Suspended, gross misconduct & looking for advice.

vegasvisitor

Nobody can really tell what will happen here, but it does sound like your mother's manager is aware of Jane's behaviour etc. This doesn't excuse her getting irate etc though. I think it's good that she has told Jane that her behaviour is unwanted. It's also good that the manager supports her. It's good that Jane and the husband have been seen disagreeing or doing things, but it still doesn't mean it will definitely be ok.

If it was me, I'd be detailing all the things that have been happening, and hopefully there are witnesses to some of them. I'd also be saying how much I enjoy my job and and that the situation with these two people is the only negative aspect. I'd be telling the story about her suggesting she got the guy sacked, because if that is true, then they will be annoyed at her for bragging about it. And I'd definitely add in the cruel jibes about a bereavement as that is clearly trying to provoke her.

I hope someone can give some advice on how to deal with this, but all organisations and situations are so different, so it's very hard to tell how things will pan out.

Forum_Name

p00hsticks wrote: »

Do you mean she went through some physical 'clocking off' or signing out process that could be seen by others to show that she had left for the day ? If so, and given it was after the end of her standard contracted hours, I can't see she has any case to answer for this part of the complaint.

Yes. I'd have to ask her for clarification but from memory as i'm sure it's come up in conversation before, it's the card in a machine for a time stamp kind of thing. As she told me - she wouldn't "just walk out" in the sense of what image everyone is likely to have in their head when you hear the phrase 'walked out'. She did her hours, did some overtime, told 2 people she was leaving and then clocked out. The only thing she didn't do was A) wait for the boss to return to then leave, but then she had no idea what time he'd be returning anyway, could've been 2pm, could've been 6pm kind of thing and she didn't call him to say there'd been an incident so she was leaving which perhaps would've been the wisest thing to do but it's easy to look back. Always best to 'get in there first' in my view, but that's all that is - my view.

She has in the past 'gotten in there first' when she felt it necessary. There was a recent episode where my mother said to Jane that a particular job needed doing that should've been done while my mother was signed off but hadn't been. Jane refused and said my mother should do it. My mother said to her, but you've openly admitted you haven't been doing it (it's a job they take in turns). One could argue it's quite petty, another could argue that my mother should've just done it to keep the peace. My mother told the boss about the incident, told him exactly what she'd said - because she didn't want her words to be twisted (as she could see it happening). The boss told my mother that she was in the right, this Jane should do the job because my mother had been signed off work so could not do it and Jane had not been doing it.

It's just a shame she hasn't 'gotten in there first' more often, but i can understand her reluctance to do so.

TELLIT01

Forum_Name wrote: »

I'm not sure why this would be assumed?

Because it's the only justification I can think of for a gross misconduct accusation based on leaving the place of work. It might have been better to say "left before her normal, or agreed, end time".


I worked at a place where there were no fixed start and finish times, but we would be expected to let a manager know that we were leaving.

Forum_Name

Question for all: how do you appeal a disciplinary decision? What do you do and when?
I've had disciplinary hearings myself but i've always accepted the outcome as what has been put my way has been factually correct so i've been unable to fault anything they've done. As a result i can't actually answer this one for her.

She knows who she appeals to, as in the name she's supposed to address it to, but what do you actually put in the letter? Do you just say i'm appealing against the decision, could you please let me know at your convenience when the appeal meeting will be ... the end kind of thing?
Or are you to lay out your reasons behind the appeal in your appeal letter? I would've assumed that your reasons would be discussed in a face-to-face appeal hearing rather than in letter where they can just be put in the bin or where the employer may have a point that cannot be addressed immediately because they're going off a letter in their hand.

But having never done this myself i don't actually know.

Undervalued

Forum_Name wrote: »

Question for all: how do you appeal a disciplinary decision? What do you do and when?

By following their laid down procedure to the letter, particularly considering she has not been there two years so any disciplinary hearing, let alone an appeal, is a bit of a bonus!

I've had disciplinary hearings myself

Seems to run in the family then!

but i've always accepted the outcome as what has been put my way has been factually correct so i've been unable to fault anything they've done. As a result i can't actually answer this one for her.

She knows who she appeals to, as in the name she's supposed to address it to, but what do you actually put in the letter? Do you just say i'm appealing against the decision, could you please let me know at your convenience when the appeal meeting will be ... the end kind of thing?

Or are you to lay out your reasons behind the appeal in your appeal letter? Normally yes. I would've assumed that your reasons would be discussed in a face-to-face appeal hearing rather than in letter where they can just be put in the bin or where the employer may have a point that cannot be addressed immediately because they're going off a letter in their hand.

