Punished twice for the same offence

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 02:29PM #1

Hi Guys, trying to help a friend out with a problem they have with a now former employer.

Essentially, friend was an apprentice, working for a company for approx 3 months, so I know they are not covered by unfair dismissals.

However, they have quite a confusing story, essentially, friend was sick one day, company has rule to ring in before 9 if you are going to be sick. Friend rang at 9.15am from doctors. Friend received a verbal warning for this in an informal meeting with two managers, but was not invited formally to a disciplinary hearing or offered representation. Nor did friend receive written confirmation of warning.

Friend missed another day due to same illness and was not physically fit to ring before 10am. Once again, pulled aside by same two managers, told they were getting a written warning. Once again, no invitation, no offer of representation, no written confirmation of said written warning.

Finally, friend was invited by letter to disciplinary hearing to deal with the above two dates, no offer of representation. Same two managers again held this hearing, at the end of the hearing, friend was dismissed and told not to return to the place of work. No mention of right to appeal. Friend now waiting on written confirmation, but given actions of employer to date, not expecting it.

Sorry for the essay! Its just a confusing one to me and I am wondering if my friend has a claim under the industrial relations act due to the procedural issues and the fact that they were essentially dismissed for something that they had already been disciplined for. Any advice is welcome!

amdublin · 26-11-2015 02:32PM

Sick twice in first two months?
And both times rang after 9am rule?

I really don't think your friend should be surprised he was not kept on.

What was wrong with him/her that could not make a call on the mobile before 9am?

davo10 · 26-11-2015 02:33PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

Hi Guys, trying to help a friend out with a problem they have with a now former employer.

Essentially, friend was an apprentice, working for a company for approx 3 months, so I know they are not covered by unfair dismissals.

However, they have quite a confusing story, essentially, friend was sick one day, company has rule to ring in before 9 if you are going to be sick. Friend rang at 9.15am from doctors. Friend received a verbal warning for this in an informal meeting with two managers, but was not invited formally to a disciplinary hearing or offered representation. Nor did friend receive written confirmation of warning.

Friend missed another day due to same illness and was not physically fit to ring before 10am. Once again, pulled aside by same two managers, told they were getting a written warning. Once again, no invitation, no offer of representation, no written confirmation of said written warning.

Finally, friend was invited by letter to disciplinary hearing to deal with the above two dates, no offer of representation. Same two managers again held this hearing, at the end of the hearing, friend was dismissed and told not to return to the place of work. No mention of right to appeal. Friend now waiting on written confirmation, but given actions of employer to date, not expecting it.

Sorry for the essay! Its just a confusing one to me and I am wondering if my friend has a claim under the industrial relations act due to the procedural issues and the fact that they were essentially dismissed for something that they had already been disciplined for. Any advice is welcome!

Time for your friend to move on, I assume he has a mobile phone so he could have phoned before the required time. Lesson learned. As he was likely on probation and had worked there less than one year, they didn't even need to go through the process of giving warnings, they could have just let him go.

mel123 · 26-11-2015 02:35PM

The rules are they were meant to ring in before 9, and on neither occasion did they do this. I'm sitting here trying to think of any reason at all that would prevent someone from picking up the phone to make a quick call.
Not only did they do it once, they did it a second time, knowing that the first time they got a warning for it.
I dont mean to sound harsh, but if they wanted to keep their job, they should not have been acting like this in the first three months of working for an employer.
I wouldnt think they have much grounds for any kind of case at all.

Miaireland · 26-11-2015 02:37PM

Your friend is not being punished for the same mistake twice.

He rang in after 9 am both times despite knowing that you had to ring before nine.

To be fair to the employers they did not have to give him a warning.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 02:37PM

amdublin wrote: »

Sick twice in first two months?
And both times rang after 9am rule?

I really don't think your friend should be surprised he was not kept on.

What was wrong with him/her that could not make a call on the mobile before 9am?

Not sure why they couldn't ring any earlier the first time, I still have to have a proper chat to them about it so don't want to make any assumptions.

The second time my friend assures me that they were in that much pain from the same condition that they were physically bent over with pain and unable to ring in before that time. I know most will read this and assume hangover, but I have been assured that it wast a genuine sickness which they were certified for.

My confusion was down to the fact that these two issues were already dealt with via the warnings.

Jonti · 26-11-2015 02:38PM

Friend should go to citizensrights and tell his case. Employers can and will be done for not following proper disciplinary procedures.
Very good chance he'll win his case.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 02:39PM

Miaireland wrote: »

Your friend is not being punished for the same mistake twice.

He rang in after 9 am both times despite knowing that you had to ring before nine.

To be fair to the employers they did not have to give him a warning.

I fully appreciate that they didn't have to, but the fact remains that they did. I usually fight these cases from the other side so I know that I would want to slap one of our managers if they did something like this just for the amount of time it would take me to clean up!

amdublin · 26-11-2015 02:39PM

Jonti wrote: »

Friend should go to citizensrights and tell his case. Employers can and will be done for not following proper disciplinary procedures.
Very good chance he'll win his case.

No I don't think this is correct. Employee was with company for three months (under a year/on probation) doesn't have a leg to stand on.

listermint · 26-11-2015 02:40PM

Jonti wrote: »

Friend should go to citizensrights and tell his case. Employers can and will be done for not following proper disciplinary procedures.
Very good chance he'll win his case.

Clearly from your posts in other threads you are having a jolly today.

amdublin · 26-11-2015 02:41PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

Not sure why they couldn't ring any earlier the first time, I still have to have a proper chat to them about it so don't want to make any assumptions.

The second time my friend assures me that they were in that much pain from the same condition that they were physically bent over with pain and unable to ring in before that time. I know most will read this and assume hangover, but I have been assured that it wast a genuine sickness which they were certified for.

My confusion was down to the fact that these two issues were already dealt with via the warnings.

Oh come on! Pull the other one!

Was able to ring at 10. But not at 9.

Was s/he on an operating table getting his/her appendix out at 9?? That's the only pain I can think of would prevent someone making a 2 min phone call.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 02:42PM

amdublin wrote: »

No I don't think this is correct. Employee was with company for three months (under a year/on probation) doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Not true, there are cases under the industrial relations act that fall within the one year limit and I was wondering if this case could be one of those!

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 02:44PM

amdublin wrote: »

Oh come on! Pull the other one!

Was able to ring at 10. But not at 9.

Was s/he on an operating table getting his/her appendix out at 9?? That's the only pain I can think of would prevent someone making a 2 min phone call.

But you keep avoiding my point, I get that the employer didn't have to give the warnings. However they did give warnings, ie they dealt with the issue and didn't follow correct proceedings and the rules of natural justice weren't applied to the procedures that they did do.

Stheno · 26-11-2015 02:47PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

But you keep avoiding my point, I get that the employer didn't have to give the warnings. However they did give warnings, ie they dealt with the issue and didn't follow correct proceedings and the rules of natural justice weren't applied to the procedures that they did do.

What rules of natural justice? Your friend broke the rules twice and was let go.

Move on, simple as.

Kimbot · 26-11-2015 02:51PM

He could have even texted someone in work or gotten someone else to ring in for him if he was in such a bad way. Rules are rules and if you break them then you have to expect some form of Punishment.

amdublin · 26-11-2015 02:52PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

But you keep avoiding my point, I get that the employer didn't have to give the warnings. However they did give warnings, ie they dealt with the issue and didn't follow correct proceedings and the rules of natural justice weren't applied to the procedures that they did do.

So they tried help your friend. And he/she didn't take the hint/the help. And this is the employees fault now?

Just because they gave warnings does not mean they have to do anything else. You friend can and was let go.

Your friend needs to learn from this. They shoild realky have been avoiding calling in sixk at all costs firstly. But defibitely should have followed the rules. Seriously what was wrong with them that they couldn't ring before 9?

gctest50 · 26-11-2015 02:53PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

...........

The second time my friend assures me that they were in that much pain from the same condition that they were physically bent over with pain and unable to ring in before that time..................

"Contractions 3 minutes apart and still takes her Psychology Test"

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153188917676643&set=a.10150344379841643.349904.650751642&type=3

.

Miaireland · 26-11-2015 02:58PM

To be honest even double over in pain he could probably dial and say his name and say that he was calling in sick. I had to ring my boss in the middle of being sick with severe food poisoning. He literally got it Mia, I am sick and will not be in to day. Will call later. It wasn't pleasant but it had to be done.

Procedure does not apply in this case and I don't even know what you mean by rules of natural justice.

Your friend did something wrong (the employer gave him a chance, nice employer he did not have to) Your friend did something wrong another time (your friend got dissmissed).

You need to tell your friend to cop on rather than going on about natural justice etc.

shane9689 · 26-11-2015 03:15PM

Jesus, no mercy for the weak here.....

Flippyfloppy · 26-11-2015 03:19PM

Sounds like they were covering themselves with the warnings & then realized this procedure was unnecessary as he was only there a couple of months. Hence no final warning. I'm sure they felt they couldn't rely on him, he got off to a really bad start.

davo10 · 26-11-2015 03:20PM

Jonti wrote: »

Friend should go to citizensrights and tell his case. Employers can and will be done for not following proper disciplinary procedures.
Very good chance he'll win his case.

Employment under one year means that for the most part he does not of protection of the Unfair Dismissals Act, also an employee can be let go without reason during probationary period

mel123 · 26-11-2015 03:35PM

As a matter of interest, what does your mate want to happen?
Their job back, or money as compensation??

