Weeks since disciplinary hearing

Undervalued

Jordan90 said:

Undervalued said:

Jordan90 said:

To update anyone on this.
The chair ignored another attempt at contact until HR were contacted, the chair then contacted me right away with a somewhat rude text. A few days later, i got the call that the outcome was summary dismissal.

The next day I got through the post the notes that were taken during the disciplinary hearing. The disciplinary hearing took place over the phone due to COVID, and the chair of the hearing stated a number of times that the hand written notes taken by the note taker, would be sent out to me for me to amend any parts I felt were wrong. I never received those notes however, and have only now received them after already being dismissed, 6 weeks after the hearing took place.

There are so many misquotes in the disciplinary hearing, and errors in the disciplinary investigation that I am appauled it's taken over 6 weeks for the result to be this. I covertly recorded the disciplinary hearing for my own records, so I could use it to take rough notes later of the hearing and cross reference with the notes the note taker had written, but I never received the note taker's notes.

Has anyone, instead of appealing, gone straight to ACAS for early conciliation? or even, straight to an employment tribunal claim?

You are focusing far too much on procedure rather than the rights and wrongs of the case itself.

The only two things that really matter are.....

Does the employer have a reasonable belief that you are guilty of misconduct? 

and if so

Would dismissal be within the range of sanctions a reasonable employer would choose?

Note: It is not a court of law, they do no need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact the dismissal would be fair in law even if their reasonable belief is latter proved to be wrong. All that matter is that it was reasonable for them to have that belief at the time.

Now, if the notes from the hearing would help you to show that they could not have formed a reasonable belief then they would be useful. Otherwise they are next to irrelevant and the very best you are likely to get is a technical win and little or no compensation.

The days of minor errors of procedure leading to automatic awards of compensation at an employment tribunal are long gone.

As Diamandis says, under virtually all circumstances you should follow your employer's appeal process before filing any claim. Note that you have 3 months, less one day, from the date of dismissal so don't let them run the clock down.

I don't know. I'll describe my case more to give you a better picture of what my disciplinary was about.
I received summary dismissal for refusing a phonecall with my manager because I was busy, and asked for an email instead so I could deal with the request at a later time. My job role is secretarial / clerical, I'm always busy. My manager contacted me through an IM service, didn't explain to me why he desperately needed to talk to me at that specific time, only mentioning that he needed to talk to me, when I asked for an email he immediately escalated the situation straight to disciplinary action, despite allowing a colleague of mine to get away with refusing tasks (gross misconduct - refusal of a reasonable management request) for nearly a year. An 'investigation' was conducted where another manager came to me while I was working shortly after this conversation through IM with my manager took place, and conducted a Q&A with me. After the Q&A, I was suspended for refusing a reasonable management request.
Before the disciplinary hearing took place, I wasn't told and didn't receive a copy of the Q&A that was conducted with my manager, wherein my manager lies about my colleague refusing a reasonable management request for nearly a year. I have evidence to show my manager was ignoring my colleague not completing this work, and instead allowed my colleague to let this work pile up until I stepped in to complete it for the better of the company. My manager acknowledged that the workload for my department was disproportinate during the Q&A, this can be seen as a form of bullying according to ACAS, which I do believe my manager was targeting me.
I've essentially been setup, and pushed out by my manager. Another manager at my old company found it worthy of summary dismissal, and ignored that my manager had lied during his Q&A. The 'investigation' he conducted was a joke, and didn't look into anything I had said.

I will admit, I have been focused too much on the procedure aspect of the case, but feel I've received such harsh treatment, especially after my colleague has been allowed to get away with much worse for nearly a year, I am so !!!!!! off about this treatment, and my employer going back on their word at every opportunity. I've worked for this company for 10+ years, received no other form of disciplinary action against me, and been dismissed for asking for an email to deal with a request at a later time because I was busy. I also have a noticeable disability, and feel I have been discriminated against.

I'm going through the appeal process, but again, it's taken my employer weeks before sorting out any kind of hearing, thankfully the manager chosen to chair the appeal is from another area in the UK, but I have no idea what's going to happen.

What a colleague did or didn't "get away with" is largely irrelevant. All that matters in your case are the two points I made in my previous post.

