Disciplinary. HELP!

Undervalued

SecondRow wrote: »

Disciplinary hearings must be consistent with the ACAS code of of practice which gives you a number of safeguards.

That is no longer strictly true I'm afraid.

A tribunal would expect an employer to have conducted a fair process and by far the easiest way for them to do so is to carefully follow the ACAS guidelines. However it is not the only way. There are no longer set procedures or any automatic penalties for not complying.

In any case this is entirely moot as the OP has not been employed long enough to have protection from unfair dismissal.

Unless the OP's contract gives an entitlement to a contractual disciplinary process (which is unlikely) the firm are under no obligation to follow any formal process at all. The fact that they are doing so could well work in the OP's favour as it may suggest an open mind rather than an intention to dismiss.

SecondRow

I assume it is appropriate for me to ask that the meeting be adjourned if I get there and get hit with a pile of "evidence" then and there? So that I can properly consider what is being put to me?

Yes, yes, yes!!!! As I said before, you nave the right to call evidence, if you need time to consider it, tell them so.

However, before that, you have rights, use them!

SecondRow

However it is not the only way. There are no longer set procedures or any automatic penalties for not complying.

That's good to know. Thanks. A link to where this innovative change in procedure occurred would be useful if you don't mind. I ask only as I believe you're wrong.

Reductions in tribunal awards are directly affected by procedural non-compliance.

Undervalued

SecondRow wrote: »

That's good to know. Thanks. A link to where this innovative change in procedure occurred would be useful if you don't mind. I ask only as I believe you're wrong.

For example (one of many)........

https://www.workplacelaw.net/services/news/19463/statutory-dispute-resolution-procedures-abolished

In particular.......

There will be a new ACAS Code of Practice on discipline and grievance (the Code) and this will be taken into account by Tribunals when deciding whether certain dismissals were fair.

The Code only applies to disciplinary situations including misconduct and poor performance. The Code expressly states that it does not apply to redundancy dismissals or dismissals where a fixed-term contract is not being renewed. It would also seem that it will not apply to non-disciplinary dismissals such as retirement and capability due to genuine long-term illness.

It will not be mandatory for employers to follow the Code so they will not be liable to proceedings simply for a failure to follow it. However, the Code sets out best practice advice that employers should follow because a dismissal will still be substantively unfair where no procedure has been followed.

SecondRow

Undervalued wrote: »

For example (one of many)........

https://www.workplacelaw.net/services/news/19463/statutory-dispute-resolution-procedures-abolished

In particular.......

Aaaah, from 2009. Noted.

Undervalued

SecondRow wrote: »

Aaaah, from 2009. Noted.

In essence it used to be that a small procedural error would automatically make a dismissal unfair, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the employee's actual conduct.

Equally various failures on the part of the employer (e.g failing to provide written particulars of employment "a contract" within eight weeks) would lead to automatic tribunal awards. This is no longer the case and a tribunal has wide discretion as to whether to make such an an award or not.

In the past any such error could often be used to negotiate a settlement even if the employee was clearly at fault. Rightly or wrongly that is no longer the case.

Quite small changes have made a substantial difference to the whole employment business.

SecondRow

Undervalued wrote: »

In essence it used to be that a small procedural error would automatically make a dismissal unfair, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the employee's actual conduct.

Equally various failures on the part of the employer (e.g failing to provide written particulars of employment "a contract" within eight weeks) would lead to automatic tribunal awards. This is no longer the case and a tribunal has wide discretion as to whether to make such an an award or not.

In the past any such error could often be used to negotiate a settlement even if the employee was clearly at fault. Rightly or wrongly that is no longer the case.

Quite small changes have made a substantial difference to the whole employment business.

Interestingly, nothing to the effect of any of this was ever suggested. It was however pointed out that the ACAS code provides a number of safeguards, that's all.

The_One_Who

Thank you all for the advice and guidance, it was extremely helpful.

Takeaway_Addict

what was the outcome?

The_One_Who

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

what was the outcome?

No outcome so far. No decison made.

Although I'll be putting in my resignation in the next few days. So it solidified that, if nothing else.