can a disqualified director make the ultimate decision

ohreally

meluvnext wrote: »

I did not quit, quitting in my eyes is walking out, quitting for no reason I handed in notice and my letter specifically said it was due to them not being able to compromise on a fair arangement for me doing on call.

And what did this achieve?

Edit: I'm going to bow out here, life's too short. Good luck in achieving a positive outcome.

Perhaps you may find this useful...

A claim for statutory holiday pay must be brought under the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR) and cannot be brought as an unlawful deduction of wages (Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Ainsworth & others [2005] EWCA Civ 441 ([2005] IRLR 465)).

patman99

OP, can I assume that when you are working from home you are logged in to the company network (either via a VPN or a browser-based remote log-in)?.
If so, you should submit the relevent request to your former employers IT manager asking for a list of all the dates and times on which you were logged-on to the company system.

Using these, you can then calculate how many hours you worked from home and claim pay for them. After all, you are legally entitled to it (and possibly at O/T rates too).

As you were on £6 p/h, then the extra hours worked for nothing would push you under the NMW and drop them in the mire with a big fine and a court order to pay you the missing cash to bring your average up to NMW at least.

SarEl

meluvnext wrote: »

... some jumped up illegally acting director...

I am making this point one last time and then I am off with ohreally - this person was NOT acting illegally. A director of a company is a legally appointed position and this person did not hold such a position or exercise such a position. Therefore they were not acting illegally. If you have a case, which we are still by no means certain you do, and you go into a tribunal ranting and raving in this way, then anything you have to say which is pertinent may be lost in the fact that you are sounding like a lunatic. People here have tried their very best to help you but you appear to be stuck "tilting at imaginary windmills".

Tiddlywinks

As this thread has progressed you have added more items to your list of 'they done me wrongs' - you are beginning to sound a bit obsessive.

A company can appoint anyone they consider suitable to undertake duties on their behalf. Just because someone is a disqualified director does not mean they are unemployable. Indeed, they may have many transferable skills to bring to a business.

What are the actual facts of your case? What do you want to achieve?

Carrying on just ranting and name calling isn't really demonstrating a reasoned approach really is it?

meluvnext

Of course I have a case, a solicitor has indeed clarified this and would only step in if I was to raise a disability by association tribunal because the holiday pay is not enough for them to act upon, funny how then thedepartment who deals with insolvency was very very interested in the disqualified director who is taking upon these duties.

Also ACAS would not have stepped in unless I was correct.

As for the logging into company systems etc, no, that was not the case, took laptop and mobile home, worked off a spreadsheet, and they only actually looked at the time we spent making calls, not the time we spent texting or receiving calls because people who we tried to get in touch with were not available and rang us back later, this in fact was the most time consuming of all.

My agreement was work on call for time off in lieu to enable me to go to appointments, they refused so did not keep to their end of the agreement, meaning I worked for nothing.

And to right, yes I am annoyed, I have every reason to be, I did my work, receiving calls at 2am in the morning is hard work, it woke my daughter up, but I did it, I wonder if I had have come on here before I agreed to take that job and said I have been offered a job but having second thoughts on takng it, people would have said take it, beggars cannot be choosers. But how many of you would have agreed to work for nothing?

You only have to look at the hoigh turnover of staff to see there is something wrong!

antrobus

SarEl wrote: »

I am making this point one last time and then I am off with ohreally - this person was NOT acting illegally. A director of a company is a legally appointed position and this person did not hold such a position or exercise such a position.....

meluvnext wrote: »

I was last working for a company where a person who is not the director but makes the ultimate decisions within the company and acts as the director ...

The Companies Act defines a shadow director as a person who instructs other directors what to do and those directors follow his instructions. Individuals who act in this way are deemed to have the same liabilities as properly appointed directors.

http://www.gillhams.com/dictionary/201.cfm

DVardysShadow

meluvnext wrote: »

I did on call as noone else liked to do it, I was offered time off for my disabled childs hospital appointments in return for being on call, however when it came to using that time off they refused. Not what was agreed to, I would never have agreed to doing 3 weeks on call and one week off if they infromed me it was for nothing I certainly would have agreed to doing my fair share if it was part of the job and each member of staff take a week in turn but there was me doing on call and noone else doing it.

meluvnext wrote: »

I did not quit, quitting in my eyes is walking out, quitting for no reason I handed in notice and my letter specifically said it was due to them not being able to compromise on a fair arangement for me doing on call. Which then leads me to other questions, did they see me as an easy target as I was a single parent wih a disabled child and just thought I had nothing else to do besides doing on call. I as I am sure many other people would never agree to doing that level of work unpaid, especially when your only earning a poxy £6 an our for the work you do in the office.

You are in a total muddle. They have not held to their agreement, but you have done nothing to establish what they have agreed to. Nor have you attempted to hold them to their agreement. You should have been working to then agreement you think you had and putting them in the position of having to sack you.

As you have walked out, you have put yourself in a very weak position. You have failed to defend yourself on the points you do have in your favour and you are wasting effort on trying to pick at this disqualified director. Hence the totally justified comment from ohreally about being assertive.

meluvnext wrote: »

I am assertive, but would not put up with the verbal abuse from some jumped up illegally acting director. He claimed if you dont like it you know what to do (gestured towards the door). I am just thankful I was not the only one who walked out

You are in a total muddle. They have not held to their agreement, but you have done nothing to establish what they have agreed to. Nor have you attempted to hold them to their agreement. You should have been working to then agreement you think you had and putting them in the position of having to sack you.

As you have walked out, you have put yourself in a very weak position. You have failed to defend yourself on the points you do have in your favour and you are wasting effort on trying to pick at this disqualified director. Hence the totally justified comment from ohreally about being assertive.

I don't think you understand what it means to be assertive. You have an agreement in place and you are failing to defend that agreement, preferring instead to pick at totally irrelevant side issues like the disqualified director. That is just plain wishy-washy cowardice which is probably why they felt they could push you about and get away with it. Which they have, because you did not stand your ground.

DVardysShadow

antrobus wrote: »

http://www.gillhams.com/dictionary/201.cfm

While useful information, this is far from helpful to the OP's issue.

Emmzi

OP, you are ignoring a majority of people who disagree with you seemingly just because they disagree.

You have HR specialists and am employment lawyer telling you that you are on a hiding to nothing.

you do not understand the role of ACAS as all - they mediate they will not be "on your side."

You are not looking for advise, you are looking for people who will agree with you. Those of us with real life experience of your situation do not.

As with the others, in the words of Duncan Ballantyne, "I'm Out."

Sambucus_Nigra

Did you raise a grievance at all?