Can making a huge mistake in work be gross misconduct?

[BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee]

Mistake was found a year after work carried out. The person who made the mistake should absolutely have known better. It was signed off by others in the department at the time. Would this on its own be enough to be considered gross misconduct? A disciplinary hearing has been called.

Fine, but lawyers don't give financial advice, and if their advice (say creation of a trust) has potential financial implications they either need to know 100% what they are or caveat that you should speak to an accountant or IFA / Tax consultant.

My accountant is far more useful than my solicitor!

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee your supervisor should have spotted especially as you openly said you had little experience on that subject. So the supervisor is responsible to some extent. If supervisor didn’t have time then … that takes some responsibility away as they should have had other jobs taken away to allow enough time. To me it is clear you cannot be held responsible because if you had been adequately supervised this would not have happened. You might expect a warning but I cannot see how you can be dismissed. I would be using the reasoning above were I in your shows.

@ReakkyAgainReally are you purposely trying to scare the OP? What sort of comment is 'I'm surprised you're being calm'?

Not considering one possible option is an error / lack of knowledge but the OP was still junior. That the error wasn't picked up is the potentially negligent issue and that doesn't fall to the OP.

Read OP’s posts again. Nowhere has she said she gave financial advice. She said the legal advice she gave had financial consequences for the client which often happens.

You are castigating her based on her reply to a finance professional when she said her error was akin to giving wrong financial advice rather than sending the wrong spreadsheet. That’s not the same as saying she gave financial advice.

I am calm because I don’t see what good panicking will do. What has happened has happened and my panic isn’t going to change it.

I am unconcerned about whether the supervisor will lose their job because it doesn’t affect me. I accept I was wrong. I accept I made a huge mistake. Yes it should have picked up by the supervisor and it should never have been presented to the client. But I was the first link in the chain. I have been trying to work out if there is anything I can say/ do to prove that I don’t need to lose my job to learn from this.

I didn’t and haven’t had a “devil may care attitude”. I am diligent in my work. It is true when they say that you don’t know what you don’t know.

I am trying now to work out next steps and how I’ll pay the mortgage if I’m dismissed.

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee I see. you asked why supervisor was not going through disciplinary proceedings like you. because their explanation of heavy workload, expecting you to know basic stuff (which you accept to be true) was accepted.

your expiation was deemed requiring a formal disciplinary process to be heard and decided on. clear?

I think you need to cut yourself some slack. We only know what we know, and can't expect to know we have a knowledge gap all the time. Some time professionals are expected to be super human and remember absolutely everything we covered in training, but this is not humanly possible unless we spent 6 months on every topic and only move on when we are 100%. We are assessed on what we can remember or what we can research (google).

Even when we complete training or qualifications, this does not always give us skills but knowledge to build on and develop the more we use it. That's what a mistake is for, to learn.

I work in education of nurses and care staff, when we get new nurses from university or from another area, we don't expect them to be able to do everything, as that's not what they where taught and even if it was covered, it's not cemented until practice. We always say "show me a nurse who's never made a medication error and I'll show you a liar".

If you are dismissed you might have a few months of hardship, but you will get another chance, and you will learn from this.

@ReakkyAgainReally I was more wondering if an argument in my own investigation could be that I was not supervised adequately and had I been the gap in my knowledge could have been addressed much sooner nor would the client have been disadvantaged. Since it has come to my attention that the gap in knowledge exists I have taken steps to resolve it.

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee 'you don't know what you don't know'.

I don't agree. look, basic info in prosecution is establishing the time limit for laying info. 6 months or 12 months. if you failed to note file A cut off is in 6 months and you laid info on the 7th month, you are out and client loses the opportunity and may have financial implications. that is basic knowledge.

that is really not something that can be blamed on a supervisor. your supervisor would be in trouble if the mistake was not basic knowledge, so you couldn't be expected to know. I am trying to see your supervisor's error and punishment, but only land on more support. you- final warning or dismissal especially for insurance purposes or for the firm to protect themselves.

you said 'colleague' picked it up on review. what level is this colleague? yours or supervisor's?

you have my sympathies.

this is a good q. the trouble you have is that 'it was basic knowledge' in the practice area you qualified in/ was working in upon qualification. a basic textbook in that practice area should cover that- and everyone has access to the relevant textbook/ internet material. you didn't research; you didn't go back to your notes but just ploughed through giving advice 'on the limited knowledge you had'. and now, for the first time, I understand why you insisted on saying 'failure to research'. that is it. even with over 20 years of experience, I always do research, check for updates in the law etc etc before sending out important advice which this clearly was.

@ReakkyAgainReally colleague is closer to supervisor level than my own. Thank you for your thoughts it has been helpful. If the worst happens then I’ll need to find a new path. I just don’t quite know what that looks like. I think I’m not used to failing and it has been a shock so it is dealing with the impact on my sense of self as well as my worries on how on earth I rebuild from here and ensure the bills are paid and my children are fed. All problems for the morning. Thank you again.

I’m a regulatory lawyer. Sorry you’re going through this OP.

It sounds like the mistake involved giving inadequate advice, i.e. failing to advise of all potential options and recommending the most appropriate/commercially sound. That strikes me as less serious than giving advice that was fundamentally wrong (in law), or missing a statutory deadline etc.

