who can you bring with you to a disciplinary meeting?

mind_the_gap

Checking this out for a friend.

Scenario is this. He has appealed a final written warning which was issued against him late last year. He informed Human Resources who he was bringing with him (someone from outside the company). In the meantime, he has received a letter stating that this is not acceptable and that he must bring another co-worker with him.
He checked the employee handbook/code of conduct/grieveance procedure and it states 'typically this will be someone from within the organisation'.

My query as follows;

1. Does current employment law overide whatever demands they make in this regard?
2. Even if thats not the case, the wording does not suggest that it is compulsory. ie. typically is not equal to MUST.

Would be grateful if anyone has the knowledge on this or link to same.

Darragh29

mind_the_gap wrote: »

Checking this out for a friend.

Scenario is this. He has appealed a final written warning which was issued against him late last year. He informed Human Resources who he was bringing with him (someone from outside the company). In the meantime, he has received a letter stating that this is not acceptable and that he must bring another co-worker with him.
He checked the employee handbook/code of conduct/grieveance procedure and it states 'typically this will be someone from within the organisation'.

My query as follows;

1. Does current employment law overide whatever demands they make in this regard?
2. Even if thats not the case, the wording does not suggest that it is compulsory. ie. typically is not equal to MUST.

Would be grateful if anyone has the knowledge on this or link to same.

If his job is on the line, he should bring his solicitor with him.

More info below...

http://www.lrc.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=88

mind_the_gap

Thanks for that Darrragh. Bit concerned as just checked through the link and it says this;

'For the purposes of this Code of Practice, "employee representative" includes a colleague of the employee's choice and a registered trade union but not any other person or body unconnected with the enterprise.'

These are only guidelines from what I can make out so if their own procedures just say 'typically' - then that leaves things open to interpretation I would hope?

gerrycollins

if his written warning was issued against him late last year, how late?

the person who goes with your friend is there purley as a witness to what was said.

If you came to me with someone I didnt know, as your manager I would refuse conversation based on the fact that I dont know the person or his credibility who has to witness all of this.

you would not like it if I brough in a complete stranger to be my witness,

MagicMarker

Why would he want to bring someone who doesn't work there?

This isn't a court hearing we're talking about. Just ask a co-worker!

IsThatSo?

His/her union rep would be best, if he/she has one.

doolox

Try your hardest to get an employment relations solicitor in with you at the meeting.
If you are on a final written warning things are dead SERIOUS so you could give the solicitor your bosses number and let him persuade your boss to let him in on the meeting.
Those solicitors might be able to find some technicality where you may be given a repreive and a second chance, or at worst might be able to get a money settlement for you to go quietly.
Unless you show you can fight they will just go ahead and fire you, if they see you are serious about resisting dismissal they might just blink and back down.
It probably will be a very difficult place to work in after this but the higher ups if they see an improvement in your work might stay your bosses hand and things might improve.

gerrycollins

doolox wrote: »

Try your hardest to get an employment relations solicitor in with you at the meeting.
If you are on a final written warning things are dead SERIOUS so you could give the solicitor your bosses number and let him persuade your boss to let him in on the meeting.
Those solicitors might be able to find some technicality where you may be given a repreive and a second chance, or at worst might be able to get a money settlement for you to go quietly.
Unless you show you can fight they will just go ahead and fire you, if they see you are serious about resisting dismissal they might just blink and back down.
It probably will be a very difficult place to work in after this but the higher ups if they see an improvement in your work might stay your bosses hand and things might improve.

Dont want to rock the boat here but a solicitor is a little over the top. The OP already has the final written warning which has a time limit on it however the OP is excerising their right of appeal.

