Unfair vs wrongful dismissal

JReacher1

Ten months is quite generous.

As part of the settlement I would ask them to ensure that they don’t provide a negative reference.

I would be surprised if a tribunal paid out much more than that and it will be a bit of a hassle and wait to get the cash.

Personally if it was me I would take the cash and move on.

ohreally

I suspect the offer may proceed as some form of settlement agreement, if so this would be the time to tie up loose ends such as agreed wording for references and what they will disclose to prospective employers re reason for exiting employment.

steampowered

10 months' salary is an extraordinarily generous offer. That's far more than most people who win at Tribunal are awarded. Let alone what most people who accept a settlement get.

I would take the offer and run. Just ask for an agreed reference to be included in the settlement agreement.

Soot2006 wrote: »

The company seem to acknowledge this by offering the payment, which online calculators suggest would be pretty much what could be expected from an employment tribunal.

What calculator are you using? This sounds way out.

In 'wrongful dismissal cases', you just get your notice period paid.

In unfair dismissal cases you get a 'basic award' and a 'compensatory award'.

The 'basic award is calculated according to a formula. For 8 years' service you would get 8 weeks salary. Not 8 months !!!

The 'compensatory award' requires the employee to prove actual losses due to the unfair dismissal - e.g. lost salary until finding another job, assuming the employee is searching for another job as soon as possible.

Soot2006 wrote: »

This is clearly wrongful dismissal - lack of process.

If unfair dismissal is proved on procedural grounds only - i.e. the employee would still have been dismissed if the employer followed the correct procedure - the 'compensatory award' is slashed right down. This is called a Polkey deduction.

So, proving a bad procedure would not be enough to get your friend substantial compensation.

My question to help my friend understand his situation more clearly is how to prove unfair dismissal? If it can be proved, is he likely to get a higher payout than 10 months of salary (approx £18,000)?

According to the Employment Tribunal's figures, the median award (i.e. what the 'average' person gets) in cases where unfair dismissal is proven is £7,521.

pinkshoes

I'd take the money and also ask for a good reference!

Soot2006

Thanks steampowered, for helping me gain a better understanding. I had indeed misunderstood and had calculated with 8 months, not weeks.


My friend is quite set on the principle of it, but given that he's a skilled worker I think he will find another job fairly quickly. We chatted last night and we did talk about the importance of the reference. Don't think a 8-year gap on the CV or a poor reference for it is something anyone wants!

Comms69

Soot2006 wrote: »

Thanks steampowered, for helping me gain a better understanding. I had indeed misunderstood and had calculated with 8 months, not weeks.


My friend is quite set on the principle of it, but given that he's a skilled worker I think he will find another job fairly quickly. We chatted last night and we did talk about the importance of the reference. Don't think a 8-year gap on the CV or a poor reference for it is something anyone wants!

TBH showing any new employer the pay-out is a reference in itself

Undervalued

Comms69 wrote: »

TBH showing any new employer the pay-out is a reference in itself

I wouldn't agree!

Firstly, it would almost certainly be a condition of the settlement agreement that the detail be kept confidential and any payment will be made without admission of liability. A potential employer being told "look what I got" could infer that the previous firm seriously wanted rid!

A good / neutral reference is a common part of any SA and costs the firm nothing, so should be easy to agree. Try to ensure that there is a line saying that any reference given verbally must conform to the agreed wording (although this is obviously hard to police).

Comms69

Undervalued wrote: »

I wouldn't agree!

Firstly, it would almost certainly be a condition of the settlement agreement that the detail be kept confidential - possibly. and any payment will be made without admission of liability. - absolutely A potential employer being told "look what I got" could infer that the previous firm seriously wanted rid! - redundancy seems the more likely view to be honest. Any decent employer know you can get rid of someone much cheaper than 18k

A good / neutral reference is a common part of any SA and costs the firm nothing, so should be easy to agree. Try to ensure that there is a line saying that any reference given verbally must conform to the agreed wording (although this is obviously hard to police).

I agree that a reference agreement is a good thing, just wouldn't put as much weight on it as some have suggested

jobbingmusician

ohreally wrote: »

I suspect the offer may proceed as some form of settlement agreement, if so this would be the time to tie up loose ends such as agreed wording for references and what they will disclose to prospective employers re reason for exiting employment.

This, absolutely. The OP hasn't mentioned a SA in the original post, but of course no employer is going to hand out 8 months' salary without one. So, the things I can think of to address are

- grab it with both hands (probably)
- make sure the employer pays the solicitor's fees (SA are not legal without the employee getting independent legal advice)
- make sure the solicitor is a good 'un (I had an excellent one in my last SA, who challenged several points successfully)

- make sure the SA includes a good reference.

Soot2006

There is indeed a settlement agreement and legal advice costs are being covered by the company up to £750.



My friend is already less set on the principle. He said he would let the lawyers exchange a few letters to secure two references for different aspects of his job, and then take the money and move on.



I now understand there is some digital material that could be under intellectual property dispute which may explain the very rapid escorting from the building after he was given the news.



Thanks for the information, everyone. It's made me a little less naive myself!