It may be, based obviously only on your side of the story, that although misconduct took place dismissal goes beyond what a reasonable employer would do in similar circumstances. If a tribunal takes that view then you would have been unfairly dismissed. However it would be likely that any compensation would be reduced to an extent to reflect the fact that you were not entirely blameless.

You now mention "a noticeable disability". Was the employer made aware of a disability (or should reasonably have been aware)? If so, what "reasonable adjustments" were agreed to help you manage at work? Did the disability in any way affect the behaviour which the employer considered warranted your dismissal? What evidence is there that it may have been a factor in deciding to dismiss you?

TELLIT01

Unless the manager is a totally unreasonable person it seems unlikely that failure to respond to a single phone call and follow up e-mail would result in summary dismissal.  It is even more unlikely that HR would permit one such minor event to escalate to that situation. 

All that said, defying the instruction of a direct manager is never a good idea.  The OP may have been busy but they should at least have spoken to the manager to explain their situation.  If the manager still insisted on demanding that the OP do whatever was so urgent, so be it.  That is their right, and the OP has a valid explanation for the other work not being completed.

TBagpuss

So, based on what you say, it sounds as though you ignored / failed to follow a direct instruction from your manager. Ultimately, it's their decision, not yours, what tasks etc are the mot urgent so your being 'busy'

That's certainly something which a reasonable employer can treat as a disciplinary matter.

On the face of it, where it was ignoring / not making a phone call, to treat it as gross misconduct resulting in summary dismissal is a surprisingly harsh outcome - what reasons did the employer give for that outcome? Were there any other concerns which were raised as part of the disciplinary process?

The fact that your co-worker may have failed to comply with an instruction is not necessarily relevant - while treating different individuals differently for the same or similar offences *can* be an indication of unfairness it is not automatically unfiar, and it may well be that there were distinguishing features between your situation and that of your co-worker, which you would not necessarily have been aware of. 

What outcome do you want? 

Jordan90

Undervalued said:

What a colleague did or didn't "get away with" is largely irrelevant. All that matters in your case are the two points I made in my previous post.

It may be, based obviously only on your side of the story, that although misconduct took place dismissal goes beyond what a reasonable employer would do in similar circumstances. If a tribunal takes that view then you would have been unfairly dismissed. However it would be likely that any compensation would be reduced to an extent to reflect the fact that you were not entirely blameless.

You now mention "a noticeable disability". Was the employer made aware of a disability (or should reasonably have been aware)? If so, what "reasonable adjustments" were agreed to help you manage at work? Did the disability in any way affect the behaviour which the employer considered warranted your dismissal? What evidence is there that it may have been a factor in deciding to dismiss you?

My colleague not receiving disciplinary action for refusing work for nearly a year directly resulted in my excessive workload and increased stress, it should be relevant, especially as my manager has lied about why he didn't take disciplinary action against my colleague, and I have proof my manager is lying about it. That excessive workload was the reason why I was so busy when my manager requested to speak with me, and why I asked for an email instead. I feel my manager's treatment toward me should be taken into consideration, as it's essentially bullying to give me all the work my colleague was refusing to do. ACAS describes bullying as, "your boss keeps giving you heavier workloads than everyone else".
The disability is more a disfigurement. I have a facial disfigurement. It doesn't cause any problems mentally, but it's blatantly noticeable. It's only one of a few reasons why I feel my manager treated me so harshly in comparison to my colleague.
TELLIT01 said:

Unless the manager is a totally unreasonable person it seems unlikely that failure to respond to a single phone call and follow up e-mail would result in summary dismissal.  It is even more unlikely that HR would permit one such minor event to escalate to that situation. 

All that said, defying the instruction of a direct manager is never a good idea.  The OP may have been busy but they should at least have spoken to the manager to explain their situation.  If the manager still insisted on demanding that the OP do whatever was so urgent, so be it.  That is their right, and the OP has a valid explanation for the other work not being completed.

The manager is a bully. He allowed my colleague to get away with gross misconduct for nearly a year, then gave me all their work to complete because they were refusing to do it. Now my manager has lied about it during a Q&A about my disciplinary, and I have proof he's lying. Lying is misconduct so hopefully now my manager will be dealt with for their poor conduct and the chair of the appeal will be able to see how poor my manager is.
TBagpuss said:

So, based on what you say, it sounds as though you ignored / failed to follow a direct instruction from your manager. Ultimately, it's their decision, not yours, what tasks etc are the mot urgent so your being 'busy'

That's certainly something which a reasonable employer can treat as a disciplinary matter.

On the face of it, where it was ignoring / not making a phone call, to treat it as gross misconduct resulting in summary dismissal is a surprisingly harsh outcome - what reasons did the employer give for that outcome? Were there any other concerns which were raised as part of the disciplinary process?

The fact that your co-worker may have failed to comply with an instruction is not necessarily relevant - while treating different individuals differently for the same or similar offences *can* be an indication of unfairness it is not automatically unfiar, and it may well be that there were distinguishing features between your situation and that of your co-worker, which you would not necessarily have been aware of. 

What outcome do you want? 

Ultimately my manager should have treated me and my colleague the same way, and disciplined my colleague months ago so I wouldn't have been so stressed due to an increased workload, and wouldn't have been so busy that I wasn't able to take his call. My manager lying about why he didn't discipline my colleague is sort of an admission of guilt that he knows he should have acted to discipline them, and it's good I have proof that my manager is lying.
The chair of the disciplinary said me refusing the phone call and asking for an email was refusal of a reasonable managerial request, and that it constitutes gross misconduct which means summary dismissal. I was suspended for gross insubordination, but received summary dismissal for refusal of a reasonable managerial request.
What possible distinguishing features could possibly allow my colleague the right to directly refuse work for nearly a year? I don't get that. My colleage was fine doing that work before they had their overtime taken away, then in retaliation to losing their overtime, they refused to do the work, my manager allowed this behaviour for nearly a year up until I was suspended.
The outcome I'd like is just fairness really, whether that be my job back, or a redundancy payment due to my job not having been covered while I was suspended, and hasn't been replaced after my dismissal.

Ultimately, my manager favoured my colleague, and bullied me, then lied which I have proof to show is a lie. My manager has pushed me to react, and when I have, even slightly in asking for an email instead of a phonecall, I've received summary dismissal. It's a joke. It's blatantly unfair.

Jordan90

Jordan90 said:

Ultimately, my manager favoured my colleague, and bullied me, then lied which I have proof to show is a lie. My manager has pushed me to react, and when I have, even slightly in asking for an email instead of a phonecall, I've received summary dismissal. It's a joke. It's blatantly unfair.

To give me summary dismissal for this, would mean taking all context away, and just focusing on the act alone, of which is a very minor act. It'd be like imprisoning a person for acting in self-defence, taking away all context that the person was attacked first and only reacted in self-defence for their own safety. My employer would be ignoring all instances of bullying I raised during the hearing, and ignoring my manager's proven lies. It would also mean my employer is fine with my colleague not receiving any disciplinary action for the same offense, refusal of a reasonable managerial request, despite their refusals occurring over a much much longer time frame, with so many more instances where my manager could have stepped in and disciplined my colleague, but never did.

Marcon

Jordan90 said:

Jordan90 said:

Ultimately, my manager favoured my colleague, and bullied me, then lied which I have proof to show is a lie. My manager has pushed me to react, and when I have, even slightly in asking for an email instead of a phonecall, I've received summary dismissal. It's a joke. It's blatantly unfair.

To give me summary dismissal for this, would mean taking all context away, and just focusing on the act alone, of which is a very minor act. It'd be like imprisoning a person for acting in self-defence, taking away all context that the person was attacked first and only reacted in self-defence for their own safety. My employer would be ignoring all instances of bullying I raised during the hearing, and ignoring my manager's proven lies. It would also mean my employer is fine with my colleague not receiving any disciplinary action for the same offense, refusal of a reasonable managerial request, despite their refusals occurring over a much much longer time frame, with so many more instances where my manager could have stepped in and disciplined my colleague, but never did.

You keep focussing on your colleague and how they were treated. It's completely irrelevant to your disciplinary, whatever you may think and feel about it. The reality is that your colleague has something you don't have: a champion. For some reason, they are more highly favoured than you (at least based on what you've said that appears to be the case). You would only have (possible) grounds for complaint if they were treated differently for 'unlawful' reasons (e.g. you have been less well treated on the basis of a 'protected characteristic' such as age, gender or ethnicity).

Have you raised your concerns about bullying and disability discrimination before now, or only at your disciplinary? If the latter, why wait until now - if you needed your employer to take reasonable steps to accommodate your disability, was this discussed with them and what happened if so?