Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

[well68]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

People are human, and I think we all fall short of being perfect. I made a mistake - that's all. It has cost me my job and all the problems that entails. But no one died, it was a mistake in venting about a company that had put all of us in a difficult situation (which caused someone else to begin the conversation which I took a part in). I will learn from this as I said before it's one of life's lessons. I did not deny or try to wriggle out of anything. This mistake has probably cost me my career. Apart from this one act of sheer stupidity on my part I have a 30 year unblemished work history and hope this reflects my character more than a mistaken outburst and hopefully ultimately it is my long standing history that will ultimately allow me to work again. As I said, I know of no one that is perfect.

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

"Once the master / servant relationship is breached, that employee should be shown the door. Who wants to pay for disloyalty?"

Loyalty works both ways. Under no circumstances would I work for a prat who treats his/her employees as servants!

[sean5302]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Yes it does. We are all free to leave our employers as long as we abide by the contract of employment.
Unfortunately, case law prevails and the relationship I outlined does nearly always be upheld.
I'm not suggesting employers treat their people as servants. The term is widely used in law courts and tribunals against disgruntled employees.

[Nomoneynoproblem]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Did you ask for an agreed reference as part of your resignation as you would still need to declare that you worked for them when applying for other jobs..

[well68]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

No I didn't ask anything as I was so worked up I couldn't speak to be honest. I typed up a statement the night before which I asked them to read and this included my resignation.

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

It could not be emphasised enough that you should never ever treat the social media as private. Even within 'private' groups or 'private' messages, be vigilant and careful.

Anything you post online can be used against you and used it will!

Saying something verbally is often not so bad (as more difficult to prove) but even then, think carefully what you say about your employer, boss, colleagues and clients!

[twigthewonderkid]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

• Employers have back up systems. If you delete your emails, they can be easily restored. A friend of mine found this out the hard way nearly 12 years ago, when he deleted all my emails after I told him I'd been suspended, they were all restored. He didn't even work for the same company as me, yet he got sacked and it had nothing to do with my emails to him but that was what prompted the investigation and they found a couple of other things on there.
• Companies back up all files on the network so if you temporarily save something, then delete it, it will be stored somewhere on a searchable system.
• There are data recovery programs to restore data deleted from your computer.
• If you ever access your personal emails or any other remote data storage system from work, so can your employers. Passwords get saved on your computer.

I don't think it is quite as simple for employers to access emails, especially personal emails, without having a clear statement in the employee handbook or other notification system detailing the how why and when, and the penalties for breaches. They also should tell for how long your emails are retained in the system.

The Regulation of investigatory powers act 2000 means they can only intentionally open emails with prior consent between any involved parties.
Looking at employees emails might also cause a breach of the Telecommunications Regulations 2000 and even the Data Protection Act.

[sean5302]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

I'm surprised that you think that.
If any member of my staff was using my company equipment inappropriately, they wouldn't be a member of my staff for long.
I wouldn't be bothered about RIPA or similar. We use the commonsense approach.
Do you think I should advise staff that they mustn't steal, grope other staff, abuse customers and suchlike, or do you think potential offenders would already know what is acceptable, please?

[twigthewonderkid]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Many would say we don't live in a commonsense time. The days of employers doing whatever they feel like doing are disappearing and that is necessary.
What is inappropriate for you could be acceptable for another and so these things do need to be stated to remove doubt. Employee handbooks and the like are vital, your employees do need to know what you deem to be gross misconduct and the process for dealing with it.

The greatest issue employers have these days is not having a policy for social media use in work or devices brought into the workplace.
It does humour me that you would not be bothered about RIPA, any others you are not bothered about? :tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[sean5302]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Do you work in the public sector, please?

[twigthewonderkid]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Do you work in the public sector, please?

Haha, found out, yes but only for the last few years.

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

The question here is what is inappropriate use?

My understanding would be visiting offensive websites, posting inappropriate comments, including offensive language.

Not long ago there was a case where an employee of a third party company posted hate mail on the net, involving a c word in full. He was stupid enough not to realise that the IP address could be used as a proof. It goes without saying that he got fired for bringing the end user in disrepute.

In some companies visiting social media sites using the company PC/Mac is forbidden. In many companies allow light personal use of the internet, others don't. For this reason all companies should have a handbook, giving clear guidelines what is acceptable and what's not.

[sean5302]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

Agreed.
It's a UK phenomenon.
When I travel to Germany every month, there is never the ethic there to do personal work on company time. It's a completely different regime. Same in France, Belgium, Italy, Poland and India.
The thought of office staff going on social media or the likes of ebay or Amazon is viewed by staff as akin to theft.
In the UK it seems OK. I see receptionists chatting away about last night's tv programmes, their relationships and suchlike. I wonder why that is.

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

I will probably be told off for this and even said to be discriminating but in my experience the English are not seen the best staff by many companies. I don't want to generalise, but whilst the media goes on about immigration, foreigners taking our jobs etc., shouldn't we ask why that is?

Aussies, Kiwis and (mainly) white South Africans are favoured by investment banks, whilst Eastern Europeans are liked in catering, construction etc. They are all seen as hard working and unspoilt.

Having said that, it's hard to be motivated if you are on a zero hour contract, not knowing if there's anything for you tomorrow.

Many Antipodeans are here on a short term working holiday visas and keen to make as much money as quickly as possible. That partly explains their enthusiasm.

It is true that German work ethics are very different. However, employees also have far more rights than here. Could that explain it or is it just a cultural thing?

When it comes to France (where I have worked on a couple of occasions briefly), I don't think it's much different from the UK.

[sean5302]

Re: Disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct

In Germany, we have workers' representatives on management boards. They really do have the best interests of the workers and the company at heart. None of the adversarial shenanigans seen in the UK. For workers to prosper, they seem to recognise that the company has to do the same.
In France, it's easy to time an operation and give workers just enough time to do the task. I'm thinking of assembly operations and suchlike at Renault, and Peugeot-Citroen for example. Lean manufacturing principles apply. All that is needed is then to reduce secretaries and seat-warmers.
It just doesn't seem to apply in UK companies.
I know what you mean about racist overtones, but I guarantee that, after you've employed a Polish builder in your house, you'd never want a British tea-swiller again. I don't think that's racist. I think it's telling it as it is.
People talk about British jobs for British people, but the reality is that 360,000 immigrants came to work here last year, principally because our own indigenous people won't do the work.
Benefits too high?
Expectations too high?
The Chinese have a phrase. "No worky, no eaty".