Why are so many decent people subject disciplinary hearings

Why are so many decent people subject disciplinary hearings

Author
Discussion

shouldbworking

4,769 posts

211 months

Monday 29th September 2014
quotequote all
It's my time to join this thread smile

Their side of the story : Their employee didn't turn up for work one day, just texting in to say that they were going to a medical appointment, and policy dictates a phone call.

My side : After suffering a broken arm and being off for 4 weeks the company refused me time off to go to a medical appointment because they felt that we were too busy. Without the treatment it was to arrange there would be a risk of permanent disability or reduced motion. After they initially refused it I went to HR who refused it again without giving any further reason and then failed to respond to my request asking when would be suitable if I were to rearrange or to answer who was making the decision.
When there was no response forthcoming I went anyway, just sending a text as I didn't much fancy haven't a pointless argument over it. Following the appointment I ended up being signed off work again for a further 2 weeks.

Given that it's got past the 'investigation' stage to an actual disciplinary I suspect the very least on the cards is a written warning. It seems nuts to me but given that they are mad enough to go this far I don't see them stopping short of the harshest they can manage.


Snollygoster

1,538 posts

138 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
I had a meal with my parents over the weekend, and we were discussing careers and jobs in general.

My dad is 60, worked for 3 companies in his life.

He was saying it used to be you would find a job with a company, and spend years with them. Only in the event that there was seriously something wrong would someone be fired. Usually, they would take every step possible to retain an employee.

Now days, we live in such a hire and fire sort of culture. I believe it's now the standard to change job every few years as it's now seen as bad staying with the same company for some time.

Gross misconduct should be an absolute last resort and not an excuse to get rid of someone because they not dotted the i's and crossed the t's.


shouldbworking

4,769 posts

211 months

Friday 3rd October 2014
quotequote all
shouldbworking said:
It's my time to join this thread smile

Their side of the story : Their employee didn't turn up for work one day, just texting in to say that they were going to a medical appointment, and policy dictates a phone call.

My side : After suffering a broken arm and being off for 4 weeks the company refused me time off to go to a medical appointment because they felt that we were too busy. Without the treatment it was to arrange there would be a risk of permanent disability or reduced motion. After they initially refused it I went to HR who refused it again without giving any further reason and then failed to respond to my request asking when would be suitable if I were to rearrange or to answer who was making the decision.
When there was no response forthcoming I went anyway, just sending a text as I didn't much fancy haven't a pointless argument over it. Following the appointment I ended up being signed off work again for a further 2 weeks.

Given that it's got past the 'investigation' stage to an actual disciplinary I suspect the very least on the cards is a written warning. It seems nuts to me but given that they are mad enough to go this far I don't see them stopping short of the harshest they can manage.
Outcome - First and final written warning, treated as gross misconduct. Mind boggling....

Muzzer79

9,806 posts

186 months

Friday 3rd October 2014
quotequote all
shouldbworking said:
shouldbworking said:
It's my time to join this thread smile

Their side of the story : Their employee didn't turn up for work one day, just texting in to say that they were going to a medical appointment, and policy dictates a phone call.

My side : After suffering a broken arm and being off for 4 weeks the company refused me time off to go to a medical appointment because they felt that we were too busy. Without the treatment it was to arrange there would be a risk of permanent disability or reduced motion. After they initially refused it I went to HR who refused it again without giving any further reason and then failed to respond to my request asking when would be suitable if I were to rearrange or to answer who was making the decision.
When there was no response forthcoming I went anyway, just sending a text as I didn't much fancy haven't a pointless argument over it. Following the appointment I ended up being signed off work again for a further 2 weeks.

Given that it's got past the 'investigation' stage to an actual disciplinary I suspect the very least on the cards is a written warning. It seems nuts to me but given that they are mad enough to go this far I don't see them stopping short of the harshest they can manage.
Outcome - First and final written warning, treated as gross misconduct. Mind boggling....
Yet you completely dropped yourself in it by doing this:

shouldbworking said:
When there was no response forthcoming I went anyway, just sending a text as I didn't much fancy haven't a pointless argument over it. Following the appointment I ended up being signed off work again for a further 2 weeks.
If you'd just had made a simple phone call telling them that you were going to your appointment, or even better telling your manager the day before you were going, you'd have had a much stronger case.

As it stands, they have you on a black and white case of not following company policy.

By doing nothing and doing your own thing, instead of dealing with the issue before it occurred, you invited a disciplinary against you.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
I think muzzer summed it up, the final warning and the charge being gross misconduct is because of deliberately ignoring a company policy you were fully aware of ...


NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
I think muzzer summed it up, the final warning and the charge being gross misconduct is because of deliberately ignoring a company policy you were fully aware of ...
but it is nothing more than a single absence and even if absence is treated as misconduct it most certainly isn't gross.

Would love to read the contract/policy on that one as I bet the manager has done more wrong than the employee.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
mph1977 said:
I think muzzer summed it up, the final warning and the charge being gross misconduct is because of deliberately ignoring a company policy you were fully aware of ...
but it is nothing more than a single absence and even if absence is treated as misconduct it most certainly isn't gross.

Would love to read the contract/policy on that one as I bet the manager has done more wrong than the employee.
it is not the absence that is the gross misconduct

the gross misconduct is despite the OP being aware of the poloicy , having seen the policy and being reminded of it by line management and HR he chose to ignore it.

shouldbworking

4,769 posts

211 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
NoNeed said:
mph1977 said:
I think muzzer summed it up, the final warning and the charge being gross misconduct is because of deliberately ignoring a company policy you were fully aware of ...
but it is nothing more than a single absence and even if absence is treated as misconduct it most certainly isn't gross.

