Advice please 16 year old dismissed gross misconduct

Undervalued

Nicki wrote: »

You are all assuming, with nothing having been said by the OP who may not even know yet, that the young man hasn't been paid in lieu of notice. Given his length of service and the few hours per week he works this isn't going to be a lot though.

Yes, but that is the whole point of calling it "gross misconduct". If they were simply sacking him for some other reason (or none) they would have to give notice or make payment in lieu. If it is "gross" then they don't.

I agree the OP needs to check but I would bet they have not paid him in lieu of notice or, come to that, for any accrued holiday.

If I'm right then, handled carefully, there is some mileage in this. As I said earlier, he would almost certainly get full remission of tribunal fee so this would be a "free punt" just like the olden days!

Undervalued

bristol_pilot wrote: »

They can't give him a falsely positive (if you see what I mean) reference.

Oh you be amazed how positive a reference can be if the employer wants to settle and be shot of a problem!

getmore4less

I think your best bet is probably to raise your concerns with the very senior management, I think for a case like this that would be the CEO office.

Since there is only one company it can be that I can think off check out the investor relations part of the website.

A factual account of the situation, position training supervision, what appears to be lack of checking of safety critical bikes going out the door, 2 hour interrogation of a minor etc. no emotion or threats just a letter of concern that there seems to be issues with the companies processes and this is potentially a safety issue.

Did he get paid for the time in interrogation?

---

One thing that occurs to me they have by getting your son to admit they have created written admission of liability(by the company).

There must be documented procedures for setting up bikes before handover to customers and they should have been focusing on how to stop this happening again not trying to allocate blame, although you have not indicated anything other than during the 2 hr they got him to admit something.

monty-doggy

I urge you to lodge an appeal ASAP because you only get five days usually from the date of the disciplinary. The fact he had no training speaks volumes. Any reputable company should allow a 16 year old to be accompanied by a parent however this is for support only and you are not allowed to speak for him.

It sounds to me they have looked to pin the blame on him when in fact the blame lies with the store manager who allowed an untrained employee to perform such duties and therefore the manager should be disciplined and not your son.

I really hope you get a positive outcome.

Nebulous2

I'm slightly bemused by the talk of safety critical functions. You need to see the standard many bikes are turned out in this country to believe it. There are regular stories on the cycling forums about bikes being put out with the forks back to front. They are partly assembled out of the factory and then bunged together in the shop in 15-20 minutes. You can't blame the youngster for that.

Secondly how on earth can anyone say what happened to the bike in the intervening few weeks? Somebody could have decided it didn't fit and moved the stem. A friend could have loosened it for a prank.

Finally he wasn't trained. His age shouldn't be an issue in respect of being able to do a good job but he needed training to do the job properly.

vodkafrog

Thanks so much for the advice re looking at 'investors relations', lots of info on ethical practice, avoiding child explotation, physical and emotional bullying ect...

I have since found out that the job describtion for the role he was employed in does not mention building bikes. The organisation does adviertise other jobs, different job title that does describe that the role includes building bikes.( this was role also paid a higher hourly rate) . Seems he was employed to do one job and then expected to do another job.

We do intent to lodge an appeal . Interestingly on the written transcript of the 2 hour disaplinary meeting he had it was titled 'misconduct' rather than 'alleged misconduct ', suggesting that a dicision was made before the interview had even began. I would have thought that the 2 hour meeting was aimed at getting addtional information so as a decision could be made as to if there was evidence of 'misconduct' ?

Bantex_2

vodkafrog wrote: »

Thanks so much for the advice re looking at 'investors relations', lots of info on ethical practice, avoiding child explotation, physical and emotional bullying ect...

I have since found out that the job describtion for the role he was employed in does not mention building bikes. The organisation does adviertise other jobs, different job title that does describe that the role includes building bikes.( this was role also paid a higher hourly rate) . Seems he was employed to do one job and then expected to do another job.

We do intent to lodge an appeal . Interestingly on the written transcript of the 2 hour disaplinary meeting he had it was titled 'misconduct' rather than 'alleged misconduct ', suggesting that a dicision was made before the interview had even began. I would have thought that the 2 hour meeting was aimed at getting addtional information so as a decision could be made as to if there was evidence of 'misconduct' ?

So what was he actually sacked for?

vodkafrog

It would appear that he has been sacked for 'failing to build a bike to a safe standard' a job that he neither applied for, was employed to do or had any training to carry out.

The organisation also states in all its marketing info that bikes are built by qualified mechanics.

Bantex_2

vodkafrog wrote: »

It would appear that he has been sacked for 'failing to build a bike to a safe standard' a job that he neither applied for, was employed to do or had any training to carry out.

The organisation also states in all its marketing info that bikes are built by qualified mechanics.

Are you sure you are being told everything? Doesn't seem quite right.
They do not even have to give a reason.

Any

So it is not actually a GROSS misconduct?

I would write to senior management about their unadequate procedures and training and ask to have any misconduct removed.
Although I would just be glad fo be shot of job at such a company!