unfounded work alligations, my rights?

DandelionPatrol

Flyonthewall wrote: »

You can't possibly know that. Might be hard, but doesn't mean it's impossible. Hopefully the school wouldn't be stupid enough to pass it on anyway. So far it seems they're following the procedures and all considering they interviewed the OP despite knowing for sure it wasn't them.

Also, if they're not a bully then no power is being handed to them.

Don't know what? 'Hopefully the school wouldn't be stupid enough to pass it on anyway' is too dumb. You are not taking into account that the school is not OP's employer.

As for 'if they're not a bully then no power is being handed to them', you are making an assumption and resting your hopes on it being true. You accused me of making the converse assumption although I was in fact covering both the case of bullying and a genuine mistake.

stevemLS

Well, having watched the exchange I still believe the letter I drafted is professional, to the point and spells out that it expects action to be taken but leaves it, as it surely must, to the employer's discretion as to what action is taken.

The "photo letter" is sarcastic and treats the situation flippantly, far from "grasping" the situation.

DandelionPatrol

stevemLS wrote: »

Well, having watched the exchange I still believe the letter I drafted is professional, to the point and spells out that it expects action to be taken but leaves it, as it surely must, to the employer's discretion as to what action is taken.

The "photo letter" is sarcastic and treats the situation flippantly, far from "grasping" the situation.

I will agree that my letter is on the flippant side. It does not make heavy demands - it just makes it clear that there will be issues if there is a repeat. It does not require heavy investigation or heavy mediation sessions, which are both undesirable.

When you are potentially dealing with a bully, your letter is inappropriate, because it plays the victim card. It is hardly professional. It just channels matters down a heavy formal investigation route which is unnecessary. What is required is that the behaviour stop. Not that it is investigated or mediated.

Flyonthewall

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

Don't know what? 'Hopefully the school wouldn't be stupid enough to pass it on anyway' is too dumb. You are not taking into account that the school is not OP's employer.

You can't possibly know that what was quoted is the case - that it could never be proven. They may be able to prove it.

It's not dumb to assume a school will follow the law. So far they have, why would they not continue to do so? It's also common sense not to pass on a private, personal letter.

It does not matter that they are not the employer. The law still applies to them.

As for 'if they're not a bully then no power is being handed to them', you are making an assumption and resting your hopes on it being true. You accused me of making the converse assumption although I was in fact covering both the case of bullying and a genuine mistake.

I'm not making an assumption, hence the word if. I'm simply pointing out that if they happen not to be then no power is handed to them. If they were then power may be handed to them, all depends on exactly what the letter says.

I said that originally as you said "Assuming that this is some form of bullying, handling this at a distance is best". Which I took as you were then assuming they were bullying because...well, that's basically what was said. There was no sense of doubt, just an assumption.

stevemLS wrote: »

Well, having watched the exchange I still believe the letter I drafted is professional, to the point and spells out that it expects action to be taken but leaves it, as it surely must, to the employer's discretion as to what action is taken.

The "photo letter" is sarcastic and treats the situation flippantly, far from "grasping" the situation.

Exactly. You can't order them to show the photo, it's up to the school/employer what action is taken. Personally, regardless of how the letter came across, I don't think showing a photo is the answer anyway.

DandelionPatrol

Flyonthewall wrote: »

It's not dumb to assume a school will follow the law.

True enough. But I don't see that there is actually any law which prevents stevemLS's letter being passed on to the staff member in question. [if you say there is such a law, I am challenging you to show how this law applies]. As drafted, I believe that his letter would be shown just as mine would, because either affects the member school of staff in question. They would only be circumspect about showing it to another member of staff who was nothing to do with the incidents in question

stevemLS

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

When you are potentially dealing with a bully, your letter is inappropriate, because it plays the victim card. It is hardly professional. It just channels matters down a heavy formal investigation route which is unnecessary. What is required is that the behaviour stop. Not that it is investigated or mediated.

All I can say is that you are unfamiliar with nether law nor HR practice, I am qualified in both.

Flyonthewall

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

Assuming that this is some form of bullying, handling this at a distance is best

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

But I would not want to admit this to someone who is potentially a bully.

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

you would just be bogged down in a situation which had handed the power over to the [potential] bully.

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

When you are potentially dealing with a bully, your letter is inappropriate

You seem quite focused on them potentially being a bully.

So do you really think that if they were a bully they'd be happy to have someone put a photo in front of them and the name pointed out like they're a child? I don't.

I think they'd make sure to cause even more problems for the person and probably make it hard to prove what's going on.

The OP is already worrying a lot over an issue that was resolved (OK, they're not sure why they were named, but the complaint issue is over now and they could just forget it and move on). How do you think they're going to cope if they are a bully and they cause more issues constantly?

Worse still, issues they brought on themself by sending in a letter and photo that they knew could be taken the wrong way (as shown on here).

On the other side, if they're not a bully and it was a genuine mistake for whatever reason, do you think they're going to like somone who's the cause of them being given a photo with a name as though they're really stupid. If there weren't problems before there could well be after.

You see it as a letter and photo trying to clear up a name issue. I see it as causing far worse problems because either way the other member of staff isn't going to be impressed if shown a photo. It doesn't matter if they're a bully or not because the end result isn't going to be a happy work environment either way if the photo is shown.

DandelionPatrol

stevemLS wrote: »

All I can say is that you are unfamiliar with nether law nor HR practice, I am qualified in both.

Then I am surprised at the lack of professionalism in your letter.

HR practice might dictate that your letter not be shared [though I doubt that], but I remain to be convinced that the law has anything to say on sharing either your letter or mine, bearing in mind that the employer being written to is not OP's employer.

At the outset you were advising OP not to take it further, but given new information that this is a second instance and the fact that the complainant has known OP for 18 years, this is not a necessarily tenable position. With Law and HR qualifications I would expect much better than you have come out with. Where you are trying to send this is to heavyweight formal processes. You should have more than enough savvy to know that this is exactly where this matter should not go. You should also have the savvy to know that your letter expressing OP's distress will be gold dust to a bully.

DandelionPatrol

Flyonthewall wrote: »

The OP is already worrying a lot over an issue that was resolved (OK, they're not sure why they were named, but the complaint issue is over now and they could just forget it and move on). How do you think they're going to cope if they are a bully and they cause more issues constantly?

The immediate issue may have been resolved. But bullying or mistaken ID is still there and has not been addressed. This saga is likely to continue.

Flyonthewall

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

True enough. But I don't see that there is actually any law which prevents stevemLS's letter being passed on to the staff member in question. [if you say there is such a law, I am challenging you to show how this law applies]. As drafted, I believe that his letter would be shown just as mine would, because either affects the member school of staff in question. They would only be circumspect about showing it to another member of staff who was nothing to do with the incidents in question

Again, the data protection act. The letter would be addressed to a person and it would be private and confidential. Even if it's regarding someone else they're not just allowed to pass that letter on because the data (which contains personal information) is protected by the act.