[Help] Employment disciplinary advice.

[Bowers-sfc]

This is going to sound quite complicated and I understand some people’s views on it will be very much ‘they did wrong, accept it’ etc.

But anyway,

A friend is currently suspended. Long story short, they done something wrong while working for a customer,
Customer has spotted what was wrong after the worker has left and has challenged them by text ( to employee work phone ). Employee was already on their way back ( allegedly ) to put right their wrong doing, but agreed to meet the customer at an agreed location to sort out what they had done wrong.

They have met, and the employee has apologised and put right what they done wrong to their customer. They accepted the apology, said they would not take it further with my friends boss etc. Case closed you think...

Roll on 18 months,

My friend has been suspended. Said customer has contacted my friends boss about the incident 18 months ago, and has sent them a video recording of the meeting between the customer and my friend in a car park.
My friend did not know this was being recorded, nor was he ever told until after he was suspended.

Said video is pretty damming, is show my friend, Audio clear, admitting his mistake etc but also hears the customer say they won’t take it any further.

My question is, is what happened regarding the video illegal? I’ve had a brief look online to help out, and I would say he has a strong case against the person filming him without his consent. Especially once this is passed onto a 3rd party ( regardless if said person has done wrong ) but also the company using this in a disciplinary setting if my friend was never aware of the video happening.

He is very aware and doesn’t need me or anybody telling him he was stupid and shouldn’t have done what he did, and yes it will be frowned upon that we are trying to find a loophole I guess to try get this quashed.

Helpful advice only please, but you lot are normally wonderful with advice...

But yes I appreciate it’s controversial.

Thanks in advance

 

[Emily's Mum]

Under GDPR 18, you have to give consent for anything to be recorded in these circumstances.
I would also suggest contacting ACAS for advice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eeyore]

I'm actually struggling to see what he did wrong, and why a customer would do that anyway.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

I'm actually struggling to see what he did wrong, and why a customer would do that anyway.

I’ve tried to be vague as the company is big as is the team my friend works in. I know would be unlikely to be read on here, but just incase.

But my friend times has to go into a customers property. ( yes, I know... idiot, if you work it out now... )

 

[Justice]

Did your friend steal something? Otherwise shit happens on site and can be rectified.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

Did your friend steal something?
[/B]Otherwise shit happens on site and can be rectified

What do you mean ( in bold )

Well, I tried to put it in bold anyway

 

[Wan Chai]

I’ve tried to be vague as the company is big as is the team my friend works in. I know would be unlikely to be read on here, but just incase.

But my friend times has to go into a customers property. ( yes, I know... idiot, if you work it out now... )

There are two issues. The first is the internal disciplinary issue, which is between your friend and the employer. The second is the issue of recording/filming without consent, which is between your friend and the customer - the employer is not involved in this matter even if it has seen/heard the recording.

On the first issue between your friend and the employer, it sounds as though your friend admits the wrongdoing. In which case the company is fully within its rights to take action against your friend without considering the recorded evidence.

The issue of recording/filming without consent is nothing to do with the employer and is a private matter between your friend and the customer. Given the circumstances I doubt there’s much mileage in your friend pursuing it.

 

[sydney]

is there not some sort of time limit for complaints to be lodged ...?? 18 months seems a bit excessive , why do that after all that time..?i'm presuming your mate has pilfered something.

 

[junior]

My opinion if it's anything to do with dishonesty then he deserves what he gets and should suck it up. If it's a mistake or accident then good luck to him as it sounds like he took steps to put it right.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

My opinion if it's anything to do with dishonesty then he deserves what he gets and should suck it up. If it's a mistake or accident then good luck to him as it sounds like he took steps to put it right.

Not a mistake or accident I’m afraid.

I think what’s bothered him ( and me, I’m quite invested in trying to help now ) is the fact it’s been so long since it happened and the fact he told him that he would not take it further.
I agree to some degree that yes, he should suck it up.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

is there not some sort of time limit for complaints to be lodged ...?? 18 months seems a bit excessive , why do that after all that time..?i'm presuming your mate has pilfered something.

