Suspended from work, and I'm innocent.

SarEl

Oh this is what I was actually hoping for but didn't dare suggest to hope for it. Can I be clear - they let you and your friend in as witnesses? THis cannot be classed as an investigatory meeting - they said it was a hearing in their letter to you! They have failed to comply with the law on arranging that hearing. Allowed the meeting to run out of control, allowed the manager to demonstrate his behaviour in front of witnesses (presumably when he is not entirely rat-arsed, so I don't think anyone needs to imagine what he is like when he is), admitted that they had no idea what they were doing... O joy of joys.

You write to the employer enclosing a copy of the minutes of the hearing (in the greatest detail possible), saying that they have had their hearing, repeating all the stuff about failing to comply with the law, and pointing out that they have failed at the hearing to produce any evidence or even an allegation. In addition to this they have allowed the manager to act in an abusive and bullying way in the hearing without exercising any control over their employee (you might even want to add that you could smell alcohol on his breath - true or not they have entered a war and all is fair), which ably demonstrates both the veracity of your evidence about the managers conduct, and also that they have put your health and safety at risk by allowing intimidation of the employe and his "friend" in the hearing, in plain sight of the management committee members, without addressing his behaviour. On this basis, since they have, at the hearing, found no case to answer and have made no allegatiuons, in addition to allowing unlawful intimidation and bullying to occur without addressing this, they have not acted in a way that is to be expected from an employer.

You are going to like the next bit! You may then say that in light of the breach of trust and confidence by the employer in this matter, and for good measure list them all again, you are treating this as a breach of contract by the employer of the most severe kind, and intend to sue for unfair dismissal. You are also taking legal advice on the options in relation to the managers behaviour, which is clearly in breach of the law, as a possible criminal act and / or bullying and intimidation, which is a separate legal action in civil law under health and safety obligations, as well as considering action against the employers by permitting this behaviour to continue in their presence, making them vicariously liable for the actions.

I should imagine I can predict what any legal advice is going to say. Settle - now. If they are foolish enough to continue stacking up evidence for you - allow them to. Remember the advice about recordings? I didn't tell you to do such a thing at all. If they come back to negotiate, which anyone with any intelligence will, you start from twelve months salary in view of how hard it is to get a job at the moment and a guaranteed gold-plated good reference, the wording to be agreed in advance, under a legally binding compromise agreement the legal costs of which they will pay for. You settle for 6 months and the reference - if you negotiate hard you may get more. Son will then be entitled to claim JSA based on his contributions and not being dismissed, and I suspect that he won't take much time to find something else - he doesn't sound like a shirker, and I doubt you would let him anyway!

You can PM me the text of the letter if you want to run it past me.

SarEl

I am adding this to the site from your PM Booie - because some people around here need to hear it. You have now also told me that the continuing suspension is unpaid. Was it before? This is almost certainly unlawful too. Another breach of trust and confidence. One can almost wonder, in light of their actions, if the employer actually knows what the term means?

There are times on this site, and I do not deny it, when people lie to us and do so so obviously that it is impossible not to comment. There are also times when people think they are "entitled" despite appalling behaviour on their own part. In neither case do I think it inappropriate to be utterly clear, or to point out the fact that the poster is acting inappropriately. But, and this is addressed to Bendix - I think it is going too far. There have been times when I cannot help but agree with your comments, but they are becoming fewer and further between. Being a long time poster does not absolve you of being a troll, or of being exceptionally abusive in circumstances where it is entirely uncalled for. I decided not to respond to your previous comments because it was not worth the effort. I am now telling you that you do not know what I know, or how I may have verified that. Not everyone who comes on this site is an out and out liar - most are not. If you think that any of the beahviour from this manager or this employer is justified, then you have serious problems in relation to what you think fair conduct is. What you are doing now is out and out bullying of posters, and I recommend that you consider this opinion as carefully (or preferably more carefully) than you consider your expectations that others respect your views.. It is not funny. It is not even a little amusing. It is bullying.

Booie_2

SarEl wrote: »

I am adding this to the site from your PM Booie - because some people around here need to hear it. You have now also told me that the continuing suspension is unpaid. Was it before? This is almost certainly unlawful too. Another breach of trust and confidence. One can almost wonder, in light of their actions, if the employer actually knows what the term means?

Sorry SarEl, that is what they said first, they said they'd investigate and then have another disciplinary next Friday, to which my friend said, we've not recieved CCTV as requested last week, no allegations, etc etc, we need 2 weeks, to arrange defense, Secretary then said with no pay, she said, no way, uk laws, etc etc, then he changed it to 2 weeks further suspension with full pay. So he is being paid, but they tried to get away without paying!

