To have disciplinary heard by manager who authorised project DH is being disciplined for?!

[Rose1ofmy5aday]

I think this set up is very unreasonable If anyone could help I'd be hugely hugely grateful. Today my DH got an email informing him that he needs to attend a disciplinary for gross misconduct. It's less than 48 hrs notice, is that right? What should we do?

This is the part that I really think is unreasonable - It's also being held by DHs manager who is the one that authorised DHs project which it is alleged he used confidential info.

Surely it cant be right, my DH says you gave me the go ahead, what's his manager going to do? Protect himself and say no I didnt. It can't be right that he holds disciplinary meeting can it?

Back story is that he was asked to work on a project from end of June to end Dec by his manager which was based on DHs idea of using information to create sales leads.

This was agreed with DHs manager and his managers manager.
Someone inside the organisation kicked up a fuss and said that he shouldn't be using that info.

This lead to him being questioned by internal affairs. He was told he couldn't be accompanied by anyone in that meeting, it was illegal for him to record the meeting and when he tried to make his own notes they asked him to stop at question 3 because it was taking too long. The meeting was minuted but DH has not seen the minutes to check if they are accurate. Only three people in meeting, one being DH two others are company representatives.

It's alleged that he deliberately misled people over what info was being used which is utter trash, as his manager and managers manager were fully aware.

My alarm bells are running riot. It's a large blue chip organisation that currently are making employees - usually long serving, high salary employees - redundant on basic Gov plans. I strongly suspect that this is a way to get someone out without paying redundancy.

Does anyone please have any idea what correct HR practise should be or what we should do?

To me the whole thing sounds really suspect and I think he's being made a scape goat.

Hi OP, a Grievance is a process for employees to raise a formal dispute (in writing) at work. Your DH's employer would have a formal Grievance Process to follow and there will be an outline of how the Grievance would be handled and what takes place at each stage of the process.

Companies do not have to suspend disciplinary processes while they look into Grievances, so your DH will not necessarily gain any time but it may help to highlight his concerns in a formal process.

I am not sure on the ethics of having his Line Manager run the disciplinary, if he was aware & approving of the Project. This is what I would raise in the Grievance....

I would certainly speak to ACAS. As his line manager could potentially be one of his witnesses I don't see how he could possibly run the disciplinary. However, as he may have a vested interest in the outcome and a serious conflict of interest i.e. deflecting criticism from himself then I wonder how the company can argue that the disciplinary process is fair. Surely there has been some input from the HR department.

He's had a conversation with ACAS which was very helpful going into more detail than I can really post here.
It's very clear that more time is required to prepare, especially to have witnessed etc.
Once children are properly fed and in bed I'll be able to find out more as we've only had snatched conversations.
As far as I'm aware HR have not been involved, certainly haven't communicated with DH. He was told to do the investigation meeting by internal affairs. They then told him not to speak to anyone in the business about it (specifically naming his managers). Then today's email from his manager telling him to attend a disciplinary hearing. DHs manager sent a lot of stuff about procedure so I guess that must have come from HR but DH hasn't been contacted by them.
I think there is a huge amount of conflict of interest too. ACAS have given good advice about it though I hope.

Just to update DH has asked for an adjournment to prepare but has not had a response and it's nearly 4:30 pm. He cannot get a union rep to go with him at such short notice either which was mentioned in the request.
If we still don't hear anything, is DH just supposed to go to the meeting first thing tomorrow and give it his best shot? Gulp!

If he doesn't get the adjournment yes he has to go. simplu not turning up would not be good.

He goes to the meeting and requests the adjournment again for all the same reasons. If they refuse he goes along with it.

Has he raised the grievance and has he spoken to HR yet? That is who I would try and get hold of right now if his line manager is not forthcoming.

He should keep a written record of all of this. In one sense, it helps him if they are not responding to requests and leaving him in the position where he can't get someone to go with him as it makes it much easier for him to argue that the process is not being conducted properly. If they try to go ahead with the hearing he should register a strong protest over the way things have been conducted. He should have a right of appeal with an independent manager anyway.

This probably isn't helpful and could be me being incredibly naive, but surely once escalated and approved, it falls under the more senior staff's remit?

It doesn't sound good. I was once accused of gross misconduct and at the time was devastated, blaming myself for every tiny mistake. Looking back the reason they gave was absolutely laughable, and since then the company has gone under due to very dodgy dealings.

On the dot of 5:30 pm DH got confirmation of adjournment. Talk about stressful.
Apparently DH will get a letter by email tomorrow confirming new time and addressing the contents of his email where he requested all evidence and a different manager.
With regard to raising a grievance he thought to wait and see if they're going to change the manager holding the meeting and hopefully the senior person at the Union will get back to us tomorrow too.
We're not really confrontational so feel slightly sick at the thought of raising a grievance. A bit like if he did his career would be over as he would be seen as trouble. Although it's probably over already....

It's not necessarily over. It really depends on what action they take.

His Defence does have to be he didn't do it, not he did it in full knowledge of his manager, or managers manager, That won't save him, he still did it, it just means seperate hearings for the managers,

Only uou both know if he did what he is being accused of. It sounds like he did. He could argue he did it in good faith, i.e. Didn't know it was wrong, but again, you'd have to check what training he has had and if he should have known it was wrong, to know that would work as a defence.

Good luck, let us know how it goes.

How much more trouble does he need? He's facing a disciplinary for gross misconduct. Usually one of the outcomes of that is dismissal. You said further up you suspect they may be trying to get rid of people to avoid costs. It doesn't really get much worse than that!

I don't know why people worry so much about raising a grievance when they have good cause. It's just a complaint but at work. So long as it's not spurious or vexatious it should be fine to raise one. Obviously things should be dealt with informally where possible but when he's already facing disciplinary proceedings that is about as bad as it gets.

However, I would wait and see what the adjournment letter says and then take it from there because that might need to be part of the grievance.

Also, I don't necessarily agree with a pp that it doesn't matter whether it was sanctioned by the boss or not. It depends on the circumstances. Did he ask permission or state he was doing it? Did he ask advice as to whether he could or should be doing it? Is it reasonable to assume he definitely knew he should not be doing it - possibly evidenced by completed training, signed memos, emails, contractual terms or workplace policies?

If a junior member of staff states they are going to do something that is gross misconduct and you, as their manager, fail to take action to stop them, then imo you are just as liable as the person doing it. Which is just another reason why they should not be involved in the disciplinary process but not necessarily mitigation for what your husband has done if he knew or should reasonably have known he should not have done whatever he did.

Put in a greivance and under the freedom of information act, I believe that he can request copies of emails , evidence against him
Doing the above should buy him more time

Thanks bluntness. Now I know precisely what the allegation is, it is absolutely easy to say it is untrue. Again I can't post it which is a little frustrating. Part of it is that he deliberately mis-led management which is utter nonsense and he has hundreds of emails to prove it.
He will just respond to the allegations and deny them which is truthfully easy to do.
I've now seen their evidence synopsis and there are faults in there too. DH has requested all evidence and full minutes.

I don't know what the format of a tribunal is, I'm hoping he will have the opportunity to put his case forward in response to.
I'd really like to thank everyone for their comments, help and advice. It's very kind especially when I feel like we're fumbling around in the dark.

No advice, just wanted to say hope you and your poor DH are ok. This must be so stressful for you both.

Good luck

Don't worry about tribunals. You're not there yet!

He can get copies of all documentation relating to him by making a Data Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act (not Freedom of Information Act, that's a completely different thing!). There is a small fee and they have up to 40 days to respond so it's not a quick thing.

Full minutes etc should have been offered already so good you have asked for those. There's no reason those can't be produced quickly.

Is there any possibility that dismissal as a result of disciplinary could end his career? For example if he has a regulatory role or a profession?

What is his Union doing? Any good?

Thank you snowflake, it's appreciated.

Hi Moving, I meant to say hearing not tribunal! Sorry! I'm hoping the email tomorrow from his manager will contain all evidence asked for but if not we can go down the Data subject access route, that's great advice.

DH is worried that at his age he might not get a job again, not that it will stop him working. We have one salary and lots of children!

His organisation is laying off staff in huge numbers at the mo. They used to give out good redundancy packages and have now gone to Gov minimum. There seems to be consistency in those that are being made redundant. long serving, high earning, usually men of a certain age. That's why I think a decision may have already been made...

He spoke to first line communication at the Union who promised someone senior would call back. That was Monday lunchtime and we haven't heard anything yet. DH will chase that as a priority tomorrow now that we know it's adjourned.

I understand. In that case I'd be looking to get out asap. Is he actively looking for another position?

In the meantime he will need to do whatever he can to preserve his job and reputation.

Don't worry about upsetting his employer. Not while they are failing to demonstrate the same courtesy to him.

Whilst you're not at tribunal stage yet, if it gets that far you will need to show that all reasonable steps have been taken to protect his position. And that includes the grievance if process is not followed properly and in line with the stated disciplinary procedure of the company. I hope it goes well - and definitely chase the union.

When he gets the evidence go through it properly.
Dh was once advised he would be disciplined for failing to contact his employer to advise he wasn't going to turn up for two shifts (not quite the same scale).
One was voluntary as a bank holiday and he had a copy of the sheet he signed advising his employer he wasn't volunteering. The second was a day he never worked.

They breached their own policies 23 times during the process and also made one major error- they failed to provide evidence that he should be in work on those days.

Read statements looking for obvious lies, witnesses need to be named, potential conflicts of interest need to be explored. Get the relevant policies.

His union rep will have good advice. Do not let your dh have any more meetings without his rep. In my dh case and also other companies, the policy will allow your dh to set the date and time that's convenient for him provided its within a reasonable (5 days) timescale.

Good luck OP try not to feel intimidated by the process and stick by the facts you know. I'd be looking for for an alternative job after this though even if he stays employed by them

He's not looking too hard is my observation. His problem is that he's immensely loyal to the company. Oh the irony...
Those who know him will know that somethings off. He is in no way a chancer, wideboy etc. Hes been approached loads in the past but always turned down risk for long term stability and pension with an eye to providing for his family.

Littledrummer, we've only been given an evidence synopsis. We've asked for full disclosure and minutes but it's already apparent that it's not accurate. It's also apparent that things they have as evidence are purely subjective. He had an investigation meeting over 6 weeks ago which he hadn't seen the full minutes of and that is quoted. DH is quite pedantic which is bloody irritating, but it does mean I do very much believe him when he says I didn't say that, what I said was xxxx.

When I've looked at definitions of gross misconduct it also says things like fighting, theft, pornographic websites, taking drugs or alcohol so I also wonder whether gross misconduct is correct for what they're alleging.

Just a thought but hope he has copies of the relevant emails proving his case somewhere secure? (I.e. not just in his work system)

Can I ask a question please? You might not like it. If it's easy to disprove the allegations against him, and he was first notified of the allegations six weeks ago, and has been working with internal affairs, why has he not simply disproven the allegations in those six weeks?

Clearly they have been into his computer and looked through all files and correspondence, inc anything deleted, as well as that of the managers involved ( easily done with data scan software ) , as well as spoken to any third parties involved, and have come up with what they think is something. However he is not suspended and also has access to the same data, so why has he not simply disproven the allegations?

It appears he is being accused of misusing confidential client information and not letting his managers know the extent of what he was doing. Is this where the difficulty lies? Sorry, I just don't understand why if it's easy to disprove he hasn't already done so..? 😞

Yes thank you Slightly, we are now the not so proud owners of a hard drive. And the new printer that I bought a couple of weeks ago - which we rowed about needing - is apparently very good as printers go! That was exactly my worry that all evidence that DH had would just disappear. Thankfully we'll have more time to do this now as the hearing is adjourned.

Hi Bluntness, I'm grateful for all input so thank you. The time line is that mid Sept DH has a request from internal affairs to go to a meeting regarding the project he's working on. This was his first and only meeting or communication with them.
He did the meeting, asked if he needed to worry. DH was told not to speak to anyone inc his manager team about it.
Nothing at all was mentioned at all in the following 6 weeks until yesterday (Monday) when he got an email from his immediate manager telling him to come to a disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct tomorrow morning (Wednesday). It was completely out of the blue.
He has had no communication for that six week period from anyone regarding potential misconduct. So it is only now that he is disprovng as he got the allegations yesterday.
DH is the type that would willingly have given his PC for analysis.
It is similar to misusing confidential client info but not as simple. He's been working on something for two years, stream lined since Jume and then inAug he is sent something confidential. They say his entire project is built on this confidential email.
It is easy to refute but it was only apparent that he needed to do since yesterday.