Suspension from work

Masomnia

antrobus wrote: »

Sadly what we have here is a new member who sees themselves as some kind of authority on the law.

Pointing out that they are wrong is not giving them a 'hard time'. Or are you saying we should all just stand by and let someone post advice that is bad and wrong for fear of offending your snowflake sensibilities?

Can you explain why (or when) being on someone's property when you don't have permission is not trespass? Everyone seems to have jumped on this.

I think suspension might be harsh but for different reasons.

OP, in your situation I would basically plead that you realise now it was a daft thing to do a momentary lapse in judgment and that you would never knowingly or willfully breach company policies and procedures. For a fair dismissal for gross misconduct they'd have to reasonably believe that it was a willful act, or gross negligence, so pleading on that basis could get you off with a warning.

sangie595

Helen1993 wrote: »

I opened up the store an hour earlier, still sticking to the same procedures, in order to get set up for a big charity cake sale we were having.

For the final time, the OP had been very clear why she opened the shop. And for a legitimate purpose. Unless, of course, the big charity cake sale was also done without the employers permission and they actually totally missed the fact that it had happened!

And that is the reason why she was not unlawfully on the premises. An event, which she was setting up, which the employer was running for charity. All explained right back on page one before the entire thread became full of silly threats about criminal offences for a keyholder with authority to be in the premises turning up to work early to get ready!

sangie595

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I also agree with others that billy2shots is making it up as he goes along. I'm beginning to suspect that he is a new version of a member with a long name who seems to have had personal experience of every situation anybody posts about. I'm going to avoid reading or responding to any of their 'contributions' from here on. I just wish there was an option to hide any posts by a selected individual.

I got to that conclusion before you did. You can in fact put posters on ignore. The problem with that is that when they are telling people total tosh and claiming it as law, you can't see it to correct it.

scd3scd4

The "law" wont be interested. They are too busy not arresting moped thefts. Billy no mates is just a drama queen.

Savvy_Sue

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I just wish there was an option to hide any posts by a selected individual.

There is. From the User CP, list of options on the left, click on 'Edit Ignore List' and you can then add anyone you like.

Sadly, if anyone quotes their posts, you'll still see them.

Going back on topic, it doesn't read as if the colleague used any of the company's product, the OP says this colleague 'does beauty on the side' rather than as part of her job. Not that it makes it OK but I'd say OP and her colleague could be in equal amounts of doodah. Except that if the OP has more seniority, then she's in the deepest doodah, because she allowed it to happen.

And did 'the management' know that you were going in to open up early? If they didn't, and it was just your own bright idea, the doodah gets deeper.

I'd recommend spending the time you're suspended in serious job hunting, and working out how to explain this episode. If it ends better than we fear, you've lost nothing.

Ja7188

Sadly there are many people in here that see themselves as some kind of authority who appear to seek out the new members and give them a hard time in response to their questions - sorry you've not been made to feel very welcome. There are some decent folk that won't cross question you

There are people here who actually are authorities and know what they're talking about - and if they cross-question posters, they're doing so to gather the information they need in order to be able to advise...

I would suggest that the people who take their time to do this are very much "decent folk".

scd3scd4

Over the years I have sat in on numerous investigations/disciplines.


Its not always/just about what happened but more your judgement and the future. This is where it maybe prudent to form a defence.

Helen1993

Sorry for the late reply.

I am the assistant manager, my manager was off on holiday. Regardless of wether my sister was gettin her nails done or not I would have been opening up to set up for the charity day. I wasn't trespassing.

My colleague didn't use any equipment of the company's she brought her own (we do not work in a beauty salon)

This isn't the first time that I or my other colleagues have opened up our shop early for different scenarios.

I have been job hunting since I've been off.

I'm not a snowflake either, and I'm on here as a new poster for advice, so any advise is welcome.

I understand now after looking at the bigger picture, I have held my hands up and said I wasn't thinking of the consequences at the time and I wasn't in any way shape or form trying to deceit my manager or the company. We have cameras all over the shop which, after managers absence they apparently have to check over. So if I thought, at the time I was doing something wrong I most certainly wouldn't allow it to happen.

I feel that I'm not getting help from work in this case. They have advised not to contact anyone or go near the shop, I have to be available to speak to/able to be available ro go to a meeting within my working hours every day that I'm off on suspension.

Thanks again for all advise and sorry for the late replies.

elsien

The not gong near the shop/colleagues and having to be available during working hours is standard practice, not them being awkward.
It's to remove any suspicion that you could potentially interfere with any investigation.
You should have been given a contact in the company though, if you have any queries. Is that the person who is on holiday?
Have you been given a copy of the disciplinary procedure to show the processes that will be followed.

My personal opinion is that the company is on shaky grounds telling you who you can/can't socialise with out of works time, but if you do you mustn't discuss the disciplinary situation at all. And would be better off not talking about work at all. How do-able that is is another matter entirely.

Comms69

Masomnia wrote: »

Can you explain why (or when) being on someone's property when you don't have permission is not trespass? Everyone seems to have jumped on this. - It may or may not be trespass, but that isn't a crime in this country.... (it's not trespass in my opinion because being a key holder would entitle the OP to have decision making authority).

I think suspension might be harsh but for different reasons. - suspension isn't 'harsh' as I said it's a neutral act. You still get paid on suspension.

OP, in your situation I would basically plead that you realise now it was a daft thing to do a momentary lapse in judgment and that you would never knowingly or willfully breach company policies and procedures. For a fair dismissal for gross misconduct they'd have to reasonably believe that it was a willful act, or gross negligence, so pleading on that basis could get you off with a warning.

This could easily be a reason to get rid of the OP. But depending on employer/employee relations I agree a warning and training would probably more useful