Goal posts changed in a disciplinary investigation

Ronaldo_Mconaldo

What difference does your phone not having a signal make? You could be playing some game or looking at photos. I'd imagine that the other side of this story would be very interesting. What kind of work do you do?

ohreally

You sound hard work, be prepared to be managed out the door if you don't change.

susec`

Sorry, I only refer to the use of the word "fair" in the government guidance. I don't know what this actually means, thus I am seeking to understand it.


I in no way expected to cross-examine the witnesses, only that I am puzzled that I can be interviewed over a very limited timescale and set of incidents, whilst the other witnesses had already been interviewed over a considerable period. I wasn't told that other issues had been included until I got the "This is considered gross misconduct...", it was a complete surprise to the union and me. It seems a little harsh, even if "fair".


Yes, this happened. Witnessed by 3 people. And yes, the accusations of the harm are real.


In response to the phone issue, I hadn't considered that they might think that I'm playing games - Naïve for sure, as I never play games! And my photos are all on the cloud and the ones on my phone deleted automatically. But I get your point. I don't understand why the manager can stand and look at a colleagues childrens photos straight after telling me off, who hadn't even lifted my phone out of my pocket!


Yes, I guess I'm hard work. I have a serious disability/mental health problem which fluctuates. I have to work collaboratively with managers to support this. Since this episode with my colleague this stopped. I am commended for my work for the whole period I am well. I think I'm one of the most diligent there, from feedback. With appropriate management I can take appropriate sick leave when I start to become unwell, with referral to the very supportive Occy health Dr and my care professionals. Without that support, the early signs of me becoming unwell get missed, and I end up in a punative cycle of meetings and refusal to refer me to Occy Health, as per Occy Health's recommendations. I am actively denied this help, this safety net. So things happen that shouldn't do. It is acutely embarrassing for me, afterwards, and my job suffers. An early referral isn't really that much to ask, is it? Yes, I'm hard work. I also work hard.


As the timings of the majority of these events coincide with my illness, wasn't the Occy health route a more logical option rather than rendering me unemployable for the foreseeable?


BTW, when I go to the employment tribunal, I presume that *is* a court of law, and that people need to testify under oath?


I prefer not to declare my profession.

Guest101

Fair is basically an employer following their processes. It only applies in certain circumstances.


The employer does not have to keep you on. It's very easy to manage someone out of a job, most employers don't do it because the people they hire tend to be reliable after 2 years.

IAmWales

What you see as reasonable adjustments are far beyond what most would. You need to be realistic as to how much the managers etc can do for you, and how much leeway you should be given due to your condition.

How much time have you had off sick?

There's no shame in admitting your disability makes you unsuitable for/ incapable of a particular role. It strikes me that this is the case here.

susec`

IAmWales wrote: »

What you see as reasonable adjustments are far beyond what most would. You need to be realistic as to how much the managers etc can do for you, and how much leeway you should be given due to your condition.

How much time have you had off sick?

There's no shame in admitting your disability makes you unsuitable for/ incapable of a particular role. It strikes me that this is the case here.

I tend to agree; it would have been easier for everyone involved to have gone down the capability route, but they have chosen not to.


The "reasonable adjustments" go little further than reducing the time interval between the regular supervision we're supposed to have anyway, and benchmarking my current performance in the workplace - am I performing less well in any way. Increasing the supervision from 4 weeks to 2 weeks isn't a difficult adjustment, is it? As for other adjustments, they have criticised me for not being able to do something Occy health has specified that must happen and has already been granted as a flexible working option to several other staff. On the other hand they have tried to impose a working pattern on me, very different from my colleagues' patterns, which actually makes my life harder. These are documented repeatedly during the time of my employment.


Do you really consider the first two aren't "reasonable"? They are quite simple and achievable and I can't see why they would have a significant impact. Well, I can't see that something that is allowed for flexible working reasons can be that bad. I work in the public sector, who, under the Equality Act (2010) have general duties to, basically, try and accommodate my needs.


It is hard enough living with my illness as it is. With support and some minor reasonable adjustments I am much less likely to have been here, facing this. The reasonable adjustments were in place. They were working well. Then my current manager decided to remove them.

Guest101

susec` wrote: »

I tend to agree; it would have been easier for everyone involved to have gone down the capability route, but they have chosen not to.


