Constructive dismassal due to pregnancy??? Please help!
Discussion
desolate said:
SickFish said:
UPDATE:
The company, in response to her asking for 24hrs to review the email, have asked her to sign it today....
This just smacks of underhandedness and not giving her the opportunity to seek proper advice.
Need some help on some sort of response. I have told the Mrs to say she wants her legal rep to review it first but I don't think they will buy it and will try to force her hand.
Don't sign anything you don't want to sign.The company, in response to her asking for 24hrs to review the email, have asked her to sign it today....
This just smacks of underhandedness and not giving her the opportunity to seek proper advice.
Need some help on some sort of response. I have told the Mrs to say she wants her legal rep to review it first but I don't think they will buy it and will try to force her hand.
Make sure that you keep notes/copies of everything.
I don't want to say anything else as I am bit aggressive on stuff like this - I'd wait for BV to respond but if he doesn't I know someone who has handled a few matters very competently.
The Mrs isn't the strongest of characters and any sort of pressure exerted and she folds, I think this is known and they are using to their advantage.
I have to the Mrs to confirm receipt of the email and to advise that we will be having it reviewed prior to issuing a response.
PurpleMoonlight said:
SickFish said:
To confirm that she accepts that she has been underperforming and to agree to the remedial steps.....
The she shouldn't sign it.But that doesn't make sense, your initial post stated the email was to arrange a meeting to discuss their perceived underperformance. Now they want her to agree to their perception without a meeting?
What remedial steps have been proposed?
the remedial actions are rather wooly.... "Do this in accordance with that...." etc
Edited by SickFish on Tuesday 29th July 16:16
ralphrj said:
BV advice is what is needed but google found this article
http://careers.theguardian.com/careers-blog/perfor...
Thank you, something to keep in the armouryhttp://careers.theguardian.com/careers-blog/perfor...
article said:
If you are being pressured to sign an acknowledgement of the Pip, you should make it clear either at the bottom of the Pip or in a separate email that your signature is under protest and that the terms of the Pip are not agreed, and why.
V8 Fettler said:
SickFish said:
V8 Fettler said:
What is the document that might be signed within 24 hours? Should this not be placed in front of your legal rep? Which could take a lot longer than 24 hours...
I have a copy of it, it is a "performance improvement note"....Basically she needs to sign that she accepts:
- System not being updated with correct information... (etc)
- Agreed "targets" to improve performance
- Agreed review date of above
My concern is that if she signs this document she is making a rod for her own back, she adamantly denies that she is underperforming and if she was to sign this it basically accepts guilt putting her in a very weak position come the review date.
But..... if she refuses to sign this document what are the consequences of this? The email was sent to her C.C.ing in the company solicitor so I think they are in this for the long haul....
Jasandjules said:
hondansx said:
She is not protected for unfair dismissal in her probation period.
But she is protected for discrimination on grounds of sex....ETA if you want OP I can send you a document setting out quite a lot about maternity law...
Edited by Jasandjules on Tuesday 29th July 17:18
cossy400 said:
KNOBS,
How can people drop an email on your deski and expect it to be signed.
ha its her signature they want to force her out, from what BV etc has said they must clearly know they are in the s
t if they just send her on her way.
LOVE PH for this st.
Yep that's what I'm thinking, the company are trying to build up a portfolio of "evidence" to build up a reason (other than being pregnant) to dismiss her, this signed document forming the foundation of their reasons..... How can people drop an email on your deski and expect it to be signed.
ha its her signature they want to force her out, from what BV etc has said they must clearly know they are in the s
t if they just send her on her way. LOVE PH for this s
t. Edited by SickFish on Tuesday 29th July 18:54
caiss4 said:
jkh112 said:
In my earlier haste to respond about SMP entitlement I forgot to congratulate the OP and his wife on the pregnancy. Congratulations.
This ^^^. Don't jeopardise the 'miracle' pregnancy with the stress of fighting an employer. I do assure you that the joy of any successful pregnancy will far outweigh any financial issues although they may seem important right now.Priorities...
hidetheelephants said:
Vaud said:
SickFish said:
Trust me..... Having suffered a miscarriage 3 years ago, NOTHING in my life is more important right now than mum and mini fish
One fish or might there be 2 fish?Apologies to Dr. Seuss.
Sounds like a prizewinningly s
tty attitude from the employer.Never really been a softie, but the thought of being a father is definitely turning me into a massively ghey marshmallow!
Durzel said:
+1
Probably not the best advice in terms of "justice", but if your missus is susceptible to pressure and the company she is working for is applying it quite mercilessly (one could make the argument that them knowingly doing this to a woman in the early stages of a pregnancy is pretty nasty in it of itself) then it might be worth "losing" this battle to win the war (a successful pregnancy).
Regardless of the outcome unless you can get some serious compensation it sounds like she is best out of that company anyway and could be minded to avoid the stress from tribunals & legal wranglings, etc. This sort of battle would take it out of people at the best of times, let alone a pregnant woman who has had a miscarriage in the past and is presumably already having to deal with a non-trivial amount of stress anyway.
^^^^^ agreed, if it gets too much we will cut our losses, but I refuse to stumble at the first hurdle. Probably not the best advice in terms of "justice", but if your missus is susceptible to pressure and the company she is working for is applying it quite mercilessly (one could make the argument that them knowingly doing this to a woman in the early stages of a pregnancy is pretty nasty in it of itself) then it might be worth "losing" this battle to win the war (a successful pregnancy).
Regardless of the outcome unless you can get some serious compensation it sounds like she is best out of that company anyway and could be minded to avoid the stress from tribunals & legal wranglings, etc. This sort of battle would take it out of people at the best of times, let alone a pregnant woman who has had a miscarriage in the past and is presumably already having to deal with a non-trivial amount of stress anyway.
Edited by Durzel on Tuesday 29th July 21:06
Hopefully this will all be a storm in a teacup and will blow over
Burrito said:
Just to play devils advocate, could your missus be under performing?
Does she have any direct colleagues who have a similar workload?
I know you say it's suspicious that the performance review just before probation period is up, but we have a meeting with any new starter just before their three month probation is up. On the whole nothing in this meeting should be a surprise as their manager should be working on any performance issues beforehand, but if your wife's manager was waiting for this review meeting to bring up her underperformance then it may be less suspicious than you think.
Regardless of the above, as others have said, put mum and baby first. And congratulations!
I hear what you're saying.....Does she have any direct colleagues who have a similar workload?
I know you say it's suspicious that the performance review just before probation period is up, but we have a meeting with any new starter just before their three month probation is up. On the whole nothing in this meeting should be a surprise as their manager should be working on any performance issues beforehand, but if your wife's manager was waiting for this review meeting to bring up her underperformance then it may be less suspicious than you think.
Regardless of the above, as others have said, put mum and baby first. And congratulations!
She is *technically* under performing due to the totally unmanageable workload. As already said, she hold 3x more accounts than her other colleagues. She goes into work an hour early every day and stays an extra half hour, just to try to get everything completed. She has voiced her concerns on numerous occasions to her direct manager, but unfortunately, nothing in writing, which I know isn't great.
Whilst I'd agree a review meeting at the end of a probationary period is standard practice, issuing a notice of underperformance 2 weeks prior is a little suspect to say the least.
And thank you
Jasandjules said:
Well, let's try a quick test.
Had any complaints been made about underperformance before informing them of the pregnancy?
Not a sausage..... Only praiseHad any complaints been made about underperformance before informing them of the pregnancy?
The usual "I know it's a tough job but you're doing great....." Etc.
Her direct manager comes across as a bit of a yes man and from what she tells me he's a wet blanket.
pork911 said:
of course pin them to the wall as much as you are able and desire but this devils advocate thing -
she's not very good with pressure
started early june
felt let lagged, she thought due to hols
working extra hours and is still struggling
found out early july she's pregnant even though thought couldn't (a pretty big thing, no?)
of course extra protections are required for the unscrupulous employers
but she was within her probationary period and while pregnancy doesn't make a probationer bad nor does it make a bad probationer good
yes it appears the screws were turned after announcing but given only up to 4 weeks in to probation leading up to that would they not have been giving her a greater chance before then like they would any probationer so that they might come good?
hopefully you won't find that highly offensive and my first line holds true, just throwing it out there
I see your point of view but that's not really how it has been.she's not very good with pressure
started early june
felt let lagged, she thought due to hols
working extra hours and is still struggling
found out early july she's pregnant even though thought couldn't (a pretty big thing, no?)
of course extra protections are required for the unscrupulous employers
but she was within her probationary period and while pregnancy doesn't make a probationer bad nor does it make a bad probationer good
yes it appears the screws were turned after announcing but given only up to 4 weeks in to probation leading up to that would they not have been giving her a greater chance before then like they would any probationer so that they might come good?
hopefully you won't find that highly offensive and my first line holds true, just throwing it out there
With regards to pressure, work wise pressure is fine. It's when people are manipulating her and cranking on the pressure to do something..... Eg sign the form.
When she had 1 account to manage it was all good and well, then she was loaded with extra accounts, which started out fine, but then the workload increased causing her to do extra hours (with no extra pay) and still is struggling to get through it all.
Without being disrespectful to the Mrs, her role isn't a particularly difficult one, it's an administrative role. Its just the sheer enormity of the work to be done cannot physically be done in a day.
pork911 said:
SickFish said:
I see your point of view but that's not really how it has been.
With regards to pressure, work wise pressure is fine. It's when people are manipulating her and cranking on the pressure to do something..... Eg sign the form.
When she had 1 account to manage it was all good and well, then she was loaded with extra accounts, which started out fine, but then the workload increased causing her to do extra hours (with no extra pay) and still is struggling to get through it all.
