Disciplinary Meeting

1hnr79jr65

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

Agree, never said it was illegal at all. You are actually protected in Irish law around this, but unless the meeting has a very significant time of bullying or pressure applied to admit wrong doing they do not go well in courts as "secreted recording"
Honestly, if a company has enough cop on to tell you bring a witness they most likely won't say anything too risky and have the ducks well lined up

The purpose of recording is accuracy of what is discussed during the meeting. Even if you bring a witness, HR could dispute the competency/accuracy/truth of the witness. HR generally take detailed notes, you are entitled to review these notes and sign off on them and receive a copy but not many know this.

With a verbal recording there is no dispute about what was discussed.

Dav010

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

Agree, never said it was illegal at all. You are actually protected in Irish law around this, but unless the meeting has a very significant time of bullying or pressure applied to admit wrong doing they do not go well in courts as "secreted recording"
Honestly, if a company has enough cop on to tell you bring a witness they most likely won't say anything too risky and have the ducks well lined up

If something is legal to do and there is a well established precedent of the Courts accepting recordings of this type, why would it “not go down well”? The WRC can rule of its admissibility, but are you saying a citizen can be punished for doing something that is legal?

The WRC has a long list of judgements where employers did not have enough cop on.

1hnr79jr65

Dav010 wrote: »

In this case the recording actually weakened the employees case, but the company could not discipline her for doing it.

https://www.irishnews.com/business/2019/11/05/news/handling-covert-recordings-in-the-workplace-1753547/

In this case the employer tried to argue their policy about trust could be used to fire the employee on the spot for secretly recording, however company policy does not trump law.

I do find in this example it was poor form to reduce claimants compensation for recording as it ultimately proved they were unfairly treated. Their representative did them a disservice on arguing this point.

Edit, Also this was UK EAT not Irish so it does not accurately reflect the outcome under Irish law.

Skyrimaddict

Dav010 wrote: »

If something is legal to do and there is a well established precedent of the Courts accepting recordings of this type, why would it “not go down well”? The WRC can rule of its admissibility, but are you saying a citizen can be punished for doing something that is legal?

No, they dont get punished for it. It just does not go down well as it is seen to be adverse to the process of a meeting.
If the facts are present in the meeting and recorded true by both witness and HR, and copies sent out of meeting notes to be verified, then the recording will be null-in-void and will be shown to represent an employee adverse attitude.

At the end of the day, it is not illegal to record, but outlined of very poor practise. Many cases have shown that using recording in a meeting WHERE THE FACTS ARE TRUE AND PRESENTED CORRECTLY does not add any favors to the employee.

Yes, in cases where the employee has been bullied or coerced into something a recording can go well. I have been part of investigations where this has happened.

My point is, like all things it is best to be transparent and work with the process.

Another note, at either a prelim meeting or investigation meeting you can, if you wish ask for union rep to join, which means you need time to organise this.

My initial point still remains though, it is not run of the mill for this type of meeting to be sprung on an employee. Employment law is very much supportive of an employee and to bring a meeting at this level like this has a serious note that the company have found something out that warrents such.
Performance issues would have been managed ( hopefully) long before a prelim meeting.

1hnr79jr65

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

N
Performance issues would have been managed ( hopefully) long before a prelim meeting.

This part is very much agreed upon, any performance issues need to be shown that a documented approach to supporting the employee was followed. Generally performance improvement plans with growth development plans with a fair and achievable goals to reach required level.

If these are discussed in prelim meeting without correct documentation, then effectively the whole process can be shut down at this point and company has to start a documented trail with appropriate glide pathway.

Skyrimaddict

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

This part is very much agreed upon, any performance issues need to be shown that a documented approach to supporting the employee was followed. Generally performance improvement plans with growth development plans with a fair and achievable goals to reach required level.

If these are discussed in prelim meeting without correct documentation, then effectively the whole process can be shut down at this point and company has to start a documented trail with appropriate glide pathway.

Agree fully. Hence why I say, from initial reading of the OP it seems if the company has enough cop to request a witness they should at least have followed procedures.

I say Hopefully!!!

OP, how did the meeting go? You are allowed to request, in a timely manner, the notes taken at the meeting and agree/disagree with points made on same.

kippy

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

You obviously dont understand the law on recording. Ireland has single party consent in relation to recording, If i am a party to the conversation then i can grant myself permission to record without informing others, this is how the law works here.

Consent from the other party is NOT required.

If the op wishes to record their hr conversation they can do so covertly if they wish if they are party to the conversation.

How do you explain this:
https://www.legal-island.ie/articles/ire/features/q-and-a/2016/oct/if-employee-asks-to-audio-record-a-disciplinary-hearing-should-we-let-them/

Skyrimaddict

kippy wrote: »

How do you explain this:
https://www.legal-island.ie/articles/ire/features/q-and-a/2016/oct/if-employee-asks-to-audio-record-a-disciplinary-hearing-should-we-let-them/

I Think its a case of a policy here , or lack of.

At the end of the day, I usually start any meeting I have on IR issues with a number of statements to establish ground rules
One of them is a very clear an express" I am conducting this meeting in good faith to all parties present today to establish facts. I do not give consent for my audio or video recording to be used in any manner"

Once I say that I am establishing that my consent is not given, so if someone decides to record that is their business. Its not illegal as said, but without given consent it becomes more of an issues.

A company policy might be very black and white on it also.

Ulysses Gaze

Jamie13 wrote: »

Hey, just a quick question. Are workplaces meant to give you notice of a meeting, for example when I arrived in work today I was immediately told to get a witness and to come for a meeting without telling me what it was about, therefore I was unable to prepare to even tell my witness what the meeting was over.

Happened to me before. Sprung on me at 4pm the day before when I was handed a letter (unsigned) that it was a disciplinary hearing for 9am the next day.

So I attended and put the unsigned letter down on the table and told them since this was against their own disciplinary proceedings, I would be leaving the meeting with no comment.

They were, of course, pissed off at me for doing this but I said to them - "Look at your own HR processes. This is not my fault, it's your fault. Now you can push the point here and I will just email the HR Director and MD. So go ahead."

So they set the meeting up for the following week, sent me a letter to which I replied my letter of resignation, which I had prepared. Scanned via email and copying in the HR Director and MD with a timeline of events.

Of course.

IITYWYBMAD

kippy wrote: »

How do you explain this:
https://www.legal-island.ie/articles/ire/features/q-and-a/2016/oct/if-employee-asks-to-audio-record-a-disciplinary-hearing-should-we-let-them/

The Question is:
If an employee asks to audio record a disciplinary hearing should we let them do so?

So, if an Employee asks to record a DH, should HR let them do it.

The Answer is:
1) This should be covered in the company handbook
or
2) The Employer can refuse to consent. However, that consent (given or not) will have no legal relevance.

Skyrimaddict

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Happened to me before. Sprung on me at 4pm the day before when I was handed a letter (unsigned) that it was a disciplinary hearing for 9am the next day.

So I attended and put the unsigned letter down on the table and told them since this was against their own disciplinary proceedings, I would be leaving the meeting with no comment.

They were, of course, pissed off at me for doing this but I said to them - "Look at your own HR processes. This is not my fault, it's your fault. Now you can push the point here and I will just email the HR Director and MD. So go ahead."

So they set the meeting up for the following week, sent me a letter to which I replied my letter of resignation, which I had prepared. Scanned via email and copying in the HR Director and MD with a timeline of events.

Of course.

You sound like a model employee.

To be fair, what you have outlined was just that, an actual disciplinary hearing.
They do require 5 days notice usually.

The OP was a prelim meeting, so not like for like.

I suppose in your case, a bullet dodged. ( not by you)

kippy

IITYWYBMAD wrote: »

The Question is:
If an employee asks to audio record a disciplinary hearing should we let them do so?

So, if an Employee asks to record a DH, should HR let them do it.

The Answer is:
1) This should be covered in the company handbook
or
2) The Employer can refuse to consent. However, that consent (given or not) will have no legal relevance.

I'll ask again, is the consent of both parties required in situation 2? My reading is straight forward - the employer (ie the second party in the both parties scenario) needs to consent to the recording happening.

Ulysses Gaze

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

You sound like a model employee.

To be fair, what you have outlined was just that, an actual disciplinary hearing.
They do require 5 days notice usually.

The OP was a prelim meeting, so not like for like.

I suppose in your case, a bullet dodged. ( not by you)

By pointing out their lack of following their own standard procedure, I was doing them a favour in the long run.

You are right. A bullet dodged by them. Maybe they won't try and do it again to other employees who won't know what they are getting into or won't know their rights.

However, I doubt that specific HR "Partner", nicknamed "The Invisible Man" because he was never seen, learnt anything though given his attitude overall.

Hence why said email was sent.

Skyrimaddict

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

By pointing out their lack of following their own standard procedure, I was doing them a favour in the long run.

You are right. A bullet dodged by them. Maybe they won't try and do it again to other employees who won't know what they are getting into or won't know their rights.

However, I doubt that specific HR "Partner", nicknamed "The Invisible Man" because he was never seen, learnt anything though given his attitude overall.

Hence why said email was sent.

Did they ever point out what you were in for?
Care to share,?

Munstermissy

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

What a load. Munstermissy, if you record in secret on your phone you will be in serious issues.

The meeting sounds like a prelim meeting as outlined, so no you don't need any notice. You can st that meeting be suspended with pay.

OP, if be more concerned that you have done something at work that warrents this other than looking at trying to catch your employer out

My disciplinary meeting was recorded without my knowledge. No notes were taken on their part but a full minutes of meeting presented to me. Their notes differed to mine as it suited their agenda! They had to re write the minutes and take out stuff that was not part of meeting.

I was given a verbal warning which I subsequently appealed even though I was on a hiding to nothing. At the appeal meeting I told them I was going to record it and they had no objections bearing in mind I called them out on when they recorded me. By the way I knew the employee handbook inside out at this stage.

Anyway, maybe the OP has done nothing wrong. Companies go down this route and making allegations in the hope that people will leave in my opinion.

It took a while but I got the hell out of dodge. Best decision I ever made.

Skyrimaddict

Munstermissy wrote: »

My disciplinary meeting was recorded without my knowledge. No notes were taken on their part but a full minutes of meeting presented to me. Their notes differed to mine as it suited their agenda! They had to re write the minutes and take out stuff that was not part of meeting.

I was given a verbal warning which I subsequently appealed even though I was on a hiding to nothing. At the appeal meeting I told them I was going to record it and they had no objections bearing in mind I called them out on when they recorded me. By the way I knew the employee handbook inside out at this stage.

Anyway, maybe the OP has done nothing wrong. Companies go down this route and making allegations in the hope that people will leave in my opinion.

It took a while but I got the hell out of dodge. Best decision I ever made.

That is a very different senario to what you mentioned earlier!
Yes if they recorded meeting and took no notes you are probably right to do same next time.

Witness should also help. If you had any back up notes to support you, print and keep copies.

I worked on a case before, meant to be open and shut of a bootstrap internal business. Chap fired on the foot of investigation internally by manager with agenda. Turned out employee had emails from manager asking them to do a deep dive into CRO level info on a competitor and write a note list of who's who in company, how it started etc.
Looked like employee was involved and he got the sack.
My firm got involved and needless to say we went hard as informed was easy to see and company got a hefty payment to chap. Manager fired!

Just keep detailed notes, factual on all meetings, and email copies of notes to be safe

1hnr79jr65

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

I Think its a case of a policy here , or lack of.

At the end of the day, I usually start any meeting I have on IR issues with a number of statements to establish ground rules
One of them is a very clear an express" I am conducting this meeting in good faith to all parties present today to establish facts. I do not give consent for my audio or video recording to be used in any manner"

Once I say that I am establishing that my consent is not given, so if someone decides to record that is their business. Its not illegal as said, but without given consent it becomes more of an issues.

A company policy might be very black and white on it also.

Law > company policy, simples.

1hnr79jr65

kippy wrote: »

I'll ask again, is the consent of both parties required in situation 2? My reading is straight forward - the employer (ie the second party in the both parties scenario) needs to consent to the recording happening.

On point 2, consent does NOT need to be requested if the op is one of the parties in the meeting and op can record without knowledge of company.

tom_tarbucket

Can everyone get over the recording scenario. It’s mentioned in nearly every post.

1hnr79jr65

Jamie13 wrote: »

Hey, just a quick question. Are workplaces meant to give you notice of a meeting, for example when I arrived in work today I was immediately told to get a witness and to come for a meeting without telling me what it was about, therefore I was unable to prepare to even tell my witness what the meeting was over.

The generally accepted notification period is 24-48 hours notice in writing of the meeting with topic for discussion and why the meeting is being called for formal meeting. The notice period can be extended or shortened within reason on agreement between all parties.

Informal meetings can be held at short notice, however the fact you are being asked to bring a representative along for what could be a fact finding meeting makes it sound more formal than what is suggested.

Ulysses Gaze

Skyrimaddict wrote: »

Did they ever point out what you were in for?
Care to share,?

I am guessing you either work in HR or are a Manager (or both) since you seem more consumed with issues related to me rather than a company not following their own standard procedures. Which is the kernel of this thread.

Disciplinary and Performance relates issues.

Long story short, I had worked in the company a year and manager that hired me moved on. New manager joined from outside the company. She and I got on fine on a personal level for about a month, then problems started. Loaded work onto me that was outside scope of my job to which I struggle with. Set unrealistic expectations for me which I struggled with. That was the Performance side.

Disciplinary side was not turning up to a presentation with one of the directors. This meeting had been arranged for a Thursday and changed to a Tuesday morning on...Tuesday morning. Which would have been fine but I had a dental appointment, of which was known about by my manager, that morning.

Apparently I should have changed this and gone into work. Since I did not have email on my phone, not a prerequisite for my role at the time, I was not aware of the change until after the dental appointment. But apparently I should have had.

This was the Disciplinary aspect.

Anything else you'd like to know so you can exonerate the company from not following their own embedded HR processes?

Esel

tom_tarbucket wrote: »

Can everyone get over the recording scenario. It’s mentioned in nearly every post.

It is relevant when a poster (or posters) repeatedly claim it is not legal when only one party is aware.

FebruarySquall

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I am guessing you either work in HR or are a Manager (or both) since you seem more consumed with issues related to me rather than a company not following their own standard procedures. Which is the kernel of this thread.

Disciplinary and Performance relates issues.

Long story short, I had worked in the company a year and manager that hired me moved on. New manager joined from outside the company. She and I got on fine on a personal level for about a month, then problems started. Loaded work onto me that was outside scope of my job to which I struggle with. Set unrealistic expectations for me which I struggled with. That was the Performance side.

Disciplinary side was not turning up to a presentation with one of the directors. This meeting had been arranged for a Thursday and changed to a Tuesday morning on...Tuesday morning. Which would have been fine but I had a dental appointment, of which was known about by my manager, that morning.

Apparently I should have changed this and gone into work. Since I did not have email on my phone, not a prerequisite for my role at the time, I was not aware of the change until after the dental appointment. But apparently I should have had.

This was the Disciplinary aspect.

Anything else you'd like to know so you can exonerate the company from not following their own embedded HR processes?

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

godtabh

FebruarySquall wrote: »

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

To be fair there is no need to be on email. If the company saw this as urgent they should have rang or texted. Email doesn’t provide instant feedback.

All other points stand.

FishOnABike

FebruarySquall wrote: »

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

To be honest, that sounds like a clear case of constructive dismissal. Set up an employee with unrealistic goals, provide inadequate or no support towards achieving those goals, change things at the last minute without informing the employee and then hold them responsible for not knowing something they weren't informed about.

FebruarySquall

FishOnABike wrote: »

To be honest, that sounds like a clear case of constructive dismissal. Set up an employee with unrealistic goals, provide inadequate or no support towards achieving those goals, change things at the last minute without informing the employee and then hold them responsible for not knowing something they weren't informed about.

Not at all - it is a development role. They will benefit in the long-term

I tell my own people, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I can't hold peoples hands, and I'm not a counsellor. Get on with it and do your best.

Necro

FebruarySquall wrote: »

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

This has to be a troll post.

I sincerely doubt you even know what an employee handbook looks like based off this response.

If by some chance it's real, then you're walking your own company into massive payouts to employees for constructive dismissal.

People are not slaves to companies, no matter what some jumped up suits think.

If the poster was to answer emails out of office hours, he should be paid an on-call rate.

If not, pick up the phone and don't be so bloody lazy sending emails.

And stop hiring fresh out of college morons with no experience in the real working world other than what they read in 'Management 101 for Dummies'

No offence meant, of course

Fireball81

FebruarySquall wrote: »

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

Ridiculous.

FebruarySquall

Necro wrote: »

This has to be a troll post.

I sincerely doubt you even know what an employee handbook looks like based off this response.

If by some chance it's real, then you're walking your own company into massive payouts to employees for constructive dismissal.

People are not slaves to companies, no matter what some jumped up suits think.

If the poster was to answer emails out of office hours, he should be paid an on-call rate.

If not, pick up the phone and don't be so bloody lazy sending emails.

And stop hiring fresh out of college morons with no experience in the real working world other than what they read in 'Management 101 for Dummies'

No offence meant, of course

A very interesting post, and I assure you I am not in anyway attempting to stoke controversy. Actually, some countries have banned out of hours email - France I believe - and their economy is going great, isn't it?

I'll give you a few examples of how it works. I run an medium sized engineering firm and we have our own premises. It is an old building, and in the winter the windows in left in a draught in the upper floors where offices and management is located. Of course, the usual whingers complained, but I was impressed by one fellow. Instead of complaining he offered to come in on the weekend and seal the gaps in the windows. Now, when I am assessing somebody for management potential, who do you think I call? The whingers who didn't show initiative, or the fellow who fixed the problem.

Now, I don't fix things - I tell my people bring me solutions and not problems. I bring in a lot of fellows on short term contracts and tell them that it is the % after the 100% that determine whether they will be retained.

Now the fellow or lassie that was concerned about out of hours emails and such matters I say this - what gets you ahead is what you do above and beyond what you are paid to do. When I see a fellow working late or in the morning early, I see management potential.

Ulysses Gaze

FebruarySquall wrote: »

I'm very surprised by all of these matters. Is it any wonder poster that you were called into the meeting. You refuse to perform tasks outside your comfort zone, you are unwilling to work with challenging and ambitious goals, and you fail to show up for a presentation. Not an excuse that you didn't have email - you need to be on email, and all over work matters, so if need emerges you can spring into action.

If it were my company, you would be out on your ear - no meeting. Sometimes you have to take a bullet for the company; you deal with it.

Sigh....

The point here should not be about the contents of the review and what happened to me but rather the company itself not following their own standard disciplinary procedures setting up said meeting.

By the sounds of things, you and your company would do the same. I’m sure it must be a great place to work then.