Disciplinary Action

[kneedeep]

Please could somebody help me to answer some questions? My lovely, honest flatmate has been dragged in to a situation at work where a couple of colleagues have admitted to fraud. Quick back story: he was suspended last Wednesday and gave a statement to Security. On Friday 17th at 10pm he received a letter by courier, inviting him to a DP meeting on Tuesday 21st at 2pm. Attached was some info to help him prepare (statements etc.). This evening we have received more information, at around 7pm, again by courier (job descriptions and more statements). My questions are

1. This is quite a serious (alledged) case of fraud. Would the police not normally be called?
2. Don't the company need to give 48 hours notice of a DP meeting, not including weekends & public holidays?
3. Is the info received today, less than 24 hours prior to the meeting, "admissable", so to speak? Thanks for reading, and thanks for your help in advance. I think he is going to be fired, even though he himself has not done anything other than being oblivious to the fraudulent activites of colleagues/direct reports.

has he asked for a postponement to give him time to consider and prepare a response?

Is he a witness or a suspect? Is he innocent or did he have a suspicion that they were doing something wrong?

Thanks for the questions. He is a supervisor of the people who have admitted fraud, and in one case, a counter-part. The investigation of my flatmate is such that I think they are trying to prove that he has committed fraud (he hasn't); or that he knew about the fraud (he didn't); or that he should have known about the fraud, because he's a manager, and should have been suspicious. I think he wants to go ahead with the meeting tomorrow, his staff handbook doesn't give a timescale that the process needs to adhere so I wondered if the HR team are being correct in this instance. Thanks again

can he take a friend or union official with him?
Has he spoken to the two who admitted it in the last week?

He's taking a work colleague with him, and he's read the statements of the 4 (!!) who have admitted it....

If he didn't want to go ahead and they refused him more time, they would be unreasonable and he could include that in any appeal. But if he's happy with the timescale himself then he won't be able to later claim that evidence was 'inadmissable' or anything like that.

If he feels he has enough time to look at it all and prepare his defence/response and get a representative to accompany him then fine. On the face of it it's not a reasonable timescale, as in the subject of the hearing could justifiably ask for a postponement. But it sounds as though he thinks it's enough.

Up to the employer whether they call the police or not. It wouldn't necessarily have any bearing on the disciplinary proceedings anyway.

i'm slightly confused about what's happened.

There is no specific timescale, but individuals should have reasonable time to prepare. It sounds like he's had enough time to read the materials and prepare. he should have been informed of his right to be accompanied by a colleague or union rep.

if he hasn't done anything wrong then there won't be any evidence that he has. having said that, they will work to 'balance of probabilities' (ie: more likely than not) as opposed to 'beyond reasonable doubt'. if his team were commiting fraud, then he may well have been negligent in not spotting it - this may be why they have sent the JDs over.

there is no requirement to involve the police, though the company may choose to when their investigation is complete. their action is civil, a police investigation is criminal so there can be one without the other.

my advice to your flatmate would be to tell the truth. if he has been stupid or negligent than admit it and say sorry. Lies, avoidance or a lack of remorse will not play well. equally if it's a fraud case it may be complicated and he might need some breaks to keep calm and under control.

wishing luck

normal practice is that papers are given 2 days in advance, but invite is 5 days in advance.

The info your flatmate has beengiven is short but could be argued within the 2 days.

Does he have any info to present, ensure that this is handed over asap.

Hi all. Thanks for your advice. He has no info to add other than his bewilderment. He's going to keep calm and carry on, hopefully they won't see him as negligent. Why does stuff like this happen at Christmas? Have a good one, and thanks again

Tell him to keep his temper at all costs. Do not let them rile him. and tell him to refuse to answer questions if they are antagonistic towards him, or if they are badgering him.

