Taking my ex employer to a tribunal

Guest101

amyjaj wrote: »

No, it was an employment solicitor! I was put in contact with via his office.

When I say they, I mean the company. Doesn't matter whether she was my supervisor or not, she is a BIG ( Business in groups) rep for the store. She is meant to be listening to peoples issues and dealing with them.

Oh I see, I misunderstood when you said you saw them at CAB. So CAB referred you to a solicitor who does a free 30 minute? - that 30 minute is used to try get your business.


Yes, but who at the company? They could mean anyone from entry level to CEO.


It really does matter if she's your supervisor or not, as the company grievance policy will be clear. So unless the policy is to report to this person, you reported it incorrectly.


Not a clue who or what BIG is/are. a quick google didn't show anything, so i'll assume it's some internal thing.

amyjaj

Guest101 wrote: »

Oh I see, I misunderstood when you said you saw them at CAB. So CAB referred you to a solicitor who does a free 30 minute? - that 30 minute is used to try get your business.


Yes, but who at the company? They could mean anyone from entry level to CEO.


It really does matter if she's your supervisor or not, as the company grievance policy will be clear. So unless the policy is to report to this person, you reported it incorrectly.


Not a clue who or what BIG is/are. a quick google didn't show anything, so i'll assume it's some internal thing.

It was the finance operations manager, one level below store manager. Big is the company/ stores equivalent to a union. They are meant to talk and communicate about problems people are having and support them.

Guest101

amyjaj wrote: »

It was the finance operations manager, one level below store manager. Big is the company/ stores equivalent to a union. They are meant to talk and communicate about problems people are having and support them.

To me this sounds like a low level 'manager' and I doubt they had the authority to speak on behalf of your employer.


As I thought, an internal 'thing', was the grievance procedure to contact your 'BIG' rep? or go to your manager?


As I say, this isn't anything to do with your dismissal anyway, I'm just curious.

aaroncaz

amyjaj wrote: »

It was the finance operations manager, one level below store manager. Big is the company/ stores equivalent to a union. They are meant to talk and communicate about problems people are having and support them.

They have no power like a union. Do you mean a commercial manager? Was you already warned? A written warning?

amyjaj

aaroncaz wrote: »

They have no power like a union. Do you mean a commercial manager? Was you already warned? A written warning?

Yes I was, but the company admitted fault, the manager that done that disciplinary has a friend who is a speech therapist who has knowledge of hemiplegia. This friend of this manager confirmed to him that hemiplegia does cause emotional and behavioural problems. This is of course is mentioned in my neurology notes from a baby that Have had to be dug up due to recent investigations into epilepsy. This Hidden effect was highlighted in the letters I provided them due to these investigations. You of course cannot grow out of the effects of cerebral palsy. They recommended occupational health be brought in, this was not done despite me filling out the form for occupational health visits to go ahead. The company admitted they knew I had this condition before they employed me and that they did not support me at all. Even after this admittance they failed to put correct support in place. They most definitely knew I had this condition because I applied for a full-time permanent vacancy when I applied to work there and they turned round and said that I could not have the position on a permanent basis and that it would be a temporary contract if I took it, Purly because of my condition.

Despite this being mentioned in the hospital letters. They still feel that my disability doesn't affect the way I behave. They are not medically trained to make this comment. I know I was not being aggressive at the time. I was just very upset that I reported bullying, Which was stressing me out, and has the potential of causing a seizure, and no one would do anything.

aaroncaz

Try your luck with the solicitor then, good luck.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

amyjaj wrote: »

Big is the company/ stores equivalent to a union.

That's a bit like "Al Capone's equivalent to the police".

Guest101

amyjaj wrote: »

Yes I was, but the company admitted fault, the manager that done that disciplinary has a friend who is a speech therapist who has knowledge of hemiplegia. This friend of this manager confirmed to him that hemiplegia does cause emotional and behavioural problems. This is of course is mentioned in my neurology notes from a baby that Have had to be dug up due to recent investigations into epilepsy. This Hidden effect was highlighted in the letters I provided them due to these investigations. You of course cannot grow out of the effects of cerebral palsy. They recommended occupational health be brought in, this was not done despite me filling out the form for occupational health visits to go ahead. The company admitted they knew I had this condition before they employed me and that they did not support me at all. Even after this admittance they failed to put correct support in place. They most definitely knew I had this condition because I applied for a full-time permanent vacancy when I applied to work there and they turned round and said that I could not have the position on a permanent basis and that it would be a temporary contract if I took it, Purly because of my condition.

Despite this being mentioned in the hospital letters. They still feel that my disability doesn't affect the way I behave. They are not medically trained to make this comment. I know I was not being aggressive at the time. I was just very upset that I reported bullying, Which was stressing me out, and has the potential of causing a seizure, and no one would do anything.

I'm sorry for your experiences.

I don't see what this has to do with your dismissal.

My understanding is that the employer must be reasonable in adjustments to your conditions at work.

However ( and I'm not sure on this, but based purely on logic ), the employer does not have to ignore all behaviour purely on the basis that's it's related to your disability. - if that's wrong I'm happy to be corrected

amyjaj

Guest101 wrote: »

I'm sorry for your experiences.

I don't see what this has to do with your dismissal.

My understanding is that the employer must be reasonable in adjustments to your conditions at work.

However ( and I'm not sure on this, but based purely on logic ), the employer does not have to ignore all behaviour purely on the basis that's it's related to your disability. - if that's wrong I'm happy to be corrected

It's the fact that no reasonable adjustments will put in place to prevent this from happening. The last part is what kicked this all off!

sangie595

amyjaj wrote: »

It's the fact that no reasonable adjustments will put in place to prevent this from happening. The last part is what kicked this all off!

I am becoming terribly confused by your story. You appear now to be saying that something did happen, but it was a result of your disability? And that even you knew nothing about these "emotional and behavioural problems" until recently - but expected your employer to put a reasonable adjustment in place to prevent them? That is entirely unreasonable as an expectation. And as has already been stated, the fact that you have a disability does not mean that "emotional and behavioural problems" must be tolerated by the employer.

So now the story appears to read that an entirely irrelevant alleged bullying incident was reported to someone who was not remotely a union rep, so you never lodged any form of formal process about the allegation. But this alleged bullying in the past caused two employees who had nothing whatsoever to do with it to fabricate stories about you, in a conspiracy with a group of managers (one of whom possibly looked oddly at a former colleague) had you dismissed for things that you didn't do; but you expected your employer to make reasonable adjustments for emotional and behavioural problems that you didn't know you had, they didn't know you had, and appear to be entirely irrelevant if you did nothing, which is what you said.

I am sorry, but you are going to have to improve on that an awful lot - it makes no sense at all, and a tribunal isn't going to see any reason in it. It's messy, illogical, and doesn't add up.

You need to understand that an employment tribunal is a court of law. If you have no representation then they will explain the process for you - but they are not going to help you to present your case at all. Your former employers will have legal representation - quite conceivably a legal team. If your case is clear cut and logical a tribunal is a difficult place. If you present yourself as you have here, that legal team will tear into you. They'll do it nicely (by their definition). They'll do it politely. But they will rip this story apart.

So - why did you need reasonable adjustments for emotional and behavioural problems that you never exhibited? Or are you now saying you did and that there is some truth to the allegations made against you?