Sacked on the spot after 4 years

zzzLazyDaisy

Okay, I will provide some information - but I will say from the outset that I suspect there is a lot more to this than we know, and my comments should not be taken as specific advice, since I do not have access to all the facts.

Following on from that disclaimer (I make no apologies... I am a lawyer...)

1. The employer is required to follow a proper procedure, which as a minimum should comply with the ACAS code of practice. Since you meet the minimum service requirements for protection from unfair dismissal, the failure to do this amounts to an unfair dismissal on procedural grounds.

In English - on the information provided, this looks like an unfair dismissal.

Therefore, if you go to tribunal, you have a good prospect of winning an unfair dismissal claim.

2. The tribunal must then consider the issue of compensation. Part of that process is to examine all the evidence and decide if you would have been dismissed in any event, had the employer followed a proper procedure. Remember that there is no requirement for the employer or the tribunal to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. The question is whether, having considered all the facts, and given you a fair chance to explain the situation, is it likely on the balance of probabilities that the employer would still have come to an honest and reasonable decision that you were guilty of gross misconduct. If so, you could get a 'nil' award.

3. Even if the tribunal find it impossible to come to a decision on that point, and so award you compensation, they can then go on to reduce the award by a percentage for contributory conduct. So if they think your actions contributed to the dismissal by (say) 50%, that's how much the compensation would be reduced by.

As I say, this is just an outline of the process, and not a comment on the likely outcome as we simply do not have sufficient information.

SarEl

dacouch wrote: »

That's so NOT Moneysupermarket...

Oh - it is. Apparently!

zzzLazyDaisy

Morganarla wrote: »

SarEl,really hope you don't get PPR'd. There are many of of who enjoy and appreciate what you take time to post, I personally have learnt much from you x

SarEl, are you REALLY at risk of being PPR'd????

I have never seen a post from you that would warrant even a warning card, let alone being banned from the site! Yes, okay, you don't go in for the 'love and hugs' style of posting but your input is valuable and respected by most of the regulars on here.

Having said that, I recently expressed concern about a series of posts on the CAB employment thread by one particular poster, because of their blatantly incorrect (and very antagonistic) advice, only to be told by the board guide that the poster was 'entitled to express their opinion'. On the Citizen's Advice Board? !!!!!! the clue is in 'advice' rather than 'opinion'. So tbh, nothing would surprise me <puts tin hat on and expects a red card....>

Dx

SarEl

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Okay, I will provide some information - but I will say from the outset that I suspect there is a lot more to this than we know, and my comments should not be taken as specific advice, since I do not have access to all the facts.

Following on from that disclaimer (I make no apologies... I am a lawyer...)

1. The employer is required to follow a proper procedure, which as a minimum should comply with the ACAS code of practice. Since you meet the minimum service requirements for protection from unfair dismissal, the failure to do this amounts to an unfair dismissal on procedural grounds.

In English - on the information provided, this looks like an unfair dismissal.

Therefore, if you go to tribunal, you have a good prospect of winning an unfair dismissal claim.

2. The tribunal must then consider the issue of compensation. Part of that process is to examine all the evidence and decide if you would have been dismissed in any event, had the employer followed a proper procedure. Remember that there is no requirement for the employer or the tribunal to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. The question is whether, having considered all the facts, and given you a fair chance to explain the situation, is it likely on the balance of probabilities that the employer would still have come to an honest and reasonable decision that you were guilty of gross misconduct. If so, you could get a 'nil' award.

3. Even if the tribunal find it impossible to come to a decision on that point, and so award you compensation, they can then go on to reduce the award by a percentage for contributory conduct. So if they think your actions contributed to the dismissal by (say) 50%, that's how much the compensation would be reduced by.

As I say, this is just an outline of the process, and not a comment on the likely outcome as we simply do not have sufficient information.