Without being disrespectful to the Mrs, her role isn't a particularly difficult one, it's an administrative role. Its just the sheer enormity of the work to be done cannot physically be done in a day.
thanks for taking it in spirit it was intendedWith regards to pressure, work wise pressure is fine. It's when people are manipulating her and cranking on the pressure to do something..... Eg sign the form.
When she had 1 account to manage it was all good and well, then she was loaded with extra accounts, which started out fine, but then the workload increased causing her to do extra hours (with no extra pay) and still is struggling to get through it all.
Without being disrespectful to the Mrs, her role isn't a particularly difficult one, it's an administrative role. Its just the sheer enormity of the work to be done cannot physically be done in a day.
admin work for a big insurer is likely to be bulky though?
anyhow, as i say just throwing it out there, screw them as much as can while on balance it remains worthwhile
The thing is.... She's the ONLY one dealing with 3+ accounts at her "level" everyone else has just the 1 account to deal with, so you can imagine the "bulk" of the workload, doing 3x more than anyone else parallel to her in the company
Edited by SickFish on Tuesday 29th July 23:11
Breadvan72 said:
As the employer has lawyered up, I suggest you do also, OP. David Ludlow at Barlow Robbins would be my suggestion for this one. Don't sign any docs for the time being.
I think their solicitor also doubles as an HR bod so not sure what the angle is with regards to C.Cing him in but we certainly smell a rat.Her hand has been forced with regards to the signing of the document, however, we have responded "with comments" refuting all blame (I have gone into a little more detail in reply to your email - thanks again for that)
ETA we will be contacting David Ludlow ASAP.
Rovinghawk said:
Vaud said:
there has been a fundamental change in H&S risk between hiring and measurement period?
In effect, she sits at the same desk & answers the same phone, uses the same pen to fill in the same forms. I don't see the increase in H&S risk.Vaud said:
If she was a site work who had to carry bricks sometimes
You would appear to be arguing based on what isn't the case rather than what is.Question to Sickfish- do you have any independent verification of what you have been told by your wife?
This is a bit of a moot point anyway, because although the workload is unmanageable in her daily hours (hence doing around an hour an half free work a day) the PIP is focusing on data entry timeliness and accuracy- She is not being given the data to enter, which her line manager is fully aware of...... Which has been reiterated further up the chain of command now. It would appear that her line manager has not been doing anything with this information.
I trust Mrs S, she is not one to lie and having worked with her in an office (it's how we met) I know from first hand experience she is not work shy
Edited by SickFish on Thursday 31st July 07:02
SteveC72 said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Jobs come and go. If any employer is hell bent of sacking you they will do so and take their chances in an employment tribunal. Whether that is worth fighting is a personal decision.
OP, you have been blessed with something you thought wouldn't happen. I seems to me you would both be better of concentrating on this child now rather that incurring all the stress and potential cost of fighting this employer very far. It may help her subsequent employment prospects if she resigns rather than waits until sacked.
If your wife has previous employment to this the chances are she can claim Maternity Allowance direct from the Government.
Whatever you decide, good luck.
I wanted to say this as well, but didn't think it was appropriate at the time.OP, you have been blessed with something you thought wouldn't happen. I seems to me you would both be better of concentrating on this child now rather that incurring all the stress and potential cost of fighting this employer very far. It may help her subsequent employment prospects if she resigns rather than waits until sacked.
If your wife has previous employment to this the chances are she can claim Maternity Allowance direct from the Government.
Whatever you decide, good luck.
Unfortunately employers can pretty much do as they please , it's just a question of how much it'll cost them. If they want to dismiss then there's not going to be much you'll be able to do about it, other than bring a subsequent tribunal.
It's also worth bearing in mind that if you win a tribunal then the tribunal has no power to enforce payment. Should this happen then you'll need to go through a separate process with a High Court Enforcement Officer to retrieve the money and, although there is a fast track system for this, an employer that knows how to play the system can make it a long and difficult process for you.
I would think nowadays that most companies, particularly larger ones, would be more responsible than this, but, it does happen. I've seen this personally and the time, stress and cost involved made it a very hollow victory.
Try and find out what you stand to gain from a successful tribunal claim and work out if it's going to be worth it, particularly with a baby on the way.
On a positive note, congratulations and I wish you and the Missus all the very best.
Steve
To be honest, it's not really about "winning" or "losing" the Mrs would rather just keep her job and be treated fairly and like everyone else she works with. If she was actually "underperforming" and not pulling her weight I'd have very little sympathy but unfortunately this is not the case.
If she was to lose her job right now it would throw a rather large spanner in the works with regard to saving for the babies birth as I would be the sole provider.... lets face it, nobody will employ a 15 week pregnant bird (rightly or wrongly).
Anyway, a H&S review of her role is now booked in for Monday, I am quite interested in seeing the results if I am honest
AKindSoul said:
Hmmmmm interesting......Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff