Suspended from work, and I'm innocent.

Booie_2

flashg67 wrote: »

You might think this is easy to say, and I'm sorry your son is in this position, but could this be a blessing in disguise? Does he really want to work under such a foul-mouthed drunk? If my 3 years of loyal service were 'rewarded' in this way, I know what I would do!

On a practical level, the internet is a great resource to find out his rights - you could start here http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/index.htm

I suggest your son write down the facts, and stick to them so his boss can't trip him up - if your son is consistent with his 'story', and his boss has no proof, I can't see what he can do, except remove his keyholder rights (and make life uncomfortable at work....)

His emloyer will have to follow the correct procedure, or risk being sued for unfair dismissal (if it comes to that). Does his boss have any cause to think your son would steal? Is he allowed to enter alone without authority; has stuff been going missing in the past? Not suggesting any wrong doing on your son's part but the boss just be suspicious of everyone! Hopefully, come Friday, his boss will have had time to think about things rationally!

I'm sorry I never replied, but thankyou, my son got onto that link straight away and has spent the night researching.
He is sitting now writing a letter to his employer asking all the points SarEl mentioned.
He told me just now that the secretary was also in the club on Sunday, and so he should be aware of his manager drinking.
But the secretary bought him several of them!!!!!!!!
Its not looking good is it! Lets hope the chairman who is also in the meeting on friday, is a tea-totaller.

vax2002

This drinking line will be the undoing here, its hear say.
You will be presented with a "charge" and your defence will be best based on disputing this.
Bringing the management in to disrepute with hear say evidence will probally be seen as gross mis-conduct and a damn good excuse to cut off any tribunal appeal, it is not a good line without solid reliable witnesses.
As a first rule, the truth is what you can make them believe, not what you can prove, its a kangaroo court.
They should be no justifiable reason if you have to go alone why the hearing can not be recorded on to audio tape as long as you agree to provide a copy and the battery operated machine to do so for purposes of keeping an accurate transcribe of the meeting. I have seen first hand such tactics really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

minicooper272

What was the manager up to to get so rattled someone came back to find him??

I've asked for a bit of advice from my mum who was her union rep at work.

1. The manager was drunk at work and on duty - that's definitely something your son NEEDS to report. You have witnesses to say he had been drinking all day and you yourself know he was drunk on the phone. No manager should be drunk at work - not even in a pub.

2.There are no grounds to suspend your son based on a drunk guys speculation. With no evidence that your son was doing anything wrong, he wasn't caught with his hand in the cookie jar... He's been suspended unfairly

3. He can claim a grievance against his boss for the abusive phone calls. That was completely out of order and he has you to verify everything that was said (though he should have probably recorded the calls)

Whatever else, when he attends any meetings with them, he should ensure he is accompanied and should aim to have someone take notes or record the conversation (in case it comes to unfair dismissal).

Your son is definitely not in the wrong here but he may find returning to work will be too awkward. I would still encourage him to clear his name though before moving on - he does not want to have this hanging over him.

minicooper272

vax2002 wrote: »

This drinking line will be the undoing here, its hear say.
You will be presented with a "charge" and your defence will be best based on disputing this.
Bringing the management in to disrepute with hear say evidence will probally be seen as gross mis-conduct and a damn good excuse to cut off any tribunal appeal, it is not a good line without solid reliable witnesses.

It's not hear say. The son put the phone on speaker, his dad heard that the boss was drunk. Several staff in the bar served him alcohol and can back it up that he had been drinking. If that's not possible, the OP said that there are CCTV cameras in the bar. They could look back at this and see how many he was served and whether he appeared in control of his actions later in the evening. This would be a last resort though.

vax2002

Some Common sense, The CCTV, you can only have a copy if it is to be used to provide evidence against you, they are under no Duty to keep it otherwise and could just destroy it and that would be the end of once its gone.
Witnesses: Of no use unless they come to the hearing, stand up and say it out loud, so it is not if they can back it up, its if they will, you tend to find people have limited memory's once it looks like they may end up in the same soup .
as I have said, this is a Kangaroo court where they are prosecutor and judge, my gut feeling is he will be called in and sacked.
I would attempt to find some union representation first, failing that plonk a tape recorder in the middle of the table and let them outline the case and state that you dispute the allegations and state why, keeping it very focused on what you are there for, what you are suspended for.
I would leave the arguing points for the tribunal, where they wont be able to Kangaroo court the proceedings and will have the onus on them to prove the allegations. This is Bar Job at a WMC not a local council, I doubt the meeting will last more than a few minutes and involve a p45 and holiday pay pre-prepared.

mountainofdebt

vax2002 wrote: »

as I have said, this is a Kangaroo court where they are prosecutor and judge, my gut feeling is he will be called in and sacked.
I would attempt to find some union representation first, failing that plonk a tape recorder in the middle of the table and let them outline the case and state that you dispute the allegations and state why, keeping it very focused on what you are there for, what you are suspended for.
I would leave the arguing points for the tribunal, where they wont be able to Kangaroo court the proceedings and will have the onus on them to prove the allegations. This is Bar Job at a WMC not a local council, I doubt the meeting will last more than a few minutes and involve a p45 and holiday pay pre-prepared.

You've changed your tune - according to your earlier posts usdaw would be more than willing to help the OP's son out, even though he wasn't a member.

