Suspended from job, advice needed

Deinonychus_2

Hi,thanks for the replies. I have been having difficulty logging on.
I went for the initial investigatory meeting last night only to have it postponed because the union representation I was promised didn't appear. This, though, is a moot point.
They seem to have a catalogue of cctv evidence. I DID sign training material at induction and later on during shopfloor standards training, stating that under no circumstance should food be consumed from the shopfloor, warehouse or canteen without paying for said item(s).
It seems dismissal is a certainty.
My main concern is JSA. The direct.gov website states that full JSA will not be paid if I was to resign 'without good reason'. I feel that this consitutes good reason. It will NOT, however, be paid if dismissed for gross-misconduct. Also, one other has already pre-emptively quit upon union advice that there would be no record of gross-misconduct, with regards future employment.
I'm still unsure.

marybelle01

Deinonychus wrote: »

Hi,thanks for the replies. I have been having difficulty logging on.
I went for the initial investigatory meeting last night only to have it postponed because the union representation I was promised didn't appear. This, though, is a moot point.
They seem to have a catalogue of cctv evidence. I DID sign training material at induction and later on during shopfloor standards training, stating that under no circumstance should food be consumed from the shopfloor, warehouse or canteen without paying for said item(s).
It seems dismissal is a certainty.
My main concern is JSA. The direct.gov website states that full JSA will not be paid if I was to resign 'without good reason'. I feel that this consitutes good reason. It will NOT, however, be paid if dismissed for gross-misconduct. Also, one other has already pre-emptively quit upon union advice that there would be no record of gross-misconduct, with regards future employment.
I'm still unsure.

I'm sorry but you have stardust in your eyes if you think the JobCentre are going to think "I resigned before I was sacked for gross misconduct" is a good reason for resigning! And the union advice is rubbish - a reference will likely just say "resigned pending a disciplinary for gross misconduct" which is no improvement on sacked for gross misconduct.

go_cat

I have dealt with something similar as a manager and because the staff had been told 3years prior by a manager it was ok, there was enough doubt even though they had signed rules saying they wouldn't eat.

They all had final warnings instead as if it had gone to ET we would have been challenged that a manager had given approval.

Do all the staff suspended have the same reason e.g a manager said they could.

Has this manager been investigated?

I would be challenging this if not been dealt with consistently.

marybelle01

go_cat wrote: »

I have dealt with something similar as a manager and because the staff had been told 3years prior by a manager it was ok, there was enough doubt even though they had signed rules saying they wouldn't eat.

They all had final warnings instead as if it had gone to ET we would have been challenged that a manager had given approval.

Do all the staff suspended have the same reason e.g a manager said they could.

Has this manager been investigated?

I would be challenging this if not been dealt with consistently.

But is there any evidence that the manager said it. It doesn't matter how many people all say the manager gave them permission - they signed policies that clearly stated they knew they shouldn't, and of course they would say a manager gave them permission, true or not. Without any evidence to support their story then it wouldn't matter if they claimed they had permission from the MD or God - it isn't democracy and numbers don't count, only evidence.

go_cat

marybelle01 wrote: »

But is there any evidence that the manager said it. It doesn't matter how many people all say the manager gave them permission - they signed policies that clearly stated they knew they shouldn't, and of course they would say a manager gave them permission, true or not. Without any evidence to support their story then it wouldn't matter if they claimed they had permission from the MD or God - it isn't democracy and numbers don't count, only evidence.

There was no evidence that this manager had told my staff however there was enough doubt that our legal dept would not push for gross misconduct. For what it's worth I did not agree with the result as I feel that they knew what they were doing was wrong but that's another story!

marybelle01

go_cat wrote: »

There was no evidence that this manager had told my staff however there was enough doubt that our legal dept would not push for gross misconduct. For what it's worth I did not agree with the result as I feel that they knew what they were doing was wrong but that's another story!

I think that is legal advice on the extraordinary side of cautionary - I wouldn't bet on the OP getting the same outcome. The OP signed twice to say they understood this rule.

Deinonychus_2

Hi, yes I believe the manager would admit to this as they have done in prior similar cases. But the company has been known to protect managers at all costs. However, the manager is also on some sort of suspension at the moment, the details of which I am unsure. We technically knew it was wrong, yes. But we were told by our superior to do it (and they did it themselves) so we just didn't really think it was a problem iykwim. But all of this isn't the point. The point is, I am facing being sacked and I have a family to support. But i have found my answer elsewhere anyway. For future googlers I will post it here...

Relationship to misconduct
34253 Claimants have not voluntarily left their employment if they resigned
1. because they genuinely believed that their employer was about to end their employment at once or
2. when they were given the choice of resignation or dismissal.
In these cases the DM may need to consider whether they have lost their employment through misconduct.
34254 Sometimes claimants have left their employment before the date on which the employer would have dismissed them. Such claimants have voluntarily left their employment, and can be sanctioned. But the period of the sanction cannot be longer than the number of days (subject to a one week minimum) between the date they left and the date on which they would have been dismissed. So, in cases where
1.
claimants left because they expected to be dismissed and
2.
the dismissal would have been because of the claimants' misconduct it may be preferable to sanction the claimant on the grounds of misconduct if this has been referred to the DM for a decision.

sorry, can't link as a newbie, it is from dwp.gov.uk

So basically, I will wait and when (if) I am told I have a disciplinary hearing I will know that the decision is more than likely to be fired (I may be able to see how others fare in their meetings first) and I will quit then as I stand more of a chance of getting my full JSA (hopefully I will get a job ASAP though!!)

Thanks for trying to help everyone!:beer:

go_cat

If they have suspended the manager as well ( hopefully for the same reason as the OP ) then They are being consistent.

However they also need to be consistent with any sanction I.e the manager should not get a lesser sanction than the OP.

Make sure in any investigation or disciplinary that you say the manager not only told you but did it as well. They have a duty to investigate this as well

pickpocketlocket

Deinonychus wrote: »

Hi, yes I believe the manager would admit to this as they have done in prior similar cases. But the company has been known to protect managers at all costs. However, the manager is also on some sort of suspension at the moment, the details of which I am unsure. We technically knew it was wrong, yes. But we were told by our superior to do it (and they did it themselves) so we just didn't really think it was a problem iykwim. But all of this isn't the point. The point is, I am facing being sacked and I have a family to support. But i have found my answer elsewhere anyway. For future googlers I will post it here...

sorry, can't link as a newbie, it is from dwp.gov.uk

So basically, I will wait and when (if) I am told I have a disciplinary hearing I will know that the decision is more than likely to be fired (I may be able to see how others fare in their meetings first) and I will quit then as I stand more of a chance of getting my full JSA (hopefully I will get a job ASAP though!!)

Thanks for trying to help everyone!:beer:

You have misunderstood the quoted section from the DMG. If you are due to be dismissed for misconduct, you may still be sanctioned - if you reread 34254, this is what it means.

anamenottaken

Deinonychus wrote: »

But i have found my answer elsewhere anyway. For future googlers I will post it here...

sorry, can't link as a newbie, it is from dwp.gov.uk

So basically, I will wait and when (if) I am told I have a disciplinary hearing I will know that the decision is more than likely to be fired (I may be able to see how others fare in their meetings first) and I will quit then as I stand more of a chance of getting my full JSA (hopefully I will get a job ASAP though!!)

Regardng what you have found via the DWP site -

Did you read on to see about the sanction which would apply to a misconduct dismissal and not realise that that is the same sanction that can thereby be applied to someone who resigns because that is what they are facing.