As I said, given that any appeal in this case relies totally on their goodwill and keeping in mind that very few appeals are actually won, then she needs to get any relevant points in early and clearly.

But having never done this myself i don't actually know.

Answers above.

You can also read the ACAS guidelines (there are no longer statutory procedures that must be followed) but, at the risk of repeating myself, is there any point?

Forum_Name

Undervalued wrote: »

By following their laid down procedure to the letter, particularly considering she has not been there two years so any disciplinary hearing, let alone an appeal, is a bit of a bonus!

She doesn't know what the procedure is to be fair. Just that she can appeal it and she's been given a name of who she's to appeal to. That's it.
I know some seem to think that because someone hasn't worked in a place for 24 months then everything is cut and dry, you'll be gone & that's it no chance of anything move on, but the fact they're offering her the option of a hearing and the fact that one of the reasons for their decision actually never was brought up in previous meetings and is something my mother says 100% did not happen then she would be foolish to not take them up on the chance of an appeal.

Seems to run in the family then!

Why is this necessary to absolutely anything may i ask?
I've had a couple, shortly after i left school. Looking back i can see why i got them and i put it down to adjusting to the real world. My disciplinary record in the years that have passed has been excellent. Not that it has any relevance here. I was merely saying that i'm here as i can't actually advise her in any way myself on this one whereas before i could, which basically echoed what you guys said. So i'm not sure what good your comment does i'm afraid.

Normally yes.

Thank you. If it's not definitive then then i suppose she may be best to ask her boss what she's to do.

As I said, given that any appeal in this case relies totally on their goodwill and keeping in mind that very few appeals are actually won, then she needs to get any relevant points in early and clearly.

Fair point. When she told me she was going to appeal my first thought was what is the point. It's 99% not going to get overturned. That would be like the boss admitting that they've made a mistake and which boss actually does that? But at the same time i can understand why she's doing it: take every chance put her way, she says one of the reasons that has literally just come out in the decision paperwork is 100% false and at the end of the day: you don't get if you don't ask. No harm in trying. The outcome of the appeal can't make anything any worse but there's the possibility it may make it better, even if that possibility is minute.

Blatchford

Forum_Name wrote: »

She doesn't know what the procedure is to be fair. Just that she can appeal it and she's been given a name of who she's to appeal to. That's it. There's no possible way that anyone can answer this, because what the terms of an acceptable appeal are are down to the employers policy. Some expect the appeal in writing, others won't accept an appeal unless there's is new evidence. And as you've been told - I assume she's been dismissed, although I can't see that you've said- just because it's offered doesn't mean anything other than the policy.

I know some seem to think that because someone hasn't worked in a place for 24 months then everything is cut and dry, you'll be gone & that's it no chance of anything move on, but the fact they're offering her the option of a hearing and the fact that one of the reasons for their decision actually never was brought up in previous meetings and is something my mother says 100% did not happen then she would be foolish to not take them up on the chance of an appeal. They are offering because they always offer an appeal. It's the right thing to do. Don't read anything into it. Your mother says something didn't happen? Really? You realise how often people say something didn't happen? Of course, saying it didn't happen will make all the difference, and they're bound to change their minds. At this point only one thing matters - does she have actual evidence it didn't happen. In reality even that makes no difference because yes, she doesn't have two years service so it is cut and dried, but evidence is the only thing that is real. What she says is irrelevant. This is not about "truth".

Fair point. When she told me she was going to appeal my first thought was what is the point. It's 99% not going to get overturned. That would be like the boss admitting that they've made a mistake and which boss actually does that? But at the same time i can understand why she's doing it: take every chance put her way, she says one of the reasons that has literally just come out in the decision paperwork is 100% false and at the end of the day: you don't get if you don't ask. No harm in trying. The outcome of the appeal can't make anything any worse but there's the possibility it may make it better, even if that possibility is minute. That would be famous last words. Is she absolutely certain it can't make anything worse? Because believe me, even if dismissed, things still can get worse. If she's can't see that, then she's lacking in imagination.

Sorry, but it's unrealistic to think that they are taking her back. What lies in some question still is how bad, or good, her reference is. And how the employer approaches that is the critical issue. She may still be able to agree a neutral reference with start and leaving dates. Or she may have a reference that says that she was dismissed for gross misconduct. Or, if she really annoys them, every reference request could be followed up with a phone call that says that she's a danger to other staff and clients, had an uncontrollable temper, and goes absent without leave at the drop of a hat.

Are you sure things can't get worse...

Forum_Name

There's no possible way that anyone can answer this, because what the terms of an acceptable appeal are are down to the employers policy. Some expect the appeal in writing, others won't accept an appeal unless there's is new evidence. And as you've been told - I assume she's been dismissed, although I can't see that you've said- just because it's offered doesn't mean anything other than the policy.