That’s what I was hopefully lookiing to
Find out, doesn’t seem
The case in general for what I have read and nothing in their handbook or contract about times.

 

[Eeyore]

I don't think we have a statute of limitations.

Secondly, I'm not sure video footage that records an admission of wrong doing breaches any law. Even if GDPR did apply this would not be an inappropriate usage.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

I don't think we have a statute of limitations.

Secondly, I'm not sure video footage that records an admission of wrong doing breaches any law. Even if GDPR did apply this would not be an inappropriate usage.

But sending this footage where a person can be identified to a 3rd party would breach one of the 6 lawful
Basis for processing, surely?

 

[Eeyore]

But sending this footage where a person can be identified to a 3rd party would breach one of the 6 lawful
Basis for processing, surely?

I don't think so. If I take video footage of a crowd scene and upload it to social media that is not in contravention. If a paper, which doubtless they will, videos crowds at Brighton beach today they can use that footage and place it in the public domain.

Thus I cannot see how this footage is in breach of any law.

I don't think it is against the law to share video footage of a person if that video footage itself is not illegal (e.g revenge porn).

A person can request footage be removed but that doesn't apply here.

He could argue that there was a contract agreement with the other person, but as it involves the action it did, and probably contravened company standards, I can't see a way out.

I just don't know why 18 months later the person chose to come back.

I'm sorry for your friend because we all do things we regret and it's a rotten time to lose a job.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

I don't think so. If I take video footage of a crowd scene and upload it to social media that is not in contravention. If a paper, which doubtless they will, videos crowds at Brighton beach today they can use that footage and place it in the public domain.

Thus I cannot see how this footage is in breach of any law.

I don't think it is against the law to share video footage of a person if that video footage itself is not illegal (e.g revenge porn).

Sounds right to be fair.
Massively clutching at straws, I appreciate that.

 

[Eeyore]

Sounds right to be fair.
Massively clutching at straws, I appreciate that.

Don't take my word for it though.

 

[yxee]

Even if the customer did something illegal in filming, I don't see how that would lead to anything reversible in terms of the company's decision to suspend, which I think it has the right to do if it sees this evidence (especially via a complaint from a customer, and your friend has not previously made them aware of the issue).

Maybe your friend has a claim against the customer for breach of privacy in sharing a privately recorded conversation but I'm not sure there's much here. It seems like a reasonable type of recording to me. It sounds like the customer changed their mind and I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

Even if the customer did something illegal in filming, I don't see how that would lead to anything reversible in terms of the company's decision to suspend, which I think it has the right to do if it sees this evidence (especially via a complaint from a customer, and your friend has not previously made them aware of the issue).

Maybe your friend has a claim against the customer for breach of privacy in sharing a privately recorded conversation but I'm not sure there's much here. It seems like a reasonable type of recording to me. It sounds like the customer changed their mind and I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that.

Yeah I think I agree really. If anything the claim would be against the person filming rather then the company.
A fee half hour advice told him it could possibly be entrapment. Especially when they’ve kept it for so long and have said in text and in the video they’d take no further action. It’s came to light that the customer used the video in bargaining when renegotiating for a product with the company.

 

[Goldstone1976]

There are two issues. The first is the internal disciplinary issue, which is between your friend and the employer. The second is the issue of recording/filming without consent, which is between your friend and the customer - the employer is not involved in this matter even if it has seen/heard the recording.

On the first issue between your friend and the employer, it sounds as though your friend admits the wrongdoing. In which case the company is fully within its rights to take action against your friend without considering the recorded evidence.

The issue of recording/filming without consent is nothing to do with the employer and is a private matter between your friend and the customer. Given the circumstances I doubt there’s much mileage in your friend pursuing it.

This would be my view as well.

Not a mistake or accident I’m afraid.

