Employment Law Advice Please
23 February 2010, 10:36 AM
#1
Employment Law Advice Please
I'm wondering if anyone can help me.
I've just been made redundant from my Job as an IT manager after only 14 months of employment. I've been given 4 weeks notice and sent home.
Basically I've gone because I'm the cheapest to go as pretty much everyone else there has worked there for 15 years or so.
Truth be told I'm not happy with the situtation and my employer has cocked the whole process up from start to finish and broken the law with what they have to do by law when making someone redundant.
One of the areas is the fact that I know the whole thing has been pre judged prior to my "meaningful consultation" meeting.
Basically they walked into my office one day and informed me I was at risk of redundancy and because of the nature of my job I had to leave there and then. I had my company phone and laptop taken from me and I was escorted off the premesis. I was informed verbally of another meeting to take place some ten days later. Which was supposed to be my meaningful consultation meeting.
Anyway to my point. In the company's infinite wisdom they neglected to stop my remote access. So I logged on the server and had a poke around for any information that might be useful. I discovered that the HR person had created a folder with my name on in a Leavers file on the server. It had various documents including my contract of employment etc and copies of the letter I was given when they marched into my office.
So my question is this, could I use the screen shots that I took of this directory, its contents, its location and its creation date as evidence as the file was created before the decision was legally supposed to be made to make me redundant i.e before my meaningful consultation meeting?
There are other areas that I have a good case to take to tribunal but if I can use these screen shots then I've pretty much got them by the bollocks.
I just don't know whether those screen shots would be admissable as I know I shouldn't have acessed the system however, nothing was communicated to me to say that I shouldn't.
Thoughts and opinions greatly appreciated.
I've just been made redundant from my Job as an IT manager after only 14 months of employment. I've been given 4 weeks notice and sent home.
Basically I've gone because I'm the cheapest to go as pretty much everyone else there has worked there for 15 years or so.
Truth be told I'm not happy with the situtation and my employer has cocked the whole process up from start to finish and broken the law with what they have to do by law when making someone redundant.
One of the areas is the fact that I know the whole thing has been pre judged prior to my "meaningful consultation" meeting.
Basically they walked into my office one day and informed me I was at risk of redundancy and because of the nature of my job I had to leave there and then. I had my company phone and laptop taken from me and I was escorted off the premesis. I was informed verbally of another meeting to take place some ten days later. Which was supposed to be my meaningful consultation meeting.
Anyway to my point. In the company's infinite wisdom they neglected to stop my remote access. So I logged on the server and had a poke around for any information that might be useful. I discovered that the HR person had created a folder with my name on in a Leavers file on the server. It had various documents including my contract of employment etc and copies of the letter I was given when they marched into my office.
So my question is this, could I use the screen shots that I took of this directory, its contents, its location and its creation date as evidence as the file was created before the decision was legally supposed to be made to make me redundant i.e before my meaningful consultation meeting?
There are other areas that I have a good case to take to tribunal but if I can use these screen shots then I've pretty much got them by the bollocks.
I just don't know whether those screen shots would be admissable as I know I shouldn't have acessed the system however, nothing was communicated to me to say that I shouldn't.
Thoughts and opinions greatly appreciated.
23 February 2010, 10:47 AM
#2
Acas - Home
if they have written it down that you shouldnt have remote access then it wont be admissable, it will just incriminate yourself. if they haven't I cant see any harm using it, but after only 14 months employment your not going to be entitled to very much, unless you go for unfair dismissal on discrimination grounds? the above site is a great starting point.
hth
james
if they have written it down that you shouldnt have remote access then it wont be admissable, it will just incriminate yourself. if they haven't I cant see any harm using it, but after only 14 months employment your not going to be entitled to very much, unless you go for unfair dismissal on discrimination grounds? the above site is a great starting point.
hth
james
23 February 2010, 10:52 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to hear this, speak to an employment law solicitor (see link)
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/choosin...asolicitor.law there is a 'finder' on the page.
