Mass Gross Misconducts

[IbbleObbleOut]

At my work we have had mass dismissals for gross misconduct. I would appreciate any thoughts from others not attached. I am not involved other than i have been witness in disciplinary for 1 colleague and will be again for another on thursday.
This started as an investigation into one manager. Whilst reviewing cctv, another manager/team were found to be leaving early on numerous occasions, yet signing out at their expected/contracted finish time.
The team were given informal warnings and had several hours money docked from wages. 'No further action' stated on paperwork. The shift manager resigned. All was dealt with.
Then 1 colleague entered a grievance with the findings, the whole thing was reopened and every single one of them has been dismissed, with the grievance claimant having resigned before it got to any meetings.
So this all rests on the fact that the manager was the one locking up the building and told the others to sign their timesheet with the 'official' finish time, so their disciplinaries have been based on fraudulantly filling in timesheet.
This is now 7 people having been dismissed, whilst the manager and grievance starter have resigned. A further person due to be decided on thursday.
Surely the manager having told the others to sign out at a certain time and physically setting alarms and locking building is responsible and not the employees following instructions? It is a norm within the company, on other days there is proof that other managers have done the same via alarm company records, yet no other manager has been dismissed, nor no other team member. Though apparently the other managers have 'been dealt with'.
It seems that in the absence of a manager (having resigned) the team are paying the price?
2 of the colleagues are going to appeal with a view to tribunal for unfair dismissal.
Anyone have an outsider view?

My first thought is that your employers have handled this badly. I suspect that they are justified in dismissing staff for the fraudulent submission of timesheets. No matter who said to do it the responsibility still lies with the people who actually did it and I expect that they can't prove they were told to do it can they? HOWEVER I am appalled that once closed the matter was reopened it appears out of spite on the part of the employer. I think your colleagues (and your employers) all need legal advice. Bit late now but sounds like everybody needed to calm down when this came out. Absolutely no need imo to escalate matters like this.

Absolutely agree, its the reopening that is alarming. According to HR as a grievance had been submitted, it meant the whole thing 'had' to be reopened. There is nothing in the disciplinary policy to say that this could happen.
Every one of them has said hands up, but its what we were told to do. It just feels really, really badly managed.

Why would one person's grievance (presumably about the procedure followed in their case) mean other people's unrelated (except in the nature of the incident) situations had to be re-examined . It's rather odd.

I would start looking for another job OP tbh.

I thankfully start my new job in 3 weeks, Getting out at the right time! I really, really think they have cocked up big style here... we are talking very large, everyday name, international plc.

After the grievance was entered; was a new investigation carried out?
If so, did that investigation reveal new information?

With respect, you are a witness and as such, probably only know part of the whole picture. How do you know the employees weren't in cahoots with the manager about this? I investigate a lot at work and witnesses are prone to believe their version of events is correct and complete, whereas it rarely is in reality.

At the end of the day they've breached their contracts by accepting pay for time not worked, and falsified their time sheets. In the public sector this is frowned upon strongly as you are, in effect, stealing from the "public purse". It sounds like you have been discussing it with the employees being disciplined, which as a witness is not good as you have probably been told to keep this confidential. Just keep your head down until you leave!

Impossible to provide a proper view based on second hand information, however as a principle, if someone raises a grievance, of course the company can't disregard it. If someone feels their employer hasn't addressed a concern satisfactorily, they are entitled to raise a grievance about it, and not hearing that grievance and looking into it properly would be in breach of the grievance procedure. There may have been more evidence raised as part of the grievance, who knows, but regardless of that, it is always right to hear a grievance and look into it.

Thankyou for all of your thoughts. I know its difficult to comment on secondhand information! Appreciated.
They weren't in cahoots with the manager, it was as simple as, we are leaving now, sign out at 'x'pm as thats whats done. None of them are disputing that they did it, they all admit doing as they were told to do by their line manager. The uncertainty has come from the suspensions after they had the initial informal paperwork stating no further action. There was no new investigation after the grievance. No other evidence than had already been talked of at the informals (timesheets, cctv, alarm records)
I am not a witness to the investigation, i am witness for 2 colleagues during their disciplinary meetings. I have obviously discussed it with those 2 colleagues.
Thanks again for your responses.

The thing is, it's fraud, and the "he/she told me to do it" defence isn't particularly solid, for something like this where it's reasonable to think even the most lowly junior staff member would know it was wrong. If it was something not nearly as obviously wrong, then yes, it's more reasonable to rely on a defence of management instruction.

I doubt there would be a lot of point bringing a tribunal claim tbh. Fraud is a serious offence and certainly dismissal would normally be within the "reasonable response" range of options open to an employer.

They could bring a claim if they felt a fair procedure wasn't followed, and if a tribunal agreed, that might be unfair dismissal, but tribunals can and do reduce compensation if they felt the decision to dismiss was correct and/or if the employee contributed to their loss of employment. Add that into the fee you now need to pay to bring a claim and it's unlikely to be worth it.

How many days/weeks passed between the receipt of the paperwork stating 'no further action' and the first disciplinary hearing?

An appeal could result in a change of outcome (at my old place anyway)
A grievance would surely have to point to someone being treated different or a previous prescient not being followed?

There is no dispute about it being fraudulent, that is all admitted and agreed. The dispute is in the dealt with then later sudden suspension/dismissal.
Everyone is given a resolution, signed etc. Then 10-14 days later suspended and dismissed for exactly the same incident with exactly the same evidence. Either it is suspension/dismiss worthy or it isn't? Grievance or not? Maybe i am being naive.
Surely if it was deemed not to be disciplinary worthy at first, with no further investigation or evidence, that decision still stands. Grievance or not?
If so it makes mockery of initial decision and process?
I'd like to add i do not defend what they did, I am questioning the process and legality?

Well there's nothing specifically unlawful about an employer changing it's mind about the appropriateness of its initial response to a disciplinary issue, and I would agree with their assessment that an informal warning is inadequate.

However the dismissed employees could certainly appeal on that basis but for a successful unfair dismissal case resulting in any level of reasonable compensation they'd really also want to be in a position to argue that the ultimate decision to dismiss was not a reasonable response, and I think they'd struggle with that argument for fraud.