Unfair Dismissal/Breach of Contract/Gross Misconduct

sangie595

Kitty78 wrote: »

My contract did state that I was to work from home and I didn't refuse to make the move I wanted to have a meeting about it to discuss coming to an agreement that would work for me as a single mum and them as an employer.

If an employer wants to change an employee's terms of contract they should have a meeting with them to discuss it.

If you have less than two years employment they can tell you to stand on your head and there doesn't need to be a meeting to discuss it. You have assumed you have rights you didn't have. They may owe you money, but I lost the will to live trying to work that out. Everything else is spurious - they sacked you and that is the end of it. Sorry, but that is all there is to say on it.

daytona0

Kitty78 wrote: »

My contract did state that I was to work from home and I didn't refuse to make the move I wanted to have a meeting about it to discuss coming to an agreement that would work for me as a single mum and them as an employer.

If an employer wants to change an employee's terms of contract they should have a meeting with them to discuss it.

It sounds like you didn't complete the work they required for the transfer, which was either outright refusal or intentionally delaying the process. Either way, a bit unprofessional...


I work with single mums, some of whom work part time (20-25 hours) and a few who do 35+ hours a week.... They cope without working from home.

Aside from the 2 year point which people have raised, does your contract possibly state that you are required to make reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of the business?


As a side note but:

I have worked many hours overtime unpaid, done certain tasks when on holiday i.e make payments/pay wages because no one else would do it.

I'm a bit skeptical, because you probably didn't give them a solid 20 hours per week of work! It was probably comprised of some bookkeeping followed by an undisclosed amount of time 'washing the clothes' or 'preparing the lunches'. Probably all mixed up with your cushy home posting

Kitty78

I didn't ask to work from home, that is what the position was when I took the job as they didn't want to pay for office space.

I actually hate working from home, I miss working in the office and was looking forward to going out to work but I wanted to speak to them about it beforehand which is just respectful I wasn't asking for blood.

tomtontom

Kitty78 wrote: »

My contract did state that I was to work from home and I didn't refuse to make the move I wanted to have a meeting about it to discuss coming to an agreement that would work for me as a single mum and them as an employer.

If an employer wants to change an employee's terms of contract they should have a meeting with them to discuss it.

Yes, changes should be discussed, and it would have been diplomatic to respond to the email offering to go in to discuss the potential new working arrangement. Simply stating that this would be detrimental to you financially was pretty unprofessional, your finances are not their problem.

You're going to need to put the majority of your complaint aside, there's nothing you can do about the dismissal. Focus your efforts on getting payment for what you are owed.

Kitty78

There was no work to complete for transfer, I had all of their company files at my home and they wanted them to be taken to head office which I was happy to do as I only live in a flat and space was becoming short especially with a small child.

As for working hours, they had plenty out of me and I have emails, texts, whatsapp messages to prove I worked many hours out of my actual working hours since I started working for them.

Kitty78

I appreciate that my financial situation is not their concern but any good company would want to work with their employee that is satisfactory to everyone.

As they were wanting to change my contract I should not have had to ask to have a meeting with them they should have called me into a meeting to discuss it as any professional company would have but yes I have realise they are far from professional.

Also on the dismissal, if they are using disciplinary procedures with other members of staff who have worked for them less than 2 years i.e giving them written warning, having meetings to discuss the issues and trying to resolve them before they resort to dismissal then I should have the same rights as an employee, they can't treat me any different or they would have to have god reason right?

sangie595

Kitty78 wrote: »

Also on the dismissal, if they are using disciplinary procedures with other members of staff who have worked for them less than 2 years i.e giving them written warning, having meetings to discuss the issues and trying to resolve them before they resort to dismissal then I should have the same rights as an employee, they can't treat me any different or they would have to have god reason right?

That would be wrong.

London50

You seem to be ignoring the fact that 2 people have told you that you can be let go for any or no reason if you have been employed by them under 2 years.
While the way your bosses have treated you is not fair they can get rid of you for any reason they choose if you have been employed for under 2 years

yvonne13_2

OP your post is very long and I gave up reading it after a few lines.

All I can say is you worked for less than two years, so when they said you're going to be office based you should've bit your lip and accepted it if you wanted to keep your job.

Kitty78

What would be wrong?

If you have procedures in place for your staff that should include all staff not just the ones you favour.