Whilst (regretably) I agree with you that the outcome has already been decided and that the disciplinary is nothing more than a process to be followed, it seems stupid not to follow the advice of SarEl who - presumably - has more knowledge of employment law than all of us put together (unless you also are an employment law barrister?)

Also presumably before the ET, the OP's son would have to lodge an appeal?

OP - if it does come to your son being dismissed, does your household insurance cover legal help and if so would your son be covered by the policy ? May be worth checking out, just in case?

SarEl

vax2002 wrote: »

Some Common sense, That would be nice - are you going to use any?

The CCTV, you can only have a copy if it is to be used to provide evidence against you, This is not true. If CCTV evidence is available then you have a legal right to obtain it - albeit that does not mean that they won't deny it exists any longer.

they are under no Duty to keep it otherwise and could just destroy it and that would be the end of once its gone. Nobody said they had a legal duty to keep it, and everyone has said that they are likley to dispose of it - but if it exists there is still a right to discover it - and if it doesn't it raises an interesting question as to why solid evidence of what we assume (since the employer has not yet clarified the allegations) to be an alleged attempt at theft, was destroyed.

Witnesses: Of no use unless they come to the hearing, stand up and say it out loud, so it is not if they can back it up, its if they will, you tend to find people have limited memory's once it looks like they may end up in the same soup . Whilst I broadly agree about people's memories, witness statements are not required to be in person at a disciplinary - that is up to the employer. But what re the wirtnesses going to say anyway - there were no actual witnesses to any of this except mum to the phone calls.

as I have said, this is a Kangaroo court where they are prosecutor and judge, my gut feeling is he will be called in and sacked. Wow, nobody else thought of that one!

I would attempt to find some union representation first, How many times? He is not in a union, and despite this lovely myth that you seem to have picked up that paying so many weeks money up front will get you representation - it just isn't true.

failing that plonk a tape recorder in the middle of the table Ah yes, great advice. because they will let you record the proceedings, won't they? This is real life and not a John Wayne film - if the OP's son does this they will stop the proceedings, remove the tape recorder and then carry on without it.

and let them outline the case and state that you dispute the allegations and state why, keeping it very focused on what you are there for, what you are suspended for.

I would leave the arguing points for the tribunal, Great advice - don't argue your points in the hearing, leave them until the tribunal. Then the employer can point out to the tribunal that their reasonable belief was based on the case you presented at the hearing, and what you are now arguing at tribunal is totally different. Which of course would be a vlaid defence for the employer.

where they wont be able to Kangaroo court the proceedings and will have the onus on them to prove the allegations. This is Bar Job at a WMC not a local council, No. It isn't. At a Working mens Club. That is what you think because you suggested it was and the OP did not respond. It isn't. I know for a fact it isn't. And I am going to say it again. An employer does not have to prove allegations at a tribunal. Tribunals do not re-hear hearing and come to their own conclusion. In law they are not permitted to do this. They only determine whether the law has been applied in relation to process, and whther the employer is within the bounds of reasonable belief - and that can be based on hearsay and the managers word for something.

I doubt the meeting will last more than a few minutes and involve a p45 and holiday pay pre-prepared.

At the moment, whilst this is not technically a legal situation because a disciplinary does not have to abide by legal process, so any advioce may have merit, your advice does appear to constantly and consistantly ignore any actual facts. And where they are missing you make them up to fit your version of events. This is not helpful to the OP or anyone else.

SarEl

vax2002 wrote: »

This drinking line will be the undoing here, its hear say.
You will be presented with a "charge" and your defence will be best based on disputing this.
Bringing the management in to disrepute with hear say evidence will probally be seen as gross mis-conduct and a damn good excuse to cut off any tribunal appeal, it is not a good line without solid reliable witnesses.
As a first rule, the truth is what you can make them believe, not what you can prove, its a kangaroo court.
They should be no justifiable reason if you have to go alone why the hearing can not be recorded on to audio tape as long as you agree to provide a copy and the battery operated machine to do so for purposes of keeping an accurate transcribe of the meeting. I have seen first hand such tactics really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Hearsay is not unacceptable in a disciplinary - this is not a court of law. The employer must determine a reasonable belief based on everything they are told, and it would be entirely stupid not to mention that the manager had been drinking. I doubt it will help, because they know this (since the Secretary was there when he was drinking), but you should never tailor your version of events to suit the hearing (inless of course you are lying - which might be found out). Saying the manager was drinking is not a dismissable offence and certainly not gross misconduct - it is a fact. Please don't be silly - it isn't bringing the management into disrepute to tell the truth! And it certainly would not affect any tribunal hearing - which is not and never will be an appeal because tribunals do not hear appeals, employers do.

There is a very justifibale reason why you cannot have a tape recorder with you - the employer is entitled to refuse you permission and there is nothing you can do about it.

no-oneknowsme

vax2002 wrote: »

Have you come here for advice or sympathy ?
I am confused.
I will ask again, HOW LONG has your son worked in this Job

How bloo dy rude are you! :mad:.

If you had read the original post then you wouldnt need to ask this question ONCE never mind TWICE!

The OP states (on the last line) "after 3 years of loyal service...."

Just a suggestion but the OP seems to be doing ok on the thread with help from the others so maybe you should take your snotty attitude elsewhere!

no-oneknowsme

Op , I have just finished reading the entire thread.

Please , take the advice of SarEL on board and your Son will not go far wrong. SarEL's advice is spot on.

Good luck to your Son in his disciplinary and please up-date the thread with any developments.