Help worried sick here. Gross Misconduct

Sambucus_Nigra

glasgowdan wrote: »

That is the most relevant question so far - I suspect the manager lacks a spine in this case.

I know it was my question, but the question was asked to try and draw out WHY the manager didn't and it worked.

The most important thing now for me would be to get a stronger union rep to attend - one that will argue a little better than the current one is.

However the OP seems happy that he won't get sacked because they aren't allowed to sack someone without proof, even though they don't need it - so no worries.

phathanded

Thanks Fireside and everyone else for your support. I am not aware of anything of this nature happening before nor is their any equality training in the business. I have full faith in my delegate, we are meeting beforehand for an hour to go through the evidence etc. The day in question was just like any other mundane day at work for me. Nothing of note happened, thats why I am struggling to remember who I was with at the time in question. The manager was outside in a car parking area looking into a factory through a shutter door so could only see the three people in his view despite there being other people in the department and surrounding areas.
The place where I was meant to be stood is very close to an entrance to the factory toilet so it is a heavy traffic area for empoyees. This is why i truly cannit remember who was there at that time.
Its doing my head in. I so wish I would have heard what was said because I wouldnt be in trouble right now if I had but I cant turn back the clock and hear something I didnt hear.

phathanded

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

However the OP seems happy that he won't get sacked because they aren't allowed to sack someone without proof, even though they don't need it - so no worries.

I am not saying they are not allowed to sack you with no proof. What I am saying is surely there has to be some evidence to support the accusations being made. The only evidence in this case is a managers and two employees version of events.

Sambucus_Nigra

phathanded wrote: »

I am not saying they are not allowed to sack you with no proof. What I am saying is surely there has to be some evidence to support the accusations being made. The only evidence in this case is a managers and two employees version of events.

No, sorry - as I said yesterday - they don't have to have any evidence.

As ACAS say

'If you are accused of an act of gross misconduct, you may be suspended from work on full pay, normally for no more than five working days, while the alleged offence is investigated. If, on completion of the investigation and the full disciplinary procedure, the organisation is satisfied that gross misconduct has occurred, the result will normally be summary dismissal without notice or payment in lieu of notice.'

So they just have to be satisfied that gross misconduct has occurred. If the manager is adamant that they heard it, and nobody is coming up with a name, then they can reasonably be satisfied that it occurred in that they think you know who it is but aren't saying.

I'm not saying you do or don't, just what it looks like if they are investigating it.

linkie to ACAS
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=919

phathanded

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

No, sorry - as I said yesterday - they don't have to have any evidence.

As ACAS say

'If you are accused of an act of gross misconduct, you may be suspended from work on full pay, normally for no more than five working days, while the alleged offence is investigated.

I have been suspended for 10 working days and the only investigation they have done is re-interviewed the manager. Does anyone really believe this is a thorough enough investigation?

Sambucus_Nigra

phathanded wrote: »

I have been suspended for 10 working days and the only investigation they have done is re-interviewed the manager. Does anyone really believe this is a thorough enough investigation?

Look. Get your UNION rep onto asking these questions - that's what you are paying for!

They will know the ins and outs and be in a position to argue your case. We can only comment on the matter.

phathanded

Yes Sambucus, i will get the union to ask all these questions. I just wanted some peoples individual perspectives on the issue. Obviously i am biased on this issue and I just wanted peoples honest valuation of the case against me.

SarEl

phathanded wrote: »

I am not saying they are not allowed to sack you with no proof. What I am saying is surely there has to be some evidence to support the accusations being made. The only evidence in this case is a managers and two employees version of events.

And what SamN is telling you is that no, there does not have to be any evidence. The employer only has to show reasonable belief, and what that means is that if it is your word against the managers then they can choose to believe the manager and only have to show that it was reasonable to do so.

So, playing devils advocate here.... The employer says that there have been six complaints from this manager of homophobic behaviour from employees. On each and every occasion they have no reason to disbelieve the manager, but groups of employees swear blind that nothing was said and they didn't hear anything. The employer has now come to the conclusion that this is a deliberate conspiracy amongst employees to bully and harass the manager, and to lie about this. They have reasonable belief that the manager is telling the truth and there is a conspiracy amongst some employees to act in an unlawful manner.

That would be all the "evidence" they require to show - and it would be a very convincing argument at tribunal, and quite feasibly a winning one. The fact that two of you are saying something is neither evidence that you are telling the truth (in my fictitious story above - you aren't!), nor is it a vote. The employer must weigh the evidence and come to a conclusion, but this is not a criminal court (and nor is a tribunal) and the burden of evidence is significantly different.

Of course, if I were the employer, and I believed my hypothetical situation above, I might box clever and give you a final warning - I can get you on being late or something equally trivial next week or next month and lower your chances of winning a tribunal to almost nil, provided I do it right!

phathanded

The thing is SarEl to my knowledge there has been no other incidences of homophobic behaviour in the company. Also, would the company not have to train the staff after the first incident to clarify the companys position on this issue?

saintjammyswine

Of course, if I were the employer, and I believed my hypothetical situation above, I might box clever and give you a final warning - I can get you on being late or something equally trivial next week or next month and lower your chances of winning a tribunal to almost nil, provided I do it right!

You sneaky !!!!!!!