compromise agreement not going well

cheese189

Hi folks,
I wrote on here a few weeks back about negotiations between my union and employer about a compromise agreement.
To keep a long story short, it still hasn't been agreed and now the employer are being reluctant about supplying anything other than a factual reference.

As there were some issues with other colleagues and managers before me going off sick with stress, I am very annoyed about this and I think I have some very good grounds to take out a grievance against the people concerned. Perhaps it might make the employer focus a little more.

I am sure that the employer just wants me to a 'good little boy/girl' and slink away with my tail between my legs.

As I recover, I am beginning to realise just how dreadfully I have been treated.

Has anyone any thoughts or experience with this? PM ok if you don't want to post publicly.

Ta

ILW

Are you asking them to lie in a reference?

cheese189

Of course not. I am expecting them to be fair and reasonable though, which they haven't been so far.

ILW

Is a factual reference not fair?
It is all that many employers offer.

getmore4less

watch the time scales for a grievance and an ET, they could be trying to get you to run out of time.

What are the union saying?

Sambucus_Nigra

What are the reasons for the compromise agreement?

Debt_Free_Chick

What's the issue with the factual reference? What are they proposing to say that you don't like?

Uncertain

ILW wrote: »

Are you asking them to lie in a reference?

Well, let's be honest here, under these circumstances most employer's do lie (at the very least least by omission)!

In the vast majority of cases the very fact that there is a compromise agreement means that all is not happy between the employee and the company. They want to part company and the firm would rather pay a known amount up front rather than risk a successful claim or even the costs of defending an unsuccessful one.

It would be a stupid company indeed that agrees to write something that is probably untrue but the vast majority of any "wordy" reference is opinion and there is a enormous grey area! Selective amnesia pays a part and they can usually be persuaded to remember the good times if it saves them money.

However the OP also needs to consider how hard it can be police what is said. Again, the company is unlikely to be so stupid as to write anything that goes against what is agreed in the CA but the grapevine can play a part and "off the record" phone calls are hard to trace.

A lot comes down to the strength of the OP's bargaining position. If the firm have a strong case for terminating her employment and are simply covering their backs then they may not move very far. However, if they are on shaky ground and get the impression the OP has access to good advice then their pockets will be quite deep.

It may well be worth spending some money with the solicitor to get them to negotiate on the OP's behalf. Remember the nominal amount normally included in the agreement will only pay for the bare minimum and not for the solicitor to argue with the company.

Uncertain

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

What are the reasons for the compromise agreement?

See here.....

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3900681

princessdon

Most references (following a CA or redundancy etc) are factutal.

Most employer references are XX started at the Company on YYY date, their salary was XXXX.

Anything else is down to the questions asked by the referer. Eg no of days sick, no of grievances, no of lateness recorded etc.

They cannot lie - it will be factual.

If you want a "friendly" reference this is your 2nd/3rd references. You can ask a colleague, old line manager to do this.

You will be hard pushed to get any CA that goes further than factual. If you have had a lot of time off sick you need to be getting an agreement that unless asked it won't be divulged, but you can't ask them to lie.

They will have a solicitor (needed for a CA) who they can ask.

I know with my OH's CA (it was one of the few friendly ones) and to make it more tax efficient for him as they moved operations overseas, despite being very friendly they wouldn't agree to put time off sick IN his reference. He had zero days sick in 18 years so wanted this in, but they refused. They had a set factual reference for all employees (as an employer HR reference) and don't deviate from that unless requested.

Sambucus_Nigra

Uncertain wrote: »

See here.....

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3900681

I was rather hoping that the OP would explain in their own terms.