Dismissal - Unauthorized Absence.

antrobus · 9 July 2017 at 7:37PM

vertigo5000 wrote: »

...So I take them to Appeals Tribunal and ask them to defend paying me SSP while classing it as unauthorized absence? ...

To bring a claim for unfair dismissal before an Employment Tribunal, the two year rule applies. You will need to make a claim for wrongful dismissal (breach of contract). The main difference being that with wrongful dismissal, fairness is not at issue.

https://www.truthlegal.com/employment-disputes/wrongful-dismissal-claims/

It is possible that the employer initially accepted the fit note as valid, and thus paid SSP, but subsequently (when someone looked at the dates on it) that it wasn't kosher, came to the post-hoc conclusion that your absence was therefore unauthorised, and dismissed you.

It would be down to the county court or employment tribunal to decide whether or not the employer's actions were in accordance with your employment contract.

You should speak to a lawyer.

theoretica · 9 July 2017 at 7:46PM

My work's sickness policy says that the first week of absence may only be self certified if any further absence has a fit note handed in according to the policy. If this does not happen the whole absence becomes unauthorised. As you didn't go to the doctor to get a note until 2 weeks after you had said you were fit to return I expect something like this happened and is why your absence is being counted as unauthorised from the start.

Undervalued · 9 July 2017 at 8:09PM

vertigo5000 wrote: »

Sorry, I couldn't have been dismissed without a disciplinary hearing... It's written in the contract... Damn, pesky written contracts...

Sangie595 - I don't know if you're a troll or you just can't read lad.

https / w w w. gov .uk /government/publications/fit-note-guidance-for-employers-and-line-managers

That's the official government website son. It's ACAS guidance, if it's not followed you end up in tribunals. I wasn't asking you to verify if you think it is the law, because it's not based on your opinion.

So I take them to Appeals Tribunal and ask them to defend paying me SSP while classing it as unauthorized absence?

My contract clearly states:
"No payment is made during unauthorized absences."

So they pay me and my written contract says they shouldn't pay me.
They will claim back the over payment as it isn't lawfully mine.
But by claiming it back, they're admitting to a breach of contract because they're admitting that they paid me during my unauthorized absence.

They paid me SSP for the entire period, now by definition of the contract: "No payment is made during unauthorized absences."
So if they're making payments... it must be authorized absence.
If not, it's a breach of contract.

Simple.

No I don't want the job back.
No I don't need JSA to get by while I find another position.

You really don't get it do you?

OK, if there is a hard and fast contractual obligation to follow a laid down disciplinary procedure (which is possible but unusual) and they fail to follow it then, in theory, you could make a claim for wrongful dismissal (i.e breach of contract).

However, the maximum that would get you would be a few days pay to compensate for however long it would have taken them to do it properly. That is all. It doesn't make the dismissal unfair and it is very unlikely such a claim would be cost effective even if successful.

agrinnall · 9 July 2017 at 8:45PM

As I agree with pretty much every other poster that you don't have the cas eyou think you have, I'll restrict myself to commenting on one point you make.

vertigo5000 wrote: »

I fully admit that I did make some serious f-ups.
But I'm not sure the management are the angels they're painting.

Management may or may not be angels, in fact they probaby aren't. But it doesn't matter: they run the company so they say how thinks should work. You have to follow the rules they put in place, and even if they make 100 other f-ups that doesn't alter the fact that they order, you obey. It's a lesson you should take with you to whatever job you get next.

robatwork · 9 July 2017 at 8:50PM

vertigo5000 wrote: »

Sangie595 - I don't know if you're a troll or you just can't read lad.

Sangie doesn't need protecting by me. I will just pose the question about who is the troll - let's look at the facts:

sangie595
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,269
Thanked 5,314 Times in 2,057 Posts

vertigo5000
MoneySaving Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Bring your working and life experience to bear on the above and let us know your workings and conclusions.

Manxman_in_exile · 9 July 2017 at 10:43PM

To repeat the question I asked in post #30, why didn't you get a certificate when your period of self-certification expired? You waited at least another two weeks to visit your GP. Did you get a certificate and provide it to your employer or not? (I note that at least one other poster suggests it is not possible for a GP to give a post-dated certificate).

The fact your employer paid you when they thought that the absence could be considered "authorised" does not mean that they can't subsequently decide it was in fact "unauthorised" because your certificate was late or not provided.

Good luck with suing your ex-employer for breach of contract and let us know how you got on. (unless of course you have already won and come back with a set of facts bearing no relation to the OP).

EDIT: Did you not breach your contract first by not providing a timely certificate from your GP?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser · 10 July 2017 at 12:46AM

Did you at any point during this process start acting like a complete !!!!, the way you have here? That may well have been the point they decided to sack you.

Dismissal - Unauthorized Absence.

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free