Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Flip

Original poster

possibility of being sacked from new tender company any advice?

17 replies

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 21:06

Im wondering if any one can offer any advice for my father. He works for a company that maintains the roads. This company has to bid to win the contract for the next five years. they have just lost the tender to a new company, so my father will now be employed by them. Right the issue is, he had a small stroke in august which resulted in his HGV license being revoked for a year. His old company have been really good and he now doesnt drive but still goes out on jobs with his work mate who drives. he is now desperately worried that the new company will sack him due to not having the license. Can they do this?

OP posts:

MrsMuddle · 09/01/2008 21:23

Don't think so, but I'm not an expert. When I worked for a company that was bought over, our terms and conditions were TUPEd (transfer protection of employees undertakings or something - google TUPE for more info) for 2 years.

Basically it meant that nothing changed in our jobs for 2 years.

Hopefully someone more knowledgable will be along soon.

Original poster

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 21:29

thankyou, its the not having a license that is worrying him silly.

OP posts:

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 21:33

mrs muddle is right, he will TUPE across so all his terms and conditions will stay the same.

Having said that, it doesn't really sound like this arrangement is a term of employment. It sounds like it is an adjustment that they have made for his disability (he is probably disabled, because he has a condition which is affecting his day to day life and is expected to last a year or more).

If the new employer fires him, they will have to justify it. Dismissing someone for ability to drive would be a capability dismissal. However, for that to be reasonable, they would need to have thought about other, less drastic measures. It sounds like it would be pretty hard for them to dismiss him for capability given that the current employer have been able to make the adjustment to let him keep working.

I know it's tough (and some employers are shits, so I couldn't offer any guarantees to him that he won't be fired and have to fight them), but I think he'll be fine.

Is he doing ok after the stroke?

Original poster

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 21:36

yes hes absolutely fine it was a very small stroke (TIA) he wishes he never went to the doctors. Ive told him to go on the sick for 6 months, then when he comes back, he will have his licence back. is this a feasable option.

OP posts:

flowerybeanbag · 09/01/2008 21:42

Just ran upstairs with my laptop to answer this to say exactly what Ribena has said!

I reckon he'll be fine. For a capability dismissal on the grounds of loss of driving licence to not be at risk of being unfair, the employer would have been expected to look for alternative work, particularly for only a year ban. Alternative work has been found for the last few months so it wouldn't be reasonable of the new employer to sack him.

Here's some stuff about TUPE.

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 21:42

Hurrah. Flowery and I agree again!

flowerybeanbag · 09/01/2008 21:43

Does he need to be off sick - it sounds as though he is capable of working just not allowed to drive, is that right? In which case a doctor won't sign him off I wouldn't have thought.

flowerybeanbag · 09/01/2008 21:44

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 21:47

Also, it would be a generous employer who had six months paid sickness leave. For most people it will be less than that. If he's ill and can't work, obviously he needs to be signed off. If not, I think he just needs to keep his head down.

TBH, it would be a daft employer to get into this type of fight if there's such a short time to run til he gets his licence back. Just not worth their while having the fight. It would cost them about the same (legal fees, compensation, etc) if not more than keeping him for the next six months. Even if you discount niceness, economics says keep him where he is!

Original poster

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 21:48

No he doesnt, hes hardly had a day off in his life, he was made to take a month after the srtoke, which he was quite annoyed about. No that was my suggestion as i was trying to think of ways round it. i thought they couldnt sack him if hes on the sick and by the time he got back to work he would have his HGV licence back, hes allowed to drive a car but HGV license is strict for obvious reasons.

OP posts:

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 21:52

I know it's really worrying, but I don't think going sick is the answer. If anything, it will make the new employer think the situation is more serious than it is with his health (and, as I said, most employers won't pay as long as six months' sick pay).

I would go in and keep his head down. If there are any mumblings about dismissal, get to an employment lawyer pronto and get them to write making it very clear that his working arrangments are an adjustment for his disability.

I am sure he'll be fine. Try not to worry. It would be a daft employer that opening a can of worms by trying to dismiss him in this situation. If they asked me (and I'm pretty sure if they asked Flowery), I would say to leave well alone and it simply wasn't worth it with six months left to run on the 'ban'.

Original poster

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 21:53

thank you all for your advice, ill let my dad know. I think hes worrying so much as hes 61yrs old and he knows it will be near impossible to get another job, and hes been doin the same job for nearly 30 years.

OP posts:

flowerybeanbag · 09/01/2008 21:54

I would indeed say exactly the same Ribena!

He'll be fine I'm sure bethelsie.

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 21:56

ooh, you didn't mention his age. That's another reason not to single him out and fire him. Age discrimination could be a problem if he was singled out, plus older people get more compensation because they can convincingly argue that it'll take them longer to get a job.

As I said, can of worms. Unless they're just plain daft, they'll leave well alone and let him get on with his job.

Original poster

bethelsie · 09/01/2008 22:00

thank you so much for replying so quickly, its really put my mind at rest, now just gotta calm the 'old man down' before he has another stroke. (that was a bad joke)
thankyou

OP posts:

RibenaBerry · 09/01/2008 22:41

You're welcome. Pop back if you have more questions.

BetsyBoop · 11/01/2008 20:48

having been through 2 TUPE's myself & seen what happened I would have thought if they were going to do anything at his age it would be a generous "voluntary" early retirement package which is basically too good to refuse (unless he's one of those strange people that wants to work until he retires, even though it would make no difference financially, I've always been the type of person who's jealous I'm not old enough to be offered one )

Flip