Unfair Dismissal

phishcakes

Ok...so

Basically to cut a long story short, i was dismissed from my position in a well known company which i will not name, for using bebo and giving the link to a fellow collegue. My Track record is pretty ok, i would be there 2 years in february and i had no warnings of any sort.

Am i on valid grounds for an Unfair Dismissals claim?

jhegarty

Where you issued with a company internet policy ?

if not , you may have a case...

phishcakes

Not that im aware of, i have a company handbook which lists the companys policy but says nothing of an internet policy.

information

phishcakes wrote: »

Am i on valid grounds for an Unfair Dismissals claim?

The only reason they can fire some straight away is for gross misconduct,
they didn't follow correct procedures in regards to your dismissal, so you
have a case.

It is extremely difficult to safely fire an employee in Ireland.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/employment/unemployment-and-redundancy/dismissal/unfair_dismissal

leeroybrown

If the information you gave is complete and accurate then it sounds like you have a strong case. Even if you had been given a strict internet policy to adhere to I would suggest that firing someone outright with no written warning would be pushing their luck. In the absence of a policy and particularly if reasonable personal usage takes place I'd say that your employer is in a very poor position.

seanabc

I would think you have a case. Especially if you were given no warning. Even if you were specifically told that you weren't allowed to use Bebo you should have been given verbal and written warnings before dismissal.

To be honest, if they dismissed you for something as innocent as that after two years, it would strike me that you must have done other stuff too. I'm sorry but that's just the way it seems!

Anyway try calling Citizens Info at 1890 777 121. They'll give you accurate information on your rights. You'd be as well telling them exactly what happened.

Wishbone Ash

I'd say you have a strong case as it could hardly be described as Gross Misconduct.

The burden of proof in on the employer - they have to prove that the dismissal was fair.

mikemac

You state it's a well known company.
I'd be astounded if there wasn't an interent usage policy in place.
Maybe you don't have a copy but possibly HR have it somewhere.

Any graduate level job I've ever had involves signing a contract for the internet usage policy.
And the fact that you didn't sign is good news for you!

If you did sign one then logging onto Bebo could possibly be a sackable offence. It's not unheard of for people to get written warnings for inappropriate use of the internet. It'd be difficult to get sacked for gross misconduct but I'm sure it could be done.

Sure this CEO of Bank of Ireland managed it and you're on this level OP

The latest job losses are part of cost cutting measures implemented by Brian Goggin, who replaced former BoI chief executive Mike Soden last year.

Soden was forced to resign after admitting using his office PC to surf Internet porn and escort agency Web sites. He was caught out after a disgruntled IT employee ran a check on his PC. At the time the bank had been engaged in a bitter dispute with labour unions over plans to outsource 500 IT staff to HP.

http://www.finextra.com/fullstory.asp?id=13401

leeroybrown

From what I've seen the financials are by far the strictest about this (with the exception of SME's with touchy MD's). They will almost certainly have a strict internet/intranet policy and are always worried about internet security, data security and bad PR. I would suggest that even they would give a verbal/written warning rather than sacking an employee for visiting Bebo.

m83

No initial warning? Sounds like you have a case indeed.

faceman

OP, you sure there isnt more to this than meets the eye? Did they tell you specifically it was due to bebo? How much time per day do you spend on the internet? Have you ever looked up porn? Does the company handbook refer to the disciplinary procedure?

Its highly unusual a major company didnt follow the disciplinary procedure.

keefg

phishcakes wrote: »

My Track record is pretty ok

Hmm....Just reading between the lines here, pretty OK seems a little bit vague and there may be more to this situation.

Most people would say that they either have a good or a bad record with their company - even one indiscretion changes your record from good to bad - not good to OK.

angelsfire

This guy at my old job got sacked for plugging his laptop onto the internet, and our handbooks mentioned nothing about internet usage at all. No warning no nothing. He didn't fight it at all because he was sick and tired of the job, but I feel he would of had a good case. They have now updated the handbook to include all the internet no no's!

Bald? er, dash!

There seems to be grounds here based on the information provided
1. regardless of whether you have had previous disciplinary issues with the employer in the past, the burden of proof is on the employer to prove that the dismissal was fair (i.e. justified in the circumstances).
2. the company may (& likely does) have an Internet (& Email) Usage Policy, but it must be accessible to the employees, i.e. if it is not included in the handbook, there should be reference to where it is held, i.e on intranet/ at HR etc. If it is referenced in the handbook, it weakens your case only slightly.
3. SI 146 of 2000 (look it up yourself) lays out the Code of Practice for handling disciplinary issues. Whether your employer has written his procedures around this Statutory Instrument or not, a Rights Commissioner, EAT etc. will look at how the dismissal was handled against this standard. Only in instances of Gross Misconduct, can an employer summarily dismiss without going through the verbal, written, final written warnings procedures. And even then, you should probably have been suspended on full pay pending an investigation.
4. Has your dismissal been confirmed in writing, have you been give the right of appeal?

Of course, this is all sight unseen, and the remainder of the circumstances of your employment are not known to the thread.

You have 6 months from dismissal date to get you complaint in.

phishcakes

well the guy tried to say i was looking at adult websites, he read out about 6 adult links which id never heard of, we where literally laughing when he called the names out, i said hadnt been to those websites and he put that aside, may i add that each day someone is required to leave their computer logged on till 1 am or sometimes overnight to keep a certain system running, also the majority of the time i wouldn't take breaks and i would eat in the office and on top of that they had a link on their website to bebo as part of the "Miss Bebo 2008" thing.

A lot of times i was required to work till 1 am and then start again at 8 am the next morning which i know is illegal.

eth0_

Did he give you the times you were logged on? You should demand an internal audit be carried out. It's up to them to prove you were logged into your PC at the times those adult sites were accessed.

Was it a trading bank you were working for, as a matter of interest? The work hours sound familiar - and illegal, yes.

Bald? er, dash!

Bald? er, dash! wrote: »

the burden of proof is on the employer to prove that the dismissal was fair (i.e. justified in the circumstances).

...this is still the case. Reading out a list of porn sites does not constitute proof that you were the guilty party - if they know what sites were accessed, they know when as well.

In any event, IF this was true, and IF there is an internet policy in place, and IF, in the company's view, this amounted to gross misconduct, the company should have investigated the allegations, and put them to you in writing, offered you the opportunity to defend the allegations (this would also have been their opportunity to give you the internet policy, whether or not you had seen it before). You should have been invited to a disciplinary meeting and offered the right to appropriate representation, e.g. trade union official / colleague. The company should have informed you that your alleged "actions" could result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. And finally, you should have been informed of your right to appeal the decision to a higher authority, e.g. MD (if (s)he was not already involved in the disciplinary process. If the company does not have this paper trail of their disciplinary process, i.e. policies, grievance/disciplinary procedures, correspondence with you up to and incl. termination, they will struggle to defend your complaint in from of the RC or EAT.

Regarding your illegal working hours, the Organisation of Working Time Act governs rest, holidays etc. which is explained in layman's terms here. You can make a complaint to the Rights Commissioner in conjunction with a UD claim - lash them all in there together!!!


************* This does not a professional legal opinion *************

phishcakes

i recieved a letter saying i was invited to a disciplinary meeting as a result of my alleged unauthoried internet access use, i asssume this is what you mean "put to me in writing".

interesting enough it didnt say in the letter the possibility of a dismissal, it just said could result in disciplinary action and i hadnt prepared myself for a dismissal, infact i tought it was the last thing that could have happened.

the_syco

phishcakes wrote: »

i recieved a letter saying i was invited to a disciplinary meeting as a result of my alleged unauthoried internet access use, i asssume this is what you mean "put to me in writing".

Most places will need you bring a witness. This can be anyone in most cases; a friend at the company (who has no relation to the action), a solicitor, a union memeber, etc.

Bald? er, dash!

Bald? er, dash! wrote: »

The company should have informed you that your alleged "actions" could result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

The employer hasn't covered himself in glory here - you should really look at how the disciplinary action taken compares with the Grievance & Disciplinary Procedures in the Company Handbook (not that this is sufficient to mitigate the company's actions) and find the gaps in application between the actual and written policy.

As I mentioned earlier, the SI 146 of 2000 is the Code of Practice which the RC or EAT would reasonably expect to apply in handling disciplinary matters. There is an right to natural justice in the handling of gross misconduct issues - the onus is on the employer to prove that a dismissal is fair - IMO (based on the facts provided) they would struggle in this case.

(i) did you ever received a policy relating to computer usage which identified A, B, C as acts of gross misconduct
(ii) were you informed that an investigation was carried out (by who)? what is their evidence, were you able to challenge the evidence, protest your innocence, explain why you were on porn sites
(iii) were you informed at the disciplinary meeting that dismissal was possible
(iv) were you informed of your dismissal at the meeting (did they consider your defence at all)?
(v) where you informed of a right to appeal?
(vi) did you get a letter of termination?

A Rights Commissioner can make an award of between 4 weeks and 2 years salary if (s)he finds in your favour. The Org. of Working Time issue is secondary to the UD claim, but valid nonetheless, i.e. if the UD fails, you might be able to get something under the Org. of Working Time Act, but I don't know what the awards are there...

As always:
*********************************************************
************* This does not a professional legal opinion *************
*********************************************************

Nody

phishcakes wrote: »

interesting enough it didnt say in the letter the possibility of a dismissal, it just said could result in disciplinary action and i hadnt prepared myself for a dismissal, infact i tought it was the last thing that could have happened.

It did say about the possability of dismissal, that is one possible disciplinary action which I'm sure you will find in the policy of the company.

Neither would any company with two working braincells mention dismissal or that actions will be taken in the invitation letter. Doing this would imply that the company has already made a decision on the case and you would not have a fair hearing. The idea being the company will make a judgement call based on the outcome of the evidence and facts presented at the time of the meeting. This rarely happens but that is the theory behind it.

Bald? er, dash!

Nody wrote: »

It did say about the possability of dismissal.

I'd disagree with you there Nody, it should be explicit IMO that there is a possibility of disciplinary action up to and including dismissal, i.e. the alleged act of (gross) misconduct is serious and you could be dismissed, but that's my opinion... "disciplinary action" is broad - an employer can depending on the severity of the act go for any one of verbal, written, final written, dismissal. The dismissal is the only one where a person is losing his/her job!!!

Nody wrote: »

Neither would any company... mention dismissal or that actions will be taken in the invitation letter. Doing this would imply that the company has already made a decision on the case and you would not have a fair hearing.

Again, I'd disagree - there are countless cases have gone through the EAT & RC Service where a dismissed employeehas cried foul - "I wasn't aware that I could have been dismissed because of whatever".. boohoo... "pay me lots of lolly etc. etc." A company would be remiss if it didn't inform the employee of the possibly outcome of the disciplinary process - at least that is the view of various RC & EAT decisions in my experience