Dont want tupe

SarEl

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

That may be internal policy but a failure to follow it would not give rise to any form of legal redress on its own. There would have to be some other unlawful discriminatory element as well. So basically, you may be right, but apart from getting your union involved (which you have done) and possibly commencing a grievance, there isn't much you can do. Even if you force their hand and get an interview, you can be pretty certain that if they don't wish to give you a job, they won't and there won't be much you can do about it.

To be honest, and apologies for sounding harsh, they are probably pleased to see you leave under TUPE.

It is important that you understand that TUPE is not a redundancy situation, so your employer has no duty to offer you alternative employment. Your job continues to exist with the new employer, with your continuity of service protected, together with your existing terms and conditions (for the time being at least).

You may find it a bit of a culture shock working in a commercial environment though!

I agree entirely, but I don't think the poster wants to hear this - they've been told often enough! What the OP fails to wish to hear is that there is a difference between "wrong" and "unlawful". If they don't hear what they want to hear it's "wrong".

SarEl

mcfisco wrote: »

I've rejected many applicants - internal and external - because I didn't like them, regardless of their application/CV details
Usually my notes would say something a bit more diplomatic; like .. "I didn't believe they would fit in well with the team" etc.

It's a subjective assessment but one that I was trusted to make, I don't ever recall being over-ruled

I can't say that I approve of the subjectivity - it can lose you a lot of good employees. But you would be far from unusual in doing this - many interviewers so it. And like you, always have a great paper trail to prove that they didn't!

publicsectorworker

SarEl wrote: »

I can't say that I approve of the subjectivity - it can lose you a lot of good employees. But you would be far from unusual in doing this - many interviewers so it. And like you, always have a great paper trail to prove that they didn't!

It looks like this is what has happened to me. HR have agreed that the warnings against me would of counted if they were not expired so past disaplinaries do not count even if they are gross misconduct which is what management are saying. the union said if the management didnt know me they wouldnt assume and if disaplinaries arent one of the questions for everyone else they cant ask about that and use it against me in my application. they are asking for copies of interview questions to see if this was on there. if its not and the other person i know got an interview i have a copy of his application management will have some explaining to do.

ILW

SarEl wrote: »

I can't say that I approve of the subjectivity - it can lose you a lot of good employees. But you would be far from unusual in doing this - many interviewers so it. And like you, always have a great paper trail to prove that they didn't!

Many people can look great on paper, but the point of an interview is to get a feel of them. It is possible to have a perfect CV but be a totally obnoxious individual that could never be any good at a particular job.

That is the reason for holding interviews and it will always have an element of subjectivity.

Notmyrealname

publicsectorworker wrote: »

It looks like this is what has happened to me. HR have agreed that the warnings against me would of counted if they were not expired so past disaplinaries do not count even if they are gross misconduct which is what management are saying. the union said if the management didnt know me they wouldnt assume and if disaplinaries arent one of the questions for everyone else they cant ask about that and use it against me in my application. they are asking for copies of interview questions to see if this was on there. if its not and the other person i know got an interview i have a copy of his application management will have some explaining to do.

If you fill in application forms the way you post, as a private sector employer I'd just throw yours in the bin.

I suspect the reason you don't want TUPE is because you know that in the private sector you'll be out on your ear in no time.

if its not and the other person i know got an interview i have a copy of his application management will have some explaining to do.

From what I can gather from the illiterate drivel you've just posted you have a copy of another persons application? And how have you got a copy of this other persons application? Are you deliberately trying to get yourself fired because that is what will happen if you produce it.

publicsectorworker

Notmyrealname wrote: »

If you fill in application forms the way you post, as a private sector employer I'd just throw yours in the bin.

I suspect the reason you don't want TUPE is because you know that in the private sector you'll be out on your ear in no time.


From what I can gather from the illiterate drivel you've just posted you have a copy of another persons application? And how have you got a copy of this other persons application? Are you deliberately trying to get yourself fired because that is what will happen if you produce it.

my form was read and spell checked by someone else. yes i have a copy of a friends application who got an interview. he know so nothing wrong with that. anyway the union can see copys of everyones application to see if they have been scored right.

Peelerfart

Stevie Wonder? Ray Charles?

BobQ

publicsectorworker wrote: »

It looks like this is what has happened to me. HR have agreed that the warnings against me would of counted if they were not expired so past disaplinaries do not count even if they are gross misconduct which is what management are saying. the union said if the management didnt know me they wouldnt assume and if disaplinaries arent one of the questions for everyone else they cant ask about that and use it against me in my application. they are asking for copies of interview questions to see if this was on there. if its not and the other person i know got an interview i have a copy of his application management will have some explaining to do.

I agree with you to a point. Applicants should be treated fairly, the sift should be done in the same way for all and the interviews should be conducted fairly. If this is not happening you should challenge it. If your application form has been sifted out unfairly you have reason to complain.

A procedure that says hat disciplinary offences time expire and need not be highlighed on a form is fair enough to prevent those who are unaware of the cases from being influenced by a cryptic summary. However, you cannot expect a panel to forget what they know about an applicant during an interview. Its equally possible they are aware that an external candidate has delivered bad service from their dealings with the Council, or that an applicant is very competent from personal experience. Should they ignore this too?

From your postings above you say these past issues involved removing council property from its custody and using it do private work (presumably for some personal gain) and false bookings. I must say that if I were interviewing people and knew for a fact someone had committed fraud, abused employers trust etc I would find it difficult to ignore this fact. The aim of the interview to to select the best candidate so all information they know about is relevant in my view.

I am very supportive of unions in the workplace but saying the union proved you were not to blame is stretching a point. Had it been proven you would not have received these warnings for misconduct. Frankly many organisations (public sector too) would dismiss someone guilty of "gross misconduct" of this kind. Many would say you were lucky to keep your job in the first place.

telboyo

Don't most places sack on "Gross misconduct"

zzzLazyDaisy

All employers are entitled to dismiss if they are satisfied that GM has occurred. But they are not obliged to dismiss and some will commute the sanction to a final written warning. TBH local government and other non-profit making organisations will often go to the ends of the earth to avoid dismissing an employee, even if they really deserve it (not saying that is what happened here, but it is fairly common).