Possible unfair disciplinary which may lead to dismissal

[Reeok]

Long story, bear with me.

I work part time on a zero hour contract and about a month or two ago we find out our senior managers have had a meeting with financial advisor's (our supervisors/managers told us) who told them that they needed to cut shifts etc.


For the first week or so only their second shop was effected, but then my shop started getting hit as well. They changed most of the 6 hour shifts to 5 and a half hours (so we have to work for the maximum amount of time without getting breaks) and a lot of our total weekly hours have been hit (I've gone from around 16+ to 10).


Anyway I was working a 5 hour shift the other week when half way through I tell my colleagues i'm just off to the loo and pop off quickly, which was fine at that point (we're allowed to go for as many loo breaks as we want however we only get an 'official break' which lasts 20mins on a 6 hour shift). On my way I picked up a couple of packs of chicken as I had forgotten to bring some with me and needed some for tea that evening (This is common practice in my work, you pick things up you want to buy and hide it / eat it out the back then pay for it when your shifts finished. We're not supposed to do it but literally everyone does, and up to this point no one has ever been punished or moaned at for it.)


Anyway, shortly after peeing I decide (because i'm starving) to eat a couple of slices of chicken (putting the rest back in my locker) and then proceed back onto the shop floor having been gone in total no longer than 4 or 5 minutes (this is a relatively short time considering some people take regular 5-10minute toilet breaks in a single shift). Only to find that a supervisor who doesn't like me has reported me to senior management for taking an 'unauthorised break'. A member of senior management comes in, calls me into the office and asks me a load of questions before giving me a letter to say i've got a disciplinary meeting next Tuesday which may include my dismissal.


Can someone help me understand this please? Literally no one else is being punished or has even been moaned at for taking items before paying for them even though everyone did and still does it? and the only difference between my toilet break and everyone else's is I ate like 2 slices of chicken whilst there? I feel like they're singling me out.


I'd probably understand it had I been gone for ages or had I gone for multiple trips but I hadn't! on my entire 5 hour shift I was gone for one 4-5 minute loo break where I happened to eat a couple of slices of chicken whilst there. Worse yet, my brother who works at their second shop tells me his colleagues and himself regularly take food out the back to eat, and even do it in front of the cameras and managers and nothing has every been said to them!


I'm very much aware that my employer has been taken to court several times before for unfair dismissals and lost. That combined with their recent meeting with a financial advisor has me worried that they're just trying to find any excuse they can to cut several members of staff.

I should probably point out at this stage that as of yet, in the two years I have worked there, I have never received any kind of verbal or written warning nor have I ever been in any kind of 'trouble' with management before.


Other points which may also point to possible wrong doing by my employer are: they regularly try to change our 20minute break on 6 hour shifts to 10 or 15 minute breaks, and on evening shifts we're only paid till 10pm yet most nights will be stuck in the shop 'closing up' for an additional 5 or 10 minutes because we're not allowed to start shut down until its nearly 10 (it use to be we couldn't start closing until it was exactly 10pm which meant we'd be forced to do an extra 10-15minutes unpaid overtime (one supervisor from the other shop being disciplined when she tried to close up at 9.55pm so that the staff would be able to finish shortly after 10.))

Any help or advice is appreciated!

[matt3942]

Re: Possible unfair disciplinary which may lead to dismissal

Hi [MENTION=68267]Reeok[/MENTION] - welcome to the forum.

If you are on a zero-hour contract your employer doesn't have to offer you a fixed number of hours every day/week/month. However, you've said you're working regular shifts, so I would question the validity of your zero-hour contract. I'm not going to get into that though.

If you are on a zero-hour contract your employer doesn't need to go through the disciplinary process to dismiss you. It can simply not offer you any more hours. So it's unlikely that's the reason for the disciplinary, unless the employer is that naïve.

As for taking food from the shop and eating it, that is essentially theft, despite your intention to pay for it at the end of your shift. When you say it's 'common practice', are the supervisors/managers aware this is happening?