Be careful what you post on here or anywhere else.
After 12 months of continuous service you do have some rights, remember that companies have to make the role redundant, not the person. Has your role gone, have you been replaced by a new IT manager or very similar?
Good luck Daz
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/choosin...asolicitor.law there is a 'finder' on the page.
Be careful what you post on here or anywhere else.
After 12 months of continuous service you do have some rights, remember that companies have to make the role redundant, not the person. Has your role gone, have you been replaced by a new IT manager or very similar?
Good luck Daz
Last edited by The Zohan; 23 February 2010 at 10:54 AM.
23 February 2010, 10:53 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know employment law but would make the following comments (having been made redundant last year)
1) As far as I am aware during your notice period you are STILL allowed all your usual perks, laptop use, phone and so on (unlees they deem it critical to the stability of the company I would imagine then they could argue you could do damage)
2) They have to allow you use of a computer etc for looking for a job
3) 14months is still under the 2 year thing which I doubt will help you in anyway
4) If you take this all the way how will it effect you in looking for other work - will it tarnish your name in the industry?
There are some great websites out there all about this stuff, you can also talk to ACAS (iirc)
Good luck in whatever you decide to do.
I would also start looking around as you may find something and slip into that before your notice period runs out.
1) As far as I am aware during your notice period you are STILL allowed all your usual perks, laptop use, phone and so on (unlees they deem it critical to the stability of the company I would imagine then they could argue you could do damage)
2) They have to allow you use of a computer etc for looking for a job
3) 14months is still under the 2 year thing which I doubt will help you in anyway
4) If you take this all the way how will it effect you in looking for other work - will it tarnish your name in the industry?
There are some great websites out there all about this stuff, you can also talk to ACAS (iirc)
Good luck in whatever you decide to do.
I would also start looking around as you may find something and slip into that before your notice period runs out.
23 February 2010, 11:00 AM
#5
Forgot to add my GF is a HR manager for a large multi-national and has said they've proper cocked it up. The fact that they have broken the law means that legally I have been unfairly dismissed so although I'm not entitled to redundancy payments I am entitled to damages for being unfairly dismissed.
I've not been replaced as such but the IT manager of the parent company is spending two days a week doing what is essentially my job despite the fact that I said I'd be willing to go part time which would be quite convenient as the GF and I have just had our first child.
My query is more about the admissibility of the screen shots. I've not been told at any point (verbally or in writing) that I shouldnt be accessing the system.
The two year rule is no longer, it's now down to just one year for unfair dismissal claims. However the two year rule does still apply foir redundancy rules i.e you have to be employed for two years to be entitled to redundnacy payments but onlly one year for unfair dismissal
I've not been replaced as such but the IT manager of the parent company is spending two days a week doing what is essentially my job despite the fact that I said I'd be willing to go part time which would be quite convenient as the GF and I have just had our first child.
My query is more about the admissibility of the screen shots. I've not been told at any point (verbally or in writing) that I shouldnt be accessing the system.
The two year rule is no longer, it's now down to just one year for unfair dismissal claims. However the two year rule does still apply foir redundancy rules i.e you have to be employed for two years to be entitled to redundnacy payments but onlly one year for unfair dismissal
Last edited by dazdavies; 23 February 2010 at 11:02 AM.
23 February 2010, 02:17 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Forgot to add my GF is a HR manager for a large multi-national and has said they've proper cocked it up. The fact that they have broken the law means that legally I have been unfairly dismissed so although I'm not entitled to redundancy payments I am entitled to damages for being unfairly dismissed.
I've not been replaced as such but the IT manager of the parent company is spending two days a week doing what is essentially my job despite the fact that I said I'd be willing to go part time which would be quite convenient as the GF and I have just had our first child.
My query is more about the admissibility of the screen shots. I've not been told at any point (verbally or in writing) that I shouldnt be accessing the system.
The two year rule is no longer, it's now down to just one year for unfair dismissal claims. However the two year rule does still apply foir redundancy rules i.e you have to be employed for two years to be entitled to redundnacy payments but onlly one year for unfair dismissal
I've not been replaced as such but the IT manager of the parent company is spending two days a week doing what is essentially my job despite the fact that I said I'd be willing to go part time which would be quite convenient as the GF and I have just had our first child.
My query is more about the admissibility of the screen shots. I've not been told at any point (verbally or in writing) that I shouldnt be accessing the system.
The two year rule is no longer, it's now down to just one year for unfair dismissal claims. However the two year rule does still apply foir redundancy rules i.e you have to be employed for two years to be entitled to redundnacy payments but onlly one year for unfair dismissal
I'm not sure about the Law in England, but I'm pretty sure the screenshots you have would be admissable in Scotland.
The point is, how valuable are they actually? Leaving aside the fact they've cocked up the process, it would not be uncommon to have employment details stored for employees who were going to be part of a redundancy consultation process.
I doubt that the date of creation would be of much value in all reality. Better to pursue on the evidencial matter of your being wrongfully dismissed as you did not benefit from due process.
Trending Topics
23 February 2010, 03:06 PM
#8
I see what your saying but in essence they have already deemed me a leaver prior to my consultation meeting. I should only be deemed a leaver after I've been made redundant and actually left the company. This is why I think it's cast iron proof that the whole thing has been prejudged and my consultation meeting where they ruled out all of my suggestions without proper consideration was just a formality and them just going through the motions so to speak.
I've got a pretty good case without the screenshots but if I could use the screenshots then its pretty much a dead cert to be ruled in my favour.
I've got a pretty good case without the screenshots but if I could use the screenshots then its pretty much a dead cert to be ruled in my favour.
23 February 2010, 05:55 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Preston, Lancs.
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other than being in a "leavers" folder, did any of the documents indicate that a decision had been made prior to the end of the consultation? For example a pre-prepared letter indicating the outcome of the consultation?
23 February 2010, 07:45 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im sorry to see this Daz (Im also disappointed to see that it didnt take five of them to drag you from the building 
). With regards to your accessing their system: if youre still employed and you arent on garden leave then you havent done anything wrong. Youve used your login and password, which they havent disabled: and unless they have specifically told you otherwise, then you youre in the clear, surely?
Simon
). With regards to your accessing their system: if youre still employed and you arent on garden leave then you havent done anything wrong. Youve used your login and password, which they havent disabled: and unless they have specifically told you otherwise, then you youre in the clear, surely?Simon
23 February 2010, 08:01 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sheffield; Rome of the North
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was a Word document, what about revision dates and such. The letter date may say one thing but the date of actual writing may tell another story.
24 February 2010, 07:15 AM
#13
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would appear that they've followed due process - the fact that you have a file on some server ahead of your consultation date is neither here nor there. What else would they do? I mean what you're suggesting is that they shouldn't do ANYTHING until the consultation, where in reality they should be preparing for your eventual redundancy - hence the folder creation.
It's standard practice to remove peoples access and put them on paid "gardening leave" while the more formal process is undertaken, and more so in the IT industry where a disgruntled employee could do some serious damage by deleting or copying intellectual property etc. and I think it was poor form to go back in and have a poke around regardless of whether they did or did not remove your access rights.
But at the end of the day you're gone, that's it.... so put all effort into finding another job rather than hanging on to a slim thread that won't actually get you anywhere!
It's standard practice to remove peoples access and put them on paid "gardening leave" while the more formal process is undertaken, and more so in the IT industry where a disgruntled employee could do some serious damage by deleting or copying intellectual property etc. and I think it was poor form to go back in and have a poke around regardless of whether they did or did not remove your access rights.
But at the end of the day you're gone, that's it.... so put all effort into finding another job rather than hanging on to a slim thread that won't actually get you anywhere!
24 February 2010, 10:22 AM
#14
It would appear that they've followed due process - the fact that you have a file on some server ahead of your consultation date is neither here nor there. What else would they do? I mean what you're suggesting is that they shouldn't do ANYTHING until the consultation, where in reality they should be preparing for your eventual redundancy - hence the folder creation.
It's standard practice to remove peoples access and put them on paid "gardening leave" while the more formal process is undertaken, and more so in the IT industry where a disgruntled employee could do some serious damage by deleting or copying intellectual property etc. and I think it was poor form to go back in and have a poke around regardless of whether they did or did not remove your access rights.
But at the end of the day you're gone, that's it.... so put all effort into finding another job rather than hanging on to a slim thread that won't actually get you anywhere!
It's standard practice to remove peoples access and put them on paid "gardening leave" while the more formal process is undertaken, and more so in the IT industry where a disgruntled employee could do some serious damage by deleting or copying intellectual property etc. and I think it was poor form to go back in and have a poke around regardless of whether they did or did not remove your access rights.
But at the end of the day you're gone, that's it.... so put all effort into finding another job rather than hanging on to a slim thread that won't actually get you anywhere!
Then we come to selection, they have not put me in a selection po,,l they have not done any kind of skills matrix analysis despite there being other IT staff.
Finally there is the consultation which needs to be fair and meaningful. and of course the decision to make me redundant shouldn't be made until after this meeting. my file in the Leavers directory was created 5 days BEFORE the meeting so they have already deemed me as a leaver regardless of the outcome of the meeting thus the whole decision was pre judged. Every suggestion I made was shot down without any consideration. I would have been prepared to go part time and I also said I would be prepared to accept a 3 month lay off period and these were not even considered and I was declared redundant.
If this was a case of not having a leg to stand on I wouldnt be wasting my time pursuing it. I know I've got a pretty good case my question is could I use the fact that the creation of the leavers file clearly shows the whole thing is prejudged and makes the issue pretty much water tight.
24 February 2010, 10:30 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Far Corfe
Posts: 3,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest, you dont sound as though you have much to go on, you have to think that any potential employer will like as not call these people for a reference. If you start the legal process you may not get much of a reference. As it is a small company and the numbers being made redundant are low then many of the rules just dont apply. The fact that they have a file on you wouldnt seem to stand for very much.
To get a more clear picture call the ACAS people they are very helpful. They wont say if you have a case but will advise you of the law regarding redundancy.
If I was you I think I would concentrate on the future rather than the past, did you ask your ex-employers for a reference?
To get a more clear picture call the ACAS people they are very helpful. They wont say if you have a case but will advise you of the law regarding redundancy.
If I was you I think I would concentrate on the future rather than the past, did you ask your ex-employers for a reference?
24 February 2010, 10:48 AM
#16
I've got plenty to go on.
Don't forget my other half is involved in HR. To be precise she's a HR director for a large multi national with 13,000 employees. She's also a member of the chartered institute of personnel and development. She says that they've broken the law in several areas so i'm not overly concerned about the merits of my case.
Don't forget that she's privvy to specific details that won't be discussed here.
My question isn't whether I've got a case or not or whether I have much to go on.
My question is would the screenshots of my file having been moved to the leavers file before my consultation meeting be admissible. If I can use that then it clearly proves the whole process has been prejudged.
The reason I'm pursuing this is because it could mean a payment of circa £14K by way of compromise or more if it goes to tribunal.
Don't forget my other half is involved in HR. To be precise she's a HR director for a large multi national with 13,000 employees. She's also a member of the chartered institute of personnel and development. She says that they've broken the law in several areas so i'm not overly concerned about the merits of my case.
Don't forget that she's privvy to specific details that won't be discussed here.
My question isn't whether I've got a case or not or whether I have much to go on.
My question is would the screenshots of my file having been moved to the leavers file before my consultation meeting be admissible. If I can use that then it clearly proves the whole process has been prejudged.
The reason I'm pursuing this is because it could mean a payment of circa £14K by way of compromise or more if it goes to tribunal.
Last edited by dazdavies; 24 February 2010 at 10:51 AM.
