Armchair Lawyers Part 2: Sacking a new staff member
- Thread starter unwashed potato!
- Start date
There are. A friend of mine works for one and some of the stories from companies he's gone into to settle disputes and deal with sackings are hilarious some people just don't have the faintest clue on how to deal with the human side of their business.
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
- Do your best Vince McMahon impression
- Scream "YOOOUURRREEEE FIIIIIRREEED" at them at point blank range
- Film it with hidden cameras
- Post it to YouTube
- ????
- Profit
Seriously though, just ask them to leave as it's not working out and offer to give them a good reference, if they need help finding anything.
Do NOT tell them the news on a Friday afternoon. That is a dick move which will ruin their weekend and rub salt in their wounds.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 6,316
Legally, and from the barebones info on offer, I think the OP's rear is covered, whether he wants to be a huge dingus is another matter. For better advice, the full story will have to appear now, won't it?
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,731
- Location
- Surrey
Haha I like how that's the only possible reason in your head. Talk about jump to conclusions. What you're basically saying is this. If you don't give us every single exact detail we will jump to conclusions and judge you on the massive assumptions. So give us more details for us to jump to more conclusions.
Example. What if I said they were regularly late, say only 10 minutes but on a 2 hour shift its not ideal. Say the other 2 staff working with them are unhappy with this person's general attitude. Say they weren't wearing their uniform after many attempts to get them to. Say they would hang up mid phone call to their boss. She drinks Pepsi over coke! Any of these reasons enough? Just examples but let's see how now everyone picks them apart.
Ive nothing to hide. I obviously talk with family and friends about my day to day issues and joys. One thing they say is it's unheard of how this person would talk to their boss in such a short time. If that's how they are now, how will they be in a year etc. I can easily get rid now while it's easy for us both.
I also don't take getting rid of staff easily. It takes a lot of my time and effort to hire staff for commercial sites. I do the training and that means a good week of meeting new members in the evening, then another week of training. I'd much rather keep the staff I've employed and enjoy years of a good relationship with trust from both sides. I've some staff I absolutely love as they are fantastic,reasonably sensible. Just pure joy and they've been with me so many years now I've forgot how long it's been and I'm very proud to have them represent my company. but if they aren't working out, they aren't working out. The reason could be all because it's my fault, the reason could all be their fault, it doesn't matter, what matters is its on worked out for whatever reason. Why pick apart anything else. I'm not being nasty in my method even in the slightest. Apparently it's wrong to want to make sure it's done legally.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
More like that its wrong you feel the need to seek out advice on how to sack them without being held accountable
Is what you have listed not considered good reasons and what colleagues have to say considered proof?
Or is the lateness due to family/child issues or unexpected traffic delays.
You surely know that you can dismiss on those reasons mentioned after reasonable warning, so its not surprising people feel that you are not painting the whole picture.
Is what you have listed not considered good reasons and what colleagues have to say considered proof?
Or is the lateness due to family/child issues or unexpected traffic delays.
You surely know that you can dismiss on those reasons mentioned after reasonable warning, so its not surprising people feel that you are not painting the whole picture.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 3,762
- Location
- My fabulous ship
Look.
Shandy Bass > Apple Tango > Diet Coke > Coke > Pepsi.
Legally you have nothing holding you back other than what is stipulated in your contract. Even then, it's debateable.
But this is more of a moral call than a legal one.
What does this say to your other staff seeing it all unfold?
How much of a leader are you? Are you fair?
Are you improving your colleagues lives by taking this path?
could you work with the employee to improve them or has that time passed?
Staff turnover is always affected when someone leaves, regardless of if it's for better or worse.
Either way, it will come to a climax and you'll forget about it in a year.
Now time for an apple tango.
The only comebacks would be on the grounds of sexual/race/disability discrimination.
So long as you give them the required notice and pay them all money due including unpaid holiday and you gave them a contract of employment within two months then the employee has no rights basically.
You just need to tell them not to come into work and from when. No reasons need to be given.
Of course from a moral viewpoint that's a spineless douche thing to do but hey, that's life.
So long as you give them the required notice and pay them all money due including unpaid holiday and you gave them a contract of employment within two months then the employee has no rights basically.
You just need to tell them not to come into work and from when. No reasons need to be given.
Of course from a moral viewpoint that's a spineless douche thing to do but hey, that's life.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,545
- Location
- Leyland
Then you have my approval
No, this is racist and offends me
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Then you have my approval
Wont the contract have to state a requirement of arriving at specific time slots, wearing uniform (rather than a vague statement of appropriate dress) and the colleagues not approving of the attitude because it is not work appropriate or acceptable behaviour (rather than because they dont say hi when they come in or dont make the tea often enough).
