Labour - the party of the worker - think again !!!

[Westdene Seagull]

For various reasons I'm involved in some disciplinary procedures at work ( no it's not against me ) but I've just read the ACAS recommendations that the government now use as the basis of employment law. Mr Brown has kindly removed the option of verbal warning as a requirement so now your employer can go straight to written warning. So much for protecting the workers from crap employers Mr Brown !!!!!!!!!! And that's coming from a right wing, Nazi, Palestinian loving Tory

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

When I worked at BT the start of the disciplinary procedure was a 2 stage verbal warning process , just a ticking off and you gave an informal oral , more serious or repetition of what you had already told them not to do led to a formal oral reprimand. The formal oral was noted on file so that the disciplinary procedure could then be escalated to the written warning level if necessary.

 

[Beach Hut]

My company tends to sack people then pay compensation later as it goes to a tribunal as they are not very good at HR.

 

[beorhthelm]

Mr Brown has kindly removed the option of verbal warning as a requirement so now your employer can go straight to written warning.

do you know that anything has actually changed? as far as i know, its never been law that you have to go through a verbal step, just accepted practice for most issues. for gross misconduct you can be instantly dismissed for example. all depends on the employers policy and and the reasons of the incident.

 

[simonsimon]

"And that's coming from a right wing, Nazi, Palestinian loving Tory"

"Tory" Irish Brigand if you do not mind.

 

[Dandyman]

do you know that anything has actually changed? as far as i know, its never been law that you have to go through a verbal step, just accepted practice for most issues. for gross misconduct you can be instantly dismissed for example. all depends on the employers policy and and the reasons of the incident.

What has changed is that the statutory 3 step procedure ceased to exist from April.

You can instantly dismiss for gross misconduct but unless you can demonstrate a fair hearing and a right of appeal you are still likely to get screwed at an ET.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

do you know that anything has actually changed? as far as i know, its never been law that you have to go through a verbal step, just accepted practice for most issues. for gross misconduct you can be instantly dismissed for example. all depends on the employers policy and and the reasons of the incident.

Changed on the 6th April this year. I'm talking about the standard three step procedure of verbal, written and then final written. While not binding tibunals always looked less favourably at employers that didn't follow this. The Scotish Twat has clearly decided he's not a man of the worker now !

 

[Westdene Seagull]

"And that's coming from a right wing, Nazi, Palestinian loving Tory"

"Tory" Irish Brigand if you do not mind.

Que ?

 

[beorhthelm]

What has changed is that the statutory 3 step procedure ceased to exist from April.

yes, the missus (HR) has explained it. the old system required meeting, written statement and right of appeal. but there wasnt an statutory verbal "warning" step. it seems the change was made to prevent petty appeals clogging up the tribunal system, where people would appeal on technicalities of procedure chasing large payouts. the new system has moved away from statutory requirement to "fairness" of the process being paramount and being guided by ACAS more than a act that cant hope to consider all possibilties and circumstance.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

yes, the missus (HR) has explained it. the old system required meeting, written statement and right of appeal. but there wasnt an statutory verbal "warning" step. it seems the change was made to prevent petty appeals clogging up the tribunal system, where people would appeal on technicalities of procedure chasing large payouts. the new system has moved away from statutory requirement to "fairness" of the process being paramount and being guided by ACAS more than a act that cant hope to consider all possibilties and circumstance.

So removing the verbal warning recommedation ( I know it wasn't statutory ) has made the whole system fairer how ? Basically an employer can now get rid of an employee in two easy steps rather than three. "Fair" is very subjective as well !

 

[beorhthelm]

So removing the verbal warning recommedation ( I know it wasn't statutory ) has made the whole system fairer how ? Basically an employer can now get rid of an employee in two easy steps rather than three.

but there wasnt a verbal warning step before and there is no "two step" process, you have to follow a fair process. before an employer could just roll you in, explain why you are sacked, write you the minutes of the meeting and offer chance of appeal (which you'd fail), end of (pending tribunal). now they might have to go through an arbitration process if the incident warranted, offer assistance, counselling or other possible solutions to the root cause. different reasons for disiplinary action can (and must) be treated differently according to the seriousness. thats the way i think its suppsed to work anyway.

 

[Gwylan]

Does anyone still think that Labour are the party for the worker?

 

[house your seagull]

we got 'ambulance chasers' in tribunals due to the bureacratic 3 step rule, not good for anybody.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

The three step procedure was never:- verbal warning / written warning / dismissal.

It was:- written letter of invitation to attend a meeting / the meeting / right to a fair appeal.

Many companies have disciplinary procedures that allow for bollockings to be followed by written warnings, with dismissal as an outcome only in the event of repeat offending or gross misconduct. All employers should have written disciplinary procedures that have to be followed. The change in the law hasn't abolished existing disciplinary procedures - although employers can change procedures if they go through due process to do so.

Failure to follow established internal procedures will never help an employer at a Tribunal. The question I would ask Westdene Seagull is:- what is the employer's written disciplinary procedure in the case that you are involved in?

 

[Stat Brother]

Just work for Royal Mail, it's like stepping back 30 years.
But even then our full-time jobs have been scarificed, by the union, for overtime.
Now if anyone can explain that to me, feel free.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Just work for Royal Mail, it's like stepping back 30 years.
But even then our full-time jobs have been scarificed, by the union, for overtime.
Now if anyone can explain that to me, feel free.

It's because unions always care more for employees that have been with the employer for donkeys years rather than those who have just started or those yet to join

 

[keaton]

Does anyone still think that Labour are the party for the worker?

Yes but only by default

 

[drew]

Are labour the party of the working man? Well, surely the question should be would the alternatives be better for the working man.

I am no expert on current law but provided there is a right to appeal then I don't see any problem. Any employer knows that if they get rid of someone unjustifiably then they may well next see them at the ET.

With regard to Westdene Seagull, whilst I appreciate you cannot pass comment whilst proceedings are in place, it would be interesting to hear whether you think the disciplinary proceedings are in fact warranted. That is, did the employee do something wrong?

 

[Don't get me started]

2 things on this.. As an employer it is still pants, if you want to offload a work shy its not easy.

The other thing is people seem genuinly surprised that Gordon Brown is a con man who would sell his granny rather than believe for a minute he could possibly be wrong.

On a lighter note the recession has only just started and will soon hit us like a whirlwind with interest rates and inflation running riot forcing highly geared companies to smack into a wall of debt and close down. 3million plus out of work and no need to worry about grievance proceedure. Trebles all round for labour as they survey the complete destruction of UK PLC whilst still in denial.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

For various reasons I'm involved in some disciplinary procedures at work ( no it's not against me ) but I've just read the ACAS recommendations that the government now use as the basis of employment law. Mr Brown has kindly removed the option of verbal warning as a requirement so now your employer can go straight to written warning. So much for protecting the workers from crap employers Mr Brown !!!!!!!!!! And that's coming from a right wing, Nazi, Palestinian loving Tory

And the laughable thing is a lot of the Tory supporters on here call Brown and his cronies "Lefties", they couldn't be further from the truth!