24 February 2010, 11:24 AM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: High Wycombe
Posts: 3,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My gut feeling is no.
It's been a little while since I studied, so my info may be out of date.
I assume the other IT bod has been there longer than you? - If not then this does not really apply.
Step one - Verify that the position is a legitimate redundancy
Has the position become redundant - YES.
- They have reduced the head count in the roll of "IT MANAGER" by one from two.
Are they employing anyone else to fill the position - NO
- The remaining workforce are going to absorb the tasks fulfilled by the redundant position. (they may have to pay the existing person travel, but if his hours do not increase. . . )
Step two - Selection
Has the company used a fair method of selection - YES
- They have used the Last in First Out selection process.
Step Three - execution.
Did the warn you that your position was under threat of redundancy - YES
Did they send you a written statement confirming the above - Unknown
Did they hold a meeting with you to discuss the matter - YES
Did they hold an appeal meeting with you / offer you an appeal meeting? - UNKNOWN
Did the offer suitable alternative employment (if available) - Unknown
Can you let me know the unknowns?
Someone was right stating that they should have let you use "a" computer - not necessarily yours and "a" phone for the period of your garden leave.
I don't think the documents will be enough for you to claim unfair dismissal.
You should really chat to someone in ACAS who knows the current laws.
Given your relatively short employment with them, I can't see you getting much in the way of recompense even if it does swing in your favour.
Good luck & happy hunting.
J
It's been a little while since I studied, so my info may be out of date.
I assume the other IT bod has been there longer than you? - If not then this does not really apply.
Step one - Verify that the position is a legitimate redundancy
Has the position become redundant - YES.
- They have reduced the head count in the roll of "IT MANAGER" by one from two.
Are they employing anyone else to fill the position - NO
- The remaining workforce are going to absorb the tasks fulfilled by the redundant position. (they may have to pay the existing person travel, but if his hours do not increase. . . )
Step two - Selection
Has the company used a fair method of selection - YES
- They have used the Last in First Out selection process.
Step Three - execution.
Did the warn you that your position was under threat of redundancy - YES
Did they send you a written statement confirming the above - Unknown
Did they hold a meeting with you to discuss the matter - YES
Did they hold an appeal meeting with you / offer you an appeal meeting? - UNKNOWN
Did the offer suitable alternative employment (if available) - Unknown
Can you let me know the unknowns?
Someone was right stating that they should have let you use "a" computer - not necessarily yours and "a" phone for the period of your garden leave.
I don't think the documents will be enough for you to claim unfair dismissal.
You should really chat to someone in ACAS who knows the current laws.
Given your relatively short employment with them, I can't see you getting much in the way of recompense even if it does swing in your favour.
Good luck & happy hunting.
J
Last edited by BlkKnight; 24 February 2010 at 11:29 AM.
24 February 2010, 12:37 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've got plenty to go on.
Don't forget my other half is involved in HR. To be precise she's a HR director for a large multi national with 13,000 employees. She's also a member of the chartered institute of personnel and development. She says that they've broken the law in several areas so i'm not overly concerned about the merits of my case.
Don't forget that she's privvy to specific details that won't be discussed here.
My question isn't whether I've got a case or not or whether I have much to go on.
My question is would the screenshots of my file having been moved to the leavers file before my consultation meeting be admissible. If I can use that then it clearly proves the whole process has been prejudged.
The reason I'm pursuing this is because it could mean a payment of circa £14K by way of compromise or more if it goes to tribunal.
Don't forget my other half is involved in HR. To be precise she's a HR director for a large multi national with 13,000 employees. She's also a member of the chartered institute of personnel and development. She says that they've broken the law in several areas so i'm not overly concerned about the merits of my case.
Don't forget that she's privvy to specific details that won't be discussed here.
My question isn't whether I've got a case or not or whether I have much to go on.
My question is would the screenshots of my file having been moved to the leavers file before my consultation meeting be admissible. If I can use that then it clearly proves the whole process has been prejudged.
The reason I'm pursuing this is because it could mean a payment of circa £14K by way of compromise or more if it goes to tribunal.
24 February 2010, 01:27 PM
#20
My gut feeling is no.
It's been a little while since I studied, so my info may be out of date.
I assume the other IT bod has been there longer than you? - If not then this does not really apply.
Step one - Verify that the position is a legitimate redundancy
Has the position become redundant - YES. I would argue that it hasn't 10 days prior to all of this I had a meeting to discuss my heavy workload and that certain tasks needed to be prioritised over the coming months
- They have reduced the head count in the roll of "IT MANAGER" by one from two.
Are they employing anyone else to fill the position - NO However they had to pay the holding company for my services their argument for making me redundant was they could no longer afford to do that Yet they have stated the group IT manager is having to spend 3 days a week there to cover the work I did and would still charge the business sector that I worked in for that provision. Basically they now have 1 person looking after the needs of 250 people over 8 different sites and 4 different companies. My argument is that my position is not redundant because there is plenty of work there for me to do and the company hasn't ceased trading. This is in breach of the definition of redundancy in section 139 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- The remaining workforce are going to absorb the tasks fulfilled by the redundant position. (they may have to pay the existing person travel, but if his hours do not increase. . . )
Step two - Selection
Has the company used a fair method of selection - YES Again No they haven't. They have people on the factory floor stood about drinking coffee all day due to lack of work yet because they've been there a long time it's more cost effective to just give me my four weeks notice despite the fact I had enough work for the next 12 months atleast, never mind all the day to day running of the IT system.
- They have used the Last in First Out selection process.
Step Three - execution.
Did the warn you that your position was under threat of redundancy - YES No they walked into my office told me the situation and I was asked to leave the building immediatly.
Did they send you a written statement confirming the above - Kind of, I was given a letter stating that I was at risk but there were no details of the next meeting other than what day it was on. there was no time place who was attending or what the meetings purpose was
Did they hold a meeting with you to discuss the matter - YES agreed they did hold a meeting but it was more of a formaility rather than meaningful consultation. Prior to going into the meeting the person holding the meeting was with someone and when i turned up he said he had to go into a meeting but he would only be ten minutes. To me this indicates that the decision was made and this was just going through the motions
Did they hold an appeal meeting with you / offer you an appeal meeting? - yes they did where I raised the above points
Did the offer suitable alternative employment (if available) - I discussed part time working and even being laid off for a three month period and these were dismissed there and then despite the fact that the MD nor HR were present during the meeting. The only time HR were present were during my apeal meeting.
Can you let me know the unknowns?
Someone was right stating that they should have let you use "a" computer - not necessarily yours and "a" phone for the period of your garden leave.
I don't think the documents will be enough for you to claim unfair dismissal.
You should really chat to someone in ACAS who knows the current laws.
Given your relatively short employment with them, I can't see you getting much in the way of recompense even if it does swing in your favour.
Good luck & happy hunting.
J
It's been a little while since I studied, so my info may be out of date.
I assume the other IT bod has been there longer than you? - If not then this does not really apply.
Step one - Verify that the position is a legitimate redundancy
Has the position become redundant - YES. I would argue that it hasn't 10 days prior to all of this I had a meeting to discuss my heavy workload and that certain tasks needed to be prioritised over the coming months
- They have reduced the head count in the roll of "IT MANAGER" by one from two.
Are they employing anyone else to fill the position - NO However they had to pay the holding company for my services their argument for making me redundant was they could no longer afford to do that Yet they have stated the group IT manager is having to spend 3 days a week there to cover the work I did and would still charge the business sector that I worked in for that provision. Basically they now have 1 person looking after the needs of 250 people over 8 different sites and 4 different companies. My argument is that my position is not redundant because there is plenty of work there for me to do and the company hasn't ceased trading. This is in breach of the definition of redundancy in section 139 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- The remaining workforce are going to absorb the tasks fulfilled by the redundant position. (they may have to pay the existing person travel, but if his hours do not increase. . . )
Step two - Selection
Has the company used a fair method of selection - YES Again No they haven't. They have people on the factory floor stood about drinking coffee all day due to lack of work yet because they've been there a long time it's more cost effective to just give me my four weeks notice despite the fact I had enough work for the next 12 months atleast, never mind all the day to day running of the IT system.
- They have used the Last in First Out selection process.
Step Three - execution.
Did the warn you that your position was under threat of redundancy - YES No they walked into my office told me the situation and I was asked to leave the building immediatly.
Did they send you a written statement confirming the above - Kind of, I was given a letter stating that I was at risk but there were no details of the next meeting other than what day it was on. there was no time place who was attending or what the meetings purpose was
Did they hold a meeting with you to discuss the matter - YES agreed they did hold a meeting but it was more of a formaility rather than meaningful consultation. Prior to going into the meeting the person holding the meeting was with someone and when i turned up he said he had to go into a meeting but he would only be ten minutes. To me this indicates that the decision was made and this was just going through the motions
Did they hold an appeal meeting with you / offer you an appeal meeting? - yes they did where I raised the above points
Did the offer suitable alternative employment (if available) - I discussed part time working and even being laid off for a three month period and these were dismissed there and then despite the fact that the MD nor HR were present during the meeting. The only time HR were present were during my apeal meeting.
Can you let me know the unknowns?
Someone was right stating that they should have let you use "a" computer - not necessarily yours and "a" phone for the period of your garden leave.
I don't think the documents will be enough for you to claim unfair dismissal.
You should really chat to someone in ACAS who knows the current laws.
Given your relatively short employment with them, I can't see you getting much in the way of recompense even if it does swing in your favour.
Good luck & happy hunting.
J
Paul,
It was the one thing she didn't know the answer on as it's more a legal question rather than an employment one.
I can honestly say If I thought didnt have a reasonable case I wouldnt be pursuing this. I've said all along I'd be happy to sign a compromise agreement for 12 weeks pay. That will make life easier and will see us through until my GF goes back to work from maternity leave. That's another thing that's pissed me off is the fact they know I've just had my first child. But that's neither here nor there legally speaking.
24 February 2010, 01:28 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: In my car!
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would seek a meeting with a solicitor. I did that once years ago regarding an incident of bullying. They gave me the first hour free so I got a good idea of whether to pursue it or not.
In the end their fees were so high I took their advice and started proceedings on my own writing a letter stating that I would take it to court and they had 14 days to respond. I got a settlement of a full months pay which was fine by me. Couldn’t be bothered to go through the whole hassle of taking it further.
In the end their fees were so high I took their advice and started proceedings on my own writing a letter stating that I would take it to court and they had 14 days to respond. I got a settlement of a full months pay which was fine by me. Couldn’t be bothered to go through the whole hassle of taking it further.
24 February 2010, 01:41 PM
#22
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming that you're a full time employee rather than consultant / contractor then you will have full employment rights as you've been there for over 12 months. Under 12 months & a company can simply throw you (or anyone) out as you've no employment rights. This is the case regardless of being on a probation period or not etc 
TX.
TX.
24 February 2010, 01:48 PM
#23
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've nothing to lose as a claim won't cost you anything bar your time? Your reputation within the industry may be of concern albeit that your previous employer has this issue too.
I think the leavers file is a red herring as it proves nothing other than you had a folder in your name + other associated paperwork. It may eventually have been (will be after consultation meeting - possible) updated to conclude no redundancy?
TX.
I think the leavers file is a red herring as it proves nothing other than you had a folder in your name + other associated paperwork. It may eventually have been (will be after consultation meeting - possible) updated to conclude no redundancy?
TX.
If this was a case of not having a leg to stand on I wouldnt be wasting my time pursuing it. I know I've got a pretty good case my question is could I use the fact that the creation of the leavers file clearly shows the whole thing is prejudged and makes the issue pretty much water tight.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sam Witwicky
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
17
13 November 2015 10:49 AM