Excellent comments as usual. There is a history though, if you check previous posts (which is why is it very helpful for us if people stick to a thread). The key point here which is not clear is whether there was any enforceable restrictve covenant - if there was not then there is no misconduct, unless the employer can evidence "espionage" - which I think may be difficult. And very expensive. I think we have a bully who is thinking that the OP won't be able to stand up to them. I may be wrong on that, but I doubt it.

zzzLazyDaisy

SarEl wrote: »

Excellent comments as usual. There is a history though, if you check previous posts (which is why is it very helpful for us if people stick to a thread). The key point here which is not clear is whether there was any enforceable restrictve covenant - if there was not then there is no misconduct, unless the employer can evidence "espionage" - which I think may be difficult. And very expensive. I think we have a bully who is thinking that the OP won't be able to stand up to them. I may be wrong on that, but I doubt it.

Thanks. I didn't check all the other threads because, in all honesty, I couldn't be bothered. Its late and I have had a glass of red :cool:

Errata

Morganarla wrote: »

SarEl,really hope you don't get PPR'd. There are many of of who enjoy and appreciate what you take time to post, I personally have learnt much from you x

Me too. If this site was sensibly moderated it would be a vast improvement.

SarEl

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

SarEl, are you REALLY at risk of being PPR'd????

I have never seen a post from you that would warrant even a warning card, let alone being banned from the site! Yes, okay, you don't go in for the 'love and hugs' style of posting but your input is valuable and respected by most of the regulars on here.

Having said that, I recently expressed concern about a series of posts on the CAB employment thread by one particular poster, because of their blatantly incorrect (and very antagonistic) advice, only to be told by the board guide that the poster was 'entitled to express their opinion'. On the Citizen's Advice Board? !!!!!! the clue is in 'advice' rather than 'opinion'. So tbh, nothing would surprise me <puts tin hat on and expects a red card....>

Dx

This reply will probably be deleted in moments. Yes I am. And I think that says more about MSE than me. Apparently even "opinion" only counts if posted in an appropriate style. Ask youngsolicitor, who made fundamental errors in law; or noelphobic, who resents anyone sayng that that the law desn't allow them time off work for medical appointments. And I am on a final warning after TEN MONTHS of never posting here. Even employers can't get away with that! MSE warnings last for ever, and there is no appeal.

But if you get to read this - can you please PM me at the other place http://www.redundancyforum.co.uk/ because I know you have PM turned off here, and if I find those perfect cases to overturn law, I'd like you to consider being on board. I happen to mistakenly think that winning is the point, whereas clearly, telling people what they want to hear is the point.

emsywoo123

SarEl wrote: »

This reply will probably be deleted in moments. Yes I am. And I think that says more about MSE than me. Apparently even "opinion" only counts if posted in an appropriate style. Ask youngsolicitor, who made fundamental errors in law; or noelphobic, who resents anyone sayng that that the law desn't allow them time off work for medical appointments. And I am on a final warning after TEN MONTHS of never posting here. Even employers can't get away with that! MSE warnings last for ever, and there is no appeal.

But if you get to read this - can you please PM me at the other place http://www.redundancyforum.co.uk/ because I know you have PM turned off here, and if I find those perfect cases to overturn law, I'd like you to consider being on board. I happen to mistakenly think that winning is the point, whereas clearly, telling people what they want to hear is the point.

Quoting in case the post disappears!

jadematic

SarEl wrote: »

Excellent comments as usual. There is a history though, if you check previous posts (which is why is it very helpful for us if people stick to a thread). The key point here which is not clear is whether there was any enforceable restrictve covenant - if there was not then there is no misconduct, unless the employer can evidence "espionage" - which I think may be difficult. And very expensive. I think we have a bully who is thinking that the OP won't be able to stand up to them. I may be wrong on that, but I doubt it.

The contract does have a non-solicitation and non dealing with clause however as I am aware all they have is a draft mail I wrote which was never sent and the basic website test page.

I never took any business from them and today's the ltd company I set up has not started.

I will copy the exact wording tomorrow from the contract.

zzzLazyDaisy

SarEl wrote: »

But if you get to read this - can you please PM me at the other place http://www.redundancyforum.co.uk/ because I know you have PM turned off here, and if I find those perfect cases to overturn law, I'd like you to consider being on board. I happen to mistakenly think that winning is the point, whereas clearly, telling people what they want to hear is the point.

Hi SarEl, I have PM temporarily turned on at the moment (until I start to get the usual stalker-type messages!!!)