Define "gross misconduct"

[Penguin27]

My DP's employer has announced a change to their policy. If a member of staff is not wearing/displaying their work ID at all times, it is a "gross misconduct" offence which may result in instant dismissal.

I understand the reason for the ID and realise that they may be more safety conscious in the current climate... but this seems a little extreme to me!

Is there any guidelines on what type of behaviours/actions should be included in "gross misconduct", and what isn't? Or are employers able to set their own policy?

Anyone?

No one?

No idea about guidelines but that seems heavy handed to me.

Depends on the company/industry.

MI5; Met; Border Control - probs reasonable.

River Island; Local Library; Petrol Station - draconian.

That seems pretty extreme

I have to wear a badge at work for security reasons and it is a swipe card to get in, I have forgotten it a couple of times and it is a pain in the arse as I cant get in or out of the buildings. My boss just rolls his eyes, no one has been given verbal warnings never mind threatened with gross misconduct.

They can announce that they would consider that to be gross misconduct, yes.

Is it possible that the company would be brought into disrepute if employees were pulled up for not displaying ID properly?

"Or are employers able to set their own policy?"

Are you for real?

If employers cant set their own policy for their business needs, then who will do it for them? the "A Team"? This isnt North Korea where the state sets it all out in black-n-white ink!

Sure, its draconian, but its a policy that is easy to adhere to - wear ones ID!!

Job done!

It's behaviour so bad that it destroys the employer/employee relationship, and there's loads of guidance about what would count, coming from employment tribunals where it's been challenged.

A breach of health and safety regs could be gross misconduct depending on the importance of those regs and severity of the breach.

Gross misconduct is something so serious that it destroys the relationship between employer and employee. There is no set definition of what actions constitute gross misconduct although some actions such as theft or dishonesty obviously qualify. By stating that this is gross misconduct your DP's employer has strengthened their position if they sack someone for this reason and have to defend a tribunal claim. However, the tribunal would still consider if sacking someone for this reason was a reasonable response. They won't step in just because it is harsh, but they will make an award if it is so harsh as to be unreasonable.

they would have to be able to convince a court that it constituted gross misconduct

they would have to be able to convince a court that it constituted gross misconduct

Not quite. They would have to convince the tribunal that sacking someone for this offence was a reasonable response. The tribunal cannot simply substitute its own judgement for that of the business. The tribunal may think it is very harsh but they can only intervene if it is so harsh as to be unreasonable.

How is that different to what I said!!!

The tribunal cannot simply substitute its own judgement for that of the business. The tribunal may think it is very harsh but they can only intervene if it is so harsh as to be unreasonable

That paragraph contradicts itself! The tribunal are making their own judgment as to the where the unreasonable 'line' is drawn which IS substituting their judgment for that of the company, and that is exactly what I said in my earlier post.

At DP's work if they do not have their SIA licences visible they can be fined, sent home unpaid to retrieve them and face a disciplinary.

Thanks for all your comments! It's an office role in financial services, not customer-facing. The ID is really just to get in and out of the building.

Interesting that there are no formal guidelines. Would be interesting to see which cases have gone to court and what the outcomes were!

I can't imagine they would actually enforce it in such a harsh way but I'd like to see what happens if they do try!

Where I work it's mandatory to wear an ID pass

I too would be dismissed if found without my ID in work, even though I we use biometrics to open doors etc

Has something happened? It sounds to me as if they're reacting to an incident.

Head office on the south coast by any chance?

The tribunal are making their own judgment as to the where the unreasonable 'line' is drawn which IS substituting their judgment for that of the company

No it absolutely is not. Deciding whether or not the company's decision is reasonable is not the same as deciding what punishment the tribunal would have imposed on the employee. The tribunal may think the offence only merits a verbal warning but they can't find in favour of the employee for that reason. They can only find for the employee if the employer's decision to dismiss is unreasonable. In legal terms, deciding something is unreasonable is a lot stronger than simply disagreeing with it. Look up "Wednesbury unreasonable" if you want to see the standard that is applied.

MrsPorth not that I know of, I did think the same.

Violet yes he's not in that office though.

Prh that sounds interesting, I might look that up.

Thanks for all your comments.

If its financial services i can see how it would be considered very serious. Part of our company is financial services and its security is very tight.

In our building if you dont have your pass you need a visitor pass. Which means yiu need to be escorted by someone else at all times. Its a pita for everyone. The ine that forgot their pass and the ones having to walk them to the toilet.

We recently went through acreditation and then audited. Part of both was that staff had their passes on at all times.

Thanks for all your comments! It's an office role in financial services, not customer-facing. The ID is really just to get in and out of the building.

I work in an office role in financial services, not customer facing.

The ID isn't just to get in and out of the building. It's to prove you are entitled to be in the building.

We are asked to challenge anyone we don't recognise who isn't wearing ID, and to not open internal doors for them if they say they've left ID on desk or something. We'd need to escort them to security.

It's an FCA regulation for all staff to wear ID. I don't know amour gross misconduct for not wearing your pass in the building where I work, but it IS gross misconduct to wear it outside.

It would have to be specifically stated as gross misconduct in policy.
What he means is he want to firepeople immediately for not wearing it.
I doubt a tribunal would agree unless its stated

What it does mean is that an employee. Losing their pass would be better protected by absence until a new pass is created than they would trying to attend.
Put forward that reception must hold temp passes for this eventuality, and you could use the disciplinary policy at lower. Levels for persistent offenders which is more practical. Propose it to head of HR, thereby gently exposing the rashness of your boss, the thoughtfulness of your nature, and the legal and operational protection of the company :)