Fair enough.
And yes, as expected she has been dismissed.
She disagrees with the point put to her in the reasoning for her dismissal. It was put to her that she launched an object at this person. This was mentioned specifically but was also the first she'd ever heard about it. She said this 100% did not even happen. Nothing was launched at anyone from either party. Not even something thrown that accidentally came near anyone. Just nothing was thrown at all. As this has specifically been stated as a reason for the dismissal, she disagrees with it totally. She accepts that what she did (raising voice) can be seen as aggressive behaviour. While she knows she wouldn't have assaulted anyone she accepts that people aren't mind readers so they wont know that. What she doesn't accept is not just a bending of the truth but an outright false statement, especially when it's given as a reason for dismissal.

You realise how often people say something didn't happen? Of course, saying it didn't happen will make all the difference, and they're bound to change their minds. At this point only one thing matters - does she have actual evidence it didn't happen

This is where they will need to go over CCTV evidence. At least it will prove one persons word against another.

As for i realise how often this is said, yes i do. It'll be said all the time. I have people lie to me all the time and i catch them out. I suppose you could argue that perhaps my mother is lying to me and then i'm passing that lie on to you. That is a possibility yes. And you can believe it, yes. All i can say is she wont have lied to me at all about it. If she says she didn't launch anything then she didn't launch anything.

she doesn't have two years service so it is cut and dried,

Not so.
I worked with one person who everyone in the company thought they were going to get sacked, on numerous occasions. The things they did were ridiculous, without making a long post even longer. To this day nobody can understand how they escaped so many times. They had disciplinary hearings, they had words of warning again and again and again.
Now if it was the viewpoint here then they hadn't served 2 years and it would be cut and dry. Employee gone, see you later, easy peasy.
But not every employer runs their ship that way it seems. Not every employer jumps at the chance to get rid of staff if they have the slightest hiccup within the first 24 months (i'm not calling my mothers case a hiccup by the way, i'm addressing the idea that all employers jump at the chance to get rid of people for any minor thing within the first 24 month).
So while i accept your points where i have said thank you and fair enough, i'm afraid while there is a choice then nothing is cut and dried. It may be likely but likely isn't game over, it's just likely.

Sorry, but it's unrealistic to think that they are taking her back. What lies in some question still is how bad, or good, her reference is. And how the employer approaches that is the critical issue. She may still be able to agree a neutral reference with start and leaving dates. Or she may have a reference that says that she was dismissed for gross misconduct. Or, if she really annoys them, every reference request could be followed up with a phone call that says that she's a danger to other staff and clients, had an uncontrollable temper, and goes absent without leave at the drop of a hat.

Are you sure things can't get worse...

Fair point.

The reference was one of the first things i thought of actually.
And how do you even address that without finding out the hard way (or is that the only way)?
Hi, thanks for the employment, sorry it didn't work out, by the way what would you say in my reference if a new employer asked you for one? Bit awkward and probably not the way to do it.

Blatchford

I'm just going with the one further response, because I really don't want to get drawn back into the "you know better because once someone else did something else" argument again.
(A) You have misread my point. I'm not saying she's lying. I'm not saying anyone is lying. I'm saying it doesn't matter one bit whether it's the truth or not. They don't need to go over CCTV evidence, if it even still exists, because it's completely and totally irrelevant. She has no evidence to prove anything and they aren't required to provide her with that evidence. It doesn't even matter if they did give it to her. The bottom line here is that the employer doesn't even need to provide a reason- and they don't have to provide a truthful reason. She had less than 2 years employment, the dismissal is not a result of one of the exceptions, so they can sack her for wearing odd socks if they want.
(B) Not every employer has to act this way, no. Some employers don't. Is there any evidence that this employer doesn't? Hmm. Let's see. They sacked her, they believed what was said by other employees and they didn't believe her so they sacked her. I'd call that fairly conclusive that this employer does dismiss people for what they consider good reasons, whether fair or not.
(C) Actually, yes, that is exactly what lots of people do! She has utterly and absolutely no chance whatsoever of making a valid claim to an employment tribunal. But that doesn't mean that it may not be a bargaining chip used very strategically, and not as a threat. A neutral reference might be worth the agreement not to take it further. A good reference or fair reference would definitely be worth it.

But you can be relatively certain here. She is not getting her job back, and all the cards lie with the employer. She can either try to mediate the mess she is in, or just go all out to really annoy them.

JReacher1

To be honest I think the appeal will just be a formality that the company have to offer for legal reasons. I would be surprised if they reverse the decision.

It also seems like they have treated your mother quite poorly so personally I wouldn’t think she would want to go back!

Good luck to her for the future!