Gross Misconduct vs Resigned pending disciplinary hearing

Takeaway_Addict

paddyrg wrote: »

As I see it, you have a problem and the company has a bigger one. They can let you go without reason of course, but if they want to try to press for Gross Misconduct or similar they're making themselves a platform for legal challenge. I would leave them to make the next move, and when they do suggest a negotiated termination where you get your wages and holiday owed, go quietly and agreed reference on the grounds that you answered all of their questions honestly and accurately. If they don't ask if a former profession would embarrass the company, then frankly that's their lookout...

What legal challenge considering the OP hasn't worked there for 2 years yet?

Funky_Bold_Ribena

I am just wondering why they are taking this to gross misconduct rather than just 'this isn't working out'? Perhaps the client is demanding the sacking and will potentially follow this up with future employers.

I think if this was me, I'd not show up to work again. And let them sack you for whatever. And then never use them as a reference.

Helpfulone

Gosh I don't think I'd want to work there if they are so narrow minded and spiteful.

You're worth more than that OP.

Hope you get a new and better job where people aren't looking over your shoulder to see what you did when you were a bairn.

Good luck

burnleymik

Helpfulone wrote: »

Gosh I don't think I'd want to work there if they are so narrow minded and spiteful.

I would assume OP's employer is basically trying to keep their client happy and look like they are acting upon their concerns.

I'd like to know how the original person who discovered you explained how they came accross the information! I hope the company treat them the same way as they want your company to deal with you.

marybelle01

burnleymik wrote: »

I'd like to know how the original person who discovered you explained how they came accross the information!

Maybe I am just a cynic, but personally I would be looking closer to home. What are the odds of one of the clients staff/ customers or whatever, browsing a paid for !!!!!! site and just happening to think that a particular "model" looks just like the new receptionist if you aged her 20 years?????? Amongst - well, just how many nude women are on the internet anyway??? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Pretty damned slim I would think, especially since, whilst I cannot personally claim experience of such sites, but I have to assume they aren't studying faces too much whilst browsing. I'd lay bets that if the truth were told, this is personal, just like all those friends people have on Facebook. Somebody always knows, and the person most likely to shop you is a fried, a former friend, or someone you thought of as a friend.

Serena_Mason

marybelle01 wrote: »

I agree with agrinall although I see the OP has already said they don't have two years employment.

For what it is worth:

(a) once I have convened a disciplinary meeting I would not accept a resignation with immediate effect. Having gone to all the trouble of investigating an arranging it and having a panel in the room waiting, I would go through with the meeting. I might consider a resignation immediately the issue came to light, but in all honesty probably not. But on the other hand I wouldn't be disciplining you for this matter anyway - I don't think it is misconduct unless the photographs breach the law. Embarrassing yes, but you didn't do anything wrong that I can see. And nobody could recognise you unless they were looking at the sites in question - which to my mind raises more questions about them than you.

(b) I wouldn't consider an application from someone who resigned pending a disciplinary for misconduct. I have no way of verifying that they are telling me the truth about what happened. You might tell me that you were sacked about a misjudged career choice in your past, but how do I know you weren't sacked for stealing the monthly takings? But I would seriously consider the truth even if someone was guilty of what they were accused of - and if I thought the employer was being bloody unreasonable (which in this case I do) I would certainly not hold it against the applicant.

(c) I think you and that lawyer on the other site are being naïve if you think that references are the only way employers communicate. There are telephones too - and you can't prove a conversation that someone has with your previous employer. Anything can be said.

(d) You may not have considered this, but I would seriously consider how being a qualified masseuse and working in that field comes across to potential employers in the context! I don't like pointing this out, but "masseuse" is often a euphemism for something else, and in this context, it would give me pause for thought as to whether your poor choices were all in the past! That would be far more likely to cause me concern about you than a few explicit photos from 20 years ago.

(a) Yes ACAS explained it would be the Company's decision if they accepted the resignation before the disciplinary meeting commenced. ACAS had explained I should definitely attend the hearing and said that I should ask before the hearing began about the tender of my resignation. There will not be a panel at the meeting. Just one regional manager conducting the hearing and a scribe.

Unfortunately the Company have me on misconduct according to my Employee handbook, which has under the offences of Gross Misconduct, this listed, "any action that jeopardises the Company's relationship with it's client or is likely to bring the company in to disrepute with it's clients."

(b) Thanks for these valid points. I guess I am going to have to face up to being asked questions about a reference from my current employer in the future along with an explanation as to what it relates to.

(c) Again valid points, thanks.

(d) I did qualify in Swedish Massage and the qualification is on my cv. Although I am a part time masseuse, on a self employed, basis, I work in hired treatment rooms of a well known UK holistic health and beauty chain. This is also on my cv as it is what I have worked as on a part basis for the past 4 yrs. It couldn't be any more legit than that. I do understand the point you make and I will have to hope that I don't have an interview with someone as small minded to believe that a UK holistic chain would allow dodgy massages in their treatment rooms.

Thanks once more for your thoughts.

John_Pierpoint

Oh dear. we are still living in the 19th century.
Almost enough to turn even me into a feminist.
It sort of reminds me of a friend who got into a spot of bother over renting out a shop property to a "non prescription chemist". The new tenant turned out to be a sex shop and the building's owner was The Church Commissioners - but that was in the 1960s.

"any action that jeopardises the Company's relationship with it's client or is likely to bring the company in to disrepute with it's clients." In my opinion you have not taken any action what so ever, and as has already been pointed out, I doubt that "the man on the Clapham omnibus" could pick you out from a 20 year old image.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus
Unfortunately I missed finding out who your employer (client?) is, so I cannot comment on the perceived conflict of interest.
However you might find it difficult to tolerate the whisper and snigger attitude of some fellow employees, now that some sleaze-ball has publicised your appearance on the interweb.

I would suggest you aim for a financial settlement and an agreed bland reference.
Perhaps in the future you can change your appearance sufficiently to be able to deny such allegations.

The legal lie:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehabilitation_of_Offenders_Act_1974

Perhaps you will have a new string to your bow in the form of giving advice to young people on the dangers of leaving too much of a youthful audit trail on the web.

Presumably someone has the rights to profit from the use your "performance" for your lifetime plus 70 years?

Treevo

The client is probably angry with your employer for putting an undesirable (as they see it) staff member in a customer/client facing role.

In order to keep the client, they may have to fire you. This is the risk you ran when you made the decision to do what you did. There's no point in moaning about it now.

paddyrg

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

What legal challenge considering the OP hasn't worked there for 2 years yet?

If they let her go STATING that she's been grossly negligent. They could just let her go, but they could potentially paint themselves into a position.

SueC_2

As far as I'm aware, no client has the right to demand that a contractor's employee is dismissed. If they did, this could potentially force the contractor into a position where they are vulnerable to a claim of unfair dismisal.

The client does however have the right to insist that a contractor's employee is no longer allowed to work on their premises. In which case, the employer would be responsible for finding alternative employment for the employee in question. (Unless of course they agreed that dismissal was appropriate and legal).

Given your length of service though, they could dismiss you for pretty much any reason they choose (setting aside discrimination), so I don't know quite what my point is. Just chewing the cud on a Sunday morning really.