Hello all. A quick update and a question... (sorry!) So he was summarily dismissed after his DP meeting, and received the letter advising him on such on Xmas Eve. . Not good. He was dismissed even though the meeting concluded that he had not been involved in fraud, or even known about it, but because he was "in charge" of the people concerned, confidence in his performance has been seriously undermined. This is a bit silly since many (more senior) people should have noticed the fraud, apart from him, and they have not been fired. He was given 5 working days to appeal, so he has (in writing). The deadline to appeal was last Tuesday, 4th January. To date he has heard nothing about when the appeal meeting will be. Is this reasonable? Because he has been fired for fraud (basically) he is struggling to apply for jobs because he a) has no confidence whatsoever and b) he doesn't know what to say about why he left his last job. So we can't move on in any sense until this is better resolved. Thanks for reading this novel!

I'm sure some of the experts will be along, but on the face of it, it appears that he has not committed a disciplinary offence. Surely there are other procedures for performance matters, which have not been followed?

Was it a large or small company?

Hope someone comes to advise soon.

Woah this is awful - and doesn't make sense - you could have the grim attitude that reporting everyone is necessary so that a proper investigation takes place, but this seems silly - my understanding would be that really he should have NOT been dismissed in these circumstances, but that if the employer wants to SEPARATELY discipline him for inappropriate supervision, they should raise a separate disciplinary process with allegations relating to his conformity to policy as it applied generally and specifically to someone at his level - if he followed all the requisite steps appropriately and it is a policy deficiency he is not liable unless at a senior level (very much enshrined in law - if, say you work in a bank and there is a policy on not doing your own bank transactions, but your manager has not ensured you are aware of this and you do, he is at fault not you. If it is not being aware of the intricacies of employment law for example and you are a supervisor, you are not liable for breaking employment law, your employer is .. etc.

If he is not involved in the fraud, he cannot be dismissed in a fraud investigation for fraud, but can be separately dismissed of supervisory negleence - if proven - which sounds unlikely if there are already not suitable procedures that would pick up a breach. The reason his employer want to behave like this is for one of two reasons - they are incompetant, unaware of the law and are poor managers anyway who think that being a manager is about doing what you kind of think is right based on how you feel at any particular time or they are deliberately trying to avoid getting into a debate about whether their procedures that your DH adhered to (presumably - or at least within a reasonable variance of 'adherence') were sound. This case would be harder for them to win usually because it debates policy, usual practice, yadda yadda and so it would be reasonable for your DH to be corrected perhaps, but not dismissed (eg although there is no specific procedure about goods being marked when they are removed in and out, a reasonable supervisor would have kept and eye on this - informal or verbal warning to be more observant OR his manager disciplined for not revising policies appropriately to manage said situation.

(It is too late for me to be precise and disciplined myself so I hope you get where I am driving at! - I'm off to sleep right now!!)

ahem flatmate - I really should scroll up when I am in 'ach I'm sure that's fine' mode!!'

BTW the reason why so many dismissals happen at xmas is that HR bods often plan that the 'bad news' absorbed in the holiday will minimise any resistance, aggression etc and hopefully mean that documents will be submitted out of time - I recall many cases where documents submitted in deadline over christmas period where falsely claimed to have been recieved out of time in the new year - e-mail has royally screwed this up for HR departments!

HI knee deep

Don't know if your friend has heard about his appeal yet? It may be reasonable in the circumstances to dismiss the manager (which he seems to be?) for negligence, even if he wasn't involved in or benefitted from teh fraud.

If he hasn't had his appeal yet, I would repeat my advice - admit where he's culpable, point to his unblemished record, acknowledge the original decision that he was negligent rather than fraudulent and suggest a final written warning instead.

Hi all, and thanks so much for responding

No news of the appeal yet. He sent an e-mail to the MD on Wednesday to chase, and received a response that he would be contacted next week to arrange the meeting.
Clearly there has been a major breach within the company for fraud to take place. I just feel that the senior managers who are making decisions to fire the entire team involved (or not involved in many cases) - including my flatmate, are arse covering, since ultimately they are responsible, for permitting the fraud to take place. My flatmate has not breached any policies, since in many scenarios they don't exist!He's one of a team of three managers, the other two managers are more senior than him and have also been dismissed. Hopefully they are not making things any better for themselves by delaying matters. Will remind him to be a pussycat in the appeal meeting but I wonder how often initial decisions are overturned at this stage? Grrrr! and thanks again!