Dismissed after handing in sick note

HendrikSavoo

I worked as a temp at a major supermarket recently and injured myself whilst on the job. Ever since the lay off (over a month now), I have been unable to walk, totally dependent on crutches (also crawling around the house on all fours and kneeling in the shower), and awaiting an MRI Scan.

I had a week off and then got a sicknote for the second week which I sent in to my employer. The next afternoon, I got a phone call from the store to say that they were "terminating my contract" due to having to "make cuts". They also claimed other employees were being let go, although I cannot verify this.

Although the terms and conditions of my temp contract stated that I could be let go "if the business doesnt need me", I am still angry and suspicious that such a layoff occurred immediately after handing in a sicknote which, at that time, only stated I would be off for 1 more week.

Having Googled a little, the following statement pricked my attention: "You cannot be made redundant after an accident at work either without a good reason which includes your employer being able to prove that your job has become obsolete". 

First off, do you think I have a reason to be suspicious here, and secondly, how can I know for sure my company had a "good reason" to lay me off unless I investigate further?
What are my rights (considering I was a temp)?

JCS1

How long had you worked there?

HendrikSavoo

JCS1 said:

How long had you worked there?

i began the position just before the lockdown at the end of February, and had just got my contract extended in June to run through to the end of November. Couple of weeks later, I am no longer needed.

TELLIT01

You have little in the way of direct employment protection with less than 2 years service, but you may have a claim against the company for an injury at work.  That would depend on whether the company had been negligent in some way which led to the accident.

Savvy_Sue

TELLIT01 said:

You have little in the way of direct employment protection with less than 2 years service, but you may have a claim against the company for an injury at work.  That would depend on whether the company had been negligent in some way which led to the accident.

Although the OP also needs to ask whether they were (also) negligent in some way. 

Undervalued

Savvy_Sue said:

TELLIT01 said:

You have little in the way of direct employment protection with less than 2 years service, but you may have a claim against the company for an injury at work.  That would depend on whether the company had been negligent in some way which led to the accident.

Although the OP also needs to ask whether they were (also) negligent in some way. 

Indeed.

Plus, as I read the OP, nowhere does he actually say the accident (if there was one) happened at work.

sharp910sh

Undervalued said:

Savvy_Sue said:

TELLIT01 said:

You have little in the way of direct employment protection with less than 2 years service, but you may have a claim against the company for an injury at work.  That would depend on whether the company had been negligent in some way which led to the accident.

Although the OP also needs to ask whether they were (also) negligent in some way. 

Indeed.

Plus, as I read the OP, nowhere does he actually say the accident (if there was one) happened at work.

"I worked as a temp at a major supermarket recently and injured myself whilst on the job."

Clearly the accident happened at work, I would get legal advice about the accident at work they have a duty of care in regards to health and safety of yourself whilst at work carrying out your duties.

Savvy_Sue

sharp910sh said:

Clearly the accident happened at work, I would get legal advice about the accident at work they have a duty of care in regards to health and safety of yourself whilst at work carrying out your duties.

Yes, the employer has a duty of care - but the OP also has a responsibility for their own safety and that of others! We don't know whether the employer had good working practices and gave training but the employee ignored these, or whether the employer expected staff to work in an unsafe way. 

Example: employee is moving stock at work and breaks a limb. Turns out they were moving an awkward load, without assistance, using a stepladder which 'everyone' knew was 'a bit dodgy'. The employer has some responsibility: inadequate training maybe, faulty equipment definitely - but if 'everyone' knew but no-one ever said "we really should be replacing this!" then it's hard to say the employer alone is responsible. 

Another example: today I left an internal gate unsecured at work, because the risks of doing so were minimal, and there was no quick and safe way of locking it. I briefly considered putting a chair or a stepladder on a sloping surface in order to reach over the gate and put the padlock on. I quickly concluded it would be extremely foolhardy to do so, even with help, but had I continued with my folly and either I or a colleague had been injured, I'd have been at least partly responsible - in my view COMPLETELY responsible! 

oh_really

Op, were you provided with sufficient training and did the employer record it, e.g manual handling? Where was the supervision? Did they risk assess, if so what hazards were identified in relation to the tasks you were performing? 

You may have a significant injury and should consult your GP to consider referral to hospital for an MRI scan. Were you a union memeber?

AW618

oh_really said:

You may have a significant injury and should consult your GP to consider referral to hospital for an MRI scan. Were you a union memeber?

Ye, the NHS doesn't have much to do at the moment.  

[Deleted User]

AW618 said:

oh_really said:

You may have a significant injury and should consult your GP to consider referral to hospital for an MRI scan. Were you a union memeber?

Ye, the NHS doesn't have much to do at the moment.  

Your still entitled to use the NHS if it’s needed.