Suspended from work please help

MikeTee

Having re read the policy I'm not sure that one of the mitigations would define GM. Essentially one of my mitigating circumstances is that I have a problem with alcohol through stress relating to amongst other things the threat of bankruptcy as I am having problems maintaining my iva. Whilst my alcohol has affected my timekeeping and subsequently time I owe I've not been physically drunk at work.

I believe the allegations against me will be along the lines of abuse of official time in terms of clocking on / off, e.g forgetting to clock off when going on break / lunch and clocking in and not immediately beginning work.

SarEl

I thought it might be. And you have to understand - from an employers point of view this is theft, if it is deemed that you have claimed to have worked time and been paid for it when you have not. Which is certainly gross misconduct, and dismissal is within the range of reasonable outcomes. A policy does not have to state every single thing that defines gross misconduct. You may not have been physically drunk at work, but the employer is entitled to not care whether your reason was that you were drunk the night before. So any mitigation is going to have to give them some glimmer of hope that you are going to resolve this problem, and your word for it is likley not going to be enough.

pollywol

jazzyman01 wrote: »

You have only given limited information and therefore the advise you are going to get is going to be based on the legal framework and not whether you are likely to be dismissed.

SarEl is correct - there is no right at all to have a representative at an investigation meeting - it is usually a result of the meeting that determines whether or not there will be a suspension. Any subsequent meetings you should be allowed to have a union rep or employee rep with you.

Yes - you should be given copies of any evidence that the Company is going to use in the disciplinary hearing and you should get this well in advance of the meeting - someone suggested 48 hours - I would say that is the absolute minimum. You have the right to postpone the meeting if your rep is not available or to enable you to prepare your case more fully.

Notes of the meeting should also be sent to you. If you disagree with the contents then make the changes and send a copy back immediately with the changes.

Finally, it does not have to be criminal for a Company to determine Gross Misconduct. Get a copy of the disciplinary procedure asap.

You should ask to see the notes before you leave the meeting and sign them there and then if they are correct and Jazzyman is correct, gross misconduct does not necessarily mean criminal, but on its reverse this means that just because you couldnt be arrested for it doesnt mean you couldnt be dismissed.

Please please keep your cool, if what you have said is correct about no copy of notes, no witness etc then I personally would contact a professional employment law specialist, most give a consulatation hour for free (though check that before attending!) where they will give you some really good pointers specific to your case (noone on here can really because of sketchy details) if you can not get free advice that way the citizens advice bureau is your next stop, again they will be able to give you specific advice regarding your case including your employers responsbilities to you.

As for the mitigation, this is down to the induvidual case but when I hold a meeting I usually would not take anything but the black and white facts into consideration in a misconduct case (ie no excuse for theft, fraud etc as i would have expected the employee to have seeked help with addiction or debt before letting it effect their income provider ie your employer). Mitigation would only prehaps come into mind for a performance issue. Its common sense really and I would not begin to predict the outcome of your case and i know so few of the facts.

Good luck

pollywol

make sure your employer knows you are seeking professional advice, this will ensure they dot all the i's and cross the t's!!! x:o

MikeTee

Thanks for your comments I feel very trapped as I may lose my partner who works at the sale place as a result of this if she finds out or if she sticks by me her house may be jeopordised when the inevitable bankrupcy happens. During any mitigation at the gross misconduct hearing would fears about things like this carry any weight?

SarEl

I am going to say it one more time because I want to be clear that you have understood that not all advice on here is good advice. You had no legal right to representation or a witness at any meeting other than an actual disciplinary (or grievance) meeting, and you definitely do not have a right to such at an investigatory meeting. The employer may allow it but they do not have to. Nor do you have to be required to sign the minutes of such a meeting - it is good practice but nothing more. On neither of these grounds would you have any case at all to prove in law that something unfair was done. I understand that you are grasping at straws here, and I do not want you to be misled by well-meaning but wrong information.

I am also quite surprised, once again, by our new HR professional admitting that there are certain types of cases that they would not consider mitigation in. For a start off, whilst I am not naive enough to think that this sort of thing doesn't happen, an employer is legally obliged to consider mitigation, and having decided that you will not consider it before you have even heard it is hardly acting well or in the spirit of the law. Whilst it is unfortunately the case that many employers hear mitigation without having any intention of consdiering it, it is most disappointing to hear an HR expert tg you that this is what they do, though it is perhaps fair warning to you of how these things go down in reality.

At this stage you have no benefit in seeking legal advice because you have no grounds - you have been suspended and nothing more. The majority of lawyers will not advise you until you have been, if you are, dismissed. And employment law specialists in particular will say this because they know that until that point there is no case for them - they are not general advisors and do not waste their time giving out general advice on employment rights (which you can obtain on the internet at thousands of sites). And I know this because I am an employment law specialist, and I (or to be more precise, my PA) would tell you not to waste your time and mine until there is a potential case to answer. If you use up your "free allowance" - and many specilaists do not operate under this scheme - then you cannot get it back, when you actually have something real to discuss with them about an actual dismissal. That is the point at which they would determine if their was a case to answer - not before.

MikeTee

Many many thanks for this information - I have had a long discussion with the union and explained all my points and they are going to discuss it amongst themselves. What they have suggested is possible trying to arrange a repeat of the meeting I had that resulting in suspension due to the fact that I felt unable to br fully factual.

The union said that the disciplinary panel should listen to and take on all my points and that essentially they are human and may reduce to a lesser charge particularly as dismissal leaves me in dire straights and they will take into account my previous years records.

The union rep also suggested but was unsure and will check to see if they could halt the proceedings after my new meeting in place of Fridays. I am not sure whether this will be possible given the charges levied but taking on board the true facts might in concerning the pressures and stresses of an enormous level that i have been under mean it could be.

My concerns would be that I haven't divulged my problems previously due to severe humiliation and embarrassment and they may deem that this is unnaceptable. Can anyone opinionate on this through experience or I guess just opinion.

Thanks again

jazzyman01

Just caught up and yes - SarEl - I did mean subsequent disciplinary meetings. Must check before sending replies.

Like SarEl, I would be extremely disappointed if professional HR people were not considering mitigating circumstances in any disciplinary case.

It is good practice to have you check the notes of any investigatory meeting. I have always done this because it is part of any bundle should it go to Tribunal and is beneficial if there are no arguements about the paperwork. Also, if the Company wishes to rely on anything that came up in the investigatory meeting then they will need to include in the documents sent to you whilst preparing for the case.

You are not likely to be able to undo the investigatory meeting, but may, at the Disciplinary Hearing put forward your reasons for why you were economic with the facts.

ohreally

I would strongly suggest you consider the potential implications involving an "employment specialist". This will likely result In your tu withdrawing advice and representation.

SarEl

ohreally wrote: »

I would strongly suggest you consider the potential implications involving an "employment specialist". This will likely result In your tu withdrawing advice and representation.

An excellent point which had entirely passed me by I was so shocked by the nature of the posts from an HR expert. It is standard union rules that all representation and access to legal advice will be withdrawn if you consult any outsdie legal practitioner. You cannot act on the advice of two representatives.