Mrs OBumble · 26-11-2015 03:36PM

I think there are some provisions that he could use to argue this (there was a lad in Galway who claimed for something and won the case even though he'd been there less than a year). You'd need to ask a specialist lawyer about this.

That said, an apprentice who twice in three months has a sickness which prevents them from making a phone call. Really? I don't know any any apprenticeship style jobs which could accommodate such a fragile person. Time to look for something s/he's a better fit for.

And while it may benefit him/her in the short term to sue for damages, I'd be worried about the long term career harm this might do.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 04:08PM

Starting to realise that if people on here don't know what the rules of natural justice are, then they are clearly in no position to offer advice. I am well aware that my friend has no claim under the unfair dismissals acts, that has never been in doubt. My question is and always has been, do they have a claim under the industrial relations act, or something like breach of contract. I retract my earlier statement of any advice welcome, if you are just going to jump in with "they have less than a year move on" or "they broke the rules so have no rights" please move along, it has been said already.

dodzy · 26-11-2015 04:12PM

If I was the boss, and between the 2 occasions of absence, your 'mate' was a solid performer, i'd probably have been lenient. My guess his performance was average at best, thereby sealing his fate at the second occurrence. Game over. Pursuance will prove fruitless IMO.

amdublin · 26-11-2015 04:12PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

Starting to realise that if people on here don't know what the rules of natural justice are, then they are clearly in no position to offer advice. I am well aware that my friend has no claim under the unfair dismissals acts, that has never been in doubt. My question is and always has been, do they have a claim under the industrial relations act, or something like breach of contract. I retract my earlier statement of any advice welcome, if you are just going to jump in with "they have less than a year move on" or "they broke the rules so have no rights" please move along, it has been said already.

This advice here is good. Especially the bolded parts.

For "specialist lawyer" read ka ching, ka ching. Does your friend have any money?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I think there are some provisions that he could use to argue this (there was a lad in Galway who claimed for something and won the case even though he'd been there less than a year). You'd need to ask a specialist lawyer about this.

That said, an apprentice who twice in three months has a sickness which prevents them from making a phone call. Really? I don't know any any apprenticeship style jobs which could accommodate such a fragile person. Time to look for something s/he's a better fit for.

And while it may benefit him/her in the short term to sue for damages, I'd be worried about the long term career harm this might do..

_Brian · 26-11-2015 04:15PM

To be honest since he's only been employed for 3 months they could let him go and just say its not working out - goodbye, no explanation or appeals required.

How sick is someone that they can't lift a phone to their head and make a call... seriously. I've dealt with this very topic several times and there is nothing that keeps you from making one phone call to save your job. He was already on a warning and then doesn't ring on time.. bad form.

Your "friend" needs to move on and learn. Employers have rules, you stick to the rules or you don't, usually if you don't it doesn't end well..

davo10 · 26-11-2015 04:16PM

Snakeweasel wrote: »

Starting to realise that if people on here don't know what the rules of natural justice are, then they are clearly in no position to offer advice. I am well aware that my friend has no claim under the unfair dismissals acts, that has never been in doubt. My question is and always has been, do they have a claim under the industrial relations act, or something like breach of contract. I retract my earlier statement of any advice welcome, if you are just going to jump in with "they have less than a year move on" or "they broke the rules so have no rights" please move along, it has been said already.

What advice are you looking for? The unfair dismissals act and rules governing probationary periods are on point.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 04:22PM

dodzy wrote: »

If I was the boss, and between the 2 occasions of absence, your 'mate' was a solid performer, i'd probably have been lenient. My guess his performance was average at best, thereby sealing his fate at the second occurrence. Game over. Pursuance will prove fruitless IMO.

Yeah thats the thing, maybe I'm overthinking it and always worried about what the employee can claim for in my usual working role. Like if the company were flawed in their procedures, and didn't get pulled up about performance, there are cases where employees have won based under the industrial relations act when they proved that the employer just used something small as an excuse to fire them for performance issues.

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 04:24PM

davo10 wrote: »

What advice are you looking for? The unfair dismissals act and rules governing probationary periods are on point.

Industrial relations act, breach of contract, hell even employment equality acts if they touched on any of the 9 grounds at any point of my friends employment!

Snakeweasel · 26-11-2015 04:27PM

amdublin wrote: »

This advice here is good. Especially the bolded parts.

For "specialist lawyer" read ka ching, ka ching. Does your friend have any money?

Thats why I came on here, they were going to go straight to a solicitor and I didn't want them to waste their time if they didn't have a case, because I know that they wouldn't have much money to pay a solicitor if it didn't go their way. Sorry if I seemed a bit short in my last reply, its just that I get the unfair dismissals issue, there are just many others avenues when it comes to dismissing someone incorrectly that isn't covered by unfair dismissals acts.

Punished twice for the same offence

Comments