The "reasonable adjustments" go little further than reducing the time interval between the regular supervision we're supposed to have anyway, and benchmarking my current performance in the workplace - am I performing less well in any way. Increasing the supervision from 4 weeks to 2 weeks isn't a difficult adjustment, is it? As for other adjustments, they have criticised me for not being able to do something Occy health has specified that must happen and has already been granted as a flexible working option to several other staff. On the other hand they have tried to impose a working pattern on me, very different from my colleagues' patterns, which actually makes my life harder. These are documented repeatedly during the time of my employment.


Do you really consider the first two aren't "reasonable"? They are quite simple and achievable and I can't see why they would have a significant impact. Well, I can't see that something that is allowed for flexible working reasons can be that bad. I work in the public sector, who, under the Equality Act (2010) have general duties to, basically, try and accommodate my needs. - That's a very simple definition of what they are obliged to do.


It is hard enough living with my illness as it is. With support and some minor reasonable adjustments I am much less likely to have been here, facing this. The reasonable adjustments were in place. They were working well. Then my current manager decided to remove them.

What I don't understand is why you want to continue working there. Clearly you aren't valued.

ohreally

susec` wrote: »

As for other adjustments, they have criticised me for not being able to do something Occy health has specified that must happen

You do realise the role of OH is advisory, they can't dictate outcomes.

Undervalued

susec` wrote: »

I tend to agree; it would have been easier for everyone involved to have gone down the capability route, but they have chosen not to.


The "reasonable adjustments" go little further than reducing the time interval between the regular supervision we're supposed to have anyway, and benchmarking my current performance in the workplace - am I performing less well in any way. Increasing the supervision from 4 weeks to 2 weeks isn't a difficult adjustment, is it? As for other adjustments, they have criticised me for not being able to do something Occy health has specified that must happen and has already been granted as a flexible working option to several other staff. On the other hand they have tried to impose a working pattern on me, very different from my colleagues' patterns, which actually makes my life harder. These are documented repeatedly during the time of my employment.


Do you really consider the first two aren't "reasonable"? They are quite simple and achievable and I can't see why they would have a significant impact. Well, I can't see that something that is allowed for flexible working reasons can be that bad. I work in the public sector, who, under the Equality Act (2010) have general duties to, basically, try and accommodate my needs.


It is hard enough living with my illness as it is. With support and some minor reasonable adjustments I am much less likely to have been here, facing this. The reasonable adjustments were in place. They were working well. Then my current manager decided to remove them.

I have a serious disability/mental health problem which fluctuates.

Has it been established that you actually have a disability (for employment law purposes)? If so, has your employer been formally made aware of this?

If so then yes, they are required to make "reasonable adjustments". Ultimately only a tribunal can decide what is reasonable in any particular case but keep in mind that reasonable adjustments generally do not got as far as many employees would like to think. Occupational health can suggest adjustments to the employer but they cannot dictate what the employer must do.

If you do not have disability and are only ill (forgive the expression) then the employer doesn't have to make any adjustments at all. They can simply say "do you full job properly, go off sick or leave".

Mental health conditions can amount to a disability but generally they would need to be long lasting and well documented with specialist medical evidence.

Having a disability does not stop you from being disciplined. Again reasonable adjustments to the process may be appropriate. Yes, they would be well advised to follow the ACAS guidelines but an alternative process may still be legally fair.

susec`

Guest101 wrote: »

What I don't understand is why you want to continue working there. Clearly you aren't valued.

I totally and utterly agree. I don't want to work here. I never interviewed for the job - it was given to me. Miles from home. Loads of travelling. After I was given a job, then had it taken away when I disclosed my mental health condition. I settled out of court. I have worked like stink, here. Whilst I have been well, I have done some really good and recognised work, leading the way in my particular niche and passing on skills. I have done my utmost, but I feel doomed from the beginning. One can't suppose, but the managers know each other well. But that's entirely conjecture. And I prefer facts.


But now I'm stuck! I can't leave, I can't go off sick and get dismissed that way, I will not get a decent reference, whatever happens. I will not work again any time soon. That's a very depressing picture. Another person on benefits... It's not me, but I won't get a job with the CV I can put together! I don't know what to do other than to pursue action based on the Equality act, which I'm about 80% sure I will win. It's all in writing, in several versions.


Sorry to whinge on. I've between the devil and the deep blue sea!


Thanks for everyone's comments.