You can only challenge a written warning based on the reason/evidence a final warning is produced on.your challenge cannot be put against you

It is not the OP's employers intention to fire him merly the fact that if the OP comits another offence based on what the warning is issued for,the OP may face dismissal or suspension.

as for a monetry settlement you are joking?? The OP employers sounds like they know whats whats as many employers and employee dont know their rights etc when it comes to displinary procedures. Employers dont take lightly the process and treat it with kid gloves and dot ever I and cross every T

Eoin

I'm a bit confused here. I thought that disciplinary policies are up to the company to define, and presumably that covers any appeals process as well. I would really recommend bringing in a union rep from the company - they will know that company's procedures and be able to offer the best advice.

doolox

Most people working in small firms are able to get a settlement of some sort when they are fired if the circumstances are hazy.
It is true that large firms will have an ironclad case before proceeding and will be able to fire someone on a final written warning easy enough. Usually more than one department or supervisor will be involved and a consistent history of rule violation across a wide area of work will be involved. Enough ammunition will have been built up to sink the errant employee.
Not so in small firms where one ill tempered comment may escalate to dismissal, the boss covering his tracks with a series of exagerated claims to get rid of his enemy and with no colleague to stop the process.
With little or no internal greivance mechanism and no union backing many employees in small firms need recourse to external emplyee relations solicitors.

Eoin

doolox wrote: »

Most people working in small firms are able to get a settlement of some sort when they are fired if the circumstances are hazy.
It is true that large firms will have an ironclad case before proceeding and will be able to fire someone on a final written warning easy enough. Usually more than one department or supervisor will be involved and a consistent history of rule violation across a wide area of work will be involved. Enough ammunition will have been built up to sink the errant employee.
Not so in small firms where one ill tempered comment may escalate to dismissal, the boss covering his tracks with a series of exagerated claims to get rid of his enemy and with no colleague to stop the process.
With little or no internal greivance mechanism and no union backing many employees in small firms need recourse to external emplyee relations solicitors.

The fact that the company has a code of conduct indicates that they have a process in place. Perhaps this is one of the times where the employee should actually try and address why he is getting warnings, rather than trying to wriggle out of it through loopholes and technicalities.

If this is an ongoing issue, which "final" warning might indicate, then they'll just make sure they have a watertight case the next time.

gerrycollins

doolox wrote: »

Most people working in small firms are able to get a settlement of some sort when they are fired if the circumstances are hazy.
It is true that large firms will have an ironclad case before proceeding and will be able to fire someone on a final written warning easy enough. Usually more than one department or supervisor will be involved and a consistent history of rule violation across a wide area of work will be involved. Enough ammunition will have been built up to sink the errant employee.
Not so in small firms where one ill tempered comment may escalate to dismissal, the boss covering his tracks with a series of exagerated claims to get rid of his enemy and with no colleague to stop the process.
With little or no internal greivance mechanism and no union backing many employees in small firms need recourse to external emplyee relations solicitors.

you may be right about the small guy, personally i disagree, but the OP has been given his final written warning and has been given the right to appeal, this sounds like a company who know their stuff.

BTW OP how did it go?

mind_the_gap

gerrycollins wrote: »

you may be right about the small guy, personally i disagree, but the OP has been given his final written warning and has been given the right to appeal, this sounds like a company who know their stuff.

BTW OP how did it go?

After an informal discussion with him, they didnt bother going forward with the final warning appeal!

Few things raised in this thread that are interesting. I cannot see why anyone should have a problem with the employee bringing in whoever they chose as a witness. What difference does it make to the employer - they always have their own 'witness' on hand also.
I take on board the suggestion that it should be a union rep - and that makes sense. However, in many other companies, this isnt an option. I know of companies where other employees would feel intimidated in putting themselves forward as 'witnesses'. I'm sure you can see how this can be a problem.
And lastly, someone above suggested that the person I was referring to shouldnt be 'trying to get off on a technicality'. Sorry, but your making assumptions here. Honest hard working people can find themselves in this situation for no good reason - fact!

Eoin

mind_the_gap wrote: »

And lastly, someone above suggested that the person I was referring to shouldnt be 'trying to get off on a technicality'. Sorry, but your making assumptions here. Honest hard working people can find themselves in this situation for no good reason - fact!

I didn't say that it was his fault he was in this situation. I said that he should try and address why he is in that situation, or he might find himself in exactly the same situation down the road, only this time the company will have all the loopholes closed.

