Mum has been fired.

marty1888

jellynose wrote: »

When an employee is suspected of committing an act of gross misconduct they cannot remain in work,

I was up for Gross Misconduct last year. didnt get suspended, was made to work for 3 days before my hearing and then got a slap on the wrist and a telling off. Suppose they just wanted the graft out of me!!

aj3001

She hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct, they have thus far asked her to willingly quit, if she has accepted this I doubt she has a leg to stand on because it was her that left, not them firing her

peter999

aj3001 wrote: »

She hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct, they have thus far asked her to willingly quit, if she has accepted this I doubt she has a leg to stand on because it was her that left, not them firing her

Just a play on words.
Obviously she hasn't willingly quit.

peter999

peter999

peter999 wrote: »

The employer has made a very silly mistake.

Your mum should seek compensation of 1.5x her salary, 1 year's salary plus 50% for unfair dismissal.

peter999

The onus is on the employer to carry out procedures corrrectly & they may have limited time to correct this by offering an Appeal, if you warn them too early.

Right now it's deemed "Automatically Unfair".

Remember you don't have to tell the Employer what their mistake is & help them correct it. The onus is on them to correct it themselves.

The clock is ticking for the Employer.

peter999

Ps: It's an expensive way to learn from your mistakes.

Bean_Counter

Law changed in October 2004 (I think) and the employer has to follow the statutory disciplinary & grievance procedures which are:

The Statutory Procedure

Key points

Employers must follow the statutory procedures if they are contemplating dismissing an employee or applying sanctions such as demotion, loss of seniority and loss of pay

An employee has the right to be accompanied at both the meeting to discuss the allegations and the appeal meeting

Employment tribunals can increase or reduce the compensation by normally between 10-50 per cent if employers or employees have not fully complied with the procedures

The statutory procedures are a minimum standard. It is best to follow the good practice in this handbook

What is the three-step procedure?

If an employer is thinking of dismissing an employee – or imposing a penalty short of dismissal such as suspension without pay, demotion, loss of seniority or loss of pay –
they must follow the statutory procedure, which is set out in full in Schedule 2 of the Employment Act 2002. The main steps may be summarised as follows:

Step 1

Write to the employee notifying them of what they are alleged to have done wrong – in terms of performance or conduct; set out the basis for the allegations; and invite them to a meeting to discuss the matter.

Step 2

Inform the employee of the grounds for making the allegations and hold a meeting to discuss them – at which the employee has the right to be accompanied. Notify the employee of the decision and the right to appeal.

Step 3

Hold an appeal meeting (if the employee wishes to appeal) at which the employee has the right to be accompanied – and inform the employee of the final decision.

The minimum requirements

Following the three-step procedure is a minimum requirement. It is strongly advisable for an employer and employee to start talking to each other long before any disciplinary process reaches even the likelihood of dismissal, or action short of dismissal. For example, counselling or a quiet word might be the most appropriate first step or – if formal action is required – an improvement note may help to resolve the problem in cases of unsatisfactory performance.

Failure to comply with the procedure

An employment tribunal will automatically find a dismissal unfair if the statutory procedure has not been followed where it applies. The tribunal will also, except in exceptional circumstances, increase compensation for the employee by between 10 and 50 per cent. Equally, if the employment tribunal finds that an employee has been dismissed unfairly but has failed to participate in the procedure (for instance they have failed to attend the disciplinary meeting without good cause), compensation may be reduced by usually between 10 and 50 per cent.

CathChat

aj3001 wrote: »

She hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct, they have thus far asked her to willingly quit, if she has accepted this I doubt she has a leg to stand on because it was her that left, not them firing her

No she has been fired for gross misconduct.

CathChat

Bean_Counter wrote: »

Step 1

Write to the employee notifying them of what they are alleged to have done wrong – in terms of performance or conduct; set out the basis for the allegations; and invite them to a meeting to discuss the matter.

This has not happened, she received only a telephone call.

Step 2

Inform the employee of the grounds for making the allegations and hold a meeting to discuss them – at which the employee has the right to be accompanied. Notify the employee of the decision and the right to appeal.

Again nothing had been mentioned untill the phone call yesterday

As my mother said if there was this much of a problem with trusting then why did they have my mum to run the cafe when they were on holiday?

I am downloading the ET1 form as I type. This is the first step advised by acas.

Thank you all for your replies and help.

Cath x

Tori_Bellatrix

aj3001 wrote: »

She hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct, they have thus far asked her to willingly quit, if she has accepted this I doubt she has a leg to stand on because it was her that left, not them firing her

Would this not be 'Constructive Dismissal' then if it were this scenario?

Bean_Counter

Tori_Bellatrix wrote: »

Would this not be 'Constructive Dismissal' then if it were this scenario?

Failure to follow the procedures would count as automatic unfair dismissal, which I believe would carry more wieght at a tribunal that constructive dismissal and hopefully generate more compensation.

CathChat

When she rang acas they told her as she has not yet had the dismissal in writing they may change why she was dismissed (lie) to something that could be instant dismissal, the throwing of food at customers for example. But they did state that she is likely to get further with the fact that they have not followed procedure and this would be the best route to follow.

I will keep you posted on events.

Cath x