disciplinary

Danielpyne

thank you for the replies very helpful.

i can confirm that we ate from a set menu so many dozens of people would have eaten the same as him and no one else was sick or felt sick in anyway.

i can confirm that people are happy to write statements in my defence and also statements to show that this person was very intoxicated

but like advised above my employer may not think this is a factor

TELLIT01

tuodtoearth wrote: »

Just deny his claim, insist he was drunk and provide proof he wasn't food poisoned. Check what he foods he ordered at the Xmas party, and if someone else ate the same foods why didn't they get food poisoned? Also use the staff working there to testify no one who ordered the same foods reported any food poisoning.

How is the OP supposed to prove that the person didn't suffer from food poisoning, or a severe allergic reaction to something they ate? The best the OP can hope is to get statements from other staff members that this person drank a lot and appeared to be drunk, also that they didn't hear the OP say what they have been reported as saying.
It's easy to jump to conclusions about why somebody is acting as they are and those conclusions aren't always accurate.

Barny1979

OP - If you are found to be innocent, have you thought of where you go from here? In terms of working with said colleague and company?

Danielpyne

i do not know about my future i am applying for other jobs ofc in case i am sacked.

thanks for replies i will do all i can do and ask for statements from other people and hope they are listened to but who knows. can i just ask though i it true that all statements have to be given to me before the meeting or can they keep them from me and just give me them there? i would like some time to go through it first. thank you

tuodtoearth

TELLIT01 wrote: »

How is the OP supposed to prove that the person didn't suffer from food poisoning, or a severe allergic reaction to something they ate? The best the OP can hope is to get statements from other staff members that this person drank a lot and appeared to be drunk, also that they didn't hear the OP say what they have been reported as saying.
It's easy to jump to conclusions about why somebody is acting as they are and those conclusions aren't always accurate.

It's easier to prove everyone else who ate the same foods had no food poisoning, and then it's up to the accuser to prove he has some medical problem. If you can't provide a doctor's note as proof you're allergic to something you ate on the menu then you're obviously lying.

elsien

tuodtoearth wrote: »

It's easier to prove everyone else who ate the same foods had no food poisoning, and then it's up to the accuser to prove he has some medical problem. If you can't provide a doctor's note as proof you're allergic to something you ate on the menu then you're obviously lying.

You can have a reaction to food without being allergic. And the other person doesn't have to prove anything, about his health or anything else. Asking for doctors notes etc isn't going to happen, not worth going there.

OP - the ACAS code of practice (guidance only, the company don't have to follow it) says "If it is decided that there is a disciplinary case to answer, the employee should be notifed of this in writing. This notifcation should contain sufficient information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance and its possible consequences to enable the employee to prepare to answer the case at a disciplinary meeting. It would normally be appropriate to provide copies of any written evidence, which may include any witness statements, with the notification."

So I would ask them tomorrow for the copy of the procedure if it doesn't arrive in the post, and ask them when you will get written copies of any statements.
You have the right to appeal if things go against you, and them not following their own procedures would be grounds for appeal.

nicechap

tuodtoearth wrote: »

It's easier to prove everyone else who ate the same foods had no food poisoning, and then it's up to the accuser to prove he has some medical problem. If you can't provide a doctor's note as proof you're allergic to something you ate on the menu then you're obviously lying.

OP please ignore this advice. If you started down this line of argument or the accusation of being drunk, it would make me think you are desperate to deflect attention from the facts and present you in a very poor light.

[Deleted User]

Personally I do think asking people who helped this person while they were being sick if there was a strong smell of alcohol would help demonstrate that this person's judgement wasn't 100%. Its not mud slinging, its helping to demonstrate that what the person who was sick said isn't true. Also asking for a one liner if anyone else was sick after eating the limited choice of food.

Its the OPs reputation and job that is being tested here, he is allowed to demonstrate the person making the accusation's judgement/memory wasn't 100% accurate. State that you don't know this manager, have never had any opinions about them and that you are as horrified as they are about what has been said.

I would also ask the OP to make a statement giving a history of their employment, stating they have not made statements of this kind before (which the other witnesses could back up) if true.

OP, I hope this goes as well as possible for you. Personally, I think it will make things difficult for you with this manager in future, whatever the outcome.

Les79

Danielpyne wrote: »

i didnt realise i had to come here and post I AM INNOCENT I DID NOT DO IT. of course im innocent of it and no this isnt my full proper name, jesus. i stay out of the way of management i dont know them well and ive never had a conversation with area manager i see him very little i dont know where this comes from.

To be totally honest, until you spell it out it isn't clear to someone who isn't privvy to all of the facts.


Also, whilst you probably wouldn't have gotten a positive reply, if you WERE guilty then it might require a slightly different approach from you. Just think of when someone hires a lawyer to defend a criminal charge; they may well be guilty (and found as such), but their lawyer will put forward a defense to, at the very least, attempt to soften the sentence.

ive been working here 3 years the other person about 3 months

I don't think this should be a factor to be fair... It is merely one employee Vs another.


I would hope that truth will out in this scenario. There's a fairly good chance that there are witnesses to be called upon, and surely they don't all have it in for you to the point where they'd LIE about that? If you are innocent then there shouldn't be much substance in the complaint, and with it being an "xmas party" it is more likely, in my eyes, that said person was DRUNK rather than having underlying health issues (surely anyone who becomes violently ill on occasion due to an ILLNESS has a better solution than relying on colleagues to bring them a box?! A bit far-fetched, unless this was the first ever time their ILLNESS caused such a pronounced reaction.).


Side note, did ANYONE say that within earshot? The thing which does make me think you may have said it is how specific it is.... You do have to have some balls to make up a very specific lie like that and put a colleague on the chopping block. You also stated "i was kindly helping him", which would be slightly weird if there was some mutual bad blood between you both! Unless some sort of massive grude has formed more recently? I'm just not seeing their motivation for lying here to be fair, especially if you were "kindly helping him" (I potentially quoted "kindly" out of context here but you get the jist).

Mr.Generous

Xmas party's keep HR busy for months. Great thread.

Just a thought: A new employee effectively on probation due to length of service who gets hammered, throws up and generally behaves in a way they feel might cause them some grief at work … might just have a reason to be Managements witness to something else, whether true or not, this could be what they are thinking. Its all speculation of course.