Employer selecting who they enforce rules on?

robatwork

This reminds me of what people say to the police when they're stopped. "But what about the 2 cars before me and 1 after that went through the red light"?

Doesn't matter - it's an absolute offence and not up to you (or A) how the "law" is applied.

B0bbyEwing

robatwork said:

This reminds me of what people say to the police when they're stopped. "But what about the 2 cars before me and 1 after that went through the red light"?

Doesn't matter - it's an absolute offence and not up to you (or A) how the "law" is applied.

I get what you're trying to say.

You just used a terrible example to say it.

One's literally against the law. The other isn't.

B0bbyEwing

MattMattMattUK said:
A start time means ready for work, not getting through the door and swiping a card at 08:00. Having been a co-worker and manager of these kind of people they are incredibly annoying, arguing that they are "on time" because they managed to lunge through the door with a second to spare, or at 08:00:59. Constantly pushing everything to the last minute is annoying, even more so if they are regularly up to five minutes late as well. This is similar to people in office jobs who stop working 15-30 minutes before they are due to finish so they can log out and run out the door exactly on their finish time.

Your friend needs to stop worrying about other people and make sure that they are at work on time and ready to work ever shift, then the "problem" will go away.

I was for letting it die as it's pretty much dealt with but your post tells me you've got the wrong end of the stick, which will be my fault for not making it clearer.

There's a difference between punch in time and start work time. The individual can punch in but by the time they get their stuff together it's always a few minutes later - this applies to all, simply due to the location of the clocking machine. It's not possible to punch in and start work that second.

So my "what about then...." was talking about what about when they punch in in good time. Let's say 7:50. Doesn't matter about pay here as they wont be getting paid until 8am anyway.
They go to their station, maybe unload their bag, get their tools, whatever it may be. They're then on the front line ready to work AT 7:59 or 8:00. 

As you're the one who brought up 8:00:59 let's go with the 7:59 one then and even make it 7:59:59 for you. Whatever way you look at it - they're on time.

But they're accused of being late.

THAT was the "what about then......".

tripled

But they're accused of being late.

THAT was the "what about then......".

Accused of being late, or disciplined for being late? Your original post suggests it's the former, which just falls into the pattern of being unpleasant but still unlikely to be illegal unless it is harassment related to a protected characteristic.

Your original post has several questions in it, which perhaps is affecting the responses.

Briefly, can an employer pick and choose who they enforce rules on? 

By and large, yes, unless they take it far enough to constitute harassment relating to a protected characteristic.

Let's assume the employer starts seeing that through & goes down disciplinary procedures and dismissal. Can it be done then?

As above.

Could A do anything about it in terms of unfair dismissal... even if they're actually not breaking the rules (in the case of being ready for 8:00)?

Presumably as they have punched in and out there would be records of the attendance that could be used to prove the allegations were untrue. Then, provided they have been there more than two years, if it progresses to disciplinaries and dismissal when they have been on time, they could potentially use those to evidence a claim tribunal claim for unfair dismissal, assuming they don't go missing. Keep in mind that more than half of tribunal claims are withdrawn or fail, it is of no consequence to them if what they are doing is illegal if your friend can't make a claim stick.

If they have been there less than two years, unless it constitutes harassment related to a protected characteristic, no.

LunaLater

B0bbyEwing said:

robatwork said:

This reminds me of what people say to the police when they're stopped. "But what about the 2 cars before me and 1 after that went through the red light"?

Doesn't matter - it's an absolute offence and not up to you (or A) how the "law" is applied.

I get what you're trying to say.

You just used a terrible example to say it.

One's literally against the law. The other isn't.

I’m an employer, and of course there are some rules in place for employees.

There’s also quite a lot of give and take on both sides, and how much latitude is given will absolutely depend on how accommodative the employee tends to be.

If my best person who’ll go above and beyond for me asks if they can turn up two minutes late every day instead of getting the earlier train and having to be 58 minutes early then I’ll happily say less.

If the guy who’s constantly a pain in the bottom and works three minutes walk away keeps turning up two minutes late while doing the bare minimum then they may well find that their persistent lateness is used as the lever to manage them out.

JCS1

It would be very unlikely for a junior manager to use disciplinary process without senior management and HR being involved.

Savvy_Sue

Jacob_Jones said:

I think in reality this depends on what type of employer you are talking about. 

I previously worked for a very large organisation. In that situation, a junior manager who did not treat all his subordinates equally would face problems. The subordinates could (and probably would) raise the issue with higher management. There was an official procedure for this. This would probably overturn any disciplinary action taken against the subordinate by the junior manager. It would also reflect poorly on the junior manager, when it came to his appraisal / annual review etc. 

In many similar organisations, the subordinate employee could also seek help from their trade union rep. 

Obviously, in a small business environment, this kind of procedure will not be applicable. 

In any organisation, large or small, anyone can join a union and get support. 

lisyloo

If this is over a few minutes then it's either very petty, there's more to it e.g. they have other reasons for managing people out, or the employee has failed to communicate their issues e.g. I get a train, is it ok if I'm 2 minutes late rather than 1 hour early.

Bosses don't have time to quibble over 2 mins for good employees so is there more to it?

marmite1979

Employee A, B and C are annoying the manager for turning up late, but A doesn't know the circumstances of B and C.
If A is the least productive and B and C are good at their jobs, then it's A who's going to be targeted with a disciplinary as it may encourage B and C to turn up on time. 
 B & C might be unhappy in their role but might be seen as a loss to the company should they leave, A might be unhappy but more dispensable.

A sounds a bit childish '' They get away with it so I will do it too'' why not be like d,e,f,g & h and turn up on time and keep your nose out on what doesn't concern you.

Savvy_Sue

lisyloo said:

If this is over a few minutes then it's either very petty, there's more to it e.g. they have other reasons for managing people out, or the employee has failed to communicate their issues e.g. I get a train, is it ok if I'm 2 minutes late rather than 1 hour early.

Bosses don't have time to quibble over 2 mins for good employees so is there more to it?

A previous and mercifully temporary manager certainly had time to quibble with me, and I'm an amazing employee. They nearly lost me over it. It was especially unnecessary because if they'd looked at my original contract - the only one which mentions what time I'm due to start - they'd have seen I wasn't actually late at all ...