If a person is not fit for the role for reasons you are able to logically quantify and evidence then move them out the business. There is zero point retaining employees who are on a trial, who don't want to be there or who are not up to the job. Get them gone cleanly and quickly and learn from your mistakes at employing the wrong person, as you need to take some responsibility here.
Business is cruel sometimes and if you feel able or willing to offer them something to get them past Christmas then great, but my advice is get them out the business and find a replacement and let them get on with finding their next role. If they can't see this coming then that is perhaps half of the problem in the first place and if you are a crap employer you are doing them a favour!
Business is cruel sometimes and if you feel able or willing to offer them something to get them past Christmas then great, but my advice is get them out the business and find a replacement and let them get on with finding their next role. If they can't see this coming then that is perhaps half of the problem in the first place and if you are a crap employer you are doing them a favour!
Indeed - we had a situation where they ummed and arred about it no one really wanting to take responsibility and then suddenly 2 years later things came to a head and they realised they were still employing the person and couldn't get rid of them easily lol.
The first thing when I read OP I assumed person is kind of doing his job, but his attitude is bad, no idea why so many people are bashing OP.
I knew one guy where I work a while ago, had a temporary contract, I think 13 weeks probationary. He was one of the best workers I've seen in my 4 years here, respecting all the site rules but got himself fired after 10 weeks because of his attitude to others. I know management would have kept him for permanent contract if not for his complete lack of manners. No staff is irreplaceable they say.
I'm surprised you kept him for so long for being late to work often (if not family reasons) and other stuff. Just tell him he's being fired and has X days/weeks to leave, that's it.
I knew one guy where I work a while ago, had a temporary contract, I think 13 weeks probationary. He was one of the best workers I've seen in my 4 years here, respecting all the site rules but got himself fired after 10 weeks because of his attitude to others. I know management would have kept him for permanent contract if not for his complete lack of manners. No staff is irreplaceable they say.
I'm surprised you kept him for so long for being late to work often (if not family reasons) and other stuff. Just tell him he's being fired and has X days/weeks to leave, that's it.
I think if your mindset is everyone is a good as one another and if they only get a chance then the'd be a superstar you have some learning to do. It would be great if it were true but if you have been involved in employing people over many years you soon realise the most will do a fair job, some will be superstars and a fair chunk will be utterly useless, time wasting and hard to manage. It's those you need to identify quickly and get them gone as if you keep giving them a chance they will keep letting you down and rarely will they change.
Get em gone as quickly, cleanly and ethically as you can but be clear, they need to go!
You have nobody to blame but yourself if people jump to the "wrong conclusions". Your OP basically said lets not go into detail why but I want to sack someone, is it legally OK?
Short answer: yes it is given the circumstances of being within their probationary period.
Long answer: We don't have enough info. Did you provide adequate training, make reasonable adjustments, allow for mitigating circumstances. Did you force them to work what wasn't contractually agreed? If the answer is no to all of the above then you are covered morally as well. If it's yes to any of these questions then, no you are in the wrong at least morally.
Don't ask for advice based on deliberately obfuscated and limited info and then get all uppity if someone calls you out on it.
So yeah, looking at your post history you come across as someone who comes to a forum for HR/legal advice on how to sack/spy on your workforce. Hardly a sign of a morally forthright set of ethics.
Lol, really, ooh that's me told off. Oh no wait, you made zero difference to the fact the OP asked a vague question then got uppity because people said not enough info. Add to the fact the OP has history for using GD as his HR advisors and you can see why people are asking questions.
The OP was asking for validation to sack somebody, hardly bad form for some of us to call him up on this.
Now what was that about making assumptions?
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,731
- Location
- Surrey
Glad some of the other users see sense. What you list wasn't what happened. You act now like everything was asked nicely without people filling in the gaps for no reason. You could have said, not enough info can you clarify such as such, but instead I was told I'm greedy for keeping them while it's our "busy" period. Amongst everything else.
And in reality I did give enough information. From the first post you got all the information you need, as like I said who was wrong is not relevant and doesn't need debating. I know who was wrong. People just wanted the juicy information to judge and come at things with a negative view.
Last edited:
If you're running a business with employees one of the first things you gen up on is employment law, you don't come to a forum to get advice from random people who may or may not know what the hell they're talking about. If you're not sure, ring a solicitor who specialises in this and get a free consultation.