I also don't think it's unreasonable for a company to not want external people partaking in an internal disciplinary procedure, any more than an employee might want an outsider sitting in on behalf of the company. "fact".

Edit - glad to hear it's sorted out though

mind_the_gap

eoin wrote: »

I also don't think it's unreasonable for a company to not want external people partaking in an internal disciplinary procedure, any more than an employee might want an outsider sitting in on behalf of the company.

I accept this is a valid point. But from the employees standpoint, if other work colleagues simply don't feel comfortable in participating as 'witnesses' in a company where there is no union recognition ie. a union rep is not an option - I'm sure you can imagine this puts the employee in a vulnerable position.

Godge

a lot of disciplinary procedures try to exclude outsiders from accompanying the accused. However, given Supreme Court rulings in relation to rights to legal representation before Tribunals etc., it is a brave employer who would refuse to allow a person's solicitor into a hearing.

However, regardless of the outcome, no employer would cough up for the cost of the solicitor.

mind_the_gap

Godge wrote: »

a lot of disciplinary procedures try to exclude outsiders from accompanying the accused. However, given Supreme Court rulings in relation to rights to legal representation before Tribunals etc., it is a brave employer who would refuse to allow a person's solicitor into a hearing.

Hi Godge. This is interesting. Could you elaborate on the above a little more? Are you saying that despite the fact that the employer stipulates that the employee should 'typically' bring another co-worker with them as witness, the employee still has a legal right to bring an outsider with them?
Or is it a case that if things deteriorated to a point of a legal dispute between employer and employee, the employers position of not allowing an outsider as witness would be viewed dimly by the courts??

Big_Mac

Our place is the same. You are entitled to bring a colleague with you to a diciplinary meeting.

One reason for this I would imagine is if the rule breakage was in regard to sensitive company information, the company wouldn't want any tom dick or harry sitting in on a meeting regarding it. All company employees would have most likely signed a declaration of secrecy.

At any rate, in all of the hearings that I've seen (been through a few as a result of my current role) its only a formality and so the employee has their own witness, its usually never taken any further than that.

Can their employee not ask their line manager to sit in as a witness if they can't find anyone else? (Also done this before)

mountainyman

eoin wrote: »

I didn't say that it was his fault he was in this situation. I said that he should try and address why he is in that situation, or he might find himself in exactly the same situation down the road, only this time the company will have all the loopholes closed.

I also don't think it's unreasonable for a company to not want external people partaking in an internal disciplinary procedure, any more than an employee might want an outsider sitting in on behalf of the company. "fact".

Edit - glad to hear it's sorted out though

But if the employer wanted a lawyer present the employee would haev no choice.

Nody

mountainyman wrote: »

But if the employer wanted a lawyer present the employee would haev no choice.

Why would a company want to pay for a laywer to sit there doing nothing while getting paid their fee? HR and Manager from the company, possibly a higher level manager if serious enough as witness and current manager presenting facts.

As for bringing a solicitor to a meeting, in my old company it was allowed (you could bring anyone) but if you brought a solicitor so would the company.

morrowa64

Speaking as a shop steward I would recommend that you bring your union representative with you, and also remember that you have the right to ask for an adjournment of the meeting at any time during which the meeting is taking place should the employers bring up anything that you were previously unaware of or something that you have not prepared an answer for beforehand

Godge

mind_the_gap wrote: »

Hi Godge. This is interesting. Could you elaborate on the above a little more? Are you saying that despite the fact that the employer stipulates that the employee should 'typically' bring another co-worker with them as witness, the employee still has a legal right to bring an outsider with them?
Or is it a case that if things deteriorated to a point of a legal dispute between employer and employee, the employers position of not allowing an outsider as witness would be viewed dimly by the courts??

Yes, in certain circumstances.

Firstly, be clear, there is no prospect of the employer paying for your solicitor so you would have to cough up yourself even if charges are dropped/dismissed. That means it is really only necessary if dismissal/demotion/suspension are at stake.

However, if your job is at stake, it would be unreasonable of an employer to refuse to let you bring in your own solicitor. Unions don't like personal solicitors either by the way.