Managing someone out
Discussion
lyonspride said:
Look it up, within 2 years they can kick you out without any notice or reason..... You can't do anything like claiming "unfair dismissal" until you've been employed for 103 weeks, which means that effectively they can do whatever they want.
All they have to do is make up a reason and give you notice of termination, you cannot even appeal it.
I'm dreadfully sorry to appear argumentative, old chum, but I'm very much afraid you continue to act under a misapprehension. All they have to do is make up a reason and give you notice of termination, you cannot even appeal it.
Edited by lyonspride on Thursday 1st November 12:34
Your kind suggestion that I "look it up" is noted, but I am once again forced to retort. I am qualified to beyond degree level to talk about this sort of thing. I have progressed long ago from the 'looking stuff up' stage to the 'knowing stuff without' stage.
I'd be happy to advise further by PM (so as not to further derail the thread), if it would put your mind at ease?
ferrariF50lover said:
I'm dreadfully sorry to appear argumentative, old chum, but I'm very much afraid you continue to act under a misapprehension.
Your kind suggestion that I "look it up" is noted, but I am once again forced to retort. I am qualified to beyond degree level to talk about this sort of thing. I have progressed long ago from the 'looking stuff up' stage to the 'knowing stuff without' stage.
I'd be happy to advise further by PM (so as not to further derail the thread), if it would put your mind at ease?
Excellent Your kind suggestion that I "look it up" is noted, but I am once again forced to retort. I am qualified to beyond degree level to talk about this sort of thing. I have progressed long ago from the 'looking stuff up' stage to the 'knowing stuff without' stage.
I'd be happy to advise further by PM (so as not to further derail the thread), if it would put your mind at ease?
I love it when this happens.ferrariF50lover said:
lyonspride said:
Look it up, within 2 years they can kick you out without any notice or reason..... You can't do anything like claiming "unfair dismissal" until you've been employed for 103 weeks, which means that effectively they can do whatever they want.
All they have to do is make up a reason and give you notice of termination, you cannot even appeal it.
I'm dreadfully sorry to appear argumentative, old chum, but I'm very much afraid you continue to act under a misapprehension. All they have to do is make up a reason and give you notice of termination, you cannot even appeal it.
Edited by lyonspride on Thursday 1st November 12:34
Your kind suggestion that I "look it up" is noted, but I am once again forced to retort. I am qualified to beyond degree level to talk about this sort of thing. I have progressed long ago from the 'looking stuff up' stage to the 'knowing stuff without' stage.
I'd be happy to advise further by PM (so as not to further derail the thread), if it would put your mind at ease?
This is the reality that most of us face, just bouncing from one bad employer to the next.
Now if all employers were being honourable, it wouldn't happen, but it happens every day, every week, every year, to people who deserve better.
lyonspride said:
I'm fully aware of what rights we have on paper, but the 2 year rule is a loophole, it allows any employer to get rid of any employee without proper reason, they could say you'd murdered the owners dog and sack you, and they wouldn't have to prove it because you have no right to claim unfair dismissal before two years. There is nothing at all you can do and even if you could, it's your word against 4 or 5 managers, they hold all the cards, they've doctored all the evidence and your colleagues all have their heads in the sand trying to avoid trouble, having also removed you from their social media and Linkedin accounts.
This is the reality that most of us face, just bouncing from one bad employer to the next.
Now if all employers were being honourable, it wouldn't happen, but it happens every day, every week, every year, to people who deserve better.
You're correct that Employers can get rid of you without any reason at all if you have less than 2 years employment (apart from certain cases). HoweverThis is the reality that most of us face, just bouncing from one bad employer to the next.
Now if all employers were being honourable, it wouldn't happen, but it happens every day, every week, every year, to people who deserve better.
1. Why would you want to work for such an Employer in any case?
2. Employers want to make money. To do this they need good employees. It's not in their interests to be continually hiring and firing. It's a waste of their time and their money. If they are letting people go then it's usually for a good reason. In other words the cost of employing that person is more than the cost of hiring/training a new person.
If Employers were completely useless it's unlikely that they would have managed to become "Employers" in the first place.
Countdown said:
lyonspride said:
I'm fully aware of what rights we have on paper, but the 2 year rule is a loophole, it allows any employer to get rid of any employee without proper reason, they could say you'd murdered the owners dog and sack you, and they wouldn't have to prove it because you have no right to claim unfair dismissal before two years. There is nothing at all you can do and even if you could, it's your word against 4 or 5 managers, they hold all the cards, they've doctored all the evidence and your colleagues all have their heads in the sand trying to avoid trouble, having also removed you from their social media and Linkedin accounts.
This is the reality that most of us face, just bouncing from one bad employer to the next.
Now if all employers were being honourable, it wouldn't happen, but it happens every day, every week, every year, to people who deserve better.
You're correct that Employers can get rid of you without any reason at all if you have less than 2 years employment (apart from certain cases). HoweverThis is the reality that most of us face, just bouncing from one bad employer to the next.
Now if all employers were being honourable, it wouldn't happen, but it happens every day, every week, every year, to people who deserve better.
1. Why would you want to work for such an Employer in any case?
2. Employers want to make money. To do this they need good employees. It's not in their interests to be continually hiring and firing. It's a waste of their time and their money. If they are letting people go then it's usually for a good reason. In other words the cost of employing that person is more than the cost of hiring/training a new person.
If Employers were completely useless it's unlikely that they would have managed to become "Employers" in the first place.
A lot of engineering related companies are basically run by people who are not technical, and to them engineers are overpaid, disposable spanner monkeys.
We are a different breed, we're not yes men, we will question everything (even if not verbally), and whilst these things make us good at what we do, they also brush people the wrong way.
Edited by lyonspride on Friday 2nd November 12:39
lyonspride said:
We are a different breed, we're not yes men, we will question everything (even if not verbally), and whilst these things make us good at what we do, they also brush people the wrong way.
Roughly translated, we're arsey and we think we know everything. Which, curiously enough, seems be the exact behaviour that you're complaining about from management.deckster said:
lyonspride said:
We are a different breed, we're not yes men, we will question everything (even if not verbally), and whilst these things make us good at what we do, they also brush people the wrong way.
Roughly translated, we're arsey and we think we know everything. Which, curiously enough, seems be the exact behaviour that you're complaining about from management.
deckster said:
Roughly translated, we're arsey and we think we know everything. Which, curiously enough, seems be the exact behaviour that you're complaining about from management.
I read it more of a disgruntled employee who has spoken his mind a bit too freely and got burnt. Don't hate the player.Countdown said:
You're correct that Employers can get rid of you without any reason at all if you have less than 2 years employment (apart from certain cases). However
1. Why would you want to work for such an Employer in any case?
2. Employers want to make money. To do this they need good employees. It's not in their interests to be continually hiring and firing. It's a waste of their time and their money. If they are letting people go then it's usually for a good reason. In other words the cost of employing that person is more than the cost of hiring/training a new person.
If Employers were completely useless it's unlikely that they would have managed to become "Employers" in the first place.
As always, I'd like to provide a counter point (as someone who has sat both sides of the management fence). 1. Why would you want to work for such an Employer in any case?
2. Employers want to make money. To do this they need good employees. It's not in their interests to be continually hiring and firing. It's a waste of their time and their money. If they are letting people go then it's usually for a good reason. In other words the cost of employing that person is more than the cost of hiring/training a new person.
If Employers were completely useless it's unlikely that they would have managed to become "Employers" in the first place.
An awful lot of micro-businesses fluke into becoming employers. Someone starts up doing something rather niche and makes a handsome profit for a few years - I can remember when digital printing was a new thing you could setup and make a fair amount of money while the established players were messing about not quite there. Ditto architects who were early into CAD while a lot of established smaller practices stuck it out with paper. And lots of other examples. Engineering is also often a very project-to-project business, where you win a deal and take on staff but then if you don't get the next deal you have to shed them.
These sorts of micro business general have a dim awareness of legislation (as do the employees!) and even when they have been on the go for a while, it only takes one big contract to go south for them to struggle or fail.
I suspect (guess, really) Lyonspride is working for 5-50 person companies. Maybe 250 at the outside?
johnwilliams77 said:
deckster said:
Roughly translated, we're arsey and we think we know everything. Which, curiously enough, seems be the exact behaviour that you're complaining about from management.
I read it more of a disgruntled employee who has spoken his mind a bit too freely and got burnt. Don't hate the player.People making decisions they're not qualified or experienced enough to make, happens a lot in my field.
But this was the point I was making, in engineering fields they want to replace experience with cheaper younger staff, who won't ask questions and will make really good scapegoats when things go wrong.
Oh and i've been on both sides, seen it all from both angles and i've horrified at how some people will throw good talented people under a bus, just to justify their existence in the business.
lyonspride said:
If you mean pointing out that a course of action is unethical, dangerous and doomed to fail, and then being dragged through disciplinary for a) being right and b) daring to question a "superior", then yes you could say that.
People making decisions they're not qualified or experienced enough to make, happens a lot in my field.
But this was the point I was making, in engineering fields they want to replace experience with cheaper younger staff, who won't ask questions and will make really good scapegoats when things go wrong.
Oh and i've been on both sides, seen it all from both angles and i've horrified at how some people will throw good talented people under a bus, just to justify their existence in the business.
Welcome to the mens club. Don't let it get you down.People making decisions they're not qualified or experienced enough to make, happens a lot in my field.
But this was the point I was making, in engineering fields they want to replace experience with cheaper younger staff, who won't ask questions and will make really good scapegoats when things go wrong.
Oh and i've been on both sides, seen it all from both angles and i've horrified at how some people will throw good talented people under a bus, just to justify their existence in the business.
Countdown said:
"Friendly chat"
Union rep called in
Initial meeting held between management, HR, Union Rep, Individual
Improvement points agreed (timescale of 3 months)
3 months later - meeting postponed due to Union rep unavailable)
1 month later - Individual goes off sick
2 months later - individual raises grievance accusing Director of harassing him while he's off sick
1 month later - rescheduled "performance meeting" takes place. Union argues that performance hasn't improved due to sickness
Union argues that Perf Improvement Plan should be put on hold until Grievance has been resolved.
Separate chain of meetings being held in respect of the company's Disciplinary & Grievance Policy
Grievance not upheld - Mgmt re-instate performance mgmt meetings
Unions argue that timetable needs to be increased
Unions argue that Employee needs further training.
Employee goes off with anxiety and stress
Unions point out that "anxiery and stress" is a recognised disability and that the Employer has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments..
Employee asks to work from home 4 days a week as a reasonable adjustment.
I could go on.....
Christ this sounds like Civil Service/local govt or maybe NHS. Saw this exact sort of thing in the MoD.Union rep called in
Initial meeting held between management, HR, Union Rep, Individual
Improvement points agreed (timescale of 3 months)
3 months later - meeting postponed due to Union rep unavailable)
1 month later - Individual goes off sick
2 months later - individual raises grievance accusing Director of harassing him while he's off sick
1 month later - rescheduled "performance meeting" takes place. Union argues that performance hasn't improved due to sickness
Union argues that Perf Improvement Plan should be put on hold until Grievance has been resolved.
Separate chain of meetings being held in respect of the company's Disciplinary & Grievance Policy
Grievance not upheld - Mgmt re-instate performance mgmt meetings
Unions argue that timetable needs to be increased
Unions argue that Employee needs further training.
Employee goes off with anxiety and stress
Unions point out that "anxiery and stress" is a recognised disability and that the Employer has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments..
Employee asks to work from home 4 days a week as a reasonable adjustment.
I could go on.....
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff