Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Hi Kjun

Yes your OH is entitled to know precisely what she has been accused off, and to receive all copies of evidence they intend to rely on. Theres no question as to whether they have an investigation meeting with or without your OH, if such meeting occurs they MUST invite your oh to attend, they can not carry out such meeting without inviting her to attend.

I find their allegation to be somewhat shocking, especially breach of fidelity i.e. faithfulness, which would tie in with breach of trust. As i see no way in how your OH could be in breach of trust and confidentiality. It maybe they could have seen this thread and put two and two together, however seeking independent legal advise is her right, and therefore is not a breach of contract trust or confidentiality. If anything their actions now put them in contractual breach that they are accusing your OH off, there actions would also now amount to bullying/harassment and since its clearly linked to the phased return to work, such bullying and harassment would be direct disability discrimination, a serious breach of the equality act 2010. Such actions if your OH resigned would be clear case of constructive dismissal - However its not the time to resign just yet, as we need to give them rope to hang themselves with i.e. know more details about what these allegations are!

Yes they should also provide your OH with a copy of the disciplinary procedure.

However if they do not provide one, don't worry in fact we're going to let them do things their way, then hit them with the legal equivalent of a nuclear bomb that will blow their financial accounts to smithereens by the time they have paid compensation either via settlement agreement of via tribunal award!

So if they are reading this thread, then all i have to say to them is they have been warned!

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Thanks for looking in this seems all to convenient to me but then I am naturally cynical (working in a legal dept does that to you lol)

I would highly doubt they have discovered this thread and even if so there are no references to the company and certainly nothing defamatory.

The breach of fidelity reference is nonsensical as this seems to relate to selling company secrets or setting up a similar business and poaching customers or staff according to the case law I have managed to find.

I had wondered if she should have been told what she was being suspended for however ACAS have advised that it is not a legal requirement which I must admit surprised me..

At present we have no information so anything is speculation however I can't help but feeling there has been some sort of allegation by the family member that was employed and as mentioned earlier as it's a 3 person office which consists of my OH, the family member and another lady who is the office manager and we have just found out the office manager has been told she is being investigated also but not suspended and this will be done by an external party (I would guess some HR company).

My guess and it is just that is that I can see a bullying allegation coming that has been concocted between certain parties but when I find out I will seek your advice if thats ok as I just don't know enough about this stuff myself.

I have no doubt this is all a result of the fuss over hours and a few weeks ago they tried to tell her because of only working part time hours (but same number of days) her holiday would be reduced for that period which would have brought her below the statutory minimum however backtracked when this was pointed out to them...

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

It may not be a legal requirement, however it is a question of fairness and transparency, either way they are required prior to disciplinary hearing to inform her exactly what she had been accused of and the details of the allegation, as made clear in the ACAS code of conduct: Disciplinary and grievance procedure does state they should be told!

Its interesting the manager is being investigated too as that would add to suspicions that it is the family member making up an allegation.

Though i think we agree that the best thing to do now is sit back and wait and see what they do next!

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Yep I agree and when I know I'll come back and see where we go from there

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Think it might be worth updating the thread with all recent developments Kjun - After tomorrows meeting of course :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Ok so an update on this thread following investigation meeting and now disciplinary hearing today.

Turns out that the company had accessed my OH's private email account which was left open when she finished work for the day and "obtained" a number of private emails sent between her and her boss where they mentioned another member of staff (who is a relative of the Director).

Note there was no swearing, name calling, offensive terms used in any of the emails and I would best describe them as a general moan.

For good measure they allowed the email program to remain open while my OH was on leave for the rest of the week and made at least one other access again printing off emails.

I took advice from among others the ICO and the very helpful Teaboy 2 who suggested this was an unlawful act and having spoken to the police it would seem they agree with an appointment arranged for Friday to take a statement and provide evidence.

Now the evidence side is pretty simple as helpfully the person who accessed the emails provided a Witness Statement saying they did it twice on separate days and that this was under instructions from the Company Director who also confirms this in his Witness Statement.

In a very one sided investigation they also managed to get a witness statement to a conversation my OH had with a colleague not from the other party but from one of 3 persons who overheard it and that surprisingly had a negative view (didn't bother to interview the other 2 or the other direct party to the conversation).

Also accused of breaching an IT Policy that was seen for the first time at the investigation meeting and sent to us a couple of days later.

With the help of Teaboy 2 a written statement was provided refuting the allegations made which were breach of IT Policy and Insubordination as well as expressing concern that the evidence they relied on was obtained by an unlawful act.

So it's wait till Friday when we expect she will be dismissed and then try to work out whether we have any recourse while providing the police with what they have requested so they can carry out their own investigation I guess.

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Oh how the mighty fall lol

Funny how it always happens to those who get to big for their boots i.e. clever in the cocky or arrogant sense!

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Yeah you are not wrong and I don't suppose for a moment that they think anything wrong has been done however that is a matter I am happy to leave to Her Majesty's finest to establish.

Certainly will look at taking this further should they dismiss her and a bit of research is needed I think to see if we have any recourse against the company under maybe privacy laws however that is way beyond my area of experience and I have said it might be worth the OH getting a free 30 mins consultation with a solicitor to ask their opinion.

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Yes i agree. even if the police prosecute, you can still sue for damages at civil court - Plus if they did dismiss her she can take it to tribunal and get compensation for the unfair dismissal while also pursuing them via civil courts for damages for breach of privacy. So yes it would be worth speaking to a solicitor.

Check your house insurance as you may be entitled to free legal representation? :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Good point however we only have car and pet insurance, mind you Pet Plan might be used to dealing with monkeys

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Good point however we only have car and pet insurance, mind you Pet Plan might be used to dealing with monkeys

lol i find that insulting to monkeys... Monkeys are clearly far more intelligent.

[dkay59]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Is this what the company did by accessing the emails?

[deleted legislation as teaboys suggestion]

[Kjun]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Hi DKay59,

From conversations with the ICO and further advice from Teaboy 2 that seems to be the general consensus.

The ICO actually referred me to the police as they said it was not a Data Protection issue and quoted that Act.

I think what is concerning is my OH was on leave for 3 days after the original breach happened and I have no doubt they would have allowed the email account to remain open during these 3 days however proof is obviously key.

I have contacted Microsoft to ask them to provide the IP addresses the account was logged in from for those dates and for any failed log offs as this may be something or nothing but in my opinion worth exploring and would be useful giving that to the police to aid their investigation perhaps.

[teaboy2]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

It would be best to keep the precise details under wraps for now, so i have requested the site team to remove mentions of the legislation itself, due to how sensitive the issue is at the moment.

[dkay59]

Re: Enforced Phased Return To Work by company (not as advised by a doctor)

Ah, a Microsoft account
See here to show recent activity :
http://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/Accou...tactivity.aspx

With their twisted logic, They may link that they are allowed to access emails on company computers as part of their IT policy, including personal emails.
However, the personal emails are stored on Microsoft's server and they used a session token on that computer unauthorised, to access Microsofts server where the emails are stored. There is a clear difference

- - - Updated - - -

Oops, replied before you posted your message, sorry teaboy