Gross misconduct for following risk Assessment

warby68

Am I the only one old enough to remember when you went everywhere (in the whole wide world) without a mobile ?

Its an inconvenience usually rather than a risk.

Energize

Comms69 wrote: »

Irrelevant if it's gross misconduct or not, you cant claim unfair dismissal, start looking for a new job

On the contrary it's not irrelevant. If they class it as gross misconduct he could be dismissed without his contractual notice thus lose a months pay.

kanosam

The company as now said that I refused to carry out a reasonable request and that was gross misconduct.

they are right plus you've been there less than 2 years so your chances are slim..

they normally provide driver with hand set which as well as other functions it is a mobile phone

do you mean, the handset doubles up as a mobile phone? this isn't clear.

MacMickster

sidimilo wrote: »

3 weeks ago I refused to take a van out because there was no mobile phone for me to use (in case of break downs and accidents etc).

How did you get to work that day? Did you have a mobile phone with you in case of breakdown or emergency? Maybe you wouldn't set off for work if you didn't have a mobile phone, but if so then you could have used that phone if your van broke down.

Surely this is a wind up. Nobody in real life would throw away a job because they might break down and weren't given a mobile phone in case of that eventuality.

ReadingTim

MacMickster wrote: »

Surely this is a wind up. Nobody in real life would throw away a job because they might break down and weren't given a mobile phone in case of that eventuality.

Not at all - matey boy knows damned well he's being an awkward pain in the @rse, but thinks he's being clever by working to rule.

In the right circumstances, 'work to rule' can be very effective strategy for getting what you want. Unfortunately, these aren't the right circumstances: the near-universal ownership of mobile phones, the unlikelihood of an accident, and the fact that it's not a genuine safety concern means his employer has deemed him as failing to comply with a reasonable request, and are chucking the book at him via gross misconduct.

I imagine they'll have got rid of him by now, but don't guess he'll be back to update us on how it went...

VictorT

This probably isn't help to you, but in my experience companies only institute such proceedings when they've decided they want rid of you. It's not like a football game where you don't know who will win or testing the law in an academic sense. You appear not willing or compliant enough for them, and the Gross Misconduct is a way to formally rubber-stamp getting rid of you, which they already decided.

robatwork

Is your point that customers couldn't sign for deliveries properly without your "handset", or that you didn't have a company mobile in case of emergency?

If the former you have something of an argument. If the latter you have a handful of dry sand. You can do the job of driving a van and carrying shopping without a phone.