Legally is an employer allowed to.....

sho_me_da_money

marybelle01 wrote: »

You just don't tet it. In the real world this isn't a trial - it is a disciplinary hearing and the employer is allowed to correct any mistakes they make, and you are assuming they will get "shredded" in a tribunal when in the real world all likelihood is that they will not. The problem is that the real world you think exists doesn't exist. Employers are not held to the same standards as criminal cases.

Im not assuming nothing. Everything I have said has been told to me by HR Directors. They are highly qualified people with over 20 years of experience.

I have no idea where we stand in this case but I presume you and/or other memebers of the forum are offering your advice based on a similar set of credentials.

As I say, i just want some opinions and I am grateful for yours despite it be contrary to what I have been told.

Savvy_Sue

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

Im not assuming nothing. Everything I have said has been told to me by HR Directors. They are highly qualified people with over 20 years of experience.

And your friend also has a union rep: what do they say?

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

I have no idea where we stand in this case but I presume you and/or other memebers of the forum are offering your advice based on a similar set of credentials.

You have no way of knowing or checking anyone's credentials here. If you've got experienced and qualified people available to give advice IRL, I don't think you'll learn much here.

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

As I say, i just want some opinions and I am grateful for yours despite it be contrary to what I have been told.

So do you not believe the advice you've had IRL? Because if you or your friend want advice you can absolutely rely on, you need to pay for it.

But key point, what does the union say?

sho_me_da_money

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

And your friend also has a union rep: what do they say?

You have no way of knowing or checking anyone's credentials here. If you've got experienced and qualified people available to give advice IRL, I don't think you'll learn much here.

So do you not believe the advice you've had IRL? Because if you or your friend want advice you can absolutely rely on, you need to pay for it.

But key point, what does the union say?

Hello Sue,

Thank you for your feedback.

We have a meeting scheduled with the rep and I would like to attend with the employee to get a better understanding of the matter. As soon as I find out, I will report back.

Thanks,

Pricivius

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

...

In this case, the employee is NOT guilty and the company has failed to offer her a fair and reasonable chance to defend herself because the points she has raised have been dismissed without investigation (well intially).

YOu've made the point yourself - initially. In the real world, companies make mistakes and people get things wrong. That's why the appeals procedure is in place, so that a company can look over everything they did and make sure that the second chance is taken and they get it right. I cannot see and have never seen a Tribunal find against an employer who corrected mistakes on appeal. Maybe they will be criticised, maybe the Tribunal won't think much of the employer, but as long as they act within the band of reasonable responses eventually, there is nothing the Tribunal can do.

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

I absolutely agree with you where you say the liklihood of these decisions are pre-determined in the mind. However, in the real world, they have to follow a law and procedure where they offer the defendant a fair trial. Now, in many situations the employee has no chance in proving the intention of an employer. However, in this particular situation, dont you think the employer has shown enough rope for the employee to demonstate a case where it could be proven that they were unbias, unfair, followed a pis-poor (illegal) procedure and had predetermined the decision from the outset?

I'm afraid I don't. I see mistakes have been made and the company is trying to rectify the situation. This is perfectly possible for them to do - for example, if they bring in a whole new disciplinary officer and new HR support who know nothing of the previous failings, the decision will be taken without any influence from the previous team. Alternatively, they can bring in an independant team from outside the company to make the decision. The fact that they may have started off on the wrong foot can be rectified without any impact on the decision which is eventually made. Hence my previous suggestion that you are jumping the gun. If they bring in a whole new team and handle this impeccably from here on in, a Tribunal will not be able to decide the whole procedure was unfair based on the earlier mistakes.

Wait and see what they do, but keep an open mind - best not to start rubbing your hands together with glee at the thought of a huge payout just yet...

ohreally

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

We have a meeting scheduled with the rep and I would like to attend with the employee

Whats your remit/ interest here as the rep is unlikely to hold the meeting as a comittee?

It may be better to let your friend and the rep have the meeting without your presence.

mynameistallulah

Can anyone recall the name of the other thread on this subject, the OP was using a different username and I can't find it. The "friend" worked at a nursery?

Thought it might help for background info!

Evilm

mynameistallulah wrote: »

Can anyone recall the name of the other thread on this subject, the OP was using a different username and I can't find it. The "friend" worked at a nursery?

Thought it might help for background info!

Cached version of the thread you thought was linked. The actual thread has been deleted.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lqXMZqXmES8J:forum.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3844931+http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3844931&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

The user in question has no posts visible on this site at all.

mynameistallulah

Evilm wrote: »

Cached version of the thread you thought was linked. The actual thread has been deleted.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lqXMZqXmES8J:forum.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3844931+http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3844931&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

The user in question has no posts visible on this site at all.

That's the user, thank you! Seem to recall there were two threads, any chance you can find the other one too?

(It seems to be called "Investigation and Disciplinary - same?" but I can only get the first few posts. )

Evilm

All I can find is this: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mRZcw3f_vxsJ:forum.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D3839429+Investigation+and+Disciplinary+-+same+moneysavingexpert&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

I think it only does the first page anyway.

BobQ

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

Hello Sue,

Thank you for your feedback.

We have a meeting scheduled with the rep and I would like to attend with the employee to get a better understanding of the matter. As soon as I find out, I will report back.

Thanks,

While I realise you are trying to help your friend, posting information about what happens in a confidential meeting between your friend and her union rep is not in your friend's best interest. I also think that you should stay out of this matter if she is now getting objective advice.

You have already posted enough on this site (under different aliases) to enable an employer to potentially identify your friend.

Let the union rep deal with it, or help your friend get reliable advice. The union rep can ask questions about the law by consulting with Unison legal advisors as needed.

Its not a soap opera that you need to report back on.