Settlement agreement followed by gross misconduct

Macman82

Hi, hoping for some advice please.

My company is closing down and everybody is being made redundant and we have all signed settlement agreements.

However, I have since been suspended for "gross misconduct".

We were having a constructive discussion about Stephen Lawrence and a number of people were saying that the police are institutionally racist. I pointed out that statistically black people are more likely to commit crime in London, than white people, and backed it up with figures from the gov.uk website.

Can they sack me for this? I was merely stating a fact. Also can they get out of the settlement agreement that is already signed?

BorisThomson

Macman82 wrote: »

Hi, hoping for some advice please.

My company is closing down and everybody is being made redundant and we have all signed settlement agreements.

However, I have since been suspended for "gross misconduct".

We were having a constructive discussion about Stephen Lawrence and a number of people were saying that the police are institutionally racist. I pointed out that statistically black people are more likely to commit crime in London, than white people, and backed it up with figures from the gov.uk website.

Can they sack me for this? I was merely stating a fact. Also can they get out of the settlement agreement that is already signed?

Settlement agreement or redundancy? They're different things.

If your comment was exactly as you have said, that is not grounds for gross misconduct. If they are taking it further, I'm doubting it was as straightforward as you claim.

TELLIT01

If what you have said is correct and is backed up by government figures I don't understand where 'misconduct' be it gross or otherwise come in.
They would seem to be in an extremely weak position if it was taken to tribunal, but as they are closing down they don't have to worry about that.
Has it been suggested to you that you wont get the settlement agreement?

Macman82

yes, it was exactly as i stated, but in the suspension letter it has been phrased as "a comment you made towards a member of staff that "black people commit most crimes"" - it was as part of a discussion,, not directed at anyone, and I certainly wasnt talking to the person who complained directly

Its redundancy but its complicated as the company is owned by 3 charities, who are moving their services to another provider, hence why we were required to sign settlement agreements. The settlement agreement included an enhanced redundancy payment and us signing away all our rights to sue any of the charities.

Even once the company has gone at the end of June, the stakeholders will all still exist

Macman82

worth noting as well that the person who complained has also said that i have made comments about her eyebrows, hair, face which has left her feeling stressed and upset...

... i made ONE comment about 4 months ago that her eyebrows (which are painted on) make her look surprised, like count duckula. Certainly havent commented on anything else, nor do I dislike her.

andrewmp

Macman82 wrote: »

worth noting as well that the person who complained has also said that i have made comments about her eyebrows, hair, face which has left her feeling stressed and upset...

... i made ONE comment about 4 months ago that her eyebrows (which are painted on) make her look surprised, like count duckula. Certainly havent commented on anything else, nor do I dislike her.

:D:D:D

Anything else? Sounds like you're making the poor girl's life hell.

Macman82

no thats all, honestly

steampowered

On its own simply expressing an opinion like this doesn't sound like gross misconduct.

However, if it forms part of an ongoing course of conduct which constitutes harassment or bullying of a co-worker, then that could be gross misconduct.

It is difficult for us to comment without knowing the full background of how you have been treating your co-worker.

Ozzuk

Macman82 wrote: »

... i made ONE comment about 4 months ago that her eyebrows (which are painted on) make her look surprised, like count duckula. Certainly havent commented on anything else, nor do I dislike her.

I really shouldn't but that did make me laugh. However, very inappropriate and highly likely to cause offence.

Macman82

Ozzuk wrote: »

I really shouldn't but that did make me laugh. However, very inappropriate and highly likely to cause offence.

Yes I agree, was stupid, thinking back. But it certainly wasnt meant to be derogatory, just an observation and "banter".

The person who complained is my managers "pet" - I've since found out that even though i've only been suspended 2 days, shes been put in charge of my position (team leader)

BorisThomson

Macman82 wrote: »

Yes I agree, was stupid, thinking back. But it certainly wasnt meant to be derogatory, just an observation and "banter".

The person who complained is my managers "pet" - I've since found out that even though i've only been suspended 2 days, shes been put in charge of my position (team leader)

Another poster that thinks "banter" is acceptable in the workplace. It's not.

It may well cost you your redundancy payment.