Advice please 16 year old dismissed gross misconduct

vodkafrog

Hi I will try to be brief, but could do with some advice regarding if I should help my son to challenge this


In employment with a large cycle/ motor parts retail store since his 16th birthday in Nov 2014.


Job involved serving customers building bikes. Suspended on Monday following a customer complaint -dimissed yesterday Friday Complaint is that a bike stem sliped causing injury to child, ( around 6 weeks after purchase and around the time when customers who purchase a bike are told to bring there bikes back for a free check)


I understand that it is common for customers to return to the store with parts of bikes needing tightening eg loose pedals, break leavers ect in the weeks or days after purchase - however the staff who have built these bikes have not faced any disciplinary I think this is due to the customer not reporting any injury as a result.


My son is distraught that his employer had dismissed him suggesting that his actions resulted in the injury of child . However is seems that his dismissal has been due to the fact that the child has been injured ( fine now bumps and bruises)


I'm asking for someone who understands employment law to offer an opinion please.

getmore4less

I wonder if their liability insurance covered this?

bristol_pilot

Employed for less than 2 years, so there is nothing that can be done by the OP.

If a bike had collapsed injuring my child I'd expect the person who assembled it to be sacked too.

I question the wisdom of a Company employing anyone under 18 in a safety critical role and I wonder whether their procedures involve a second person checking the build (they should). Won't help the OP though, sorry.

ohreally

bristol_pilot wrote: »

If a bike had collapsed injuring my child I'd expect the person who assembled it to be sacked too

It didn't collapse though, the stem slipped and this was after 6 weeks use. Didn't the parent check the cycle before use, as likely instructed to do in the manual.

bristol_pilot wrote: »

Employed for less than 2 years, so there is nothing that can be done by the OP.

The two year rule simply places a barrier in seeking remedy at tribunal, it doesn't abolish the requirement for dismissals to be fair, although if the employer digs in options may be limited.

Op, was a hearing convened or was this a knee jerk response from the employer? Was there any form of investigation or was the response simply to terminate employment?

vodkafrog

ohreally - they appeared to have followed their procedure eg suspended whilst they did there investigation and then invited him in for an interview, gave him a transcript of the meeting and seems they eventually had him agree that his actions caused injury to a child. I do feel that after two hours he would have agreed to anything they suggested ( rather cruel given he is only 16 and the meeting lasted over two hours - his Dad had to go in an demand he be allowed to leave the meeting in the end )

Southend1

Was he allowed representation in the meeting? He should have been.

Is he a union member?

vodkafrog

No sadly no in a Union, only 16 and doing a part time job to help pay his way through college. Did have another young employee in with him at the meeting.

tanith

Was he given proper training on how to assemble/check these bikes and was he work overseen by someone senior? Seems to me someone of his age and inexperience should of been having his work checked by a supervisor. Maybe not in this day and age but it seems a lot of responsibility for one so young.

Undervalued

bristol_pilot wrote: »

Employed for less than 2 years, so there is nothing that can be done by the OP.

Not quite.....

The OP's son can't claim unfair dismissal (unless he could argue unlawful discrimination which seems unlikely).

However he could potentially claim WRONGFUL dismissal arguing that the misconduct (if any) wasn't gross. If successful that would get him payment in lieu of notice.

Also, if it was in any way unlawful for the firm to employ a minor in such a roll (as you suggest), then that may be a bargaining tool in reaching a settlement.

ohreally

vodkafrog wrote: »

seems they eventually had him agree that his actions caused injury to a child.

How can he, or anyone else, determine his actions caused the event which led to the injury?

I'd go to appeal, apart from anything else what has he got to lose?

I'd be paying attention to their handling of the hearing, effectiveness of their supervision, the decision to dismiss was not proportionate in the circumstances, it is unreasonable to hold him to account for a mechanical failure 6 months later especially when it looks as though the parent has failed to ensure their child's safety be inspecting before use, and on and on and on.

bristol_pilot

Damages for wrongful dismissal would be for payment in lieu of notice. This is a lad doing a part-time job, in the unlikely event of a successful claim the payment would be not worth the bother.

If I were the employer here, I'd fight any such claim tooth and nail as their business reputation is at stake. For part of a bike to collapse after 6 weeks use is not normal and if the Company's resposne had been to try and pin the blame on the customer as some posters here have suggested that would have been an absolute disgrace.

It's a tough lesson to learn as young as 16, but the best thing the lad can do now is look for another job doing something that doesn't involve assembling bikes.