything other than positive (or a refusal) then it would probably reflect more on the employer than on the employee. (and certainly in our business, word spreads fast!)
An alternative, acceptable method to provide a 'bad' reference is to only state the bare minimum (e.g. period of employment & job title, etc).
This is usually better than a refusal from the referee & requesters PoV.
However, some companies only will provide this anyway as a matter of policy. (but usually they then state it is their policy)

The question over a reference is probably immaterial anyway. This is a 17 year old who was doing part-time, 1 night a week work. (sounds like to simply earn some extra beer vouchers)
Unless the employee is seeking to make a lifelong career out of flipping burgers or asking about stuffed crusts, then I suspect such a job will never appear on the employee's CV anyway. They'll probably offer a reference from their school/college to anyone that asks.

Premier_2

cassie55 wrote: »

So, because my contract doesn't specifically state that I shouldn't steal from my employer, I can assume that if I do it wouldn't be gross miconduct :think:.

A 17 year old doesn't (shouldn't) need it spelt out that they shouldn't steal.

Correct.

All employees are deemed to have certain responsibilities even if these are not spelt out. In simple terms, it is the responsibility to not wilfully harm the business or employees of the employer. That could be, for example, to divulge commercially sensitive data, to bad mouth the company, or probably the easiest to enforce, to steal from the company.
(But the warnings from other posters of the employer having proof is well founded, else there may be a claim on the employer)
Theft from an employer is probably the simplest form of 'wilfully harming' from a business sense as assaulting a fellow employee is to a employee sense. Both are considered gross misconduct (and may also be subject to further criminal charges)

Googlewhacker

Pee wrote: »

On the information given here, I would refuse to give the employee a reference to avoid any problems. I would not give him a bad reference.

Thats fine but you are still wrong that you cannot give a bad referance but FWIW I wouldn't risk it myself, I would just refuse to give a referance.

Sambucus_Nigra

Premier wrote: »

Correct.

All employees are deemed to have certain responsibilities even if these are not spelt out. In simple terms, it is the responsibility to not wilfully harm the business or employees of the employer. That could be, for example, to divulge commercially sensitive data, to bad mouth the company, or probably the easiest to enforce, to steal from the company.
(But the warnings from other posters of the employer having proof is well founded, else there may be a claim on the employer)
Theft from an employer is probably the simplest form of 'wilfully harming' from a business sense as assaulting a fellow employee is to a employee sense. Both are considered gross misconduct (and may also be subject to further criminal charges)

If you are 17 and have no contract and it's your first job, how do you know that?

heretolearn_2

Well I started work at 16 and I'm pretty sure I would have known I wasn't supposed to steal from my employer or punch another employee, even without having it spelled out to me... :-)

jenie_2

Have you done spot checks on his till and float during his shift ?