Whilst there could be potential professional negligence involved, as a PP said that’s ultimately for the firm’s PI insurance to deal with - but obviously doesn’t stop the firm instigating individual disciplinary proceedings.

Re supervision, there definitely appears to be shared culpability here - but it sounds like you are reasonably experienced, and being realistic it’s not possible or practicable for supervisors / partners to check and review every piece of work line by line. That said, it does sound like the supervisor missed something pretty crucial in this case!

From my experience in investigating professional fitness to practise matters (and I appreciate this is an internal rather than SRA investigation), I can tell you that what tends to go in people’s favour is transparency/candour and insight. Owning up to your mistake, reflecting on how you’d approach it differently in future etc is key. However, they do seem to be taking a hardline approach which I agree doesn’t sound too promising.

Your life and career aren’t ruined either way though OP, though it might feel like it now- you’ll move on from this one way or another. Good luck!

Sorry op but if this has the potential to have huge career implications for you then you must fight it. Can you join a union or speak to a legal advisor if you have legal protection through home insurance or similar? The whole reason for governance in an organisation is to reduce risk. Whoever signed this off is responsible, that is why these control checks are in place. I would be reiterating that point until the cows come home. The people signing off are in more senior positions and being paid more because they hold that responsibility. The whole reason for control checks - and especially when the control is manual ie. You deciding which option is better - there is always the chance something will go wrong. Manual processes cannot have 100% success simply due to human error. Every process will have risks and controls are built to strengthen the environment. The control for your process was manager sign off. The manager is being paid to competantly attest to your work, the manager has not done this to a competant standard therefore the control has failed. To go forwards, the business must address this by changing the process removing the risk ie. Automate the decision making - if this is not possible then they must strengthen the control environment. Firing you doesnt resolve the issue, the risk remains because the control failed.

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee you are most welcome. you already appear willing to be honest, which might just be what will save you. as for the future, I would expect someone to say why they did wrong as opposed to, they just didn't do research. maybe focus on being inexperienced at the time, as the main reason.

having done the course on B will be good to show the overall picture at their hearing.

you have learnt the hard way- whatever the outcome. it's why junior lawyers work on average 3 hours of unpaid work a day, just to cross their ts and is. I get you are diligent, which is why this upsets you. law is very demanding, exactly to minimise basic errors.

There was someone who should have supervised this- you are not alone to blame and I'm sorry- I would be identifying it. Whilst taking responsibility that the deficit in your knowledge was yours- there was a check and balance system in place that failed. I would not be going into this taking sole blame and responsibility

colleague- noted. it shows why it was 'obvious' to them as they are senior. your supervisor is being let off lightly (harder in law to punish them on these facts) but they really let you down, but you also let yourself down.sorry

It sounds like the mistake involved giving inadequate advice, i.e. failing to advise of all potential options and recommending the most appropriate/commercially sound.

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee can you comment on the above? I also picked this up when reading, but wasn't sure it was the premise of your mistake. Is it a case of giving wrong advice, or not giving the client the best option because you failed to consider the best option which was option B?

Yes this is correct. The advice given was an option but option B would have been the better option and was not considered

I’m a lawyer and agree with this - that’s why firms have insurance

To be honest this is also why after nearly 10 years I’m leaving the law. Sick of living in fear of making a mistake. Most of us lawyers are perfectionists. Don’t let this define you op. We have all made mistakes at some point.

I see. both arguments don't look good as both rely on research to avoid/rectify. so maybe, do highlight you didn't give wrong advice, but just didn't give the best option.

How long have you been employed by your current firm OP? Your chances are likely to be better if it's 2+ years.

It's potentially gross misconduct, but whether or not dismissal falls within the range of reasonable responses will hinge on the full facts and mitigation.

Even if dismissal is a potentially fair outcome, the outcome is likely to depend on your firm's culture.

Do read up on Human Factors - you may find it useful in preparing your case for a disciplinary hearing.

Disclaimer: my background is HR. IANAL

@BumbleBumbleBumbleBumbleBee you talk about 'chain' and signing off. What do you mean by these?

Signing off- is it like a cheque? That only certain pp can sign off your work after doing quality checks? Or was it just your supervisor okaying it and you sending it off to the client yourself?

Oof. Some firms are brutal. We wouldn’t fire someone for something like this, and the secondary checks at our firm are rigorous. Even people with 5 years experience are still considered ‘junior’ really as they have so little practical experience compared to the old timers. I can say that not all firms are like this, and some are genuinely supportive of their staff, even when mistakes are made. I mean, I’ve been reduced to tears many a time by my boss, but I also know that when it comes to it he has my back. He will always defend the team, even if privately he will rip people to shred for thibgs he doesn’t feel are good enough

yes, we all think there might be a bit more to this story.

You were unconsciously incompetent and have an unblemished record. You have addressed the knowledge gap since. Your supervisor was new, and it was your first assignment of this type. Their back to mitigate the risk of you making a mistake failed.

I work in a highly regulated industry - healthcare and I'm responsible for legal activity within my role. I can't see you being dismissed. Read your disciplinary policy. At worst I think you'll cone out with a final written warning that'll be on your file for two years and you'll just have to sit tight until it's expunged from your record.