Can An Employer Search My 17 Year Old?
Discussion
Here for a bit of advice regarding my 17 year old son. He works as till staff/shelf stacker for one of the national supermarkets. He says the store has a big problem with shoplifting, but refuse to employ a security guard. Staff are expected to challenge shoplifters, but none of them do as they are well aware of the risks involved.
This has led the shop to have a large shortfall when it comes to stock audit time. The manager, who is pretty useless, has decided that the staff must also be on the take (both stock and cash). She has today searched three random staff members, and their vehicles (but found nothing). She did not search my son today. She did however pull him into the office and say the biggest cash loss is on weekends (when he works). The cash loss is on a particular till, on which he very rarely works. He said it felt very much like she was implying the he was responsible in some way, without specifically accusing him.
I know 100% that he is not responsible for the theft of the goods or cash. My question is what are his rights regarding being searched by his manager? Especially as he is not classed as an adult. I have told him that if his manager wants to search him he should tell her that if she suspects him of theft then she should call the police, and that she is not to touch him. Obviously this is a bit intimidating for a 17 year old, so I was hoping somebody could give me a definitive answer so we know where he stands.
This has led the shop to have a large shortfall when it comes to stock audit time. The manager, who is pretty useless, has decided that the staff must also be on the take (both stock and cash). She has today searched three random staff members, and their vehicles (but found nothing). She did not search my son today. She did however pull him into the office and say the biggest cash loss is on weekends (when he works). The cash loss is on a particular till, on which he very rarely works. He said it felt very much like she was implying the he was responsible in some way, without specifically accusing him.
I know 100% that he is not responsible for the theft of the goods or cash. My question is what are his rights regarding being searched by his manager? Especially as he is not classed as an adult. I have told him that if his manager wants to search him he should tell her that if she suspects him of theft then she should call the police, and that she is not to touch him. Obviously this is a bit intimidating for a 17 year old, so I was hoping somebody could give me a definitive answer so we know where he stands.
Your son needs to consent to the search, unless of course it’s in a signed contract, in which case he has already consented.
He can withdraw that consent, but then may be in breach of contract.
I’d suggest the call the cops option is reasonable.
I’m surprised with till logs and CCTV that the store can’t narrow this down.
He can withdraw that consent, but then may be in breach of contract.
I’d suggest the call the cops option is reasonable.
I’m surprised with till logs and CCTV that the store can’t narrow this down.
There’ll probably be a bag search clause in the contract but it’ll specify what they’re allowed to search and I’d be surprised if it extends to personal searches and cars.
I’d maybe query the manager’s instruction with HR, see if it’s official or someone worried about their target going overboard.
I’d maybe query the manager’s instruction with HR, see if it’s official or someone worried about their target going overboard.
Rough101 said:
Your son needs to consent to the search, unless of course it’s in a signed contract, in which case he has already consented.
He can withdraw that consent, but then may be in breach of contract.
I’d suggest the call the cops option is reasonable.
I’m surprised with till logs and CCTV that the store can’t narrow this down.
I have just gone through his contract of employment. There is no mention of being searched.He can withdraw that consent, but then may be in breach of contract.
I’d suggest the call the cops option is reasonable.
I’m surprised with till logs and CCTV that the store can’t narrow this down.
There have been discrepancies on the till when he was on it, but this was basically due to him pressing the wrong buttons (thanks to a lack of training by the company).
With regards to the CCTV, I agree. It should be fairly simple for the manager to go through it and find the culprit. However she is incredibly lazy, and it feels to me like she is randomly targeting staff because she has no evidence, in the hope that someone will either fess up or stop stealing.
Monkeylegend said:
Are these searches carried out with witnesses or is she doing them with with only the employee present?
She sounds like the type not to be trusted in a one on one situation.
Incredibly the searches she carried out were on the shop floor with customers present!She sounds like the type not to be trusted in a one on one situation.
I don’t trust her one bit, which is why I told him to insist on the police being called if she insists on him being searched.
Vroom101 said:
Monkeylegend said:
Are these searches carried out with witnesses or is she doing them with with only the employee present?
She sounds like the type not to be trusted in a one on one situation.
Incredibly the searches she carried out were on the shop floor with customers present!She sounds like the type not to be trusted in a one on one situation.
I don’t trust her one bit, which is why I told him to insist on the police being called if she insists on him being searched.
In this day and age you have to log into the till you are using, so it should be fairly obvious who’s on the fiddle, it is also possible that the manager is the one fiddling, and setting the staff up for the fall. As for the search? As said, ask for the police if she has doubts, she has no right to search anyone.
CoolHands said:
Tell him just to refuse, then it’s up to her what she does next. She will probably give it a bit of baloney and let him leave without doing anything. Doubt she even has the authority to sack him.
From what I can work out (assuming all the staff have the same contract) the searches she has carried out are on thin ice legally. It’s only because the staff didn’t kick up a fuss and refuse that she was able to carry out the searches. gazza285 said:
In this day and age you have to log into the till you are using, so it should be fairly obvious who’s on the fiddle, it is also possible that the manager is the one fiddling, and setting the staff up for the fall. As for the search? As said, ask for the police if she has doubts, she has no right to search anyone.
Who knows if she’s on the fiddle. All I do know is that she is ignorant, lazy and incompetent. I'd be a little bit careful - my employer handbook has some random clause where I need to consent to searches. I'm pretty sure, knowing what the company was like at the time it was done (I joined it as a founder employee with equity- we're doing excellently now thanks... like really f
king brilliantly 
) it will have been copied and pasted as a "standard" handbook.
Specifically, it says - and I 100% guarantee this was not a considered decision by anyone at our place* - that:
*Indeed if you google how this starts it ends up with some random nursery in Brighton - so definitely boilerplate from somewhere
king brilliantly ) it will have been copied and pasted as a "standard" handbook.Specifically, it says - and I 100% guarantee this was not a considered decision by anyone at our place* - that:
SWF's handbook said:
The Company may reasonably request to search employees’ clothing,
personal baggage or vehicles. An authorised member of management in the
presence of an independent witness must conduct any such search. Should
an employee refuse such a request, the Company will require the appropriate
authorities to conduct the search on behalf of the Company. An employee’s
failure to co-operate with the Company in this respect may be treated as
gross misconduct. Any search undertaken will not prejudice or target any one
individual.
Employees are solely responsible for the safety of their personal possessions
on Company premises and should ensure that their personal possessions are
kept in a safe place at all times.
Should an employee find an item of personal property on the premises he or
she is required to inform management immediately.
So your son should probs check what it says now, to understand the company's perspective as to this sort of thing.personal baggage or vehicles. An authorised member of management in the
presence of an independent witness must conduct any such search. Should
an employee refuse such a request, the Company will require the appropriate
authorities to conduct the search on behalf of the Company. An employee’s
failure to co-operate with the Company in this respect may be treated as
gross misconduct. Any search undertaken will not prejudice or target any one
individual.
Employees are solely responsible for the safety of their personal possessions
on Company premises and should ensure that their personal possessions are
kept in a safe place at all times.
Should an employee find an item of personal property on the premises he or
she is required to inform management immediately.
*Indeed if you google how this starts it ends up with some random nursery in Brighton - so definitely boilerplate from somewhere
Oh also he should join USDAW and ask their advice, assuming he's intending to be there more than a couple of months. PHers may hate unions but that's cause they don't understand being a lowly peon at these sorts of places. While it's a better idea to not be a lowly peon, while you are one you should be in a union fosho. A lot of them come with pizza express vouchers etc so can break even anyway.
Somewhatfoolish said:
So your son should probs check what it says now, to understand the company's perspective as to this sort of thing.
I have gone through his contract myself, and nowhere does it say anything about being searched. Somewhatfoolish said:
Oh also he should join USDAW and ask their advice, assuming he's intending to be there more than a couple of months. PHers may hate unions but that's cause they don't understand being a lowly peon at these sorts of places. While it's a better idea to not be a lowly peon, while you are one you should be in a union fosho. A lot of them come with pizza express vouchers etc so can break even anyway.
That’s worth thinking about, thanks. Hopefully he will be off to uni later in the year, so won’t be at this supermarket any more. I have the luxury of being in a union, so am aware of the benefits it affords. hidetheelephants said:
Someone other than the police searching a child without the consent of a guardian or parent? Seems legit.
That’s kind of my thinking. I suspect she is very ignorant of the law. However when you’re a teenager in a lowly position like that, it can be hard to stand up for your rights, especially in the heat of the moment. I had this when working at Tesco. Nothing in the contract but in the employee handbook.
It wasn’t a physical search but just empty your pockets. When we left via the staff entrance/exit we pressed the button to leave and it randomly selected if you needed a search. Again just empty your pocket type thing.
They could do ‘random’ searches. It was always two managers. You could ask for it to be someone else (IE if it was two females you could ask for it to be a male) and go somewhere else. They never did it on the shop floor though in public. It also extended to cars and lockers if they had reason to (i was there for almost 12 years and heard of it happening once).
It’s not a big thing. It’s a preventative measure.
It wasn’t a physical search but just empty your pockets. When we left via the staff entrance/exit we pressed the button to leave and it randomly selected if you needed a search. Again just empty your pocket type thing.
They could do ‘random’ searches. It was always two managers. You could ask for it to be someone else (IE if it was two females you could ask for it to be a male) and go somewhere else. They never did it on the shop floor though in public. It also extended to cars and lockers if they had reason to (i was there for almost 12 years and heard of it happening once).
It’s not a big thing. It’s a preventative measure.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff