Reasons for dismissal

danco

(Fortunately I am enquiring for someone else, not myself.) If an employer has followed due process in dismissing someone, could the employee still succeed in an unfair dismissal case on the grounds that dismissing her was excessive?

I live in a block of flats where a member of the onsite management team has just been dismissed. The residents are very upset about this and have strongly protested to the management company. We have demanded that she be re-employed. But the company refuses to engage with us or provide any information, in part because they have a genuine need of confidentiality.

As far as we can tell, she was dismissed because ill-health among members of her family have meant that she has frequently been late, possibly  (I'm not sure) actually been absent on occasions, and she was dismissed after being late twice in a month. We assume the company followed due process in warning her, but do not have confirmation of this. In contrast to her lateness she has also stayed late, and even returned to work outside her duty hours when there was a crisis, and that she was very supportive of us, even to the extent that one person's life was saved because she insisted that the resident did not ignore symptoms.

If she has any chance of success, many residents would be willing to act as witness on her behalf, and we would like her to bring a case for unfair dismissal.

In the meantime, though this part is not an employment matter, the residents have lost all confidence in the management company and are unlikely to regain it, but there seems nothing we can do.

TELLIT01

If the full process has been followed correctly I doubt there will be anything effective the employee can do.  The appeal from residents of the block may have helped in getting the decision reconsidered but the outcome remained the same.

The residents cannot know the full background to the dismissal, only what they may have hear from the person who lost their job.

danco

It's not been reconsidered.

We do know somewhat more about the background, as we have heard from the person who was acting as her support who confirms that lateness was the only reason.

I am not surprised to be told that there is nothing she can do, though I had hoped it might be argued that dismissal was an excessive decision.

Any suggestions about how good relations between residents and management can be restored? I now (and only now) wish enough of us had the energy to apply the Right to Manage, but we're not up to that.

Browntoa

As above 

Could be a multitude of other more important or serious offences, data protection would stop the employer revealing anything ( although it would be revealed at a tribunal if it went that far ) 

I've experienced this where the on site warden was popular but was moved away . It appeared that she was taking cash bookings for the on site visitors room ( including a family for at least 2 months) and keeping it and a multitude of other dodgy things. 

Mr.Generous

If the decision was beyond the band of possible outcomes that a reasonable employer might consider for the outcome then yes, she could win. However, dismissal is definitely within the band for persistent lateness and absence. The first hurdle in the world of work is to turn up. After turning up you can do a good or poor job, but to do either you need to be there.

Undervalued

danco said:

(Fortunately I am enquiring for someone else, not myself.) If an employer has followed due process in dismissing someone, could the employee still succeed in an unfair dismissal case on the grounds that dismissing her was excessive?

I live in a block of flats where a member of the onsite management team has just been dismissed. The residents are very upset about this and have strongly protested to the management company. We have demanded that she be re-employed. But the company refuses to engage with us or provide any information, in part because they have a genuine need of confidentiality.

As far as we can tell, she was dismissed because ill-health among members of her family have meant that she has frequently been late, possibly  (I'm not sure) actually been absent on occasions, and she was dismissed after being late twice in a month. We assume the company followed due process in warning her, but do not have confirmation of this. In contrast to her lateness she has also stayed late, and even returned to work outside her duty hours when there was a crisis, and that she was very supportive of us, even to the extent that one person's life was saved because she insisted that the resident did not ignore symptoms.

If she has any chance of success, many residents would be willing to act as witness on her behalf, and we would like her to bring a case for unfair dismissal.

In the meantime, though this part is not an employment matter, the residents have lost all confidence in the management company and are unlikely to regain it, but there seems nothing we can do.

1st Paragraph highlighted in bold. - Yes, in some circumstances but probably not in the situation you describe.

2nd Paragraph highlighted in bold. - Obviously you are entitled to your opinion but why on earth do you think you have the right to "demand" that?

Unless there is some very unusual contract in place between the residents' (committee / association ??) and the management company you have no say over who they employ or dismiss.

If she brings a claim against the company you can obviously offer to provide a witness statement about how wonderful she was but that doesn't really seem to be in dispute. Repeated poor timekeeping could certainly be a valid reason to dismiss, depending on the circumstances.

danco

Obviously the residents have no formal right to "demand" anything, but the word was used to express the strength of our feelings.

The company frequently claims to be acting in our best interests, but rarely bothers to consult us as to what we think our best interests are. Usually this is just on minor matters, such as what furniture should be chosen when some is required. This leads to minor grumbles, and we accept that it is the company's decision in the end. This is the first time they have made such a claim on a major matter.

I think you have convinced me that the employee probably does not have a claim against the company.

As regards myself and other residents, we no longer have any confidence in the company's ability to understand our needs, and we will no longer accept assurances that they are dealing with problems but are facing some delays - this seems to be their standard response. There seems no point in discussing further the situation of the employee, but any suggestions on how to repair the residents' trust in the company would be gratefully received. Of course this is really a matter for a different forum, but might as well continue here since I started it here.

TELLIT01

I would guess that there have been multiple instances of lateness, not just a couple.  If the person who has been dismissed is required to be on site by 'x' time to liaise with contractors (for example), and their absence/lateness has impacted on their work, there would come a breaking point for the management company.

As far as regaining trust in the management company, all the residents can do is see what sort of job the replacement does.  Be fair with that individual as the current situation is not of their doing.  Do not pick on and complain about every little error they may make.  That would achieve nothing other than making the over all relationship worse.

Undervalued

danco said:

Obviously the residents have no formal right to "demand" anything, but the word was used to express the strength of our feelings.

The company frequently claims to be acting in our best interests, but rarely bothers to consult us as to what we think our best interests are. Usually this is just on minor matters, such as what furniture should be chosen when some is required. This leads to minor grumbles, and we accept that it is the company's decision in the end. This is the first time they have made such a claim on a major matter.

I think you have convinced me that the employee probably does not have a claim against the company.

As regards myself and other residents, we no longer have any confidence in the company's ability to understand our needs, and we will no longer accept assurances that they are dealing with problems but are facing some delays - this seems to be their standard response. There seems no point in discussing further the situation of the employee, but any suggestions on how to repair the residents' trust in the company would be gratefully received. Of course this is really a matter for a different forum, but might as well continue here since I started it here.

Who appoints this company and who has the power to take action against them if they provide an unacceptable service? Do "the residents" own, presumably leasehold, their flats or do they rent? In other words what is the legal structure?

Do you have a formal committee made up of some or all of the residents? Have they explored alternative companies?

danco

Thank you. The flats are leasehold. Until recently fewer than half had been sold, so we could not have a formal committee. We probably could have one now and exercise a Right to Manage, but I do not think enough of us (it is a retirement block, with most of us over eighty in age) have the energy to do so. I think we are sutck with the company we have, but need them to be on better terms with us and to remember that it is sensible for them to consult with residents about issues that concern us.

At the moment, apart from small issues, there are a couple of significant ones. The first is one where they have agreed that we are due compensation for defects in the heating system, but have not yet suggested a figure even after a year; I do expect they will respond shortly. The other is an issue about service charge on the car park. Some of us are taking the issue to the first-tier tribunal, where it will depend on the precise wording of the lease, and possibly precedents on  earlier decisions. Not worth discussing here, as it is too technical, with different versions of the lease, and deeds of variation, being involved.

danco

TELLIT01 said:

I would guess that there have been multiple instances of lateness, not just a couple.  If the person who has been dismissed is required to be on site by 'x' time to liaise with contractors (for example), and their absence/lateness has impacted on their work, there would come a breaking point for the management company.

As far as regaining trust in the management company, all the residents can do is see what sort of job the replacement does.  Be fair with that individual as the current situation is not of their doing.  Do not pick on and complain about every little error they may make.  That would achieve nothing other than making the over all relationship worse.

You are right, of course, but it is going to be hard to do.