Statement of loss - advice please!

SarEl

The_DJ wrote: »

Four counts of direct sex disc, a further count of indirect sex disc, as put forward by judge in recent case management discussion.

In that case your statement of loss can include injury to feelings. You can't claim holiday pay - you are already claiming earnings and that covers all category of earnings. And you cannot claim breach of statutory dismissal process - they didn't dismiss you and besides which, there hasn't been one for nearly three years.

I hope you know what you are doing - a judge saying that there is a case to be heard is a sight different from winning a case.

ESKIMO

The_DJ wrote: »

I resigned because the line from the company was that they couldn't offer me anything other than my old role, knowing full well that it wasn't financially viable to come back to that role because of childcare costs. Nothing illegal in that, I know, but I was contacted out of the blue suddenly to be advised that this was the case, that I was expected back at work the following week (not correct) and that I needed to inform the respondent directly of my decision. What I didn't know was that they were lining up my department for redundancy.

You wouldn't really know until you got an official 'At Risk' Notice. Employees are often 'last to know' - officially. Come into work one day and told to go home the next.

The_DJ wrote: »

And because I felt it was inappropriate to be actively looking for freelance work whilst still employed by my former company, I felt it best that I resign. Stupid and naive in hindsight, I know, but I felt it was duplicitous and dishonest to do otherwise as I wanted to remain on good relations with them.

So what you are really saying is that you felt cohersed and pressured into making that decision based on the voulnerable condition you were in...? :A

The_DJ wrote: »

I only use this word as it was used both by ACAS and an employment solicitor. I remember finding it surprising that they both used the exact same term when I had described my situation.

"Hoodwinked" is a bit wishy-washy tbh. No, scrub that. More 'airey-fairey'. It's another way of saying mislead or implied or suggested. Basically, they planted a seed of an idea in your head. Not uncommon. But you took it. Did you 'resign' 'officially', hand in letter/notice of resignation, P45 etc?

The_DJ wrote: »

Four counts of direct sex disc, a further count of indirect sex disc, as put forward by judge in recent case management discussion.

:T

There's not much going for you as far remedy. They will in no doubt just turn around and say you resigned. But, you could as previously mentioned (and from the sounds of it) escalate your case. Slightly difficult to prove, but in theory you 'could' have a point.:)

The_DJ_2

SarEl wrote: »

In that case your statement of loss can include injury to feelings. You can't claim holiday pay - you are already claiming earnings and that covers all category of earnings. And you cannot claim breach of statutory dismissal process - they didn't dismiss you and besides which, there hasn't been one for nearly three years.

Thank you very much for your advice. Understand your point about holiday pay but presumably I can still claim it for the period of maternity leave?

One more query... If my schedule of loss doesn't start until the date at which I would have gone back to work after maternity leave, do I have to show any earnings received before this date (i.e. between date of resignation and date on which I would have gone back) as well as earnings between the period claimed?

Am assuming as you don't specifically mention them, travel expenses, loss of statutory rights and future loss of earnings all ok to include.

Thanks again for all your help.

SarEl

The_DJ wrote: »

Thank you very much for your advice. Understand your point about holiday pay but presumably I can still claim it for the period of maternity leave?

One more query... If my schedule of loss doesn't start until the date at which I would have gone back to work after maternity leave, do I have to show any earnings received before this date (i.e. between date of resignation and date on which I would have gone back) as well as earnings between the period claimed?

Am assuming as you don't specifically mention them, travel expenses, loss of statutory rights and future loss of earnings all ok to include.

Thanks again for all your help.

If your maternity leave was unpaid then there is no loss for that period, but yes, if you had earnings for that period you would have to show them. The tribunal may decide to discount them but that would be their decision. Your claim is for loss of earnings - so no, travel expenses and the costs of seeking other employment are not expenses you can claim. There is no claim for loss of statutory rights. But future loss of earnings is fine.

pinkshoes

The_DJ wrote: »

I resigned because the line from the company was that they couldn't offer me anything other than my old role, knowing full well that it wasn't financially viable to come back to that role because of childcare costs. Nothing illegal in that, I know, but I was contacted out of the blue suddenly to be advised that this was the case, that I was expected back at work the following week (not correct) and that I needed to inform the respondent directly of my decision. What I didn't know was that they were lining up my department for redundancy.

I'm somewhat confused about what happened.

You're saying that the week before you were due to return to work, they phoned you to say that you couldn't work part time, and they'd need you back full time.

Had you requested to return part time several months prior to your return to work date? (i.e. I returned to work after 9 months of maternity, but agreed part time instead of full time with my manager 6 months before I returned, allowing plenty of time to find alternative employment should they decline my part time request).

Or did you request part time work in advance, and they ignored your request?

I am struggling to see how you were "hoodwinked" into resigning.

There seems to be some information missing...

jobbingmusician

Am I the only one who interprets this as follows?

- the OP was contacted at a random date and told she was expected back the next week (which was incorrect)
- during this contact the employer stressed that the OP must return to work FT rather than PT. They had no reason to contact her at this date, since she was NOT due back to work the following week, therefore it is likely that the only reason for contact was to tell her, suddenly, that she could not return PT (which might in itself be indirect sex discrimination, might it not?) and to bully her into making an unnecesarily rapid decision.

If these assumptions are correct, sounds like a good case to me....

SarEl

jobbingmusician wrote: »

Am I the only one who interprets this as follows?

- the OP was contacted at a random date and told she was expected back the next week (which was incorrect)
- during this contact the employer stressed that the OP must return to work FT rather than PT. They had no reason to contact her at this date, since she was NOT due back to work the following week, therefore it is likely that the only reason for contact was to tell her, suddenly, that she could not return PT (which might in itself be indirect sex discrimination, might it not?) and to bully her into making an unnecesarily rapid decision.

If these assumptions are correct, sounds like a good case to me....

The problem is - they are assumptions. Sex discrimination claims means that the burden of proof is initially on the claimant - the employer doesn't have to prove anything. And the first thing that the OP will need to prove is that she was left with no choice but to resign. It may not be a claim of contructive unfair dismissal, but for these purposes it acts like one. And the OP did have another choice - appeal the decision. If we are going to play the assumptions game, let's go the whole hog...

Someone had noted an incorrect return date on the OP's personnel file, which resulted in a phone call because Mr Jones thought that she was due back and realised that the application hadn't been dealt with. No decision had been made at that time about the future of the department or the jobs therein, but because management knew it was under review it was decided that it would be inappropriate to agree a variation of contract (business decision). We were utterly surprised to get a resignation from the OP - when she pointed out that the date we were working to was incorrect we revised her file and left it at that, expecting that by that date a decision about the future would have been made. Since the OP was returning from maternity leave there was every intention, should a decision be made to make redundancies, to observe our legal duty to find her a suitable alternative employment upon her return. She didn't give us the chance to. Nobody put her under any pressure to return or to make a decision about returning (verbal telephone conversation - no proof) and we are sorry to hear that she thinks we did. If she didn't agree with the decision made we would have expected an appeal, but she didn't submit one. She just resigned. And Mr Jones knew nothing about the review of her department because it was being conducted by other managers / we were not in a position to explain to her what was happening because other staff had not been informed and the matter was still under discussion as to what we might do.

That's also an assumption - want to bet on how close it is to their defence?

lincroft1710

SarEl wrote: »

That's also an assumption - want to bet on how close it is to their defence?

I'll give you odds of 10 to 1 on.