I've Got Someone Sacked .....

Wicksta said:
Because they actually exist? lol.
Click to expand...

I find it highly unlikely that nobody else in the OP's company has a mortgage or children.

Nice ninja edit.

Yes they are now in this situation. And had the OP taken a different course of action it could have been someone else's life/mortgage/family (possibly his own) who were in the situation.
 
Haggisman said:
Well, people are using the argument that the (possibly) sacked employee has a family to support/mortgage to pay. Why should they be any more important than the OP's or anyone elses? :confused:
Click to expand...

because the employee in question is at fault, that's why. it's not a case of whose family is more important, it's a case of who is breaking the rules.
 
mrk1@1 said:
not a chance it is worth the risk for the op,

why should the op even entertain the risk of loosing his job and facing prosecution should the worst happen in the future.
Click to expand...

The answer is in my post that you quoted.

I think it is worth the risk. The OP said he knows the guy in question well and that he's a good worker. He gives him a lift in to work frequently. I reckon there is very little risk of any repercussions. Going straight down the official route in this situation was not worth it.
 
Wicksta said:
Yes, poor old Mr and Mrs Hypothetical, you hear about them so often - I don't know how they cope with all they go through in this forum alone.
Click to expand...

risks are hypothetical, fill out a risk assessment form, it's hypothetical but the surrounding facts equate to how high the risk is.

man with alcohol in his sytem, operating heavy machinery = very high risk. not worth taking the risk.
 
Robbie G said:
Castiel - what are your thoughts on this point:



?
Click to expand...

The team-leader was present, so I fail to see your point. He could still have referred the matter to the HR manager whilst limiting the employees access to the premises. We are discussing the alternatives that the OP could have considered that may have meant the employee may have kept his job. Sending/advising him to go home whilst still showing due diligence in informing HR as to the reasons he was advised to remain at home, off the premises or sent home (depending on the authority the team leader has) is one such alternative.

Once the employee was on the premises intending to begin or had begun work the limitations placed on management as to the application of the company policies became apparent.

However, as mrk1@1 pointed out, it is unreasonable to expect the OP to have the same Level of consideration as I would given our respective positions so I have conceded the point somewhat.
 
Last edited:
Malc said:
The answer is in my post that you quoted.

I think it is worth the risk. The OP said he knows the guy in question well and that he's a good worker. He gives him a lift in to work frequently. I reckon there is very little risk of any repercussions. Going straight down the official route in this situation was not worth it.
Click to expand...

do you actually understand the legal, let alone company policy implications on the op if he had said nothing?
 
albert said:
...and i feel terrible about it. I hate playing good cop , bad cop :mad:

I'm a Team Leader at work and pick up a workmate on my way to work. On the way there he told me he'd had 4 cans of lager a couple of hours previous. As he drives machinery at work i told my supervisor what he'd said in the car. Subsequently the lad was taken to office and then walked off site. He had worked with me for a year and a half.

I know i did the right thing by telling my supervisor but i can't help thinking how i could have handled it differently so the lad would have kept his job. To make matters worse he was one of my best workers, knew every job and more and was always talking about trying for promotion. Also he's just bought a house and is paying for a holiday for early next year. This keeps going around and around in my head.

I'm not paid enough for this :( and my head is buzzing ......
Click to expand...

Usually I would mind my own business with stuff like that but when it comes to machinery and safety you did 100% right thing IMO. Someone like that doesn't deserve a job. It's not Russia.
 
cm1179 said:
he didn't think of others though, he put every other person who would be within his vacinity in danger.
Click to expand...

Absolute crap, he fessed up to a senior person before he got to work. That is not the action of someone who is concealing things to the endangerment of others.

I'm still surprised the manager who fired him did so, honesty should count for something and punishing people for their honesty only breeds future deceit and lies.

This has been handled all wrong by whoever the guy was that actually fired him and highlights the difference between a good manager and a complete jobsworth.
 
