Possible Unfair Dismissal Advice Needed Please

Undervalued

jobbingmusician wrote: »

However, my main point remains. The chap was sacked for family reasons, and the employer made no investigations about whether the mother was, in fact, a dependant (at least as far as we know from these postings.) That would automatically make even a less than 2 year length of employment dismissal unfair.

Sorry but no, it wouldn't.

IF the mother was dependant then he might have had a valid UD claim. However, we are all agreed she was not. The fact that they didn't inquire, just guessed correctly, doesn't suddenly make the dismissal unfair.

Poppie68

Op I agree with TBagpuss with regards to it may be a heat of the moment decision and maybe worth your friend going in and speaking to his boss...
If it's found that the mother is indeed found to be 'a dependent' and the friend was entitled to the time off...couldn't he still be sacked for GM by refusing/or not turning up as requested by his employer? Mistakes seemed to of been made by both sides.

dancingfairy

Whether they acted lawfully or not, it doesn't seem the right way to behave/a good way to conduct business
I think a lot of people would have done the same in the situation to be honest.
I hope that things were said in haste and that the employer would like your friend back and isn't cutting off their nose to spite their face.
df

Another_not_new_user

Sorry. I am not going to get involved in a debate about sympathy or empathy - all of which I would probably agree with. The right to time off is to make arrangements for a dependant for care in an emergency. Past that - nothing. The mother was in a hospital and was being more than adequately cared for. There is no right to "worry about her". I wish there was. But the employer is in the legal right here. Even if mum was a dependant, the right to time off (without pay) is to arrange for care. It would be impossible to claim that being in the care of a hospital was not fulfilling the care requirement.