Employment law experts please - i been dismissed for no 'apparent' reason?

cainer · 27 Jan 2012 at 17:12

maybe in a few weeks we should have an OcUK meet/night out at wez's old restaurant.. all complain about the food and not pay them.. and give it to wez

wez130 · 27 Jan 2012 at 17:50

Another update, i've just been on the phone to somebody higher in the company, and he ststed that i had not been 'dismissed' but they had terminated my employment with notice'. Surely the same rights apply? What's the difference?

Pookie Bear · 27 Jan 2012 at 18:26

Call ACAS and speak to someone who knows what they're talking about - it's what they're there for.

edit: They're on 08457 47 47 47 and they are open until 8 tonight.

ash_scotland88 · 27 Jan 2012 at 18:50

Pookie Bear said:
Call ACAS and speak to someone who knows what they're talking about - it's what they're there for.

edit: They're on 08457 47 47 47 and they are open until 8 tonight.

What's up with the phone number tag? New google chrome feature? I've noticed it on a few sites today.

TRNC · 27 Jan 2012 at 18:53

There is no right to appeal, within 1 year of starting employment with the business you can be dismissed/sacked/fired/let go/made redundant or whatever else you like to call it for no reason and with no consultation.

wez130 · 27 Jan 2012 at 18:55

I've filled in a tribunal form for wrongful dismissal and discrimination, as i'm the only one 'disciplined' for poor sales. If it doesn't get anywhere then so be it. At least i tried lol.

wez130 · 27 Jan 2012 at 18:57

TRNC said:
There is no right to appeal, within 1 year of starting employment with the business you can be dismissed/sacked/fired/let go/made redundant or whatever else you like to call it for no reason and with no consultation.

oh really?

http://www.backuphr.com/human-resources-modload-news-article-105.htm

says different

Grievances and Accompaniment

Employees can raise grievances at any time and this right cannot be restricted to employees over one year's service. It is important to deal with all grievances properly and this will include the right of appeal against the decision to dismiss someone with less that a year's service.

It is often forgotten that the right to be accompanied at disciplinary or grievance meeting is not dependent on service so make sure that employees are aware of their right to be accompanied at a grievance or disciplinary meeting and never deny then the right to be accompanied by a colleague or accredited Trade Unions official. This is a free standing right.

TRNC · 27 Jan 2012 at 19:00

You can appeal all you like, you're gone. If you expect any different then you are crackers, it will just make them want you gone even quicker!

I'm an employer and within 1 years service the law is just about on our side, if we want you gone we dont have to give reason, you just go.

Castiel · 27 Jan 2012 at 19:04

wez130 said:
oh really?

http://www.backuphr.com/human-resources-modload-news-article-105.htm

says different

From the same source:

The 3 step statutory procedure i.e. invite to a meeting giving reasons, hold a meeting to consider and give the right to appeal have conflicting legal status during the first year of employment has been repealed.

Unless you fall into very specific criteria (which it doesn't appear from you have said you do) you have no right to appeal.......

You would be better served spending the time looking for another job, this one has gone.

"andy" · 27 Jan 2012 at 19:38

Castiel said:
You would be better served spending the time looking for another job, this one has gone.

He really wouldn't. It doesn't take 24/7 to look for a job. Plenty of free time to pursue this.

People "not bothering" is why our employment rights are so poor imo

TRNC · 27 Jan 2012 at 19:43

"andy" said:
People "not bothering" is why our employment rights are so poor imo

It shows how little you know about employment law if you believe this, they are heavily swayed in favour of the employee and against the employer.

The only half decent law supporting the employer is the one allowing employers to get rid of someone in the first year with no questions asked (soon to become 2 years). Without this you'd never be able to cull the dross from a workforce without being up on a tribunal for unfair or constructive dismissal.

Castiel · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:04

"andy" said:
He really wouldn't. It doesn't take 24/7 to look for a job. Plenty of free time to pursue this.

People "not bothering" is why our employment rights are so poor imo

In fact he would.

It would be a waste of his time as he has no appeal rights.....he is simply chasing rainbows.

Curio · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:36

He's already got a new job - so he's got nothing to lose. If he wants to take some of his free time to peruse it (I would...) then maybe something will come of it....if only that his old employer might think twice before abusing the 12 month rule next time.

TRNC said:
The only half decent law supporting the employer is the one allowing employers to get rid of someone in the first year with no questions asked (soon to become 2 years). Without this you'd never be able to cull the dross from a workforce without being up on a tribunal for unfair or constructive dismissal.

While I agree, you have to admit it can be easily abused. The OP performed his job well (apparently) and was cut loose just so the position could be filled with a chum of his boss? That's not right.

TRNC · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:40

Its not abusing the rule just because they are protected by it. They have their reasons and we only know 1 side of the story, i'm not saying the OP is lying but to suggest the ex-employer is abusing his right to shift on any employee he likes within 1 year is not fair.

Martini1991 · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:43

Which place was this?

Participant · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:44

Wez what are you hoping to gain from this? Financial compensation, or a sense of self-satisfaction at not having laid down and accepting a shafting without a fight? Because I doubt you will gain either. Someone they liked more than you has been given the job, not someone better than you.

Curio · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:49

TRNC said:
Its not abusing the rule just because they are protected by it. They have their reasons and we only know 1 side of the story, i'm not saying the OP is lying but to suggest the ex-employer is abusing his right to shift on any employee he likes within 1 year is not fair.

There's a difference between moving somebody on for valid reasons and just taking the ****, as the employer clearly has in this case. Even though I basically agree with the 12 month rule, there should be a tiny bit of protection in cases like this.

jas72 · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:52

Jokester said:
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index...ex_ew/basic_rights_at_work.htm#Rights_at_work

the right to claim compensation if unfairly dismissed. In most cases you will have to have worked for one year to be able to claim unfair dismissal

There are always exceptions.

NiCkNaMe · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:55

TRNC said:
Its not abusing the rule just because they are protected by it. They have their reasons and we only know 1 side of the story, i'm not saying the OP is lying but to suggest the ex-employer is abusing his right to shift on any employee he likes within 1 year is not fair.

I think you are quite lucky that you only run a company with 3 employees as between your shocking understanding of employment law and network security I am surprised you are still in business

If this is your opinion of 'employment law' then you have a very naive view. There have protection via CONTRACTS and STATUTORY RIGHTS which if they have been contravened can be pursued. If in the case of the OP he feels he has evidence to suggest he has been wrongfully dismissed then he should pursue!

Participant · 27 Jan 2012 at 20:58

NiCkNaMe said:
If in the case of the OP he feels he has evidence to suggest he has been wrongfully dismissed then he should pursue!

But wrongfully dismissed within 12 months has to correspond with a certain number of potential scenarios, such as dismissed on race or gender, none of which apply to him.