Not paid for a disciplinary hearing. Correct?

BarrelScraper

I've had disciplinary hearings in the past, during work hours & have always been paid for them.
I've had meetings after work hours with the rest of my dept & the bigwigs & always been paid for them.

I recently sat in on a co-workers disciplinary hearing. It was originally scheduled for during the day, but he was struggling for a witness & asked me, so i said no problem. When the bigwigs learned of this, they changed the slot to 5:00pm (we 'finish' at 5:30pm - though at this time of year overtime is expected & frequent).
Due to the nature of his job, he didn't get back (he's a delivery driver) until 5:00pm, so by the time he did his checks & such like, it was 5:30pm before we were ready to go up.

The meeting lasts 3/4hr & we leave.

Basically i've not been paid for this & i want to know if this is correct.


I'm hoping it doesn't boil down to the old classic "it depends what it says in your contract" as surely there are policies in place for this sort of thing? How detailed are peoples contracts because mine is not THAT detailed. It seems it needs to cover every single eventuality, which is impossible. To get a bit silly with it to make a point ..... that's like saying "your boss is allowed to only pay you for half a day because it rained for 3 hours solid .............. because your contract doesn't specify that he can't do that".

I know that is being silly, but it seems the answer is always "depends what your contract says", but mine isn't that detailed at all.

marybelle01

It doesn't depend on what your contract says. That's the good news.

The bad news is, those isn't your work and you aren't entitled to payment for it.

ohreally

I seem to recall from past issues, there is a trade union in the workplace. Are you now a steward or is the colleague not a union memeber?

In terms of payment, I would expect a colleague to be paid the rate as if they were at work.

mynameistallulah

marybelle01 wrote: »

It doesn't depend on what your contract says. That's the good news.

The bad news is, those isn't your work and you aren't entitled to payment for it.

I would agree with this - the OP is there as a witness/ support for his colleague, he is not there to work and so should not expect payment as such.

DVardysShadow

mynameistallulah wrote: »

I would agree with this - the OP is there as a witness/ support for his colleague, he is not there to work and so should not expect payment as such.

As it is only a fellow employee or a Trades Union Official who is entitled to attend - ie you cannot make the employer accept your partner etc as witness - unless they qualify, I would say that this should be paid.

It is sharp practice on the part of the employer to discourage witnesses. And the employee should be paid. It is exceedingly discourteous to do this to another employee - when their presence actually lends credibility to the disciplinary process.

BarrelScraper

There isn't a union in the workplace, no. I am a member of a union though. On my first disciplinary hearing, the person chairing it told my representative that they "don't recognize" the union.

There are only 2 members of staff who are joined in this union & i only have my co-workers word that he's joined.

People generally come to me because while i don't have a stack of knowledge on employment law, i do find out what i need to know & then relay any info, whereas others can't be bothered & just put up with whatever they're told.



Anyway, thanks for the reponses guys. If i'm not entitled then i'm not entitled, simple as that. I thought i would've been, as i was at work as a witness for a co-worker.

I'll know in future to not volunteer so readily. There are very few that i would help as a witness due to the place being full of trouble makers & selfish people. The chap i was witness for doesn't come into this category so i was happy to help him out as he felt that going alone he would be annihilated.

I wanted to find out first before causing a scene & embarrassing myself. As i'm not entitled to anything then that is fair enough. Thanks.

vax2002

You should have both left at 5.30

marybelle01

Neither a trades union official nor a work colleague is entitled to be paid for "working" outside their normal hours of work, unless there is a collective agreement to this effect (which usually only applies to union officials). Most trades union officers are also volunteers and don't get paid for such things.

DVardysShadow

vax2002 wrote: »

You should have both left at 5.30

I incline to agree that the one under discipline would have been fully entitled to tell management to reschedule.

mynameistallulah

DVardysShadow wrote: »

As it is only a fellow employee or a Trades Union Official who is entitled to attend - ie you cannot make the employer accept your partner etc as witness - unless they qualify, I would say that this should be paid.

It is sharp practice on the part of the employer to discourage witnesses. And the employee should be paid. It is exceedingly discourteous to do this to another employee - when their presence actually lends credibility to the disciplinary process.

Equally it could be argued that paying someone to attend a disciplinary would be classed as asserting undue influence, or imply that they are attending for the wrong reasons - that they are there for the money, not to support their colleague.

I cannot think of any case where a tribunal (or higher) has criticised an employer for not paying a witness to attend. Feel free to demonstrate otherwise.

ohreally

The worker and the companion have protection against any detrimental act or dismissal in connection with exercising their section 10 rights, and can take a claim to a tribunal within three months. If working for the same employer, both the companion and the worker have the right to be paid.


provision in relation to companions under paragraph (k) corresponding to section 10(6) and (7) of the Employment Relations Act 1999 (c. 26)(right to paid time off to act as companion, etc.); .