I'm a bit confused, do we continue with this charade and go to the next disciplinary, and then the appeal, or do we just get on with contacting employers with breach of trust and confidential allegation, H&S allegations etc and finding a lawyer too.

SarEl

Booie wrote: »

Sorry SarEl, that is what they said first, they said they'd investigate and then have another disciplinary next Friday, to which my friend said, we've not recieved CCTV as requested last week, no allegations, etc etc, we need 2 weeks, to arrange defense, Secretary then said with no pay, she said, no way, uk laws, etc etc, then he changed it to 2 weeks further suspension with full pay. So he is being paid, but they tried to get away without paying!

I'm a bit confused, do we continue with this charade and go to the next disciplinary, and then the appeal, or do we just get on with contacting employers with breach of trust and confidential allegation, H&S allegations etc and finding a lawyer too.

You do what I have told you to do. You don't need a lawyer yet (if you ever do) - do not pay until you need to!

I have already told you - this was their hearing. They put it in writing! They had their shot - now it is our turn, and we are infinitely better than they are! Just write the letter, send it to me and we will make it the most frightening thing they (or their solicitor) have ever seen. Meanwhile, you do as you are told - without doing so. If your son is instructed to turn up somewhere the he does - with a witness. On each and every occasion you repeat everything I have told you, everything that is in the latter, and you allege breach of trust and confidence, and then you shut up and saying nothing more.

I doubt it will come to this unless the employer really is scarily stupid. They are going to settle if they get any legal advice at all. They are now, with a witness, which you did not have previously, in seriously bad territory for them. I do not give a !!!! what the manager says about refusing to work with your son - that is not a disciplinary offence and they have to be bloody stupid to think it is. And to allow threatening behaviour in the hearing - unheard of.

And there is now more than enough information out here to identify the employers and your son - so let's not worry about it because they are not in a position to quibble now - this is not a working mens club as many people here have assumed. It is the sort of private club that has members who think they are better than everyone else, and has a C in the title. Which is an excellent reason as far as I am concerned to do whatever I can to help the OP take them down. One small step for two women, one huge step....

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone

Just a reminder that this is an open forum that anyone can read so please be very careful what you say and do on it. Plus, a reminder, that we ask forum users not to exchange personal details.

Thanks!

Andrea

dickydonkin

I just love it when SarEl has the bit between her teeth and is in full flow!

Great stuff!

SarEl

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

Just a reminder that this is an open forum that anyone can read so please be very careful what you say and do on it. Plus, a reminder, that we ask forum users not to exchange personal details.

Thanks!

Andrea

And to my knowledge nobody has been exchanging personal details. Providing an offer of reviewing a draft document is not exchanging personal details.

no-oneknowsme

SarEl wrote: »

And to my knowledge nobody has been exchanging personal details. Providing an offer of reviewing a draft document is not exchanging personal details.

I read Andrea's post and couldnt quite figure out what exchange of personal details she was referring to either...

I then decided that she must have been talking about your offer to let Booie send you the draft of her letter for your opinion before she sent it to the Employer.

I dont think Andrea relised that Booie was simply sending you the draft via pm and so no personal details were being revealed.

jobbingmusician

I also wondered if Andrea was worried about people guessing the employer, and being able to identify anyone personally...... Far fetched, I know, but it did seem to me like a sensible time for a reminder (not that SarEl would have needed it, but SOMEONE might just have jumped in).

SarEl

Or possibly, since the site team spend little time actually looking at the stuff on this board judging by the pointless and abusive attacks on any public sector worker who dares to post here, and this post appeared at exactly the point in time when I complained to the site team about the excessive abuse of any public sector worker posting here about anything, and the fact that this was making the whole site a no go area for anyone in the public sector - maybe it was as a result of my complaint. The answer to which was to "not contact them because this e-mail address was only to report abuse" - an interesting definition of abuse, one that doesn't actually include abuse.

Anyway, it doesn't matter because I have had enough of it. This isn't a site for employees to ask genuine questions and get answers - it's a place for people to ask questions and if they mention the phrase public sector, get abused of being weak, lazy or a scrounger.

So no, I haven't and wouldn't be contacting the OP personally - I value my own privacy too much for that. But she does know where else on the web to find me. On a site with moderators who actually care.

No doubt this post will disappaer soon anyway.