Advice need gross misconduct

[Jane7kitson]

Hi,

I am currently facing gross misconduct due to a serious error of misjudgement on my part.

I would like advice on the following:

I have just been reading my companies disciplinary procedure they have sent me with my suspension letter and it's very minor I know but their policy states I should of been sent a letter confirming my suspension within two days, I didn't it was four days.

It also, lists examples of things considered to be gross misconduct and doesn't list my alleged offence.

Also, if anyone works in HR or a similar area they haven't updated this document since April 2005, is there anything I should be checking this document for.

Any advice or help is really appreciate.

[Trebushay]

No specific advice but call the Acas advice line they are really helpful

[stevemLS1]

Hi

A minor technical departure from a policy does not usually undermine the substantive process.

I don't think the delay in sending your suspension letter matters.

Nor do I think it matters that your particular transgression, if you indeed did it, isn't significant. As you say it is a list of "examples" and is usually preceded by some words to the effect of it being an exhaustive list.

What matters, so far as you are concerned is that your employer is treating whatever it is it is said you did as misconduct.

You need to focus on your defence and/or mitigation.

[Heels99]

Call acas. None of the things you mention make a material difference.

[lougle]

Was it over a weekend? Two days would be two working days I think.

If your 'misjudgement' was not a mistake then if it was serious gross misconduct would be appropriate. Hard to tell unless you give detail (which you would be rightly reluctant to give).

[Butterflywings168]

I'm sorry OP. I have been there. Feel free to PM me.
ACAS weren't much help. Basically told me meh you did it, so we're not interested and employer can do what they want. Wrong. It does matter if they don't follow procedure.
If you aren't in a union join, now. Mine were great.

[EBearhug]

Be aware that not all unions will take on existing cases with new members - mine expects people to have been members for at least 3 months, except in exceptional circumstances. (I don't know what those circumstances would be.)

[FishWithABicycle]

OP your username looks awfully like it might be actually your real name with a digit in the middle. It's a really really bad idea to post something so identifiable on a public forum when there are legal issues pending. If you click on the buttons by your initial post you can ask mnhq to edit it to be less identifying and obviously change your username too for future posts.

Meanwhile, much sympathy for your plight. Agree with pp that you should get some proper advice. However, have a think about what outcomes are possible / probable. Are you actually going to be able to convince them it was an honest mistake and stay working there and still be trusted? I don't know the details of course but if they have started this case against you them basically they want you gone, and they will achieve this one way or another. It's an awful lot of effort to go through the formal disciplinary process so you might be better off offering that whilst you would wish ideally to legally prove your innocence, you are willing to go quietly without fighting this in exchange for a simple reference that confirms your good qualities and makes no mention of this unfortunate situation.

[sandgrown]

FWIW DP went through the formal process . The judge was totally sympathetic but as employer had followed legal process generally there was nothing he could do. The barrister allocated said the company basically wanted DP out. We found lots of anomalies and lies but in the end it counted for nothing. It was very stressful and nearly broke DP. Check house insurance if you have free legal protection that could get you a solicitor. We turned down a settlement in a bid to prove DP s innocence but ended up with nothing. It is hard to fight a big company

[flowery]

Procedure is important but if they dismiss you, them being two days late with a suspension letter isn't going to make it unfair dismissal. That won't have addicted anything like your ability to prepare a defence or similar, ie it will have no material impact.

If you don't think the offence is gross misconduct you can and should point that out, but it not being specifically listed isn't a reason for that.

I agree with steve you need to focus on your defence. Things like any mitigating circumstances, any lack of training or clear instruction, any evidence that similar errors aren't usually treated as seriously, your previous good record (assuming it is), those sorts of things.

[flowery]

affected anything, not addicted!

[Hoppinggreen]

Poster also posted in Legal for anyone following the thread.

[FishWithABicycle]

Thanks Hopping. click link