Sacked when partner imprisoned.

frilly_knickers

Many thanks for all your advice. I do hope that I have been told all the facts, however, even if anything has been kept from me, it still seems a bad situation when a young woman loses her job through trying to do the right thing and be honest.
My niece and the children are the innocent parties in all of this.

frilly_knickers

Dunroamin wrote: »

If she's confident that she's done nothing wrong then she should involve her union before seeing a solicitor as they should be able to advise her and provide her with legal representation.

Thank you, there is no question of her guilt in any way, she was not even interviewed by the police, it has nothing what so ever to do with her, only that the children are his and he was living at her address.
I don't know whether she is in a union but I will advise her. Thanks.

Valli

Dunroamin wrote: »

If she's confident that she's done nothing wrong then she should involve her union before seeing a solicitor as they should be able to advise her and provide her with legal representation.

THIS

And ANYONE who works in a school, in any capacity, should be in a union for their own (legal) protection. Allegations are made against staff employed in a variety of roles, so they need to be 'armed'.

zzzLazyDaisy

Other posters are right. The law changed on 6th April 2012. If she started her job at any time up to and including 5th April 2012 the old rules apply, and she only needs 12 months service to have protection. In that case this would very clearly be an unfair dismissal.

One other thing - if she does fall under the old rules, she should get advice and make a tribunal claim quickly, as fees come in on 29th July, and although she may qualify for an exemption, the rules can seem quite complex and it would be more straight forward for her if she could make the claim on or before 28th July.

Snuggles

The only circumstances in which I've ever seen this happen before is where a person works with children and their partner is convicted of an offence involving children, and there is a concern that they could gain access to children through their partner's employment.

It seems quite bizarre and very unfair that this action has been taken due to a motoring offence.

mum2one

If she has been threr for 3 years she has job protection, id she is in a union, I would get hold of them first as they can offer advice, and if it does go to tribunal, they can arrange representation, - I represented myself against a nationwide company and it was damm hard, in the end I took an out of court settlement, although I had legal funding at the time it did not cover representation on the day.

if she not in a union, then has she got legal cover with any house insurance, as they have legal helpline,

plan c - contact a solicitor and ask for a free introduction interview and find out where you go from there.

as an ex-school goveneror, - there in charge of the schools, the responsibility was taken away from the local councils, - but if everything you have been told is true, (not I'm disputing you) seems odd that they sack her when she was not the person at fault. x

OldBeanz

Is there no car to sell?

Southend1

Dunroamin wrote: »

If she's confident that she's done nothing wrong then she should involve her union before seeing a solicitor as they should be able to advise her and provide her with legal representation.

Yes, speak to the union before seeking advice from anyone else. She may lose her right to union legal representation if she has taken advice from a non union solicitor/advisor.

anamenottaken

Southend1 wrote: »

Yes, speak to the union before seeking advice from anyone else. She may lose her right to union legal representation if she has taken advice from a non union solicitor/advisor.

If this is true then nobody who is a member of a union should ever tell their union that they have spoken to any solicitor (probably not even if they have spoken to the CAB).

This is appalling that unions would seek to so control their members.

Southend1

anamenottaken wrote: »

If this is true then nobody who is a member of a union should ever tell their union that they have spoken to any solicitor (probably not even if they have spoken to the CAB).

This is appalling that unions would seek to so control their members.

I think it's more about preventing conflict of interest than controlling people. Also, a solicitor is not always the best person to assist in such cases. It may be more appropriate for a union rep (who has access to legal advice from union solicitors) to represent someone facing disciplinary action.

In any case union members can often access free legal advice via their union so it makes sense to go this route rather than pay someone else for advice.