Castiel said:
The team-leader was present, so I fail to see your point. He could still have referred the matter to the HR manager whilst limiting the employees access to the premises.
Click to expand...

My point is that the HR manager could have judged the situation far more accurately with the employee present, team leader or not. Therefore your off-the-wall point about letting the employee stay at home just in case the company's liability is increased for the two minutes he might have been operating machinery for (your assumption), is superseded by the need to get the employee's side of the story as soon as possible.

Kenai said:
Absolute crap, he fessed up to a senior person before he got to work. That is not the action of someone who is concealing things to the endangerment of others.

I'm still surprised the manager who fired him did so, honesty should count for something and punishing people for their honesty only breeds future deceit and lies.

This has been handled all wrong by whoever the guy was that actually fired him and highlights the difference between a good manager and a complete jobsworth.
Click to expand...

Afaik he hasn't actually fired him?
 
Last edited:
What a horrible little snake. Nobody likes a grass. :mad:













(j/k you did the right thing and the guy deserves to lose his job if he's getting pished a few hours before driving machinery)
 
Haggisman said:
I'm sure saving face and having the respect of people at work will be a great consolation when you're up in front of a manslaughter hearing.

That's assuming you still have that when they partly blame you for the death of one of their co-workers because you didn't take the appropriate action to prevent it.

Or if you're really unlucky, maybe it will console your grieving family when you're the one that gets hurt.
Click to expand...

Talk about extremes. Do you read the Daily Mail by any chance? Looking purely at the OP's situation and no hypothetical drunken massacres, the OP wouldn't be held liable for anything. Hearing a passing comment wont get you charged for manslaughter:D
 
albert said:
I'm a Team Leader at work and pick up a workmate on my way to work. On the way there he told me he'd had 4 cans of lager a couple of hours previous. As he drives machinery at work i told my supervisor what he'd said in the car. ....
Click to expand...

Would you feel it acceptable if it was a friend who had drunk 4 cans of lager on a night out and then decided to go out for a drive? Chances are he would still be under the influence if not over the DD limit. Would you ever take that risk?

I think it is unacceptable in both circumstances, and you were right to report it in the working environment as Team Leader you have a responsibility to your team as well as to your supervisor and the company to maintain a level of professionalism.

If it was was on a night out, then I would (and have!) given the mate a talking to and told them to take a cab home :)
 
Every company I have worked for has stated that if you are under the influence of drugs/alcohol at work it is gross misconduct and could lead to instant dismissal.

I don't know why people are giving the OP such a hard time, yes he may have made the wrong decision, but no-one makes the right decision everytime.
 
Kenai said:
I've not read all of it but he said sacked in the OP and i've not seen a definite clarification otherwise so i'm going on that.

If he's just been sent home for the day, then that's a much better approach.
Click to expand...

No need to guess anymore:

albert said:
The lads been suspended
Click to expand...

But in any case you are wrong, because if it's company policy to adopt a zero tolerance approach to booze, then it doesn't matter if he fessed up or got on his knees or donated a million pounds to Cancer Research, jobsworth is nothing to do with it and the manager has little choice but to sack him.
 
mrk1@1 said:
do you actually understand the legal, let alone company policy implications on the op if he had said nothing?
Click to expand...

I don't know them word for word but I'll play along and assume they go something along the lines of:

"if you have any reason to suspect that a fellow employee is unfit to work due to any of the following circumstances, i) under the influence of drugs or alcohol ii) etc etc, then you must inform your line manager and/or HR immediately."

This is to cover the employers back should any health and safety issue arise and I agree that it's a good and useful thing to have, as well as being the law.

However, these are guidelines and whilst everyone in HR etc will tell you to follow them and most of the time you would do well to follow them, in this case, I think the best result for the OP would have been to take matters in to his own hands considering his relationship with the employee and the social dynamic of the environment in which he works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom