Unfair disimissal???
Discussion
Hi all I just wanted a third party view on this and thought PH would be my first port of call! I was talking with a friend late last night (Mr Baker ;-) ) who was recently dismissed from work, from what he said the boss and him hadn’t seen eye to eye for ages etc.
To cut a long story short he feels that on one particular day the workload given to him was unachievable within the time frame. I think he said about 2 days worth of work to be done in 1 day, bearing in mind he had to leave work that day at 6 to catch a flight so couldn’t stay late like normal. He said he did what he could in priority order. Due to this work not being competed on is return his boss said he’d have to go to a hearing about his performance etc.
He made a case in his defence for the hearing pretty much stating the above about too much work, and even got a colleague to give a good estimate at how long all the work would take, which was nearly 2 days worth of work but felt life the information fell on deaf ears. In the hearing meeting was his boss and an ‘independent’ lady from HR. He said to them at the time he was fighting a lost cause as his boss appeared to be the judge jury and executioner in the whole ordeal.
Any way Mr Barker (the sneaky devil) recorded the entire thing on his phone unknowingly to the boss and HR lady. He mentioned that when he was expressing his views as to why things were the way they were the HR lady who was taking minutes wasn’t writing every thing but just simply writing a yes / no answer! (Personally I think this is mega wrong, as surely it’s these minutes which will be reviewed as to the eventual out come!?) He doesn't have a copy of the minutes to review as I said he should do this and compare it to what was actually said to find discrepancies.
There was also a part where Mr Baker left the room for the boss and HR lady to review the documents he put together, but left his phone in the room which meant we could listen back to what they were saying, and I have to admit, it sounds like this HR woman is most definitely on the side of his boss, not a third party independent.
Eventual outcome, Mr Baker went in the next day and was handed a letter - lost his job but it wasn’t stated in the dismissal letter as to why he had lost it, and going from his contract of employment you can only be dismissed for gross miss conduct, and I cant see how on earth GMC has been carried out here.
Does any one have any thoughts on the above as I feel he has a case for , 1. the minutes not being word for word, 2.collusion between the boss and HR lady, 3. his evidence falling on deaf ears and 4. being dismissed without it specifically stating in breach of GMC.
Any ways I wish him all the best in finding a new job, I think he was glad to get out but annoyed his reference for the last year has been screwed up, thanks ya’ll!
To cut a long story short he feels that on one particular day the workload given to him was unachievable within the time frame. I think he said about 2 days worth of work to be done in 1 day, bearing in mind he had to leave work that day at 6 to catch a flight so couldn’t stay late like normal. He said he did what he could in priority order. Due to this work not being competed on is return his boss said he’d have to go to a hearing about his performance etc.
He made a case in his defence for the hearing pretty much stating the above about too much work, and even got a colleague to give a good estimate at how long all the work would take, which was nearly 2 days worth of work but felt life the information fell on deaf ears. In the hearing meeting was his boss and an ‘independent’ lady from HR. He said to them at the time he was fighting a lost cause as his boss appeared to be the judge jury and executioner in the whole ordeal.
Any way Mr Barker (the sneaky devil) recorded the entire thing on his phone unknowingly to the boss and HR lady. He mentioned that when he was expressing his views as to why things were the way they were the HR lady who was taking minutes wasn’t writing every thing but just simply writing a yes / no answer! (Personally I think this is mega wrong, as surely it’s these minutes which will be reviewed as to the eventual out come!?) He doesn't have a copy of the minutes to review as I said he should do this and compare it to what was actually said to find discrepancies.
There was also a part where Mr Baker left the room for the boss and HR lady to review the documents he put together, but left his phone in the room which meant we could listen back to what they were saying, and I have to admit, it sounds like this HR woman is most definitely on the side of his boss, not a third party independent.
Eventual outcome, Mr Baker went in the next day and was handed a letter - lost his job but it wasn’t stated in the dismissal letter as to why he had lost it, and going from his contract of employment you can only be dismissed for gross miss conduct, and I cant see how on earth GMC has been carried out here.
Does any one have any thoughts on the above as I feel he has a case for , 1. the minutes not being word for word, 2.collusion between the boss and HR lady, 3. his evidence falling on deaf ears and 4. being dismissed without it specifically stating in breach of GMC.
Any ways I wish him all the best in finding a new job, I think he was glad to get out but annoyed his reference for the last year has been screwed up, thanks ya’ll!
Isn't there a documented disciplinary procedure which should be followed, ie verbal warning, written warning, final warning etc, and also an appeal procedure. I wouldn't have thought not achieving a days workload would be considered an act of gross misconduct and lead to an immediate sacking.
singlecoil said:
I shouldn't think the secret recording could possibly be used as evidsence, and why would anyone think that someone working in HR should be independent?
Oh but it can be used as evidence he should type out a transcript from the recording , keep the recording , and when the case goes to tribunal(if it gets that far) the other side will have to either agree the transcript or have the recording heard by the tribunal.
SeanyD said:
Isn't there a documented disciplinary procedure which should be followed, ie verbal warning, written warning, final warning etc, and also an appeal procedure. I wouldn't have thought not achieving a days workload would be considered an act of gross misconduct and lead to an immediate sacking.
Not sure on this one, Ill have to check. I would think that there should be procedures in place which must be followed!Odie said:
For a start he should forget about the recording but perhaps he should type up what he 'remembers' from the meeting as his own form of minutes.
Sounds like he has a case.
Would you mind expanding on what the difference between having a recording and a typed up version of events, or is it just so its in a 'hard copy' form? On what grounds do you think he may have a case, prcedures not being followed?? many thanksSounds like he has a case.
dingg said:
Oh but it can be used as evidence
he should type out a transcript from the recording , keep the recording , and when the case goes to tribunal(if it gets that far) the other side will have to either agree the transcript or have the recording heard by the tribunal.
Could he not go in at the angle that the minutes they have written down are inaccurate therefore cannot be used to dismiss him?? (Picked that up from the good wife!) ;-Dhe should type out a transcript from the recording , keep the recording , and when the case goes to tribunal(if it gets that far) the other side will have to either agree the transcript or have the recording heard by the tribunal.
motorbreath said:
Odie said:
For a start he should forget about the recording but perhaps he should type up what he 'remembers' from the meeting as his own form of minutes.
Sounds like he has a case.
Would you mind expanding on what the difference between having a recording and a typed up version of events, or is it just so its in a 'hard copy' form? On what grounds do you think he may have a case, prcedures not being followed?? many thanksSounds like he has a case.
also http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/RedundancyA...
"What is unfair dismissal
There are several ways your dismissal could be unfair:
your employer does not have a fair reason for dismissing you (eg if there was nothing wrong with your job performance)
your employer did not follow the correct process when dismissing you (eg if the have not followed their company dismissal processes)"
was procedure followed? the procedure should be based on this - http://www.acas.org.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=1041
"I think it was 10 months or so."
Then, in short, there is probably little he can do as unfair dismissal protection does not kick-in until 12-months (and now rising to 24 months). I'm sure others will be along to point-out that there are some exceptions to this (race, sex etc. discrimination) but nothing you have said indicates that any of these would apply. I'm assuming he was on a 1-month notice period, if not, he could argue an unfair dismissal claim if his notice period plus his service took him over one year.
Was he paid his notice period? If so, they have just terminated the contract by giving notice and not for gross misconduct (where no notice would be given/paid). If they have not given notice he could sue for breach of contract, but I would question if this is really worth it as all he would be recovering would be his notice period.
Sacking someone just before they hit the unfair dismissal protection is a move many companies will use if they perceive that an employee will not work out for some reason. Tough but perfectly legal.
Having seen first-hand dismissed employees try to use secret recordings in tribunals I can tell you that tribunals do not like this and it will probably turn the panel against the claimant, regardless of if they let him use it as evidence.
I think he should move on....
Then, in short, there is probably little he can do as unfair dismissal protection does not kick-in until 12-months (and now rising to 24 months). I'm sure others will be along to point-out that there are some exceptions to this (race, sex etc. discrimination) but nothing you have said indicates that any of these would apply. I'm assuming he was on a 1-month notice period, if not, he could argue an unfair dismissal claim if his notice period plus his service took him over one year.
Was he paid his notice period? If so, they have just terminated the contract by giving notice and not for gross misconduct (where no notice would be given/paid). If they have not given notice he could sue for breach of contract, but I would question if this is really worth it as all he would be recovering would be his notice period.
Sacking someone just before they hit the unfair dismissal protection is a move many companies will use if they perceive that an employee will not work out for some reason. Tough but perfectly legal.
Having seen first-hand dismissed employees try to use secret recordings in tribunals I can tell you that tribunals do not like this and it will probably turn the panel against the claimant, regardless of if they let him use it as evidence.
I think he should move on....
WhereamI said:
If he was only employed for 10 months then it's all pretty irrelevant, he is an unprotected employee who can be dismissed, you can't claim unfair dismissal until you have worked for the company for a year (or two years if employment started on or after 6th April this year).
Ah I see, that clears that one up! I think maybe they were aware of that and took advantage. TBH if things weren't working out with his boss then its probably best to jump ship, shame about the 10 month blob on his cv though. Not sure if he would get away with not using them as a reference, I should think that would put off potential employers?HappySilver said:
"I think it was 10 months or so."
Was he paid his notice period? If so, they have just terminated the contract by giving notice and not for gross misconduct (where no notice would be given/paid). If they have not given notice he could sue for breach of contract, but I would question if this is really worth it as all he would be recovering would be his notice period.
He said he was on one months notice with garden leave so is sat at home being paid at present. Thinking about it he signed his contract of employment in Feb 2011, but didnt actually start working until 2nd May 2011, so going by the later he would of been 1 day shy of a years employment! lol I think they knew what they were doing!Was he paid his notice period? If so, they have just terminated the contract by giving notice and not for gross misconduct (where no notice would be given/paid). If they have not given notice he could sue for breach of contract, but I would question if this is really worth it as all he would be recovering would be his notice period.
HappySilver said:
I think he should move on....
My thoughts as well! 
HappySilver said:
Sacking someone just before they hit the unfair dismissal protection is a move many companies will use if they perceive that an employee will not work out for some reason. Tough but perfectly legal.
It is the latest refuge of a number of ****ishly inclined employers it would appear.Take someone on for £xpa on the promise that after a year they will get a pay rise to £x+a few K as they have agreed to a much lower than normal salary to make sure that they are still in work and hey it’s going to be closer to what they should be o in a year anyway...
Use them like a dog for the first 8 or 9 months to get all your systems up to date, H&S sorted and generally reverse all the f
k ups of bad or no management or real operations management for the last 4 or 5 years. Get all the protocols and so on in place and generally make things work.Then trump out a reason to kick them out the door before they have any protection.
At least people who only hand out fixed term contracts are straight about it.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff