Disciplinary? Help

micflair_2

vax2002 wrote: »

Come forward with what hear say evidence.
A private conversation is just that.
Admit nothing.

Its no longer a private conversation though. Doesnt matter if its hear say or not, onus is on the employee to prove they did not say it - not the other way around Im afraid as wrong as that is.

whitewing

Your neighbour ran down the school and the local cafe. It is a shame that she could not have used her big mouth to promote the event and get more people to turn up.

vax2002

The employer can believe what they want, a employment tribunal wont and with no admission that the conversation even occurred it will be a very quick case as well.
To start explaining this that and the other, confirms 3 things.
that you were there
That you were involved
That something along the lines did occur.
Without these 3 things they have nothing other than the words of a local gossip.

micflair_2

vax2002 wrote: »

The employer can believe what they want, a employment tribunal wont and with no admission that the conversation even occurred it will be a very quick case as well.
To start explaining this that and the other, confirms 3 things.
that you were there
That you were involved
That something along the lines did occur.
Without these 3 things they have nothing other than the words of a local gossip.

A local gossip.. or a few local gossips - all saying the same person told them - all saying exact figures that will match upto the actual figures in question.. bit more to it than what you are saying.

In the real world, the OP's neighbour will be in bother.

You could sit there and deny everything, wont help you in anyway at all. Could be worth a try, but I think that silence says everything in a situation like this.

A bit more info from the OP would help, maybe how many people did the person tell, and who where they etc. How has it got back to the school..

micflair_2

On another note - the school would have to be pretty stupid to get involved in firing someone on this kind of proof anyway.

Now if the person had put it on facebook etc then they would not have a leg to stand on..

Sambucus_Nigra

micflair wrote: »

On another note - the school would have to be pretty stupid to get involved in firing someone on this kind of proof anyway.

Now if the person had put it on facebook etc then they would not have a leg to stand on..

No employer needs proof - they just need to think that it happened.

All this stuff and nonsense about 'deny everything' 'they have nothing other than the words of a gossip' is piffle. That's all they need!

The employer has heard a staff member basically bringing the school into disrepute and that can be classed as gross misconduct.

Yes, the person could be sacked.

Yes, they should be entitled to either a colleague or a union rep in disciplinary proceedings.

micflair_2

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

No employer needs proof - they just need to think that it happened.

All this stuff and nonsense about 'deny everything' 'they have nothing other than the words of a gossip' is piffle. That's all they need!

The employer has heard a staff member basically bringing the school into disrepute and that can be classed as gross misconduct.

Yes, the person could be sacked.

Yes, they should be entitled to either a colleague or a union rep in disciplinary proceedings.

This is what I said, just think they would be stupid to go there as such.. but we all know they can - and will if needs be.

I totally agree, the `deny everything' technique would not work anyway, would just make the person look even more guilty in my eyes.

vax2002

micflair wrote: »

Now if the person had put it on facebook etc then they would not have a leg to stand on..

You are beginning to understand how "hear say" evidence works.
She said this blah blah.
No employment tribunal would allow such a thing and I doubt no local gossip is prepared to be dragged through one to grass on someone they know and to be shone out in the community as such.

In life you play for the end game, in a legal situation the smart make sure that they dont show any cards to the other side that can be played against them.

My advice is : Just to say you can not recall any such conversation taking place.
Will it save a Job, probably not for anyone who has employed anyone knows you dont start official disciplinary procedures against anyone you want to remain working for you, for the first chance they get anyone with half an ounce of self pride will take the next job going.
it is the action of someone looking to sack someone and with no hard or admitted evidence that this conversation even took place, the employer will be in a most unfortunate position once the Union jump in and start official proceedings.

RuthnJasper

vax2002 wrote: »

The employer can believe what they want, a employment tribunal wont and with no admission that the conversation even occurred it will be a very quick case as well.
To start explaining this that and the other, confirms 3 things.
that you were there
That you were involved
That something along the lines did occur.
Without these 3 things they have nothing other than the words of a local gossip.

This could be turned on its head, Vax.
Maybe they WERE there - but not for the whole day;
Maybe they WERE involved - but not for the entire programme on the day's events;
Maybe something along the lines DID occur - but only according to the gossip. So 12 people turned up for the Bingo - perhaps they were only expecting 10...?

As micflair says, the OP's neighbour's account sounds highly subjective. Even if it wasn't, openly sl*gging-off one's employer is NEVER prudent. Proper, accountable, "whistle-blowing" is justified and in the best interests of all. Expressing a derogatory personal opinion of one's employer in public (without 100% concrete evidence) is NOT acceptable.

If the individual in question had proper concerns worth raising then, within the school and local education authority procedures, there ARE appropriate channels available. Only when ALL of THESE channels have failed to act on a legitimate concern should an employee "go public". And, even then, NOT to a few bods at the school gates.

My own experience of local authority procedures would suggest that the school was only charged for the food actually consumed - the remainder would have been written-off as a loss.

But I apologise if this is not salacious enough for the scandal-minded.

All in all, I am afraid that SOMEONE has taken offence and reported what the neighbour said - whether rightly or wrongly remains to be seen - as a general principal, however, it is inappropriate to sl*g-off one's employer in public.

Hope this helps. x

micflair_2

This is getting interesting and wham, the OP (ahem on behalf of neighbour) vanishes.. damn!