I have been suspended by a retailer for mis-use of discount card. Please help me!!

TELLIT01

68ComebackSpecial said:

TELLIT01 said:

From the viewpoint of the business, you used the discount card but you did not pay for the items.  That, it would seem, is in breach of their rules.  It does seem odd that they should react like that over two very small purchases.  I can only assume it's because the card was used twice in quick succession and you didn't pay the bill.  Hopefully with the sales value being so low you will get off with a warning.

The OPs latest thread suggests that he has been dismissed.

Sorry, I missed that bit.

Jonathan_Powell

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

Marcon

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

steampowered

This feels like a thread where we are not getting the full story.

I strongly suspect there is more background to this than the Op is letting on.

TELLIT01

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

Some companies have actions / activities which automatically are classed as gross misconduct and instant dismissal.  That would seem to be the case here.

getmore4less

TELLIT01 said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

Some companies have actions / activities which automatically are classed as gross misconduct and instant dismissal.  That would seem to be the case here.

They pretty much have to or word gets round.

They have a clear policy  stick to it.

74jax

steampowered said:

This feels like a thread where we are not getting the full story.

I strongly suspect there is more background to this than the Op is letting on.

The op is no longer working there so you are probably right. 

brendankiwi

i've been honest. I've given the facts as management have put it...but I have explained the circumstances-- my wifes birthday, i live with chefs in the same apartment, they cook for me and my wife for celebrations often-- and at the till they offer to pay. 

brendankiwi

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence and 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.
It is the first time "offence" - ie no other disciplinaries. I complained about the HR before Christmas because they never issued me a discount card- and after 3 months asking for it finally I wrote a formal complaint to Head office. I believe that this is retaliatory but i accept that i may have broken the contract as well ~(due to "carelessness"). This contract clause which states carelessness is "gross misconduct" is contestable...and an top employment tribunal has told companies that issue such cards to change the "careless"= Gross misconduct as it turns contracts into games where employers hold all the cards. 
Finallly I cannot give all the information- but i am being fair to the employers account and mine as well. I am not here to explain away how unfair this is to me. I am here for legal help to beat the "careless" = misconduct clause. I do not need help from cynics

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

Marcon said:

Jonathan_Powell said:

Don't know how some companies can be so robotically stupid. It's a first time offence, surely it should just be a verbal, non-formal warning and everyone then gets on with their lives. 

How do you know for certain it's a first time offence - or what other sort of 'issues' the employer might have had with the employee in question? OP is hardly going to give chapter and verse on either point.

MovingForwards

You won't get legal help here, you can get opinions.  Unfortunately, if you want the former you'll have to pay for it or speak with your union.