Sacked for excessive internet use !!

smileylondongal

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

How many of the people replying are using the internet in work to reply?
and out of the ones who aren't in work; how many have never been in an office environment where they have internet access?

there seems to be a lot of people who think that you should never be allowed near the internet unless it's your own time.

Not at work and have never used the web at work for my own personal use. And yes, your second statement is absolutely true - that's what your paid to do, not surf the net. Surely, it's common sense?

Honestly, with so many people out of work, one would think everyone who does have a job would be trying that much harder to hold on to it!

scheming_gypsy

smileylondongal wrote: »

And yes, your second statement is absolutely true - that's what your paid to do, not surf the net. Surely, it's common sense?

!

no it isn't common sense which is why companies have an internet policy which states what you can and can't do. Such as

Reasonable, limited personal use is permitted for communication with family and friends,
independent learning, and public services so long as it does not interfere with employee
productivity, prevent any business activity, incur any cost to the company or take more than a
trivial amount of your time.

Which is copy an pasted from an Info and Comms Systems Acceptable Use Policy from a previous employer, and isn't that unique in that companies do let you use the internet as long as you:
a - don't take the !!!!
b - don't run another business from work
c - aren't using it for racist / criminal / gambling activities etc

So no, it isn't absolutely true.

DCFC79

Apologies if its been covered but Were you shopping on work time ?

SarEl

DCFC79 wrote: »

Apologies if its been covered but Were you shopping on work time ?

OP said they were internet shopping, watching sports "etc" - not clear what the etc was. And OP has also not entirely elaborated on how much time OP was doing any of these things. Which they must have some clue about...

scheming_gypsy

must be a fair bit of time though as they've been asked a fair few times but not answered... lol.
Although as they say the manager only gave them a list from the browsing history, it doesn't seem like the manager / work know either...... I still trying to work out how they've been there 7 years but they were asked to resign on the 'last in first out' basis - no new staff in 7 years???

Sachin

Spoke to 2 lawyers today .
Ist one is a friend who sits on these tribunals as a lawyer . He says that in general it is unfair to dismiss someone for Internet misuse . It should be a warning. Employer threading on very thin ground unless has robust policies in place . Regarding the falsifying of time sheets it says again that can be difficult to prove on the balance of probability unless work not done or previous complaints warnings .

I then took legal advise and was told I had a good case and that they seem to have muddled things up as haven't done things procedurally right however no guarantee you ll win as tribunal will look at band of reasonable responses .

DCFC79

But were you shopping when you should have been working ?

ILW

Did you ask the employer if it was OK to use the internet for personal use during working hours?

Savvy_Sue

Sachin wrote: »

I think i may have a Case for discrimination as i was told in the meeting that others use the internet and use it all day for music sports etc. they say i used it to shop etc and that is not the same . Im a woman

If you're the only woman, and none of the men have ever done any online shopping in work time, there MAY be some sexual discrimination here, but IMO you'd have a hard time proving it, especially as I don't believe the company HAVE to let you see anyone else's browsing history.

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

From what you have said it looks like they want you out on the cheap, hence resigning not redundancy. You yourself have said work is drying up and you were the last in. When you refused they have obviously looked at if there is anything they can use to dismiss you rather than pay redundancy and it seems like they have found this internet thing as a way.

Now, if at the time the OP had looked into fair redundancy assessments, she might be in a happier situation. AFAIK last in first out does not a 'fair' consultation make ...

Any wrote: »

I assumed that is what the timesheet was for, because most office based jobs are not timesheet based unless they only get the hours down paid.. (as SarlE is saying).
Office jobs are usually set office hours so no need for timesheets.

Although I thought keeping a timesheet even for 'standard' office hours was sensible, to 'prove' that no-one was in breach of the European Working Time Directive?

hcb42

I thought that simply hid the history from anyone using same machine, is it also untraceable from any monitoring software???