Suspended - help please

RiverStar

Ozzuk wrote: »

I think that is part of the problem - ambiguity, you are using words such as reasonably visible, implied...all terms which can lead to legal issues, though I'm also guilty of saying must when that isn't true at all times. Should would be better.

The laws around this are a minefield and lacking, and I only deal with IT side (and then limited).

However I still maintain the wording of this policy uses the word excessive, suggesting limited usage is actually perfectly fine and that would be key for my defence.

That is exactly what I'm going to use in my defence. Yes, l admit l use it for personal use (only to my partner) but can go weeks without emailing each other at all.

Surely, what was ok before, cant suddenly be a suspension case when a quiet word would have worked.

Incidentally, this has only happened since l did give the temp manager my password. I had no reason not to and if l had anything to hide, why would l do that?

RiverStar

JunkUtopia wrote: »

I don't have any points that haven't already been stated other than to say if I was in your situation I'd be using these 2 weeks to do some serious CV writing / job applying!

Thanks Junkutopia, l have actually been doing that.

PHILANTHROPIST

pelirocco wrote: »

It needs to be set out in the company handbook as far as I am aware , so yes they should make you aware of the company policy on email usage .

To summarise. Based on what has been stated in evidence to date if the employer summarily dismissed the OP for gross misconduct then I would happily come out of retirement, defend the OP pro bono (i.e, for free) and either get the OP re-instated or get the OP adequately compensated for any fair and reasonable economic loss that arose from the alleged injustice.

DKLS

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I don't think it's gross misconduct if this is the first time but in my opinion this is misuse of company time and equipment and if this is a common practice amonst employees then that is wrong.

I also don't understand why you would need to e-mail your partner anyway.

Any decent company should accept that sometimes life crosses over into work I wouldn't object to any employee making the odd email, paying a bill online, calling a partner etc, the workplace shouldn't be a vacuum unless its a role with such security requirements.

RiverStar

pelirocco wrote: »

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2177

7. If there is an investigatory meeting this should not by itself result in any disciplinary action. Although there is no statutory right for an employee to be accompanied at a formal investigatory meeting, such a right may be allowed under an employer's own procedure.


OP you need to check your employee handbook / contract .

Thanks pelirocco, l read that too. I'm still waiting on the actual investigation meeting and so far l only know its for misuse/personal of email.

My contract doesnt state anything about this only general t&c.

No handbook either, just policies listed via the intranet.

Prothet_of_Doom

Back in the real world, most people in offices are using internet and email for personal use, when they should be working. It's custom and Practise and unless everyone had checks done, on thier usage, then this smacks of being slightly unfair. How many people including managers would have to be suspended ?

pelirocco

PHILANTHROPIST wrote: »

To summarise. Based on what has been stated in evidence to date if the employer summarily dismissed the OP for gross misconduct then I would happily come out of retirement, defend the OP pro bono (i.e, for free) and either get the OP re-instated or get the OP adequately compensated for any fair and reasonable economic loss that arose from the alleged injustice.

I am an employer we employ a company to advise us on all employment law issues , and we have to jump through hoops even to ''have a talk'' with an under preforming employee . I really couldnt imagine them advising us to do what has happened here ( not that we would , if it is as the OP has said )

ohreally

RiverStar wrote: »

No handbook either, just policies listed via the intranet.

Does the policy prescribe excessive or is it silent?

Is it left to the discipling manager to decide what amount becomes excess?

pelirocco

2. What counts as gross misconduct?

It is strongly advisable to give employees a clear indication of the type of behaviour you consider to be gross misconduct. You can do so in the contract of employment itself or in a staff handbook. Identifying such behaviour in advance will help to demonstrate later on that you regard it as significant. Most employers would identify intoxication (whether from drink or drugs), fighting or other physical abuse, indecent behaviour, theft, dishonesty, sabotage, serious breaches of health and safety rules, offensive behaviour (such as discrimination, harassment, bullying, abuse and violence) and gross insubordination as examples of gross misconduct.

You might want to specify other offences, depending on the nature of your business: for example, accepting or offering bribes, downloading pornography, downloading software from the internet or using personal software (to protect the business against legal risks, and the risk of importing viruses), misusing confidential information or setting up a competing business. If you have policies covering all or any of these activities, you can specify breaches of all or some of them (or of particular activities specified in them) as gross misconduct.
Other lesser offences, often relating to work and work performance - for example poor timekeeping, absenteeism, use of workplace facilities, personal appearance, negligence or sub-standard work - do not usually amount to gross misconduct. However, you may want to specify that repeated minor misconduct (for example, persistent poor timekeeping) can, cumulatively, amount to a more serious offence.
In view of the fact that smoking in enclosed (or substantially enclosed) areas is illegal, you should identify the steps you will take if employees flout the law (and that you would like them to take if customers or other visitors do likewise).

It is wise to say that the list is not intended to be exhaustive.

Caution should be exercised when dealing with an employee under the influence of alcohol or drugs. If the employee is an alcoholic or drug addict then this should be dealt with as a capability issue and not as gross misconduct in the first instance.

RiverStar

PHILANTHROPIST wrote: »

To summarise. Based on what has been stated in evidence to date if the employer summarily dismissed the OP for gross misconduct then I would happily come out of retirement, defend the OP pro bono (i.e, for free) and either get the OP re-instated or get the OP adequately compensated for any fair and reasonable economic loss that arose from the alleged injustice.

Thanks Philanthropist, l hope l dont have to take you up on that... but l have told you guys all l know to date. I am a reliable, trustworthy employee...and am quite by all this.
I've a feeling that this temp has done this to tick a box on their cv re suitable managerial experience. Would l (if l could prove it in any way) be able to raise a grievance?