Gross misconduct
Discussion
A relative has got a gross misconduct hearing in the near future, and has asked me if I will go with them to it.
Now there is no union or works council, and he does not think any of his co-workers would be interested in going with him to this "meeting".
It is my thought that relatives are not allowed is this correct??
The thing is I do not want to get involved in any off this unless there is no option.
Any advice from the great fount of PH knowledge would be welcome.
Now there is no union or works council, and he does not think any of his co-workers would be interested in going with him to this "meeting".
It is my thought that relatives are not allowed is this correct??
The thing is I do not want to get involved in any off this unless there is no option.
Any advice from the great fount of PH knowledge would be welcome.
I'm not an expert in employment law..... Just an employer.
Gross misconduct is a serious charge and can be used for instant dismissal. As for recording proceedings, that sounds a bit heavy handed. I'm not sure if they're entitled to do it, they probably are.
Does he have a formal contract of employment? Any info in there on procedure?
Gross misconduct is a serious charge and can be used for instant dismissal. As for recording proceedings, that sounds a bit heavy handed. I'm not sure if they're entitled to do it, they probably are.
Does he have a formal contract of employment? Any info in there on procedure?
He has a contract but as he is suspended cannot get at the company intranet? to show me it.
They are on a very sticky wicket as they do not have 2 years in, as per the latest change for unfair dismissal, and have I think, annoyed the "new" company that came in, by asking for a rise and further training that was promised etc.
They are on a very sticky wicket as they do not have 2 years in, as per the latest change for unfair dismissal, and have I think, annoyed the "new" company that came in, by asking for a rise and further training that was promised etc.
I don't see why you wouldn't be allowed to be there and I think recording it will be a good idea.
The company will have a supposedly impartial HR person there who will make notes. Usually this is down to their interpretation and speed of writing / typing. Which may be for several reasons different to yours.
Recording it could help everyone.
The company will have a supposedly impartial HR person there who will make notes. Usually this is down to their interpretation and speed of writing / typing. Which may be for several reasons different to yours.
Recording it could help everyone.
If employment started before 6/4/12 only 1 year service needed.
Statutory right to be accompanied restricted to colleagues and union reps/officials. Contract may entitle friends.
Ask employer to record meeting or for permission to record. Covert recordings might cause difficulties for the employee at Tribunal if a claim is made.
Statutory right to be accompanied restricted to colleagues and union reps/officials. Contract may entitle friends.
Ask employer to record meeting or for permission to record. Covert recordings might cause difficulties for the employee at Tribunal if a claim is made.
SLCZ3 said:
A relative has got a gross misconduct hearing in the near future, and has asked me if I will go with them to it.
Now there is no union or works council, and he does not think any of his co-workers would be interested in going with him to this "meeting".
It is my thought that relatives are not allowed is this correct??
The thing is I do not want to get involved in any off this unless there is no option.
Any advice from the great fount of PH knowledge would be welcome.
The only restriction on the 'friend' you can take is usually that they aren't a FELIX/ Solicitor /Barrister, primarily because the HR subject matter expert for both the 'prosecution' and the panel will be HR personnel and not lawyers... Now there is no union or works council, and he does not think any of his co-workers would be interested in going with him to this "meeting".
It is my thought that relatives are not allowed is this correct??
The thing is I do not want to get involved in any off this unless there is no option.
Any advice from the great fount of PH knowledge would be welcome.
There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 9th November 18:23
mph1977 said:
The only restriction on the 'friend' you can take is usually that they aren't a FELIX/ Solicitor /Barrister, primarily because the HR subject matter expert for both the 'prosecution' and the panel will be HR personnel and not lawyers...
There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
No.There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 9th November 18:23
You are only entitled to take in a colleague or a union rep, unless specifically allowed in the company procedures there is no entitlement to take in anyone else. So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed.
Try reading this
Zeeky said:
If employment started before 6/4/12 only 1 year service needed.
Statutory right to be accompanied restricted to colleagues and union reps/officials. Contract may entitle friends.
Ask employer to record meeting or for permission to record. Covert recordings might cause difficulties for the employee at Tribunal if a claim is made.
I'm going with this.Statutory right to be accompanied restricted to colleagues and union reps/officials. Contract may entitle friends.
Ask employer to record meeting or for permission to record. Covert recordings might cause difficulties for the employee at Tribunal if a claim is made.
A 'note taker' may well be present to minute the proceedings.
I believe (note, believe) that recordings are only allowed if agreed by both sides/parties.
Your relative should have been made aware of what the gross misconduct is (alleged to be) - I don't think it is seen as reasonable to let them go into the meeting "blind"
Siscar said:
mph1977 said:
The only restriction on the 'friend' you can take is usually that they aren't a FELIX/ Solicitor /Barrister, primarily because the HR subject matter expert for both the 'prosecution' and the panel will be HR personnel and not lawyers...
There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
No.There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 9th November 18:23
You are only entitled to take in a colleague or a union rep, unless specifically allowed in the company procedures there is no entitlement to take in anyone else. So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed.
Try reading this
"If a colleague can’t go with you and you’re not in the union you can ask to bring a family member or a Citizens Advice Bureau worker. However, your employer doesn’t have to agree to this unless your employment contract says they must."
so your statement " So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed." is inaccurate
mph1977 said:
Siscar said:
mph1977 said:
The only restriction on the 'friend' you can take is usually that they aren't a FELIX/ Solicitor /Barrister, primarily because the HR subject matter expert for both the 'prosecution' and the panel will be HR personnel and not lawyers...
There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
No.There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 9th November 18:23
You are only entitled to take in a colleague or a union rep, unless specifically allowed in the company procedures there is no entitlement to take in anyone else. So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed.
Try reading this
"If a colleague can’t go with you and you’re not in the union you can ask to bring a family member or a Citizens Advice Bureau worker. However, your employer doesn’t have to agree to this unless your employment contract says they must."
so your statement " So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed." is inaccurate
All the comment about taking your friend or relative is fine, but - as I said - unless specifically allowed in the company procedures you aren't allowed to take one in with you. Of course you can ask that you take in a friend or a relative or a solicitor or anyone else and you can ask that they witness or speak on your behalf, but in the absence of your request being granted you aren't allowed to do it.
Siscar said:
mph1977 said:
Siscar said:
mph1977 said:
The only restriction on the 'friend' you can take is usually that they aren't a FELIX/ Solicitor /Barrister, primarily because the HR subject matter expert for both the 'prosecution' and the panel will be HR personnel and not lawyers...
There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
No.There is no reason why someone who is acting as a friend in such a hearing can;t be a relative.
the main difference between a.n.other randomer ( including relatives) and a accredited TU representative is that the 'friend' will generally not be allowed to speak except to clarify questions , where a TU rep may be allowed more freedom in making representation and asking questions.
with regard to the recording issue , HR may well record the meeting for the very reasons suggested and it;s cheaper to record it rather than have a suitably fast shorthand / transcriber present
Edited by mph1977 on Saturday 9th November 18:23
You are only entitled to take in a colleague or a union rep, unless specifically allowed in the company procedures there is no entitlement to take in anyone else. So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed.
Try reading this
"If a colleague can’t go with you and you’re not in the union you can ask to bring a family member or a Citizens Advice Bureau worker. However, your employer doesn’t have to agree to this unless your employment contract says they must."
so your statement " So friends and relatives, legal reps, anyone else are not allowed." is inaccurate
All the comment about taking your friend or relative is fine, but - as I said - unless specifically allowed in the company procedures you aren't allowed to take one in with you. Of course you can ask that you take in a friend or a relative or a solicitor or anyone else and you can ask that they witness or speak on your behalf, but in the absence of your request being granted you aren't allowed to do it.
who did he take the evidence gathering meeting ?
Edited by mph1977 on Sunday 10th November 16:25
mph1977 said:
wehat is gained by the employer from not allowing it - unless it's to exclude a Brief ... who are usually explicitly excluded anyway because there are TU employed / retained Briefs ...
who did he take the evidence gathering meeting ?
A good TU rep is very good to have there, from the employers perspective, but it can be a nightmare if they bring in someone who who doesn't understand the process. I sat in on one where the employee brought her dad who also was her colleague, one minute he was trying to protect her, the next he was angry with her at her behaviour, the one thing he wasn't was a witness who kept quiet.who did he take the evidence gathering meeting ?
Edited by mph1977 on Sunday 10th November 16:25
Then there was an employee who wanted to bring in a friend who had a law degree and a reputation for giving everyone around them bad advice on anything vaguely legal. She eventually persuaded that employee to take us to tribunal where she lost comprehensively.
From an employer perspective there is no upside to letting them bring someone with them, just make sure that there is a good witness there who is independent in case it does end up at tribunal and you need your version of events backing up.
SLCZ3 said:
He has a contract but as he is suspended cannot get at the company intranet? to show me it.
They are on a very sticky wicket as they do not have 2 years in, as per the latest change for unfair dismissal, and have I think, annoyed the "new" company that came in, by asking for a rise and further training that was promised etc.
Were they TUPEd across when the new company took over? If so I think their previous service counts as continuous employment. If the company don't inform them in good time of what they are accused of and supply a copy of the contract on demand they are just making any subsequent ET more likely to go against them.They are on a very sticky wicket as they do not have 2 years in, as per the latest change for unfair dismissal, and have I think, annoyed the "new" company that came in, by asking for a rise and further training that was promised etc.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff