Discussion
Friend has been dismissed from her job for gross negligence. She has appealed this decision and her solicitor says that the circumstances do not amount to gross negligence, at worst meriting a warning and an appeal is likely to succeed. However the process will take time, especially if the company denies the initial appeal and it ends up in an employment tribunal.
She would like to apply for other jobs as soon as possible. How should she explain why she left in an interview, and what should she do if the new job asks for a reference?
She would like to apply for other jobs as soon as possible. How should she explain why she left in an interview, and what should she do if the new job asks for a reference?
I was sacked for gross miss-conduct some time ago. I took my employers to tribunal and the decision went 50/50 in that I was guilty of miss-conduct but that I was unfairly dismissed.
I have spoken to many HR people since and they have all agreed that I wasn't guilty of miss-conduct but that doesn't change what was decided by ACAS!
Anyway, I have never lied about what happened to new future employers and told them exactly what happened to get me sacked but I generally leave out the 50/50 decision and just say that I took the company to ACAS and I was awarded compensation - which is the truth!
I have spoken to many HR people since and they have all agreed that I wasn't guilty of miss-conduct but that doesn't change what was decided by ACAS!
Anyway, I have never lied about what happened to new future employers and told them exactly what happened to get me sacked but I generally leave out the 50/50 decision and just say that I took the company to ACAS and I was awarded compensation - which is the truth!
Chim Chim said:
I was sacked for gross miss-conduct some time ago. I took my employers to tribunal and the decision went 50/50 in that I was guilty of miss-conduct but that I was unfairly dismissed.
I have spoken to many HR people since and they have all agreed that I wasn't guilty of miss-conduct but that doesn't change what was decided by ACAS!
Anyway, I have never lied about what happened to new future employers and told them exactly what happened to get me sacked but I generally leave out the 50/50 decision and just say that I took the company to ACAS and I was awarded compensation - which is the truth!
You didn't 'take the company to ACAS'. ACAS is the conciliatory body that liaises between Employees and Companies. I have spoken to many HR people since and they have all agreed that I wasn't guilty of miss-conduct but that doesn't change what was decided by ACAS!
Anyway, I have never lied about what happened to new future employers and told them exactly what happened to get me sacked but I generally leave out the 50/50 decision and just say that I took the company to ACAS and I was awarded compensation - which is the truth!
You took them to an Industrial Tribunal and met what is often the case, the tribunal trying to reach a 'middle line' verdict, so that both sides can save some face.
In your case, you were meant to feel good that they decided you were unfairly dismissed, and your employer was supposed to feel vindicated because they supported his decision that you mis-behaved. You got soem cash, but far less than your employer might have expected.
Simples...............
Over the years I have been involved in several tribunals. Only once, where the claimant basically took the piss and lied throughout, did I see a one sided verdict. Every other case was as I described above.
Edited by DSM2 on Monday 22 March 22:34
purplepolarbear said:
There was a feed of data that should have been sent to a supplier on a regular basis which never got set up about 6 months ago following a change to how a system operated. It's only just been noticed.
and she was the owner of the data?how did the client not notice?
Was this not part of the test?
Interesting - If she has been negligent for not doing her job - why has it taken 6 months for someone to notice?
If what you say is correct she has been negligent - but is it serious enough to warrant dismissal? No one at the employer seemed to notice - or care. Was she reminded to do this - was her work checked.
If the client didn't notice did they actually need this data? Why didn't they mention it earlier? Are they just using this as an excuse to beat up the client and it's worked down the line?
Looks like negligence all round and some scapegoating here
If what you say is correct she has been negligent - but is it serious enough to warrant dismissal? No one at the employer seemed to notice - or care. Was she reminded to do this - was her work checked.
If the client didn't notice did they actually need this data? Why didn't they mention it earlier? Are they just using this as an excuse to beat up the client and it's worked down the line?
Looks like negligence all round and some scapegoating here
Dude... I've been in recruitment over 10 years and in nearly every case where someone says, "I'm taking my previous employer to a tribunal" the consultants have instantly made a decision 
Many employers freak out too because they see someone as a trouble maker
She may get lucky but it might be worth settling the case before she approaches a company that she really wants to work for!
Many employers freak out too because they see someone as a trouble maker
She may get lucky but it might be worth settling the case before she approaches a company that she really wants to work for!
How carefully are references examined - the only time I wrote one I explained someone's work in broadly positive terms but I don't think I explained the reasons why they left (I'm not sure I knew and I think the chap resigned to move on to something else) and no-one asked any questions about this.
If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
purplepolarbear said:
How carefully are references examined - the only time I wrote one I explained someone's work in broadly positive terms but I don't think I explained the reasons why they left (I'm not sure I knew and I think the chap resigned to move on to something else) and no-one asked any questions about this.
If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
That is the standard reference that I got on redundancy... but what happens if she is asked directly, will she lie?If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
purplepolarbear said:
How carefully are references examined - the only time I wrote one I explained someone's work in broadly positive terms but I don't think I explained the reasons why they left (I'm not sure I knew and I think the chap resigned to move on to something else) and no-one asked any questions about this.
If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
Sorry this is a vague (ish) answer.If she persuades someone she worked with (maybe who no longer works there themselves) to write a reference describing the work she did but ommitting the details as to why she left would the future employer find out or the consultant become suspicious?
What if she found someone to give a reference of the form "It is policy not to provide references but I can confirm W worked here from X to Y as a Z."?
Some employers check in detail, others don't bother at all. Many will check a sample (depends on size, nature of job role / organisation / culture / 'customer expectations, standard and level of staff required, their potential responsibilities etc.).
A reference is the person's opinion, it may include a reflection on what the other has done, how they have behaved, how they are trusted or whatever. It is an opinion, and we all have those.
Referees will choose to include or exclude data for many reasons so it should not be an issue if there are 'honest' omissions intially, if ever.
However, when faced with a direct question (some forms ask specifics) then it would be dishonest to lie and therefore it would be fraudulent. I would have no qualms whatsoever in dismissing anyone for submitting a false cv or if I could establish a referee had been encouraged to slant a reference in a way that hid or distorted material particulars.
To follow up on this - following her appeal she has been offered a without prejudice letter suggesting a compromise agreement with the following:
1) Payment of notice period (3 months) and a bonus that would have been paid (10% of annual salary).
2) A reference, which she can write and a director of the company will sign.
3) A communication to the company to say that she had resigned.
This seems fair to me - does anyone have any thoughts on this?
1) Payment of notice period (3 months) and a bonus that would have been paid (10% of annual salary).
2) A reference, which she can write and a director of the company will sign.
3) A communication to the company to say that she had resigned.
This seems fair to me - does anyone have any thoughts on this?
OneDs said:
Jump now! she may not get another chance, unless she is sticking to her morals, wants a day in court (well tribunal), some possible publicity which could go either way, which no one will care about, but will affect her future employment opportunities then I'd go for it.
Thanks - I'm inclined to agree. It's her decision but I think it's important to be pragmatic and move on.Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff