Going to tribunal a few questions...

lincroft1710

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

. I just had a friend who still works for the firm who told me he is happy to come and give evidence to confirm that no one ever got disciplined for similar issues when he was in management as recent as last year...

Which is irrelevant

Undervalued

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

Will do thanks, I will get a session booked in asap because I think that 12 years with no prior warnings, refusal of representation(got this in writing too) and admission of failing to interview relevant parties should count in my favour. I just had a friend who still works for the firm who told me he is happy to come and give evidence to confirm that no one ever got disciplined for similar issues when he was in management as recent as last year... Thanks for all the advice guys!

As lincroft has said, the fact that no one else got disciplined for similar issues is irrelevant.

Yes you should have been allowed representation (by a colleague or accredited trades union rep only) but these days just getting a technical win on this sort of point does not necessarily get you anything. The days of fixed awards for technical breaches are over.

Keep in mind that to dismiss fairly (in law) an employer does not need proof. They only need a "reasonable belief" that misconduct has taken place and, if so, that dismissal is amongst the sanctions a reasonable employer would consider. Yes, they need to conduct a fair process but that doesn't necessarily mean they, for example, have to interview every possible witness. The would be wise to follow the ACAS guidelines but they don't absolutely have to. There are no longer mandatory procedures. It is very different and far less demanding than the criminal standard of proof.

Realistically, 90% or more of employees who say they will testify against their employer get cold feet. A few principled individuals will but most don't when it comes to it.

As I said take professional advice but you do need to understand the rules and limitations of the tribunal process. The majority of people don't and think that some higher authority will fairly decide the matter over the employer's head. Sadly they won't!

Buckyboy04

I have started making enquiries for legal advice. I have also been reading up on the ACAS code of practice as well to try and merit my case. I am still within the timescales set out by the tribunal/ACAS. Once again, thank you for all the advice, its really appreciated and it puts a lot of things in perspective.

nicechap

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

No, I didn't and I am honest I am black but I have not once played on race and have no interest in dealing with it in that fashion. The guy actually discloses that information in his witness statement.

Really - their only witness stated in their written evidence that they used to work for a corrupt police force where bribes were common??

What possible relevance was that to their statement of facts/ events that led to your dismissal?

steampowered

I am not clear what basis you have for challenging the employer here. Is it a case of "I didn't do it" or a case of "I did it but it wasn't bad enough to justify summary dismissal"?

Either way, I think you need to work out what your case is about and focus on that. It might be that the employer didn't follow a fair procedure by failing to investigate properly, or it might be that a summary dismissal was not in the employer's range of reasonable responses.

Don't get side tracked with things like whether your colleague was allowed to speak at the disciplinary (he wasn't), whether this person used to work for a corrupt police force (that sounds like utter tosh to me, and isn't relevant anyway) or whether they breached the DPA by telling the note taker you were dismissed (they didn't).

Buckyboy04

Hi, this is the reason why I am after advice. They both didn't complete a fair investigation and secondly, the dismissal was not in any employers range of reasonable responses. I think the responses I am getting from the forum may not be as helpful as I initially thought it'd be. There were a few constructive points raised and I appreciate the input from everyone. I think people are under the impression that I am a gold digger who wants an unreasonable outcome, when this is not the case. My life was almost ruined by a company who accused me of theft and bribery and when they failed to get those charges to stick they went out of their way yo justify my dismissal by other means. I am innocent and believe that I owe it to my family to do everything in my power to prove that. Thanks again for your responses...

Buckyboy04

Hi, they were accusing me of bribary and theft from a customer and this guy was their star witness but was only willing to provide a written statement. Needless to say they could not prove this but they believe that I had although they could not dismiss me for this.
:mad:

steampowered

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

I think the responses I am getting from the forum may not be as helpful as I initially thought it'd be

I wouldn't worry too much about this. You haven't told us what you were actually accused of doing so I don't see how anybody could offer a view on the strength of your case.

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

Hi, this is the reason why I am after advice. They both didn't complete a fair investigation and secondly, the dismissal was not in any employers range of reasonable responses.
...
My life was almost ruined by a company who accused me of theft and bribery and when they failed to get those charges to stick they went out of their way yo justify my dismissal by other means. I am innocent and believe that I owe it to my family to do everything in my power to prove that. Thanks again for your responses...

There are two principal ways to allege unfair dismissal in a case like this.

The first route is to say that you didn't do what you were accused of doing. If that is the route you take, you should be aware that the employer does not have to provide 100% proof. The employer only has to show that it had a 'reasonable belief' in the accusation. Of course this would involve conducting a 'reasonable investigation' to verify whether the allegations were true - if the employer did not investigate properly then its belief that you did the thing you are accused of doing would not be reasonable. However the employer does get given leeway in how it thinks the investigation should be run and the employer is not required to exhaust every possible angle of investigation.

The second route is to say that you did what you were accused of doing, but it wasn't bad enough to justify a summary dismissal. This is where the 'reasonable range of responses' test comes in - the tribunal would have to decide whether summary dismissal was within the realm of possibility for a reasonable employer. The employer gets given a lot of leeway to decide what it thinks is reasonable.

You might find this discussion of these issues from a real life case interesting: https://www.blakemorgan.co.uk/training-knowledge/features-and-articles/what-constitutes-reasonable-investigation/.

I am not entirely clear whether your case fits into the first box or the second box (or both). If the dismissal was for bribery/theft, your case fits into the first box only. If the dismissal was for generic breach of company policy, it could fit into both boxes.

Either way, it is probably worth having a brief initial chat with a solicitor to see if they think there might be a case or not.

If you want to get people's opinions on here, I think you would need to tell us much more specifically what you were accused of doing and what you were dismissed for.

nicechap

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

Hi, they were accusing me of bribary and theft from a customer and this guy was their star witness but was only willing to provide a written statement. Needless to say they could not prove this but they believe that I had although they could not dismiss me for this.
:mad:

So they had reason to believe you stole from a customer (you don't make clear who bribed who, you're going to have to improve your attention to detail if you go to a tribunal) - presumably the falsifying a report and not following company procedures relate to that as well.

I think you will struggle to show that dismissing you was not within a reasonable range of responses.

Based on what you've said, where the appeal process has sorted out the accusations & evidence, I doubt you will have much of a case.

Undervalued

Buckyboy04 wrote: »

Hi, they were accusing me of bribary and theft from a customer and this guy was their star witness but was only willing to provide a written statement. Needless to say they could not prove this but they believe that I had although they could not dismiss me for this.
:mad:

As I explained earlier, to dismiss fairly in law an employer does not need proof. They only need a reasonable belief.

If you bring an employment tribunal claim and they convince the tribunal that they had a reasonable belief you lose, simple as that.

Dismissals have been held to be fair even when it has been proved that the employer was wrong and the employee was "innocent". All that matters is whether their belief was reasonable at the time.

I am not saying you don't have a case, there is not enough detail here to say that. What I, and others, are pointing out is that much of what you consider to be important is not relevant.