Professional advice needed please

KatrinaWaves

homeworkgirl wrote: »

My concern now is whether other staff will admit to taking it when they are questioned, as they have heard on the grapevine what has happened.

Sorry to beat a dead horse but if the rub was given to customers with meat, and the staff are buying the meat as customers, why would they need to ‘admit’ to taking it!?

Clearly your daughter is doing something she shouldn’t have been. Clearly this has become habit amongst the staff and she has got caught. But it’s very clearly not just taking what would normally be given to a customer.

Masomnia

The way they handled the search could undermine trust and confidence, imho, but I think it's a bit weak for a constructive dismissal claim. Whether other staff members are also given the rub for free could be relevant but that's really fact specific.

The daughter might be entitled to accompaniment at the investigation meeting if there are contractual policies or procedures that provide for this. She is at the disciplinary hearing.

If she is given the rub in the same way as any other customer would be then I really don't understand how this is 'stealing', if she wasn't entitled to it then surely the company's gripe should be with the person who gave her the rub?

homeworkgirl

"Clearly your daughter is doing something she shouldn’t have been. "But it’s very clearly not just taking what would normally be given to a customer."

I object to your wording here....if you think my daughter is lying and a thief please keep your opinions to yourself!

homeworkgirl

If she is given the rub in the same way as any other customer would be then I really don't understand how this is 'stealing', if she wasn't entitled to it then surely the company's gripe should be with the person who gave her the rub?

homeworkgirl

"If she is given the rub in the same way as any other customer would be then I really don't understand how this is 'stealing', if she wasn't entitled to it then surely the company's gripe should be with the person who gave her the rub?"

Exactly!

TELLIT01

None of us know the full details of what happened, and I don't believe that anybody should be accused of lying or stealing without that knowledge. There are so many 'ifs' that speculation is pointless and unhelpful. All we can do is help explain what steps the person being investigated can take to ensure that the full story, as they understand it, is given at the meeting. As I suggested earlier, write everything down in a timeline and refer to that during the meeting. It's much easier to keep calm and recollect events accurately if the information is in front of you.

KatrinaWaves

homeworkgirl wrote: »

"Clearly your daughter is doing something she shouldn’t have been. "But it’s very clearly not just taking what would normally be given to a customer."

I object to your wording here....if you think my daughter is lying and a thief please keep your opinions to yourself!

Object all you want, but your version/your daughters makes no sense and you can’t be naive to that. It’s a item normally given to customers to free but a) someone had to suggest an easily transportable bag, because normally customers just get a pile of powder in their hand? And b) you are now saying how you hope other people ‘admit’ to doing the same, well why would that be a problem if it is indeed routinely given to customers, of which your daughter was one.

Nothing makes sense. So someone isn’t being truthful.

KatrinaWaves

TELLIT01 wrote: »

None of us know the full details of what happened, and I don't believe that anybody should be accused of lying or stealing without that knowledge. There are so many 'ifs' that speculation is pointless and unhelpful. All we can do is help explain what steps the person being investigated can take to ensure that the full story, as they understand it, is given at the meeting. As I suggested earlier, write everything down in a timeline and refer to that during the meeting. It's much easier to keep calm and recollect events accurately if the information is in front of you.

I don’t see how pointing out huge holes in the version of events is ‘accusing someone of lying’ other than simply saying it makes no sense. It went from a reasonably straightforward case of confusion to one which became more and more unlikely as the detail was added. There’s no point tiptoeing around and saying ‘oh how awful’

getmore4less

In workplace situations like supermarkets you have to be careful of self dealing.

ie. You should not sell/give stuff to yourself.

eg. you work the meat counter if you want to buy something you need to wait till someone else is in charge of the counter, also if you have authority to price goods like discount the meat that is going out of date you should ask for permission to buy anything you have reduced.

This extends to known relationships, all dealings should be at arms length.


Accepting something from your partner is not a smart thing to do even as a customer.
best to get a 3rd party to deal with your close associates like family and partners.


If the situation is as described then it should be possible to defuse, if not already covered in the policies it should be and further training given to all.

I would not play the everyone does it card.



Also surprised the partner is not under investigation if there is any wrong doing then he was complicit in the act.

Pension_Geek

getmore4less wrote: »

In workplace situations like supermarkets you have to be careful of self dealing.

ie. You should not sell/give stuff to yourself.

eg. you work the meat counter if you want to buy something you need to wait till someone else is in charge of the counter, also if you have authority to price goods like discount the meat that is going out of date you should ask for permission to buy anything you have reduced.

This extends to known relationships, all dealings should be at arms length.


Accepting something from your partner is not a smart thing to do even as a customer.
best to get a 3rd party to deal with your close associates like family and partners.


If the situation is as described then it should be possible to defuse, if not already covered in the policies it should be and further training given to all.

I would not play the everyone does it card.



Also surprised the partner is not under investigation if there is any wrong doing then he was complicit in the act.

Indeed, especially if the company 'have previous'. I would say that any discount probably isn't worth the hassle.