False accusation of gross misconduct

SpideressUK

ohreally wrote: »

I wouldn't hang too much faith in this witness. Even if they are consulted the best testament they can offer is they did not see anything untoward which is not the same as the allegation did not take place.

I think if I was in a shop or walking into a small shop and a member of staff had hit/punched another member of staff either as as I was walking in or whilst I was there it would be difficult for me not to see or hear anything. If I were the woman in question and had just been assaulted the first thing I would say to a person walking into the shop is "did you see that" or I would be reacting in some way to the person who had punched/hit me either with an "owww" or "what do you think you are doing" type angry response so that would be hard for someone not to see or hear. However, if it had happened in the 2or 3 mins after I had left the shop then evidently I would not be likely to have seen or heard anything though I might of picked up on an "atmosphere" in the shop. I would only be able to testify to what I saw, heard or felt either just prior to walking into the shop, what happened whilst in there and anything I heard or felt just after I left. This is all the evidence we would hope this customer would provide.

We do not know at what point this female is saying my husband attacked her - we do not know if she said it happened when the customer was in the shop or once he had left the shop. It is an open plan, open fronted tiny shop so any internal sounds should be heard in close proximity "outside".

polgara

In our organisation it would only be the person who is alleged to have done something who would be suspended and also we would take a very dim view on someone contacting witnesses. The correct process would be for your husband to tell the investigator who they think is a witness and the investigator would then contact them to discuss what they did/didn't see. By contacting them direct I'd be considering whether there was collusion and whether I could believe the witness.

SpideressUK

polgara wrote: »

In our organisation it would only be the person who is alleged to have done something who would be suspended and also we would take a very dim view on someone contacting witnesses. The correct process would be for your husband to tell the investigator who they think is a witness and the investigator would then contact them to discuss what they did/didn't see. By contacting them direct I'd be considering whether there was collusion and whether I could believe the witness.

Someone mentioned on this thread that they woud expect both parties to be on suspension and suggested that part of the reason might to be protect the invesitgation so for eg stop my husband saying anything to the woman in question or to other colleagues etc. I thought this seemed sensible and logical. It does seem unfair that somone can make such an allegation and remain working - who is to know how many people this woman is now speaking to in the company to "get them on her side" etc, the very fact she is there when it is supposed to be under investigation surely give her the option to tamper with/alter "evidence" etc and make the investigation invalid.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Was there an argument? Does she say something provoked the alleged attack? Or does she claim this happened completely out of the blue?

SpideressUK

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Was there an argument? Does she say something provoked the alleged attack? Or does she claim this happened completely out of the blue?

We do not know if she is saying there was an argument or if she is claiming something provoked the alleged attack. All we know is he was told he was on 7 days suspension on full pay whilst an investigation is carried out as he had been accused by this female member of staff of punching/hitting her.

From my husband's testimony there was nothing out of the ordinary in the interaction between him and her on that day. No arguments, nothing to provoke, no bad words said etc. He had just had a normal every day interaction with her and so was in complete shock when called into the office to be told he was suspended and that she had made such an accusation against him.

SpideressUK

He has been given a date and time for the investigation interview. Whilst the letter states "suspension is not a form of dsciplinary action and does not involve any prejudgement" the very first line of the letter states "following the incident involving physical contact with another member of staff". Not following the ALLEGED incident. That seems to give an indicator of where the company mindset is already at inspite of the claim of no prejudgement.

SpideressUK

For anyone interested who is still following. It turns out they were working on tills side by side. A customer came in and he thought the customer was his to serve (since it was still his shift) and his female colleague seems to think the customer was hers to serve. The customer placed the mints on the counter near my husband's till and (whilst he was in full eye contact with the customer) he reached out to pick up the mints. At the same time the girl reached out to pick up the mints and my husband's hand touched hers. From that she alleged assault. CCTV footage captured it and my husband was allowed to see the footage. It has been accepted by mangement that the incident was exactly what it actually was - an accidental touch with no malice and my husband's suspension is lifted.

He has asked for some safeguards to be put in place at work regarding him and this colleague in order to protect him from further such allegations.

motorguy

SpideressUK wrote: »

For anyone interested who is still following. It turns out they were working on tills side by side. A customer came in and he thought the customer was his to serve (since it was still his shift) and his female colleague seems to think the customer was hers to serve. The customer placed the mints on the counter near my husband's till and (whilst in full eye contact with the customer) reached out to pick up the mints. At the same time the girl reached out to pick up the mints and my husband's hand touched hers. From that she alleged assault. CCTV footage captured it and my husband was allowed to see the footage. It has been accepted by mangement that the incident was exactly what it actually was - an accidental touch with no malice and my husband's suspension is lifted.

He has asked for some safeguards to be put in place at work regarding him and this colleague in order to protect him from further such allegations.

She sounds like a nutter.

I'd be asking for a transfer or finding another job ASAP.

Idiots like that dont realise the wholesale damage they can do to peoples lives making allegations like that on a whim.

Imagine if she'd managed to make that stick. :eek:

SpideressUK

motorguy wrote: »

She sounds like a nutter.

I'd be asking for a transfer or finding another job ASAP.

Idiots like that dont realise the wholesale damage they can do to peoples lives making allegations like that on a whim.

Imagine if she'd managed to make that stick. :eek:

Yes, he was lucky the whole thing was covered by CCTV and he was able to explain his thought process whilst serving - he is totally customer focussed as he ought to be.

I am sure I must have bumped into people yesterday but I do not remember it as people "bump" all the time on buses, trains etc. A lady accidentally brushed against me in Starbucks today as she squeezed between tables. Never in a million years would it occur to me to report that as "assault"

TBagpuss

SpideressUK wrote: »

For anyone interested who is still following. It turns out they were working on tills side by side. A customer came in and he thought the customer was his to serve (since it was still his shift) and his female colleague seems to think the customer was hers to serve. The customer placed the mints on the counter near my husband's till and (whilst he was in full eye contact with the customer) he reached out to pick up the mints. At the same time the girl reached out to pick up the mints and my husband's hand touched hers. From that she alleged assault. CCTV footage captured it and my husband was allowed to see the footage. It has been accepted by mangement that the incident was exactly what it actually was - an accidental touch with no malice and my husband's suspension is lifted.

He has asked for some safeguards to be put in place at work regarding him and this colleague in order to protect him from further such allegations.

Good to know that they have investigated and found that he did nothing wrong. It sounds as though they followed the correct process and came to the right outcome, so hopefully knowing they they didn't ump to conclusions and did investigate properly will reassure him.

What specific safeguards is he suggesting, and what was their response to his suggestion? Is he planning to make a formal complaint about her making false allegations?