Dismissed for 'gross misconduct'

cr1mson

There would still be alcohol in your body as the important time is when you stopped I.e. 11.30pm so would be 1.30pm before your body would have got through all the alcohol.

CKhalvashi

cr1mson wrote: »

There would still be alcohol in your body as the important time is when you stopped I.e. 11.30pm so would be 1.30pm before your body would have got through all the alcohol.

Not necessarily........

CK

DaveTheMus

I don't believe you when you say had 6 pints and 2 shots.......

By your own admission, you're a big guy, you regularly go for drinks after work. You were drinking for almost 8 hours, finishing at 12am even though you started at 7am the next morning.

Only 2 types of people go out on the lash for 8 hours till 12am the night before a 7am start;
Heavy drinkers
Irresponsible people

Those types of people aren't known for exercising restraint.

I think you were smashed and you'd drank so much your drinking partner blacked out.

[Deleted User]

Dm0203 wrote: »

It was 8 months and they do need to give me a reason. I wasn't on probation therefore they have to follow the correct disciplinary procedure and can't just sack me - which they did so that isn't an issue anyway.

No they don't. An employee with under 2 years service can be terminated without reason. The rules used to be 1 year but it changed to 2 years in April 2012.

http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3733

1. Did you work there for more than 2 years? No.
2. Do you believe you have been discriminated against? No.

ess0two

Whats the companies drug and alcohol policy?


Did they take a sample of breath or blood to confirm drunkenness?


Just because you told them 'you may have been intoxicated' they need proof.


Got a friend whos been thru similar he won the case because the company failed to follow there D+A procedures correctly.


Get a decent solicitor who deals with employment etc,I reckon you'll win it.


They've got no proof,just your word,tell them you were pressured and flustered into admission.

Takeaway_Addict

ess0two wrote: »

Whats the companies drug and alcohol policy?


Did they take a sample of breath or blood to confirm drunkenness?


Just because you told them 'you may have been intoxicated' they need proof.


Got a friend whos been thru similar he won the case because the company failed to follow there D+A procedures correctly.


Get a decent solicitor who deals with employment etc,I reckon you'll win it.


They've got no proof,just your word,tell them you were pressured and flustered into admission.

he's been there 8 months, hiring a solicitor (even if right) is a very costly risk because if they carry on with the dismissal there is little the OP can do

ess0two

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

he's been there 8 months, hiring a solicitor (even if right) is a very costly risk because if they carry on with the dismissal there is little the OP can do

Either way the burden of proof is on the employer,i'd certainly be challenging it.


The dismissal is based on what? his admission under pressure,nothing else.


Where other employees canvassed about his work or state of mind that day.

Takeaway_Addict

ess0two wrote: »

Either way the burden of proof is on the employer,i'd certainly be challenging it.


The dismissal is based on what? his admission under pressure,nothing else.


Where other employees canvassed about his work or state of mind that day.

If they dismiss him he has no recourse.

DaveTheMus

He's been there for less than 2 years, they can fire him for anything at all as long as it's not discriminatory. A lawyer will do him no good.

Phil_68

They could have a walking in a straight line policy but the guy has zero comeback through the courts due to his length of service.

Except in a small number of cases, H&S, discrimination etc, he needs two years service to take it to court. Yes he could employ a solicitor but no one will touch him unless he has deep pockets to fund the case.

Turning up for work in an unfit state is gross misconduct. He was not pressured into giving his statement, he was under pressure to answer questions. They are different scenarios however you want to wrap them up.

Even during the appeal, there will be pressure. But without new evidence or a substantial failing by the employer, he has no case. Not being breathalysed is not a failure. The employer only needs form a belief that he was unfit for work. Little evidence is required to form that belief.

Phil.