Can I be sacked?

Manxman_in_exile

I first joined these forums four years ago seeking advice following a RTC. The replies I received were not what I wanted to hear, but after carrying out some research (I have two law degrees but am not a solicitor or barrister) I reluctantly accepted that what I had been told was correct. I am perfectly capable of understanding legislation and case law despite not being a practising lawyer. But if I need legal advice I will consult a lawyer. (My wife - who is a solicitor - and I did our own wills, but then relaised we had cocked them up and went to a solicitor to get it done properly. Of course this costs you.


I don't respond to posts on here unless I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about. (Although I agree a lot of posters on here clearly don't!). I recently replied to posts about NHS employment contracts because I had dealt with these for 25 years. The OP (like lots of OPs on here) clearly did not know what they were talking about and completely misunderstood the situation.


I am not aware in any of the threads that I have read on this board that any body has either claimed or represented themselves to be a"professional" lawyer ( I use this term because it could be argued that I am a "qualified lawyer", but obviously I'm not permitted to practise or to give advice.


FWIW there is only one regular poster on here whom I conclude to be a professional lawyer from the content of their posts and the depth of their knowledge. And their advice generally looks pretty good to me.


PS - If I'm seeking advice I want the best I can get - I don't want empathy.

k3lvc

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

FWIW there is only one regular poster on here whom I conclude to be a professional lawyer from the content of their posts and the depth of their knowledge. And their advice generally looks pretty good to me.

And presumably this is the same regular poster that seems to be banging her head against a brick wall with this particular OP - whilst the advice is never sugar-coated it's genuine :mad:

sangie595

k3lvc wrote: »

And presumably this is the same regular poster that seems to be banging her head against a brick wall with this particular OP - whilst the advice is never sugar-coated it's genuine :mad:

If it is and its me (people know I'm female!) then she isn't a professional lawyer, although I think a 40 years time served union official is better than a lot of lawyers, especially in the workplace (rather than the court - you've already lost your job when you go to court!)... But several very good advisors gave advice on this thread, all saying the same thing. I'm just persistent / keep on banging my head against the wall to try to stop someone doing something very stupid. Whereas others are much more sensible and walk away. Occupational hazard I guess. I'm not posting on a website. I'm doing what I care about and am passionate about, and no matter how much someone doesn't like it, my first priority is keeping someone in their job unless there is no other alternative. Because the odds are that resign or get fired, you'll lose at tribunal.

Manxman_in_exile

Actually, it wasn't sangie I was thinking of. - Although I respect her views and in particular the no-nonsense, pragmatic and realistic way in which it is delivered. I enjoy reading her replies. I'd rather hear genuine bad news than misguided good news.


I'm 90% certain that at least one fairly regular poster here is probably a solicitor. There is one other poster who may also be, but as sangie usually pointed out they were wholly mistaken, I can't be sure! (I suspect sangie has as much legal knowledge of employment law as many lawyers anyway).


There was a poster on the consumeraction group and LegalBeagles who claimed to be legally qualified but their advice was appalling and hopelessly ignorant. (sangie may be able to guess who I mean although they never posted on this forum). They were giving inaccurate (and potentially dangerous and costly) advice on all legal aspects, particularly on inheritance law.


The worst example (and I was minded to contact the forum in question to complain about them) was a case where the OP was in danger of being prosecuted by a train operating company - can't remember if it was for failing to provide a valid ticket or for intent to avoid paying. The poster I'm referring to gave bad and literally dangerous advice. Despite being corrected by many other posters they refused to accept that a TOC could bring a private prosecution. They insisted that only the CPS could initiate a prosecution and the OP should ignore it!


I think they were eventually kicked of both forums.


(sangie can you guess who I mean? You may not as they tended to steer clear of employment issues).

sangie595

Yes I can. There's one on one of those sites on employment whose advice is so bad that I've almost stopped posting there because they are leading people dangerously astray, and just telling people made up law and what they want to hear. That poster has tried migrating here several times bit found they are called out by too many people.

To be honest, sites like this kind of scare me. They have good intentions. But the only good advice is to have union membership or good legal cover. Obviously I'm biased too the former. But whatever. Frankly, anyone who doesn't insure their job is an idiot. And union official (now) or not, I can testify as to why you should be in a union. The people here are not the only people who get unfairly treated or dismissed. But in my case I will never pay as much union fees in my lifetime as the amount I won because of my then union - who, in several reincarnation later, I now work for.

Manxman_in_exile

Yeah..Nearly 35 years ago my father in law (who was a senior Personnel- as it was then - manager at British Gas) advised both of us when getting a job (1) to join the pension scheme and (2) to join the union.


I certainly think there are some posters on CAG who are, to say the least, unreliable!

robatwork

What gets me is the bloody-minded rudeness of OPs who get people's time totally free of charge, 90% of which is well-meaning, x% of which is fantastic, free advice that they can choose to ignore or follow.

The arrogance of someone who posts from a position of "lack of knowledge" and then won't accept an answer because all of a sudden they know best, is astounding.

Note I'm not talking about the OP here, nor can I be bothered to go back and re-read the OP, this is just a general rant.

When I get a reply from a question I asked, if it's an attempt at help they get a Thanks and a "Thanks" even if it's not what I wanted to hear.

ohreally

Deleted_User wrote: »

Thank you for your useful post. I contacted the Union on Monday and am still awaiting to hear from them

God help your poor shop steward, member from hell springs to mind.

sangie595

ohreally wrote: »

God help your poor shop steward, member from hell springs to mind.

It's part of the job. To be fair, most are not members from hell. They are genuinely upset people who think that the law should support them and it doesn't. That doesn't make them right or wrong, just upset. But what happens is that they shape and reshape their story, and just like the OP here, it starts one place and ends up somewhere else. Find a case of the first doesn't work. If they are lucky they get an experienced rep who tells them to stop bull---tting and tell the truth. If they find a less experienced one who doesn't spot the truth, they end up in a worse place and then blame the union!