Regularly trying to change your breaks is not the same as actually stopping you taking your full 20m break. If they were actually stopping you, and you have evidence of it, you might have something useful. IMO having to stay 10-15m late isn't right but it's quite common in many organisations where there are opening/closing procedures. What does your contract say about this (if anything)?

- Matt

[teaboy2]

Re: Possible unfair disciplinary which may lead to dismissal

I agree with the points @matt3942 makes.

Regarding the zero hour contracts and you getting regular fixed hours, Matt was hinting that depending on how long you have been on those fixed hours its likely your on an fixed hourly contract via custom and practice.

Also if the senior managers knew about the taken food of the shelf and paying afterwards and that is a common practice amongst staff at yours and other shops/branches then your likely covered via customary practice due to the company allowing to to happen and not putting a stop to it. Though i wouldn't say it was theft as in order for it to be theft then they same rules applied to shoplifting would have to be applied, therefore its not theft until you leave the store without paying. Technically you can go to a supermarket pick a sandwich of the shelve, eat it on way round the aisle and simply give the cashier the empty sandwich packaging in order to pay for it - Because so long as you pay for it or attempt to pay for it, then there is no theft, as in order for it to be theft there has to be a clear deliberate attempt to not pay for it!

Now what does the letter informing you of the disciplinary hearing (@matt3942 notice they skipped investigatory stage?) say is the reason for disciplinary?

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 require the provision of suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences and washing facilities at readily accessible places for use by employees. It is therefore an implicit duty on the employer to ensure reasonable access to safe and clean toilet facilities to all employees. Therefore an Employer has an implied duty under health and safety laws to protect the health and well being of employees this means they are duty bound to all you reasonable access to and usage of the toilets as an when the need to use them occurs!

[matt3942]

Re: Possible unfair disciplinary which may lead to dismissal

Though i wouldn't say it was theft as in order for it to be theft then they same rules applied to shoplifting would have to be applied, therefore its not theft until you leave the store without paying. Technically you can go to a supermarket pick a sandwich of the shelve, eat it on way round the aisle and simply give the cashier the empty sandwich packaging in order to pay for it - Because so long as you pay for it or attempt to pay for it, then there is no theft, as in order for it to be theft there has to be a clear deliberate attempt to not pay for it!

The problem is that intention is difficult to prove, which is why I asked if supervisors/managers are aware that this goes on.

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 require the provision of suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences and washing facilities at readily accessible places for use by employees. It is therefore an implicit duty on the employer to ensure reasonable access to safe and clean toilet facilities to all employees. Therefore an Employer has an implied duty under health and safety laws to protect the health and well being of employees this means they are duty bound to all you reasonable access to and usage of the toilets as an when the need to use them occurs!

This isn't relevant. Employers have a duty to provide the facilities as you described, but employers are not obligated to allow employees to use those facilities outside their normal rest breaks.

- Matt

[teaboy2]

Re: Possible unfair disciplinary which may lead to dismissal

The problem is that intention is difficult to prove, which is why I asked if supervisors/managers are aware that this goes on.

Yes i know, i was simply advising the OP of that!

This isn't relevant. Employers have a duty to provide the facilities as you described, but employers are not obligated to allow employees to use those facilities outside their normal rest breaks.

Actually it is relevant, as not allowing employees reasonable toilet breaks can effect their health, safety and welfare - So it does fall under health and safety laws. Whilst there is no legal right to toilet breaks par se, there is an implied duty on employers to act reasonably to ensure the protection of their employees health, safety and welfare and to provide adequate facilities and arrangements for welfare at work (i.e. a policy on toilet breaks allowing reasonable usage). Refusal of toilet breaks can lead to low morale (which eventually can lead to depression), which makes it a health and welfare issue, and it can cause other health issues if employees are forced to hold it in!

Its also a mutual trust issue, as needing the toilet is a basic human need and you would reasonable trust the employer to allow you reasonable use of the toilet as an when you need it - after all we're not robots! That's the general consensus anyway.

- Matt

See above in red