Probation and gross misconduct

Blatchford

hyubh wrote: »

I emboldened the bit concerned, just for you and Dox.



I thought your unsheltered life meant 'calling someone thick' was like water off a duck's back...? Now throwing the odd word at someone, on an Internet forum, is really, really bad. Okilly dokilly...



'Chuck bricks' indeed! But chucking actual physical objects... no problem, if HR can't be arsed.

Still not seeing any actual advice or help here.

Blatchford

patman99 wrote: »

Kbb, it might be worth helping him write down exactly what happened, so he has a prepared timeline of events to refer to.
Also, do his employers know about his PTSD?. They might treat him with a bit more leinience if they were aware of his mental health problem and still offered him a chance.


People learn a job at different speeds, so what someone might pick up in 5 minutes, another might take a day to get to grips with.

According to the poster the employer did know about the PTSD. But unfortunately they don't appear to be responding to suggestions so I'm not sure if they are around. I'm still not clear that the posters husband has committed gross misconduct, nor that they couldn't possibly go back and talk to the employer about the situation. So they walked off the job. So what? This appears to be a construction labouring job, or something similar. It might not be "right", for whatever that is worth, that he got called a name and had something chucked in his direction. But construction work has somewhat different cultures and mores than your typical office job. Equally, it won't be the first time somebody had taken the hump and walked off.

Maybe they won't take him back. But he had nothing to lose, as I said previously.

Rbb

The name calling etc happened off site so no witnesses,I think the fact is he has walked off telling his boss he was done with it as he was not being treated like that.
After an hour or so of calming down he then called his boss to say he didn't want to lose his job but his boss said he was unsure of what he could do and would call him back -which he did and said take rest of day off and then come in monday afternoon for a meeting with him and higher up boss.nothing seems to have been done to the guy who was doing the name calling etc. His work has a policy in place where there are situations where you need to have 5 minutes to calm down you can take yourself somewhere and do so however not sure it means heading off home in a rage! I guess we will find out outcome tomorrow and have to go from there,unfortunately this situation has played havoc with his mental health and he is unwell again.
He hasn't been in his job long so really I guess they can get rid of him at a drop of a hat ...been a very rubbish weekend!

Blatchford

Rbb wrote: »

The name calling etc happened off site so no witnesses,I think the fact is he has walked off telling his boss he was done with it as he was not being treated like that.
After an hour or so of calming down he then called his boss to say he didn't want to lose his job but his boss said he was unsure of what he could do and would call him back -which he did and said take rest of day off and then come in monday afternoon for a meeting with him and higher up boss.nothing seems to have been done to the guy who was doing the name calling etc. His work has a policy in place where there are situations where you need to have 5 minutes to calm down you can take yourself somewhere and do so however not sure it means heading off home in a rage! I guess we will find out outcome tomorrow and have to go from there,unfortunately this situation has played havoc with his mental health and he is unwell again.
He hasn't been in his job long so really I guess they can get rid of him at a drop of a hat ...been a very rubbish weekend!

Well, it's good that they are willing to talk. What he needs to focus on now is getting back to work. He can't demand that "something be done" to the other guy. And honestly - and he needs to consider this - in what way has the other guy done any differently than he has? The other guy was frustrated / angry / whatever about something and acted inappropriately and in anger. So did hubbie! Construction / labouring, as I said, has a different kind of workplace culture and whether that is right or wrong isn't really the point here - he needs to learn the strategies to hack it if he wants to work in this type of field. That's no doubt why they have the cooling down place. The employer realises that this isn't a polite tea party, and is trying to make some adjustments to "keep a lid on things". That isn't going to work every time, but at least it's a recognition that they need to work on it.

You are right that they can get rid of him at the drop of a hat. But the fact that they are willing to talk to him suggests that they aren't taking that approach, at least not without an attempt to sort this out. It's worth a shot.

Rbb

He has already said to boss that he didn't like the way he was treated but however understands that it may have been frustrating for the other lad that he was not quick enough for him but he too had to learn and wondered of he got that kind of treatment when he was learning the job? Construction I agree will have a different culture to other work,typical banter between the lads etc but there is always that line where that has been taken too far.
Hopefully he gets a stern talking too and can turn this around and keep his job because the sad fact is he actually loves it and he was really happy until this point -which he has not been in such a long time!

Blatchford

Rbb wrote: »

He has already said to boss that he didn't like the way he was treated but however understands that it may have been frustrating for the other lad that he was not quick enough for him but he too had to learn and wondered of he got that kind of treatment when he was learning the job? Construction I agree will have a different culture to other work,typical banter between the lads etc but there is always that line where that has been taken too far.
Hopefully he gets a stern talking too and can turn this around and keep his job because the sad fact is he actually loves it and he was really happy until this point -which he has not been in such a long time!

I don't disagree that it shouldn't have happened in the first place. But unfortunately stuff does, as these pages attest to all the time. Many employers have policies that say what shouldn't happen, but whether those policies have any meaning is quite another thing. That's why he needs strategies to deal with what he does when it happens. Unfortunately, in life, things don't always go nicely or the way you want them to. And sometimes "you" can be your own worst enemy too! Tell him to stay calm, don't get into the blame game and who was at fault. State factually what happened, that he realises that he himself could manage things better, and how he intends to do so in future. It'll go down better if he shows the more mature response. If the other lad is a plonker, leave him to being one. It probably won't be the last time. He needs to rise above it.

jobbingmusician

OK, so here's some advice.

When your partner goes in tomorrow, he should ask for a copy of the grievance procedure and state that he wishes to raise a grievance against his colleague for throwing equipment at him. He can mention in this grievance that this incident triggered his PTSD, and as a result he felt at the time that he was unable to continue working. Having taken the weekend to think about things, he now sees that this may have been an over-reaction, and so he would like to invoke the grievance procedure to have the incident examined formally.

There is no point in just standing back and saying the thrower 'seems to have got away with it'. The person to raise the complaint is your partner!

kanosam

When your partner goes in tomorrow, he should ask for a copy of the grievance procedure and state that he wishes to raise a grievance against his colleague for throwing equipment at him.

right procedure but there were no witnesses so it would be one person's word against another.

Smodlet

kanosam wrote: »

right procedure but there were no witnesses so it would be one person's word against another.

Is this not the case 99% of the time? If no-one ever had the courage to raise a grievance for the reason you stipulate, there would probably be no grievance procedures in place, anywhere; there never used to be, back in the day.

Who knows? It could be the employer(s) know what a moron this other employee is, the one who threw something at another person; who does that to anyone except a moron? It could be they are hoping the OP's partner does raise a grievance as they need one more piece of evidence to get rid of the moron. This may be wishful thinking but I wonder how many others he has been asked to train and how many of those may have raised complaints against him? Once a moron, always a moron in my book.

Whatever happens, I wish the OP and her partner luck and hope he does decide to take the mature approach over the grievance procedure. I admit I know next to nothing about PTSD but do know that taking control over any situation makes me feel calmer. We cannot always control what happens to us, hardly ever in fact; we can control how we deal with it.

Please let us know what happens, Rbb; it might help someone else. Thank you.

kanosam

they are hoping the OP's partner does raise a grievance as they need one more piece of evidence to get rid of the moron.

good point! that reminds me of an incident we had at work earlier this year. they were just waiting on this guy to slip up, which he did, now he's gone.

it would be much easier if there was a witness.