Jury Service: Attending against employer's wishes.
- Thread starter £15
- Start date
Sorry for not updating the thread. In the end I did agree to defer. To the 1st September 2014.
Basically, I agreed on the grounds that not doing so would severely impact any future defence should I find myself being disciplined, or sacked, for attending against my employer's wishes. All the advice I read pointed in that direction.
I made sure the date was agreed by my employer, in emails, should they cause problems come the time.
Fast foward to present day and they're at it again. They have failed to plan for my absence and as we are running at, often below, minimum staffing levels, any absence, be it annual leave, sickness, or jury duty, is going to have an impact. An impact that usually relies on other people filling the gap with overtime - something people are less and less willing to do.
They've had 9 months to come up with something better and haven't.
Most of my jury duty falls on my rest days - my shifts fall over weekends - so they are now saying I should work all week in court, then come into 'real work' over the weekend. If I were to submit to their demands, I'd be working for nearly 4 weeks with 1 'day off' and that's not even a proper day off, but the day off you get after finishing a night shift and are due into work the following day-time. I'm pretty sure this is against the WTD. Not to mention just plain unfair.
All the guidance I have read states the courts, and employers, need to be reasonable, fair and sympathetic - I do not think they are being any of these things.
I spoke to a representative of the Jury Central Summoning Bureau yesterday (after sending them a lengthy email) and she agreed. However, she was unable to offer any binding advice and suggested, due to the complexity of the matter, re. the shift pattern, I contact the court where I'll be serving. I've read that some courts specifically do not allow jurors to return to work and advise summoning officers to be sympathetic when dealing with shift workers being asked to go on jury duty on rest days. I plan on doing this tomorrow. She also suggested I contact my union, ACAS and/or CAB.
It's all up in the air at the moment and frankly stressing me out a little. Like it did back in December. I thought it had all been resolved. All the ill-feelings are coming back. It shouldn't be like this.
I was encouraged by what the woman from the bureau said, but also worried that she wouldn't go as far as to say what she thought I/they can/can't do. She actually said that, if I wanted to, she's sure they would agree to excuse me if I should ask. But implied she thought i shouldn't let them get away with it - especially as I really want to do it. If I were to be excused, I go back into the pot to be chosen at random - it may never happen.
Basically, I agreed on the grounds that not doing so would severely impact any future defence should I find myself being disciplined, or sacked, for attending against my employer's wishes. All the advice I read pointed in that direction.
I made sure the date was agreed by my employer, in emails, should they cause problems come the time.
Fast foward to present day and they're at it again. They have failed to plan for my absence and as we are running at, often below, minimum staffing levels, any absence, be it annual leave, sickness, or jury duty, is going to have an impact. An impact that usually relies on other people filling the gap with overtime - something people are less and less willing to do.
They've had 9 months to come up with something better and haven't.
Most of my jury duty falls on my rest days - my shifts fall over weekends - so they are now saying I should work all week in court, then come into 'real work' over the weekend. If I were to submit to their demands, I'd be working for nearly 4 weeks with 1 'day off' and that's not even a proper day off, but the day off you get after finishing a night shift and are due into work the following day-time. I'm pretty sure this is against the WTD. Not to mention just plain unfair.
All the guidance I have read states the courts, and employers, need to be reasonable, fair and sympathetic - I do not think they are being any of these things.
I spoke to a representative of the Jury Central Summoning Bureau yesterday (after sending them a lengthy email) and she agreed. However, she was unable to offer any binding advice and suggested, due to the complexity of the matter, re. the shift pattern, I contact the court where I'll be serving. I've read that some courts specifically do not allow jurors to return to work and advise summoning officers to be sympathetic when dealing with shift workers being asked to go on jury duty on rest days. I plan on doing this tomorrow. She also suggested I contact my union, ACAS and/or CAB.
It's all up in the air at the moment and frankly stressing me out a little. Like it did back in December. I thought it had all been resolved. All the ill-feelings are coming back. It shouldn't be like this.
I was encouraged by what the woman from the bureau said, but also worried that she wouldn't go as far as to say what she thought I/they can/can't do. She actually said that, if I wanted to, she's sure they would agree to excuse me if I should ask. But implied she thought i shouldn't let them get away with it - especially as I really want to do it. If I were to be excused, I go back into the pot to be chosen at random - it may never happen.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
You do know it's a random selection process? So someone can be called many times whereas others not at all.
