Possible sacking facing gross misconduct

geoffken

So somebody who admits to falsifying records multiple times and "forgets " to advise about payment for time off for study and despite this only manages 40% of her course requirements should be let off with a good reference.
Mean spirited does not even go close.
Maybe you should try this with your good employer by falsifying your time sheets and try muddying the water by saying "every body else does it!!!
The OP was taking the p s and got caught multiple times but still she and her union thinks that she did no wrong and can get off on a technicality about the clock time.

p00hsticks

geoffken wrote: »

So despite quite a few /many "cheats" of the system she is allowed to be able to continue "working" elsewhere in the system with a good reference.

geoffken wrote: »

So somebody who admits to falsifying records multiple times and "forgets " to advise about payment for time off for study and despite this only manages 40% of her course requirements should be let off with a good reference.

You can't be reading the same post as me, as it doesn't sound to me like she's getting a good reference

Gavin78 wrote: »

The head said he has happy to do references ....it will also state that there was a disciplinary pending.

geoffken

The head said he has happy to do references

undaunted

agrinnall wrote: »

In addition to Guest's point 1, I would suggest that she writes the time in words as well as figures, it's easy to change 1 to 7 but not so easy to change one to seven.

I think you're missing the point at issue here. As I read it they are suggesting that she is signing in dishonestly - i.e. arriving at 9.07 and attempting to hide the degree of lateness by signing it as 9.01.


Whilst simply altering it to the time she actually signed in rather than addressing the issue earlier may not have been the best or right way to go about things I can't see that writing the words will alter anything if she is indeed signing in with a false arrival time. She really needs to be able to deny and ideally evidence that this is the case I would have thought

undaunted

Gavin78 wrote: »

In the real world you'd have thought the employer would have understood the situation considering she's worked there for 5 years and never been late it was this short period of time our daughter was going from the baby room into the older room and was having problems integrating her into it.

And, being a school they might have done I suspect - if it were this one thing alone. What they are probably taking issue with is her (alleged) attempts to lie about it by signing in earlier & then just a couple of days ago having the audacity to raise it as a complaint with the Head. What they were really saying when stating they knew who had done it was that they knew who and why. Adding in the Uni. "study" time when the Class was not on is only strengthening their issue / "charge". Your wife bringing this up has surely merely forced the Heads hand into taking some action sooner rather than later.

undaunted

Gavin78 wrote: »

We are talking about a couple of mins no more than about 5. I'm not excusing her lates and I know he's be fair with them and when she has been late she's wrote in the sign in book she's been late.

1. Didn't you say above that you didn't know the extent?


2. You are actually defending & therefore excusing her lates


If I were the Head I think an explanation & apology would probably go down better with me / more likely permit me to give her the benefit of the doubt than attacking the office Managers decision to do what they believed more accurate


From what I've read so far I think she'll be lucky to avoid dismissal & will at the very least get a written & "final warning" as things stand

undaunted

Gavin78 wrote: »

Just updating this page now....

HR are taking it to a disciplinary meeting Tuesday. For the lates and her failure to inform school she had gone as an external student and going to Uni on school time out of semester time.

The Union says they will probably scrap the lates because they have made a mess of the time keeping, saying the clock was wrong then it wasn't wrong, then it was synced by satellite then went and said it was corrected to the right time.

They couldn't even say if she signed in with her daughter or not when entering the doors but then back tracked and said she could see if she was late.

There was also a load of other errors but overall after speaking to HR it doesn't look like they will follow through with the late charges.

As for her Uni the Tutor has said that wife failed her first year only managing to finish 2 of her 5 assignments. they gave her a 12 month extension and suggested she go external but added in that she could still have tutor support despite no fees needing to be paid. during this time she has only needed to attend 1 tutor meeting as already had the paper work needed to continue her work.

It was suggested that she perhaps used the Thursdays out to help finish the assignments. there has been enough medical evidence submitted to the UNI that is why is has gone the way it did giving her potentially 3 years to do the course instead of 2.

However the Head stated she failed to inform him that she had gone external and never suggested that she could take paid time off out of semester time and he had no proof or the UNI couldn't prove that she was still going to study during the time she went external.

He's lost trust in her and feels that she has been unprofessional in keeping the school informed.

The union has managed to do a deal instead of going to a disciplinary she has managed to do a 3 way convo with the HT and HR. Wife hands her notice in by tomorrow and she finishes at the end of July getting paid till the end of August before the new school term starts.

The head said he has happy to do references and it will not inc anything to do with lates on them it will also state that there was a disciplinary pending.

Her union suggested this is the best outcome for being able to continue her career working in schools as if she had lost the fight it would have probably stopped her getting employment in schools again.

In all honesty your Union Rep appears to me to be kidding you / themselves. Failings in the Uni. course appear to have caused the Head to lose confidence in your wifes competence - she's been given time off on pay and hasn't even completed the assignments - and then you expected them to be happy about that? The other issues have probably then just provided the excuse to get rid of her - and that is what's happening here make no mistake. Future employers will however read between the lines and / or want to know more about this pending disciplinary & I'd doubt that she'll ever work in another school if this deal goes ahead.


To me she needed to either clear her name or seek to come to a better compromise with the school - eg apologise, offer to repay any funds they feel to be lost as a misunderstanding, ensure that she commits to and passes that course within x period etc. If she can't do that then the result would probably be just the same either way I'm afraid

harz99

undaunted wrote: »

In all honesty your Union Rep appears to me to be kidding you / themselves................

................To me she needed to either clear her name or seek to come to a better compromise with the school - eg apologise, offer to repay any funds they feel to be lost as a misunderstanding, ensure that she commits to and passes that course within x period etc. If she can't do that then the result would probably be just the same either way I'm afraid

Tend to agree here; if the Head and HR were sure of themselves having a watertight case they wouldn't be doing a deal, even one so poor as the one on offer. They'd simply go ahead with the disciplinary hearing and be done with it.


The school and the Head seem to have dealt with matters in a poor and sloppy way right from the start of the lateness issue and the original request for study leave, everything should have been documented from the beginning.


Does the school not have progressive procedures for dealing with absence and lateness, does the school not have a progressive disciplinary system? It or the EA should have both, and none of this should have got this far without going through those procedures at a much earlier time.


I suspect a good Union rep, certainly the ones I have had to deal with in the past, would wipe the floor with a Management who were as sloppy or cavalier as this one. Or is the Union rep inexperienced or in the Head's pocket?


If any reference mentions anything about a disciplinary outstanding she's cooked, although I must say, to mention that matter at all in a reference is ill advised as no hearing and nothing proven. Not something I would put in a reference unless asked specifically whether that was the case.

[Deleted User]

To those of who continue to criticise the OP and his wife. You're adding nothing to the discussion at all of any use because, to be honest, it makes no difference at all to the OPs situation what you think. Just saying....

So I stand by my comment. There is no need for the nastiness for the sake of it.

I will agree that "maybe" the OPs wife may have made a few mistakes. We'll never know. None of my business or anyone elses but some of the comments on here are disgraceful.

geoffken

Let us hope she does not work for Durham council who have just noticed that they have been paying their classroom assistants for 52 weeks a year whilst only working 36.
A nice addition to their index linked pensions!!!