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.

I don’t. Your posts are coming across in a slightly nasty way

I would be clear you didn't know about B, you weren't trained to do this and supervisor didn't suggest it.

Name change as potentially outing, I’m a senior professional indemnity solicitor and my work focuses on negligent solicitors. I’ve done this work for 20 years, working in house for large firms, for firms instructed by other firms and insurers. I’ve never seen an employee dismissed directly for an error (although some client firms have ‘exited’ the negligence lawyer, which in my view is always counter productive) Dealing with mistakes is what indemnity insurance is for. All firms have it, pay a lot for it and use it. Most solicitors make 2-5 large errors in their careers. When working in house for law firms, I’ve never once recommended that a lawyer be disciplined for a genuine mistake. It breeds a cover-up culture.

If you work for a top 50-100 firm, they’ll have several hundred negligence issues a year and probably pay out a large (couple of million) claim every few years. You’ll be fine to move on to a new role in most circumstances.

I caveat this by saying that if the SRA are involved and / or there is any suggestions of lying or dishonesty then it can be a very different situation.

It doesn't make sense to sack you as all other cases of yours that were reviewed came back OK. Everyone has something to learn from this mistake. I don't think sacking you is necessary as it seems unlikely you will make a mistake like this again. Your company should ensure that supervisor actually have time to check work properly.

Agreed.

I work in finance and wouldn't expect to be sacked for what you describe. BUT I am definitely aware of places which might want to. I hate those sorts of environments, and got out as soon as I could.

Even when I was there though, every single piece of work had to be checked and the checking person definitely held responsibility for making sure what they had checked was right (otherwise what was the point).

I would be pushing back hard on this, for, at the very least, a mutually agreed exit including a suitable reference. If they want you to leave this could be a lot less trouble for them than sacking you.

I think you need to push back harder too. There was a process in place to check your work and that process failed.

Don't take all the blame here.

As a solicitor I completely agree with this.

You've posted with such clarity and reflection, without any attempt to minimise your mistake. You are aware of what went wrong and it has nothing to do with your honestly or conscientiousness. It was simply a specific piece of ignorance, which you have since taken steps to rectify by attending webinars.

That makes me feel like the people in the disciplinary process would be looking to keep you in your post. Someone who has the right attitude to learn from a bad mistake, and who is straightforward and honest about what went wrong, could be a valuable employee. That is surely what the ethos of a regulated organisation should be - acknowledging errors and learning from them

Some of these responses are very harsh. You made an honest mistake (who hasn’t?!), it’s not a moral failing. I would hope worst case scenario should be a final written warning. It’s a horrible thing to go through, but you will learn from this and move forward. I wish you well, and feel sure one day you’ll look back on this from a better place one way or another.

I don't

Although I do think that you might be the OP's supervisor who manifestly failed to check appropriately and should, imo, be disciplined

This is really hard, but if I’m honest, your posts are conflicting, and you need to resolve that before the hearing. On one hand you say you knew through training/qualifications, simply you’d no experience, on the other you say you didn’t know at all and didn’t even know you didn’t know. It can’t be both.

the supervisor is irrelevant to your case, trying to blame them will not come across well. You need to take responsibility. Accept it was an error due to lack of experience, and one you have now remedied through additional training, so you can guarantee it won’t happen again.

they may well move to dismissal. But potentially a final warning. Fingers crossed it is the latter.

OP rather than listen to @ReakkyAgainReally who is responding in a really weird way, listen to the regulatory lawyer or professional indemnity lawyer.

If it doesn't involve dishonesty, then I think you'll be fine.

And on a very worst case scenario there was quite an infamous case involving the SRA striking off a junior solicitor (it involved leaving a suitcase on a train and not admitting to it). Anyway, I know for a fact that solicitor worked in law again.

I think if it was a genuine mistake at the time and it was signed off by others at the time then its about if you've since learned and not made the same mistake. If you deliberately took short cuts and ignored protocol that's something else or if you didn't take on board training or didn't do your training when asked. All you can do is be open about what you did and why. I agree you need to be clearer about what you knew or didn't know at the time.

So it was an unfortunate alignment of a knowledge gap on your part and an inexperienced (at supervising), busy supervisor.

I think you definitely need to mention more thorough checking on subsequent cases. And that you've taken steps to improve your knowledge.

Anyone could find themselves in that situation.

As I understand it, 'Gross Misconduct' should be defined on the original contract of employment.

Is a Union involved in this matter?

Exactly, which is why, just as my solicitors have correctly done, the caveat should have been made that there are potential financial consequences and you should get an accountants advice on that.

Often what we do in our professions can have a knock on effect in another area, if we advise our client to get advice from the relevant professionals before proceeding, and they don't, we have covered our backs.

I don't see conflicts in what the OP has said, @Sunnyandsilly. Of course the need for opacity on an internet forum makes the explanations less lucid than the OP will be able to be within her workplace. That's all. And she isn't trying to blame her supervisor; she is just explaining that there was a procedural need for independent checks on her work, which wasn't fully met. That is a material fact.

OP, I'm glad you have had such informed responses from regulatory and professional indemnity lawyers. Fingers crossed for you. I hope it all goes well. As a poster said above, it would be counterproductive to discipline people harshly for honest mistakes. It would encourage a cover-up culture. The key thing is not infallibility but a commitment from individuals and organisations to scrutinise their mistakes and follow appropriate procedures to do better in future.

Is it tax op? I can only see tax falling in this category.

Not as a solicitor they didn’t,

@Sunnyandsilly yes they did as they appealed the strike off with help, on a pro bono basis from a law firm and barrister.

The point being that the conduct in that circumstance ended up with the worst possible outcome for a solicitor and she still came back from it. Her name may have been cleared but her failures were still well known.

There are loads of situations where a decision has both financial and legal consequences where an accountant can add no value whatsoever to the conversation!

Just one example would be litigation strategy in a significant liability case. That will obviously have cash flow and cost of money implications and might impact reputation and market value of the business (share price if a PLC) but that’s not something you would ever suggest an external IFA or accountant should get involved in and there would be privilege issues in the litigation if they did.

In the relatively narrow spheres of tax, trusts, probate, corporate restructuring, high net value divorces then maybe you would get an external finance view but for a large number of legal matters this would not be the norm

Also agreed. Also I very much doubt that Reakky has any idea what they are talking about, definitely not from a legal practice perspective.

Yes , just looked at that one cue to medical issues that were undisclosed she was allowed to practice but with constraints.

@Sunnyandsilly the dishonesty is a major factor which doesn't appear to be an issue here.

Giving wrong advice is why professional indemnity insurance exists (and why supervisors / partners have additional responsibilities).

I'm 12 years PQE and I still need to have anything with formal advice in it, signed off by a partner. Anyone under partner level has to. (Top 20 firm).

It would seem v unfair for you to get fired for this. Yes you made a mistake, but sounds to be a one off and nobody's died.
Surely lots of ppl / most ppl make cock ups occasionally. As long as you learn from them it shouldn't be career ending imo.