Multiple items on disciplinary hearing
Discussion
Hi,
New to this neck of the woods and im after a little advice.
I got asked to attend a disciplinary hearing, which i did.
The letter set out several complaints, they were...
- Time keeping. Some times and dates were listed. Half of them were completely inaccurate. listing days that i don't even work, or was ill or in training with a room full of people etc...
- Browsing history. Essentially complaining that i visit this site during work hours. EVERYONE browses there own sites during work hours, and most do much more than me!
- Complaints from colleagues. this is the exact phrase used, no other information.
So i defended my self as best i could during the meeting. Blew the false accusations of time keeping out of the water, but only for about half of them as its difficult to retrospectively defend your self unless you can find emails / calender entry's of ware you were etc...
The browsing history, i explained that everyone does it. Asked why i was being singled out.
Complaints from colleagues, had a few extra accusations and info delivered to me during the meeting. Explained that they have just spring it on me and is difficult to defend my self on the spot. The accusations here were very very wishey washy and did not include any complaints or people specifically. (Was around not being approachable, fluctuating customer service etc..)
1 - Can you create a dossier of things to bring some one up for a disciplinary hearing and hope that one of them sticks?
2 - Does the fact i have torn apart there time keeping "Evidence" mean anything? Or will they still try and "do" me for it anyway?
3 - Is there any law stopping you from being singled out for a disciplinary ? Web browsing etc...
Any pointers appreciated, i find out there results tomorrow. My expectation is they will ignore everything i have said and just do me a written warning anyway.
New to this neck of the woods and im after a little advice.
I got asked to attend a disciplinary hearing, which i did.
The letter set out several complaints, they were...
- Time keeping. Some times and dates were listed. Half of them were completely inaccurate. listing days that i don't even work, or was ill or in training with a room full of people etc...
- Browsing history. Essentially complaining that i visit this site during work hours. EVERYONE browses there own sites during work hours, and most do much more than me!
- Complaints from colleagues. this is the exact phrase used, no other information.
So i defended my self as best i could during the meeting. Blew the false accusations of time keeping out of the water, but only for about half of them as its difficult to retrospectively defend your self unless you can find emails / calender entry's of ware you were etc...
The browsing history, i explained that everyone does it. Asked why i was being singled out.
Complaints from colleagues, had a few extra accusations and info delivered to me during the meeting. Explained that they have just spring it on me and is difficult to defend my self on the spot. The accusations here were very very wishey washy and did not include any complaints or people specifically. (Was around not being approachable, fluctuating customer service etc..)
1 - Can you create a dossier of things to bring some one up for a disciplinary hearing and hope that one of them sticks?
2 - Does the fact i have torn apart there time keeping "Evidence" mean anything? Or will they still try and "do" me for it anyway?
3 - Is there any law stopping you from being singled out for a disciplinary ? Web browsing etc...
Any pointers appreciated, i find out there results tomorrow. My expectation is they will ignore everything i have said and just do me a written warning anyway.
That reads as though you are completely innocent (apart from the browsing but even then you don't think it should be an issue) and if so then I'd fight whatever they throw at you.
My thoughts from the above are;
Time keeping: As you say some of the dates/times are inaccurate but what about the others? Are you regularly late?
Browsing: just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean you should and you might not know if it has been brought up with other people.
Complaints: This sounds a bit dubious given your description and like they are just adding to the above from your description but do you feel any of it is true?
I can't help but feel but there is a lot missing from your version of events. When others (not all) come on here with similar issues they tend to include more detail. If there is some truth in all the allegations then it doesn't look good for you because it reads like you don't turn up on time, waste a lot of their time on the internet and don't work to a consistent level when you decide to do something...
My thoughts from the above are;
Time keeping: As you say some of the dates/times are inaccurate but what about the others? Are you regularly late?
Browsing: just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean you should and you might not know if it has been brought up with other people.
Complaints: This sounds a bit dubious given your description and like they are just adding to the above from your description but do you feel any of it is true?
I can't help but feel but there is a lot missing from your version of events. When others (not all) come on here with similar issues they tend to include more detail. If there is some truth in all the allegations then it doesn't look good for you because it reads like you don't turn up on time, waste a lot of their time on the internet and don't work to a consistent level when you decide to do something...
Read this:
http://www.acas.org.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=1043
Not legally binding, but certainly frowned upon by the tribunal if they ignore it.
Timekeeping should really be something that's "nipped in the bud" rather than taken to a full blown disciplinary straight away. Has it been mentioned previously by your manager?
Browser history is a bit of a slam-dunk for them really, and stuck into this disciplinary to make it more damning. You signed the IT agreement; and as the old adage goes, "if everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you follow them?"
Complaints is the interesting one. It strikes me that this is the crux of the disciplinary since the other two things are fairly cut and dried - complaints are very much a subjective matter though, and mean that emotions are often involved.
For a disciplinary about behaviour to be done properly, they have to be a little bit more specific about it than they have been because you are supposed to be able to defend yourself.
That would mean they really do need to let you know the nature of the complaint, basically a witness statement from the person who is grumbling detailing what was said. They'll claim data protection or some such bulls
t when you ask but since you were presumably in the room when the things were said there isn't any data protection issue.
One other thing I would ask for is your HR file. You'll need to make a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act, which will cost (up to) £10. You will likely find it quite useful as there are usually quite a lot of interesting things in there.
http://www.acas.org.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=1043
Not legally binding, but certainly frowned upon by the tribunal if they ignore it.
Timekeeping should really be something that's "nipped in the bud" rather than taken to a full blown disciplinary straight away. Has it been mentioned previously by your manager?
Browser history is a bit of a slam-dunk for them really, and stuck into this disciplinary to make it more damning. You signed the IT agreement; and as the old adage goes, "if everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you follow them?"
Complaints is the interesting one. It strikes me that this is the crux of the disciplinary since the other two things are fairly cut and dried - complaints are very much a subjective matter though, and mean that emotions are often involved.
For a disciplinary about behaviour to be done properly, they have to be a little bit more specific about it than they have been because you are supposed to be able to defend yourself.
That would mean they really do need to let you know the nature of the complaint, basically a witness statement from the person who is grumbling detailing what was said. They'll claim data protection or some such bulls
t when you ask but since you were presumably in the room when the things were said there isn't any data protection issue. One other thing I would ask for is your HR file. You'll need to make a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act, which will cost (up to) £10. You will likely find it quite useful as there are usually quite a lot of interesting things in there.
My views, as someone who used to be in Senior Management positions, responsible for hiring, contracts, disciplinaries, misconduct meetings and dismissals:
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
Even then, there are very few accusations which can result in 'immediate' dismissal. The main ones would be things like theft, fighting and assault, severe sexual harrassment, etc.
But the company and the employee are posturing and on shaky ground, in the absence of a clear employment contract and terms of employment. This is the key, for both parties. If you haven't been given, read, understood and willingly signed terms with the company upon commencement of employment, then it would be ard for a company to enforce a disciplinary matter, and further if they did dismiss you, then you have good grounds for defence at an employment tribunal.
To comment specifically on the points you raise:
Time keeping: The company should have clear, indisputable evidence of continuous flagrant breaches. Even then, they should be able to demonstrate, before dismissal, that you have had warnings to this effect. The usual procedure is a verbal warning (with written confirmation), then a written warning next time, then a final written warning. One further example can lead to dismissal without further forum.
Complaints: Can be difficult for a company. Unsubstantiated complaints from other employees can often be difficult to engage with and enforce. Again, would require sound evidence - an email trail, or witnesses willing to back up the complaint. But again, unless it was gross misconduct, the normal warning procedure will apply.
Browsing: This one might be totally impossible for the company to enforce, or it may be your death knell. And that depends upon whether you had an electronic communications policy given to you at the beginning of employment, which you were asked to read and sign. If you didn't receive one (or there's nothing about it in your terms) then they have no chance. Your assertation that 'everyone else does it' is no defence, but if 'everyone else' including you have never had an electronic communications clause to sign, then the company can go fish.
However, if you have signed a policy which forbids use for anything other than work use, and they have browsing data to the contrary, then you are fked.
Good luck anyway, might be useful if you can comment upon the things I have written about?
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
Even then, there are very few accusations which can result in 'immediate' dismissal. The main ones would be things like theft, fighting and assault, severe sexual harrassment, etc.
But the company and the employee are posturing and on shaky ground, in the absence of a clear employment contract and terms of employment. This is the key, for both parties. If you haven't been given, read, understood and willingly signed terms with the company upon commencement of employment, then it would be ard for a company to enforce a disciplinary matter, and further if they did dismiss you, then you have good grounds for defence at an employment tribunal.
To comment specifically on the points you raise:
Time keeping: The company should have clear, indisputable evidence of continuous flagrant breaches. Even then, they should be able to demonstrate, before dismissal, that you have had warnings to this effect. The usual procedure is a verbal warning (with written confirmation), then a written warning next time, then a final written warning. One further example can lead to dismissal without further forum.
Complaints: Can be difficult for a company. Unsubstantiated complaints from other employees can often be difficult to engage with and enforce. Again, would require sound evidence - an email trail, or witnesses willing to back up the complaint. But again, unless it was gross misconduct, the normal warning procedure will apply.
Browsing: This one might be totally impossible for the company to enforce, or it may be your death knell. And that depends upon whether you had an electronic communications policy given to you at the beginning of employment, which you were asked to read and sign. If you didn't receive one (or there's nothing about it in your terms) then they have no chance. Your assertation that 'everyone else does it' is no defence, but if 'everyone else' including you have never had an electronic communications clause to sign, then the company can go fish.
However, if you have signed a policy which forbids use for anything other than work use, and they have browsing data to the contrary, then you are f
ked.Good luck anyway, might be useful if you can comment upon the things I have written about?
Ray Luxury-Yacht said:
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
What's the significance of 12 months?2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
Ray Luxury-Yacht said:
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
What's the significance of 12 months?
davepoth said:
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
Ray Luxury-Yacht said:
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
What's the significance of 12 months?
Thanks for the responses so far.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
Prizam said:
Thanks for the responses so far.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
74.5 hours...
and somebody is questioning your time keeping?
davepoth said:
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
Ray Luxury-Yacht said:
The fact is, if you're in a job for less than 12 months, it can be a difficult task to defend a disciplinary and dismissal. Over 12 months, you have a more robust position, and the accusations have to be pretty solid, combined with good evidence.
What's the significance of 12 months?
This is all the kind of thing that st me to tears and caused me to make the change!2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
You can fight...
...but if they want you out then it'll happen. Is there an underlying reason do you think?
Yes, without sounding like im blowing my own trumpet.. im good at what i do. ...but if they want you out then it'll happen. Is there an underlying reason do you think?
And upper management are not good at there jobs. I tell them something is about to go wrong and cost us money. Thay ignore it. Things go wrong and cost us money. Thay then look foolish.
There morals have also been brought in to question by me at least once. Massive data leeks. that are almost to the scale of the Sony / eBay fiasco.
I told them to fix it and then fess up. Thay told me to hold my toung and keep it all hush hush. Which i have done.
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
Prizam said:
Thanks for the responses so far.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
To try and answer a few questions...
I have been there just over 4 years
The time keeping... I am not always at my desk when i am supposed to start but i do way way more hours than i am contracted for. 74.5 hours last week. Contracted for 37.5 hours. I also don't usually take a lunch break.
Web browsing - I have a signed counterpart to my contract that allows me to pretty much do what i want so long as it is inline with my job. I guess Pistonheads is not inline with my job. The acceptable usage policy states i can use the internet for personal stuff so long as it does not get in the way of my job. So far the acceptable usage policy has not been mentioned.
Complaints - i don't think anything official has been brought forwards, otherwise they would say. right? As i read it, its just something else to pack in.
To me, there main issue was time keeping. Whilst some of the times and dates they submitted might be accurate, around 50% of them definitely are not. and can be proved.
God shout on the HR file, might be worth a poke.
74.5 hours...
and somebody is questioning your time keeping?
Prizam said:
Their morals have also been brought in to question by me at least once. Massive data leaks. that are almost on the scale of the Sony / eBay fiasco.
I told them to fix it and then fess up. They told me to hold my tongue and keep it all hush hush. Which I have done.
Sounds to me like you could suggest to them that if they want to follow this through you feel you may have to turn whistle blower - maybe?I told them to fix it and then fess up. They told me to hold my tongue and keep it all hush hush. Which I have done.
I wouldn't go down that route just yet. If the OP does feel like he's being pushed out then you need to be whiter than white for a while. If that means turning up at your desk on time, not using PH during work time and being as nice as pie to any and everyone then so be it. One thing I wouldn't do is unpaid overtime. If they want to be arsey, you can be too. Take your lunch. You're not paid for it and legally entitled to it but be on time.
If they do push you out, it might then be prudent before hand to backup emails about the companies data leaks, BCC yourself into any emails etc. Could mean a wee payoff if you mention the Data Commissioner.
If they do push you out, it might then be prudent before hand to backup emails about the companies data leaks, BCC yourself into any emails etc. Could mean a wee payoff if you mention the Data Commissioner.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff