Fired for asking to volunteer, illegal??

KatrinaWaves

I’m going to mention volunteering frequently just in case I get sacked, so I can pay my mortgage off! 

Undervalued

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

I suspect they weren’t officially sacked but instead “failed probation”. That probably negates a lot of the points above and removes a lot of the legal options. 

Subject Access Request to demonstrate "positive & brilliant reviews/feedback, got along with everyone well, went the extra mile every day and did a lot more than ask, very proactive etc"

Request for written reasons under s.6 of the legislation I stated (which has some interesting stuff about drawing inferences from non-responses).

What you said really doesn't negate what I said. It is literally the default counter-argument from an employer. And a surprisingly bad one at that.

It does negate what you have said. 

The chance of the OP winning any legal case after being dismissed during their probation period is very low (I would say around zero). There has been no discrimination and frankly your suggestions if followed would be waste of everyone’s time 😀

What part of my post is wrong and therefore renders it a waste of time? Genuinely curious, as I'm only trying to help the poster here.

The OP has failed probation.  Although unfortunate that is the situation

You have suggested that they use "The Part-Time Workers' (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000" to launch a legal challenge to this decision.  This would be a waste of time as it doesn't apply in this situation

You have also suggest that the OP contacts ACAS/CAB and a solicitor to help them pursue this legal challenge and also want them to raise SAR requests which will provide very little information if the OP has been working there for less than three months.  At most you will get a couple of feedback reviews which according to the OP will be positive.  I am no sure this helps much.

Lastly even if you were right and the OP won this legal claim they were working there for less than 6 months.  Any compensation they would receive would be minimal and I would be amazed if it was more than a weeks wages.

Therefore as I stated your suggestions although well meaning would be a waste of the OP's time.  She would be far better to just move on and not waste much more of her time on this

The compensatory award could be quite substantial if there was a successful claim for unfair dismissal, or similarly a settlement. In the current climate you could be out of work for a long time.

Maybe, maybe not.

However, as I said earlier, I can't see this going anywhere at all unless the employer admits that the OP's intention to volunteer was the real reason for dismissal. Even if they do, it is no means certain that her circumstances are actually covered by this new legislation.

Even if the OP turns up evidence of excellent work appraisals there are still plenty of other valid reasons to dismiss somebody with less than two years service at the moment. Yes, she cannot lawfully be treated less favourably because she is part time. However, last in first out would be a perfectly fair reason and with only a few months service I would think it is very likely she was last in. 

To me the chances of making a successful claim out of this are paper thin, at best! If it did go the distance it is likely to attract publicity so her name would then come up if any prospective employer did a simple Google search. Rightly or wrongly that will put off ten potential employers for every one that may see it as a positive. OK, the publicity aspect, as I also said earlier, may possibly encourage the employer to settle. However, unless the OP has union membership or legal expenses insurance is she really in a position to take a complex case like this on themselves?

Pajaro

There should be no reason for the employer to know about any kind of work that the OP is doing on day that she is not working, provided it is not in the same/similar industry with her current role. I doubt volunteering for the NHS likely falls within this.

OP - can you explain why you felt  the need to tell your former employer this?

Manxman_in_exile

KatrinaWaves said:

I’m going to mention volunteering frequently just in case I get sacked, so I can pay my mortgage off! 

Only works if you're part-time.

Lomast

Pajaro said:

There should be no reason for the employer to know about any kind of work that the OP is doing on day that she is not working, provided it is not in the same/similar industry with her current role. I doubt volunteering for the NHS likely falls within this.

OP - can you explain why you felt  the need to tell your former employer this?

Many employment contracts have clauses stating employee may not have a second job without permission from the employer.

Masomnia

JReacher1 said:

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

I suspect they weren’t officially sacked but instead “failed probation”. That probably negates a lot of the points above and removes a lot of the legal options. 

Subject Access Request to demonstrate "positive & brilliant reviews/feedback, got along with everyone well, went the extra mile every day and did a lot more than ask, very proactive etc"

Request for written reasons under s.6 of the legislation I stated (which has some interesting stuff about drawing inferences from non-responses).

What you said really doesn't negate what I said. It is literally the default counter-argument from an employer. And a surprisingly bad one at that.

It does negate what you have said. 

The chance of the OP winning any legal case after being dismissed during their probation period is very low (I would say around zero). There has been no discrimination and frankly your suggestions if followed would be waste of everyone’s time 😀

What part of my post is wrong and therefore renders it a waste of time? Genuinely curious, as I'm only trying to help the poster here.

The OP has failed probation.  Although unfortunate that is the situation

You have suggested that they use "The Part-Time Workers' (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000" to launch a legal challenge to this decision.  This would be a waste of time as it doesn't apply in this situation

You have also suggest that the OP contacts ACAS/CAB and a solicitor to help them pursue this legal challenge and also want them to raise SAR requests which will provide very little information if the OP has been working there for less than three months.  At most you will get a couple of feedback reviews which according to the OP will be positive.  I am no sure this helps much.

Lastly even if you were right and the OP won this legal claim they were working there for less than 6 months.  Any compensation they would receive would be minimal and I would be amazed if it was more than a weeks wages.

Therefore as I stated your suggestions although well meaning would be a waste of the OP's time.  She would be far better to just move on and not waste much more of her time on this

The compensatory award could be quite substantial if there was a successful claim for unfair dismissal, or similarly a settlement. In the current climate you could be out of work for a long time.

Its not really my problem and I am not a lawyer but if you believe that the OP should pursue a case of unfair dismissal against the company because they failed their probation then that is fair enough.

I personally think it will be a waste of time but if you are saying she has a strong case which will net her a substantial award then she should go for it. 

I didn't say she should pursue a case, nor did I say she had a strong case, and nor is it because she failed her probation and I didn't say it will lead to a substantial award... 

'Failed probation' is a meaningless term in law. And I'd say the same to whomever it was that said something about failing probation rather than being sacked. It's a dismissal in any event.

It's one of my real bug bears on this forum that pretty much every time someone raises a dismissal with less than 2 years service the same line is trotted out 'Unless it's for a protected characteristic you can't claim unfair dismissal. This is not correct. There is a long list of reasons for dismissal where the two year rule does not apply, and it's not just discrimination.

JReacher1

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

I suspect they weren’t officially sacked but instead “failed probation”. That probably negates a lot of the points above and removes a lot of the legal options. 

Subject Access Request to demonstrate "positive & brilliant reviews/feedback, got along with everyone well, went the extra mile every day and did a lot more than ask, very proactive etc"

Request for written reasons under s.6 of the legislation I stated (which has some interesting stuff about drawing inferences from non-responses).

What you said really doesn't negate what I said. It is literally the default counter-argument from an employer. And a surprisingly bad one at that.

It does negate what you have said. 

The chance of the OP winning any legal case after being dismissed during their probation period is very low (I would say around zero). There has been no discrimination and frankly your suggestions if followed would be waste of everyone’s time 😀

What part of my post is wrong and therefore renders it a waste of time? Genuinely curious, as I'm only trying to help the poster here.

The OP has failed probation.  Although unfortunate that is the situation

You have suggested that they use "The Part-Time Workers' (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000" to launch a legal challenge to this decision.  This would be a waste of time as it doesn't apply in this situation

You have also suggest that the OP contacts ACAS/CAB and a solicitor to help them pursue this legal challenge and also want them to raise SAR requests which will provide very little information if the OP has been working there for less than three months.  At most you will get a couple of feedback reviews which according to the OP will be positive.  I am no sure this helps much.

Lastly even if you were right and the OP won this legal claim they were working there for less than 6 months.  Any compensation they would receive would be minimal and I would be amazed if it was more than a weeks wages.

Therefore as I stated your suggestions although well meaning would be a waste of the OP's time.  She would be far better to just move on and not waste much more of her time on this

The compensatory award could be quite substantial if there was a successful claim for unfair dismissal, or similarly a settlement. In the current climate you could be out of work for a long time.

Its not really my problem and I am not a lawyer but if you believe that the OP should pursue a case of unfair dismissal against the company because they failed their probation then that is fair enough.

I personally think it will be a waste of time but if you are saying she has a strong case which will net her a substantial award then she should go for it. 

I didn't say she should pursue a case, nor did I say she had a strong case, and nor is it because she failed her probation and I didn't say it will lead to a substantial award... 

'Failed probation' is a meaningless term in law. And I'd say the same to whomever it was that said something about failing probation rather than being sacked. It's a dismissal in any event.

It's one of my real bug bears on this forum that pretty much every time someone raises a dismissal with less than 2 years service the same line is trotted out 'Unless it's for a protected characteristic you can't claim unfair dismissal. This is not correct. There is a long list of reasons for dismissal where the two year rule does not apply, and it's not just discrimination.

I’m a bit confused now 😉

Based on the OP what do you suggest they do?

Undervalued

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

I suspect they weren’t officially sacked but instead “failed probation”. That probably negates a lot of the points above and removes a lot of the legal options. 

Subject Access Request to demonstrate "positive & brilliant reviews/feedback, got along with everyone well, went the extra mile every day and did a lot more than ask, very proactive etc"

Request for written reasons under s.6 of the legislation I stated (which has some interesting stuff about drawing inferences from non-responses).

What you said really doesn't negate what I said. It is literally the default counter-argument from an employer. And a surprisingly bad one at that.

It does negate what you have said. 

The chance of the OP winning any legal case after being dismissed during their probation period is very low (I would say around zero). There has been no discrimination and frankly your suggestions if followed would be waste of everyone’s time 😀

What part of my post is wrong and therefore renders it a waste of time? Genuinely curious, as I'm only trying to help the poster here.

The OP has failed probation.  Although unfortunate that is the situation

You have suggested that they use "The Part-Time Workers' (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000" to launch a legal challenge to this decision.  This would be a waste of time as it doesn't apply in this situation

You have also suggest that the OP contacts ACAS/CAB and a solicitor to help them pursue this legal challenge and also want them to raise SAR requests which will provide very little information if the OP has been working there for less than three months.  At most you will get a couple of feedback reviews which according to the OP will be positive.  I am no sure this helps much.

Lastly even if you were right and the OP won this legal claim they were working there for less than 6 months.  Any compensation they would receive would be minimal and I would be amazed if it was more than a weeks wages.

Therefore as I stated your suggestions although well meaning would be a waste of the OP's time.  She would be far better to just move on and not waste much more of her time on this

The compensatory award could be quite substantial if there was a successful claim for unfair dismissal, or similarly a settlement. In the current climate you could be out of work for a long time.

Its not really my problem and I am not a lawyer but if you believe that the OP should pursue a case of unfair dismissal against the company because they failed their probation then that is fair enough.

I personally think it will be a waste of time but if you are saying she has a strong case which will net her a substantial award then she should go for it. 

I didn't say she should pursue a case, nor did I say she had a strong case, and nor is it because she failed her probation and I didn't say it will lead to a substantial award... 

'Failed probation' is a meaningless term in law. And I'd say the same to whomever it was that said something about failing probation rather than being sacked. It's a dismissal in any event.

It's one of my real bug bears on this forum that pretty much every time someone raises a dismissal with less than 2 years service the same line is trotted out 'Unless it's for a protected characteristic you can't claim unfair dismissal. This is not correct. There is a long list of reasons for dismissal where the two year rule does not apply, and it's not just discrimination.

Yes, it is a simplification but whether there is a "long" list of other criteria depends a bit on your definition of long! Many of the others are obscure and obviously irrelevant in 99% of cases. As we discussed yesterday, the one you may have come up with here is far from clear cut. It is a possibility, nothing more, I'd go 80:20 against but of course I may be wrong!

Ultimately this forum is no substitute for proper legal advice (no, not the ACAS call centre!) and there is a balance to strike between simplification and raising false hopes, which one or two on here (not usually you) tend to delight in doing.

Masomnia

Undervalued said:

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Masomnia said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

Jsacker said:

JReacher1 said:

I suspect they weren’t officially sacked but instead “failed probation”. That probably negates a lot of the points above and removes a lot of the legal options. 

Subject Access Request to demonstrate "positive & brilliant reviews/feedback, got along with everyone well, went the extra mile every day and did a lot more than ask, very proactive etc"

Request for written reasons under s.6 of the legislation I stated (which has some interesting stuff about drawing inferences from non-responses).

What you said really doesn't negate what I said. It is literally the default counter-argument from an employer. And a surprisingly bad one at that.

It does negate what you have said. 

The chance of the OP winning any legal case after being dismissed during their probation period is very low (I would say around zero). There has been no discrimination and frankly your suggestions if followed would be waste of everyone’s time 😀

What part of my post is wrong and therefore renders it a waste of time? Genuinely curious, as I'm only trying to help the poster here.

The OP has failed probation.  Although unfortunate that is the situation

You have suggested that they use "The Part-Time Workers' (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000" to launch a legal challenge to this decision.  This would be a waste of time as it doesn't apply in this situation

You have also suggest that the OP contacts ACAS/CAB and a solicitor to help them pursue this legal challenge and also want them to raise SAR requests which will provide very little information if the OP has been working there for less than three months.  At most you will get a couple of feedback reviews which according to the OP will be positive.  I am no sure this helps much.

Lastly even if you were right and the OP won this legal claim they were working there for less than 6 months.  Any compensation they would receive would be minimal and I would be amazed if it was more than a weeks wages.

Therefore as I stated your suggestions although well meaning would be a waste of the OP's time.  She would be far better to just move on and not waste much more of her time on this

The compensatory award could be quite substantial if there was a successful claim for unfair dismissal, or similarly a settlement. In the current climate you could be out of work for a long time.

Its not really my problem and I am not a lawyer but if you believe that the OP should pursue a case of unfair dismissal against the company because they failed their probation then that is fair enough.

I personally think it will be a waste of time but if you are saying she has a strong case which will net her a substantial award then she should go for it. 

I didn't say she should pursue a case, nor did I say she had a strong case, and nor is it because she failed her probation and I didn't say it will lead to a substantial award... 

'Failed probation' is a meaningless term in law. And I'd say the same to whomever it was that said something about failing probation rather than being sacked. It's a dismissal in any event.

It's one of my real bug bears on this forum that pretty much every time someone raises a dismissal with less than 2 years service the same line is trotted out 'Unless it's for a protected characteristic you can't claim unfair dismissal. This is not correct. There is a long list of reasons for dismissal where the two year rule does not apply, and it's not just discrimination.

Yes, it is a simplification but whether there is a "long" list of other criteria depends a bit on your definition of long! Many of the others are obscure and obviously irrelevant in 99% of cases. As we discussed yesterday, the one you may have come up with here is far from clear cut. It is a possibility, nothing more, I'd go 80:20 against but of course I may be wrong!

Ultimately this forum is no substitute for proper legal advice (no, not the ACAS call centre!) and there is a balance to strike between simplification and raising false hopes, which one or two on here (not usually you) tend to delight in doing.

I don't disagree as such. I don't think giving false hope is a good thing, but nor do I think is saying there is no hope when there can be a case to argue. In fact I think it's just as bad, and plenty on here are keen to do it!

This forum should not be assessing the relative merits of cases at all.

Pajaro

Lomast said:

Pajaro said:

There should be no reason for the employer to know about any kind of work that the OP is doing on day that she is not working, provided it is not in the same/similar industry with her current role. I doubt volunteering for the NHS likely falls within this.

OP - can you explain why you felt  the need to tell your former employer this?

Many employment contracts have clauses stating employee may not have a second job without permission from the employer.

I have worked in many jobs and never had this clause.
I suspect very few have this as it is not necessary.

As long as it does not cause a conflict with your full-time job it is none  of your employers business anyway.