Help worried sick here. Gross Misconduct

firesidemaid

Gosh, it really does punish you in many ways, doesn't it.

Your delegate will be able to help you to see things clearly, prioritise and see what they can/cannot do.

Are you really starting in new dept tomorrow?

Surely, as per your contract, your hours etc will be the same. I don't know what anyone else thinks but, surely your punishment cannot also be that they ALTER your contract - which surely they will have to do if they change your role/job description?

zzzLazyDaisy

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Well, usually for GM either they think you did it or they decide you didn't. If they think you did, then why not get rid of you? If they think you didn't, then drop the issue.

It's all very odd.

It often happens that an allegation has the potential to be viewed as gross misconduct sufficient to justify dismissal, but the decision maker decides to give the person another chance and give a FWW instead. Having decided the employee did the act complained of, he must then go on to consider whether dismissal is a reasonable response. For example this might happen where the employee has long service and a previous clean disciplinary record, so it is viewed as an isolated incident, so that then is the purpose of a FWW - not to instantly dismiss but to place them on warning of dismissal should concerns arise again about their conduct. So this is part of the process and open to the decision maker.

phathanded

firesidemaid wrote: »

it will be quite telling to see if they really have done enough investigating and gained enough evidence.

what has their confidentiality been like? has anyone involved in the investigation been indiscrete? has everyone at work been talking about it?
QUOTE]

They have done nothing to investigate this incident. As my delegate said in my disciplinary there is not one piece of independent evidence. Just one side against another.

There has been no confidentiality, in fact the investigating manager showed my foreman the managers complaint and statement in an informal environment before any witnesses were sought!!!

I just cant believe how much of a farce the whole incident has turned into.

phathanded

firesidemaid wrote: »

Gosh, it really does punish you in many ways, doesn't it.

Your delegate will be able to help you to see things clearly, prioritise and see what they can/cannot do.

Are you really starting in new dept tomorrow?

Surely, as per your contract, your hours etc will be the same. I don't know what anyone else thinks but, surely your punishment cannot also be that they ALTER your contract - which surely they will have to do if they change your role/job description?

Yeah I am in a new department but my job title will be the same really. It is a very similar job but very different if you know what I mean. I will be using the same tools etc but making a completely different product.

firesidemaid

'Although the most common actions are warnings or dismissal, your contract may allow other penalties such as demotion, or suspension without pay. Your employer must not change your job description as a punishment, nor fine you, unless this is allowed by your contract.'

i've been googling - the above statement is from the direct.gov website. the second half is interesting, as if you say you will be moved to a new role/dept, your job description will surely change - unless it is pretty open. OR unless this is written into your contract/disciplinary procedure.

phathanded

Thanks fireside. i am sure my delegate will know the best course of action as I really think it is him that has kept me in a job. I now think that they set out with the intention of dismissing me and my colleague (whether this is proper procedure or not) and have made a complete hash of it from start to finish. My delegate pointed out all the flaws in the case and they have realised that they would have had two tribunals on their hands. To get out of it they are issuing FWW and can get us without the tribunals later. That is how I see it. It may be biased but I have been completely honest throughout and am trying to understand and come to terms with their decision.

dandelionclock30

Yeah your probably right-they would have been at risk in an E.T.
You need to leave really.

Sambucus_Nigra

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

It often happens that an allegation has the potential to be viewed as gross misconduct sufficient to justify dismissal, but the decision maker decides to give the person another chance and give a FWW instead. Having decided the employee did the act complained of, he must then go on to consider whether dismissal is a reasonable response. For example this might happen where the employee has long service and a previous clean disciplinary record, so it is viewed as an isolated incident, so that then is the purpose of a FWW - not to instantly dismiss but to place them on warning of dismissal should concerns arise again about their conduct. So this is part of the process and open to the decision maker.

Aye, I know that. But it's not as if they can say 'next time, don't stand next to someone and not hear things'...whereas usually if someone has done something or not done something they can say 'do this/don't do this next time'.

phathanded

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

Yeah your probably right-they would have been at risk in an E.T.
You need to leave really.

Its o.k saying this but it really isnt that simple is it? I have a mortgage to pay and I am on a wage which I will struggle to find especially in the current climate.

Plus the point is I should'nt have to leave, I have done nothing wrong and I really enjoyed my job. Why should I be bullied out?

phathanded

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Aye, I know that. But it's not as if they can say 'next time, don't stand next to someone and not hear things'...whereas usually if someone has done something or not done something they can say 'do this/don't do this next time'.

Yeah what are they going to say? I think they really believe I am hiding someone. I told them why the hell would I want to hide someone, while I am going through all this and they are waltzing around work with not a care in the world. If they had done their investigation properly they could have found this third person!!! Its an absolute farce.