Would love to read the contract/policy on that one as I bet the manager has done more wrong than the employee.
it is not the absence that is the gross misconduct

the gross misconduct is despite the OP being aware of the poloicy , having seen the policy and being reminded of it by line management and HR he chose to ignore it.
Could well be the case, it wasn't clear in the hearing how the penalty was apportioned between the two aspects - absence and not following the company policy on reporting absence.

Genuinely curious as to how calling or telling them on the day would have made a difference? After all it would still be being aware of their policy and ignoring it.

I do feel that they didn't give enough consideration to the surrounding circumstances, but that argument won't go any further unless for some reason I was dismissed and it went to an employment tribunal to decide what a reasonable employer would do - in which case I hope it would go in my favour.

Muzzer79

9,806 posts

186 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
shouldbworking said:
Genuinely curious as to how calling or telling them on the day would have made a difference? After all it would still be being aware of their policy and ignoring it.
Really?

By ignoring the company policy, you asked for a disciplinary - open and shut

If you'd have dealt with the issue beforehand, then you wouldn't.
Dealing with it would mean telling your company you had to go to this appointment. They could refuse it, at which point you could highlight how unavoidable it was and the fact that an alternate appointment time was not possible.....right?

At this point the company have a choice to reject your unavoidable appointment or accept it. If they reject, you can inform them that you are going because you have no choice - it's unavoidable. No company in their right mind would do this however, if the circumstances you give are true.
If they did, you have a (relatively) cast-iron appeal

By doing nothing and not confronting the issue, you leave yourself totally open

shouldbworking

4,769 posts

211 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
Muzzer79 said:
shouldbworking said:
Genuinely curious as to how calling or telling them on the day would have made a difference? After all it would still be being aware of their policy and ignoring it.
Really?

By ignoring the company policy, you asked for a disciplinary - open and shut

If you'd have dealt with the issue beforehand, then you wouldn't.
Dealing with it would mean telling your company you had to go to this appointment. They could refuse it, at which point you could highlight how unavoidable it was and the fact that an alternate appointment time was not possible.....right?

At this point the company have a choice to reject your unavoidable appointment or accept it. If they reject, you can inform them that you are going because you have no choice - it's unavoidable. No company in their right mind would do this however, if the circumstances you give are true.
If they did, you have a (relatively) cast-iron appeal

By doing nothing and not confronting the issue, you leave yourself totally open
I must have not mentioned it earlier in the post - I did tell them about the appointment as soon as I heard about it -about 9 days before it, they refused to allow the time off with no information on when would be ok, I escalated to he who again refused.

Their argument is that hr suggested I provide a list of alternative dates shows they were willing to allow me to go at some point... Their suggestion was given at half 3 the day before the appointment, allowing no time for rearrangement, or info on when would be ok

siovey

1,632 posts

137 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
I worked for a large organisation for 17 years until being made redundant back in 2011. I never even got close to a disciplinary. I have worked for 6 different firms since then, mainly small , mickey mouse firms that seem to do whatever they like to their employees.
In one of them I was brought in on a telesales role to increase new business. After 9 months I got a pay rise up to the same level as the longer serving staff as I had done very well. The company then decided that they wanted to market their business by using social media like facebook, linked in etc instead of telesales. Even in the training we got, we were warned that business would inevitably drop off during the transition. 3 months later, the md sacked half of his sales staff for poor performance! Although surprisingly, he kept anyone who had been there for more than years on..Joke of a company

I'm sure that as soon as the economy improves, conditions will improve, as people won't put up with that sort of scensorede any more.

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
it is not the absence that is the gross misconduct

the gross misconduct is despite the OP being aware of the poloicy , having seen the policy and being reminded of it by line management and HR he chose to ignore it.
Without being able to read the contract it is hard to be 100% certain but i very much doubt tha a failure to report an absence could be gross misconduct. Failure to report in all my many employers has always rendered the absence unorthorised and some employers have limits on how many times that can hapoen but I have never known it to be gross misconduct, even the strictest employer I have worked for would not have that as gross misconduct.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
NoNeed said:
mph1977 said:
it is not the absence that is the gross misconduct

the gross misconduct is despite the OP being aware of the poloicy , having seen the policy and being reminded of it by line management and HR he chose to ignore it.
Without being able to read the contract it is hard to be 100% certain but i very much doubt tha a failure to report an absence could be gross misconduct. Failure to report in all my many employers has always rendered the absence unorthorised and some employers have limits on how many times that can hapoen but I have never known it to be gross misconduct, even the strictest employer I have worked for would not have that as gross misconduct.
For the umpteenth time, the gross misconduct is NOT the absence. The gross misconduct is the deliberate and calcualted breach of the reporting policy despite having been warned of it;s content less than 24 hours before the policy was breached.

NoNeed

15,137 posts

199 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
For the umpteenth time, the gross misconduct is NOT the absence. The gross misconduct is the deliberate and calcualted breach of the reporting policy despite having been warned of it;s content less than 24 hours before the policy was breached.
OK lets try this a different way.


Show me an employment contract that states that failure to report an absence is gross misconduct.


Just re-read mine and all it says is failure to report on time may make me lose my sickness benefit.



ETA Last employment contract says the same with an added may also be liable to disciplinary action for repeated offences.