The employer (who you say elsewhere is a large company) has received what appears to be prima facie evidence that a current employee has admitted doing something wrong that isn’t a ‘mistake or accident’.

They will be thinking about the following things:

1. What else has he done during his employment that we don’t yet know about?
2. If the issue at hand (and you carefully don’t say what it is) involves an employee entering a customer’s house and doing something that involves a breach of trust, they will take an extremely dim view.
3. They will be very worried about reputational damage. Their nightmare scenario will involve considering the impact of the video appearing on Twitter with a description of “Look at this - Company X’s employee admits to Y action; I provide complete proof, the employee admits it, and they do nothing”. A world of pain for the PR team.
4. As the company is large, they presumably have a whole load of employees who could cover your mate’s workload until they recruit a replacement. Indeed, due to the current economic situation they may be looking to cut costs anyway.

As Wan Chai says, the issue of the legality of the recording is between the customer and your mate.

Your mate would be well advised to brush up his CV and, imo, based on the evidence you have provided (which is scant - understandably - but damning) consider resigning now. It would be far better to have to explain to a new employer why he’d resigned rather than why he’d been sacked.

He’d also be well advised to consider the issue of a reference from his current employer (if they are important in his line of work). If it is inevitable that he’s going to be fired, and the fact that you and he are looking for ‘loopholes’ suggests it is, he may be able to trade “Look, it’s clear where this is heading. How about I save you the HR effort of going through a disciplinary procedure by resigning, in return for a reference?” He needs to be realistic - he’s not going to get “he’s the best thing since Peter Ward”, but he might get “he was employed by us from X to Y. He left by resignation”, which is far better than “he was dismissed” or “we won’t give a reference”.

TL;DR? Suck it up. It’s time for him to focus on his future employment prospects.

 

[Bowers-sfc]

This would be my view as well.



The employer (who you say elsewhere is a large company) has received what appears to be prima facie evidence that a current employee has admitted doing something wrong that isn’t a ‘mistake or accident’.

They will be thinking about the following things:

1. What else has he done during his employment that we don’t yet know about?
2. If the issue at hand (and you carefully don’t say what it is) involves an employee entering a customer’s house and doing something that involves a breach of trust, they will take an extremely dim view.
3. They will be very worried about reputational damage. Their nightmare scenario will involve considering the impact of the video appearing on Twitter with a description of “Look at this - Company X’s employee admits to Y action; I provide complete proof, the employee admits it, and they do nothing”. A world of pain for the PR team.
4. As the company is large, they presumably have a whole load of employees who could cover your mate’s workload until they recruit a replacement. Indeed, due to the current economic situation they may be looking to cut costs anyway.

As Wan Chai says, the issue of the legality of the recording is between the customer and your mate.

Your mate would be well advised to brush up his CV and, imo, based on the evidence you have provided (which is scant - understandably - but damning) consider resigning now. It would be far better to have to explain to a new employer why he’d resigned rather than why he’d been sacked.

He’d also be well advised to consider the issue of a reference from his current employer (if they are important in his line of work). If it is inevitable that he’s going to be fired, and the fact that you and he are looking for ‘loopholes’ suggests it is, he may be able to trade “Look, it’s clear where this is heading. How about I save you the HR effort of going through a disciplinary procedure by resigning, in return for a reference?” He needs to be realistic - he’s not going to get “he’s the best thing since Peter Ward”, but he might get “he was employed by us from X to Y. He left by resignation”, which is far better than “he was dismissed” or “we won’t give a reference”.

TL;DR? Suck it up. It’s time for him to focus on his future employment prospects.

Thank you very much.
Agree with everything you say really.

In terms of resigning to save the hr cost, this has been ongoing for over a month now as they keep delaying it. He hasn’t delayed it once.

I have advised him to resign to save face, but they believe he’s so deep into this whole
Mess now he may as well see it out he reckons.

end of the day, it was bloody stupid what he done so he can have no complaints about the inevitable outcome imo