Doing it now has no effect on whether you'll be re-called later for another one.
I know.
I don't know how the probability of being chosen is effected once you have been chosen, but in my mind the odds of being chosen once are small enough, never mind being chosen more than once.
I don't want to look a gift-horse in the mouth and all that.
I don't know how the probability of being chosen is effected once you have been chosen, but in my mind the odds of being chosen once are small enough, never mind being chosen more than once.
I don't want to look a gift-horse in the mouth and all that.
Last edited:
I know.
I don't know how the probability of being chosen is effected once you have been chosen, but in my mind the odds of being chosen once are small enough, never mind being chosen more than once.
I don't want to look a gift-horse in the mouth and all that.
Gamblers fallacy, the odds don't change.
Jury duty is the most boring waste of time ever. Deffer and be done with it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
I know.
I don't know how the probability of being chosen is effected once you have been chosen, but in my mind the odds of being chosen once are small enough, never mind being chosen more than once.
I don't want to look a gift-horse in the mouth and all that.
The odds of being chosen twice is higher than being chosen once before you've ever been chosen. But once you have done it your chance of being chosen again is the same as someone who's never done it being chosen for their first.
Having deferred for 9 months you have already been reasonable. I would stick to your guns and if they really are as hard up as you say for staff, then I can't imagine they would dismiss you for this even if they think they could get away with it.
I did it after deferring. I was under the impression you are given a slot and thats it, none of this pick the days rubbish and it's all week days. Mine involved turning up day one, not being picked. Phoning the line each day to see if I was needed the next day, 1 in 3 times I was but let go within and hour and then after a couple of weeks let go without getting close to any jury duty.
I think your reasoning or at least part of it is a bit naff - while its good to have an opinion on how it will affect your workplace your manager's manger has one too and his trumps yours... if he feels that it would be better for the organisation for you to be doing jury service later on then just do it later on - that's what your employers want.
As for the not doing it while close to redundancy etc... due to your mood seems a bit irrelevant really - you're over thinking things. Just delay it and stop creating a nuisance when there is no need to - they know you can delay it, they've asked you to delay it...
As for the not doing it while close to redundancy etc... due to your mood seems a bit irrelevant really - you're over thinking things. Just delay it and stop creating a nuisance when there is no need to - they know you can delay it, they've asked you to delay it...
he allready has delayed it by deferring last december when he started this thread, you can only defer once, after that time if you want out you have to go before the judge with a valid excuse
oops - maybe I should read the whole thread... hadn't realised it had been bumped
@OP I reckon just tell your managers verbally that 'the court won't allow working for the duration of the case'...
better to blame it on something out of your control than to start going all union/working time directive etc...
I'm surprised how dumb they've been given they've had advanced warning this time and jury service isn't exactly a novel thing to have to deal with for an employer.
@OP I reckon just tell your managers verbally that 'the court won't allow working for the duration of the case'...
better to blame it on something out of your control than to start going all union/working time directive etc...
I'm surprised how dumb they've been given they've had advanced warning this time and jury service isn't exactly a novel thing to have to deal with for an employer.
If it is randomly selected each time then the highest probability is in this order of highest to lowest.
Not being chosen at all.
Being chosen once.
Being chosen twice.
Once you have been chosen once then the probability of being chosen again reduces. The probability of being chosen isn't the same for everyone. The only time the probability was the same was on the first ever jury service draw.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Wrong....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy
The chance of me flipping 2 heads in a row from a coin toss is 25% before I start (50% x 50%). However if I flip a head, then at that point in time the chance of me doing it again on the next flip is 50% (the same as me flipping one head once) not 25%.
The chance of X happening is statistically independent from all previous events. Therefore being chosen once does not lessen your chances of being chosen again or make someone who has never been chosen more likely to be picked than you.
Last edited:
I have been told by a court official that the reverse is true.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
If the selection process is random (as is stated on the government website) the chance of being picked is the same regardless of how many times you've been picked before.
It can however go up depending on how many things you are registered for. So someone on the electoral role and holds a full UK driving license is twice as likely as someone merely on the electoral role. So a a court official may see the same people turning up more than others giving them the illusion you are more likely to be picked again but the reality is people who are registered on many official government lists are just more likely to be picked period.
Last edited: