final written warning

Sleipnir

If he threatened to withhold your pay, put in a formal complaint now. I don't think you'll be able to use it in court unless you've followed (or at least tried to follow) the company's greivance procedure.

If you lodge the complaint formally, and also mention that you did try to complain about the same thing previously but it was ignored, then at least you and your union can say to the LRC "we did lodge a formal complaint for bullying/harrassment"
If you don't formally lodge the complaint, then you didn't follow procedure and I don't think it would be heard.

How the company deal with it would be interesting. Ignore it again and it would add to any constructive or unfair dismissals claim. Deal with it and they have to admit that it's a problem.#

Again, I would mention all this to your union rep also.

dade

@ sleipnir

you make a vaklid point, i wasn't looking at it from that angle. i did mention it to my union rep when we first met, and i did say at my dirst Circus, i mean disciplne meeting that i wanted to make a formal compliant about it. I'll pop a mail off to the union now.

dade

Ok the silly fupper just sent me 2 letters not one.

Firstly it has been decided to downgrade to a written warning LOL

I'm not engaging in teh process and refuse to engage in the process??

nore have i submitted grounds for appeal?
Eh I already have both personally via email and by my union rep
I must sign the warning and must enter into a performance improvement plan one of those steps is that i must develop strategy eh I'm not a manager


apparantly i said myself my performance was crap WTF??
I said no such thing
i said forgetting to tell someone the stage a blackberry synchronisation was in was probably a rookie message that night but given the fact that in 3 years i have configured 50+blackberries and once the activation passes beyond the encryption synchronisation then only a catastrophic failure of the device or server will cause it to fail.


my refusal is wholly counter productive

so is the companies refusal to afford me my rights counter productive, and they can expect me to sign anything they want, getting me to put ink on paper will be a different matter, it's gonna take 10 burly ex marines to get me to lift a pen never mind form letters

honestly she hasn't a snowballs hope in hell of me doing anything. I'm about a millimetre away from waiting on my manager to walk in and telling him to shove his job up his hole.


I've to implement stratgesies, security p;olices and risk/gap analysis for teh whole IT dept? eh that's teh job of teh manager not me


so I'm taking the next week off with stress and they can go **** themselves

dade

what really grinds my gears is that she will acknowledge part of the letters ie the bit where we said i will not attend any meetings but will not acknowledge the you're going to court bit or they you may actually be operating outside the law here

Xiney

You know, it really sounds like she hasn't the faintest clue of what she's doing.

On the positive side, think of all the heat she's going to get when this ends up in court.

dade

Xiney wrote: »

On the positive side, think of all the heat she's going to get when this ends up in court.

the problem is the CEO is a cnut he doesn't care,

Xiney

wow. sounds like a real winner.

tricky D

You have the entitlement to engage in the process "under protest" should you so wish. Similarly, should you have issue with the Written Warning issued, you will be expected to sign acknowledgement of same, while at the same time you may ask it to be noted that you are similarly doing so "under protest".

'Under protest' sounds more like sign 'under duress'. I wonder what the LRC will think of that?

dade

tricky D wrote: »

'Under protest' sounds more like sign 'under duress'. I wonder what the LRC will think of that?

oh I've objected alright i printed my "warning" out, handed it to my manager and told him i was signing nothing and that the matter was referred to the LRC because the company are acting outside the law. well his jaw dropped, cos the dope was not aware of what was going on. in other words the "manager" was not keeping track of the discipline process and the HR manager was not keeping my line manager informed of what was happening in the process. how very professional

i also emailed her and told her A i had given her my grounds for appeal. B my union rep had also given her them. C the matter had been referred to the LRC. D i would only sign things on instruction from the LRC or my trade union rep.

and was about to sign off with " now F off and leave me alone, I've enough stress on my plate"

Elessar

Deadly buzz

Sounds like they are trying to use HR buzzwords and business speak to pressure you into doing it their way.

Keep us informed.

dade

spoke to SIPTU and they told me to reply with

thank you for your offer dated blah after due consultation i must inform you that i will not be accepting this offer and will be awaiting my date in court.

i was discussing how i get the impression that HR had not kept my manager informed of what was happening. how did i come up with this? his stuttering when i told him earlier it was gone to court and that she had operated outside the law. he didn't have a word to say and i walked off before he got a chance to even try worm out of it


so my union rep said "well its a bank holiday, why not ruin it on your manager, send him copies of all the letters both hers and mine and inform him that you are waiting on a court date, and make sure you CC me an her on the email where you send it to him"

so Mr manager if you're reading hope i didn't ruin your drinking buzz, coz my day was shot because of her behaviour. i've been shaking all day with anger because of her childish behaviour, her disredard for my rights and her lies and sulling of my character, as if i would say i felt my own work was bad only a bloody idiot would do that

doolox

If your true identity gets out and the company gets known in a public forum such as this you will be in serious trouble and your case will be severely weakened.
Calling a financial controller a "gimp" is not very professional and referring in a disparaging manner about your boss may also weaken your case.
I know these people would drive any sane person mad but you have to keep the head and minimise the damage this might do to your case.
If your interaction with the people you work with is like your accounts here then you come across as a highly unpleasant personality and this might encourage them to get rid of you any way they can.
At the final analysis they might even buy you off to get rid of you but no amount of redundancy will suffice to survive into the bleak times ahead.
I was in a similar situation three years ago and if I kept my head I would have had the other person over a barrell for bullying. I weakened my case by shouting back and have regretted it since.
On much earlier instances of bullying I kept my cool and reported on the quiet to the authorities and it worked wonderfully earning me much respect among workers and management alike.

Jumpy

doolox wrote: »

If your true identity gets out and the company gets known in a public forum such as this you will be in serious trouble and your case will be severely weakened.
Calling a financial controller a "gimp" is not very professional and referring in a disparaging manner about your boss may also weaken your case.
I know these people would drive any sane person mad but you have to keep the head and minimise the damage this might do to your case.
If your interaction with the people you work with is like your accounts here then you come across as a highly unpleasant personality and this might encourage them to get rid of you any way they can.
At the final analysis they might even buy you off to get rid of you but no amount of redundancy will suffice to survive into the bleak times ahead.
I was in a similar situation three years ago and if I kept my head I would have had the other person over a barrell for bullying. I weakened my case by shouting back and have regretted it since.
On much earlier instances of bullying I kept my cool and reported on the quiet to the authorities and it worked wonderfully earning me much respect among workers and management alike.

Doesnt sound at all unpleasant to me. I agree on the keep information to a minimum on a public forum bit, but I hope he wins this.
I am all for doing favours for people if I physically can, but work is work, if you have commitments outside your working hours and you cannot do said favour, then I dont believe a written warning is appropriate. As for presenting it to him personally 2 hours past your finish time on a college day :rolleyes:

Sir Oxman

Dade doesn't come across as unpleasant at all but i do agree he should keep any identifiable info to a minimum or zero on the forum.
His exasperation is evident (and justified) but definitely if anything can identify him and his company he should delete the references.

I decided a few days ago to delete a couple of posts in a thread elsewhere relating to my sphere of work because I realised I could be identified if some nosey company person decided to, although I was bursting at the seams to join in and put a few other posters right!

dade

doolox wrote: »

Calling a financial controller a "gimp" is not very professional and referring in a disparaging manner about your boss may also weaken your case.

i never said it was the financial controller. i said it was a gimp in finance as in a general dogs body. also i never spoke or acted disrespectfully to anyone in teh office.

doolox wrote: »

If your interaction with the people you work with is like your accounts here then you come across as a highly unpleasant personality and this might encourage them to get rid of you any way they can.

unpleasent? how so because i become angry when someone tried to walk on me or refuses to give me my rights under law? or am i unpleasent because i know my rights? you have no idea how i interact with teh people i work with unless you work in teh same comapny as me so don't assume i'm unpleasent. if teh truth be known i am probabaly teh nicest person you'll meet in an office, i'm accomidating i work ti the users schedule as best i can even if that means i do not get to take lunch because they can't afford down tome during their day. i'm pleasen and polite on teh phone and in any email or verbal communication and do not use foul language when dealing with people.

trust me i take tome to word everything i write in response to any and all emails i send out, because i know how easy it is for people to become confused, there is no inflection, tone or bosy language in email and i know that can cause problems so i purposly ensure my email responses are clear, concise and poilte

doolox wrote: »

At the final analysis they might even buy you off to get rid of you but no amount of redundancy will suffice to survive into the bleak times ahead.

mcdonalds are always hiring I'm not too proud to do that. I'll do any job that puts food in my kids mouths but i will not tollerate anyone slandering me, calling me unprofesisonal or thinking they can bully or harasse me into submission, it's in my blood.


i've edited some of my past posts cause they are in hind sight a little identifiable. i'll make sure not to do that again

doolox

I think there is some stuff in law called sub judice where the parties to a case are forbidden or at least advised not to discuss it in a public forum in an identifiable way.
If I come across as strong about this its to protect you from what can happen if this gets public or identifiable.
Cool heads and discretion will prevail.

dade

sometime's it's hard to keep a cool head when confronted with someone that should know somethnig and clearly doesn't.

in relation to discression i hear ya and have edit out what i can and asked a mod to look at the others.

Just read this thread and wanted to offer you my support dade. Fair play to you for the stand you are taking, I hope this all works out for you.

doolox

I know how hard it is to keep the head when confronted with self righteous people hungry with power lust but in the end it will be worth it.
I would still be in gainful (painful??) employment if I was able to keep the head in confrontations with people with less than adequate people skills in positions of authority.
On more than one occasion supervisors had to intervene when engineers in my presence were making things hot and emotional by berating shop-floor employees.

dade

doolox wrote: »

I know how hard it is to keep the head when confronted with self righteous people hungry with power lust but in the end it will be worth it.

well i got a week left them i'm off for 2 weeks so i'll just keep teh head down and ignore her if she comes in

dade

another bloody letter. this time apparently my manager tried to address the issue last week and i refused and other fabrications. Eh other way around actually. i approached him.

Oh and apparently any participation with the labour court would be on a voluntary basis and they do not intend on doing so. WTF? its a court i would have thought that it was compulsory for them to attend. she's obviously deluded in this right?

Xiney

dade wrote: »

any participation with the labour court would be on a voluntary basis and they do not intend on doing so.

LOL

Xiney

hmmm. seems I may have laughed too soon. from the LRC website:

Question: Is a Labour Court Recommendation enforceable?


Answer:

Due to the voluntarist nature of the industrial relations machinery in this country, Labour Court Recommendations for the resolution of trade disputes are not legally binding. However, as the Labour Court is a court of last resort in the industrial relations process, it is expected that the parties come to that process in good faith and consequently are prepared to accept the outcome of the process namely the Labour Court Recommendation.

Similarly, where the recommendation of a Rights Commissioner in an industrial relations case is appealed to the Labour Court, it is expected that the parties will abide by the Courts decision on the appeal.

There are, however, certain other categories of cases dealt with by the Labour Court in which the decision of the Court (as expressed in a Determination or Order or Decision, depending on the legislation under which heard) is enforceable. Such cases include:-

* appeals of decisions of Rights Commissioners under the Organisation of Working Time, National Minimum Wage, Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work), or Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Acts;
* appeals of decisions of Equality Officers under equality legislation;
* dismissal cases under equality legislation;
* complaints of breaches of Registered Employment Agreements.


Employment Regulation Orders (which set out minimum pay and conditions of work in the sectors to which they apply) made by the Labour Court are also enforceable.

Maybe your issue is of the bolded nature. I'd ask your union rep, though.

penexpers

I think he would be going to the rights commisioner

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/employment/enforcement-and-redress/rights_commissioner

which I think is compulsory to attend.

mdebets

Xiney wrote: »

Maybe your issue is of the bolded nature. I'd ask your union rep, though.

Even if the employer doesn't have to go to the LCR, I would assume that in a later court case (in front of a 'real' court), the judge would take a dim view of the employer, as he is practically wasting the judge's time, as he now has to do hear a case that could have been dealt before at the LRC.

Xiney

mdebets wrote: »

Even if the employer doesn't have to go to the LCR, I would assume that in a later court case (in front of a 'real' court), the judge would take a dim view of the employer, as he is practically wasting the judge's time, as he now has to do hear a case that could have been dealt before at the LRC.

I would agree that a prior judgement in the LRC against and ignored by an employer would probably count against the employer. Or at least I would hope so.

It would probably make a constructive dismissal case pretty much open and shut as well.

Tuvok

She really sounds like an idiot!

Dublin_Gunner

There would be definite constructive dismissal involved, even if you now left of your own accord.

Get all of your evidence and info together for your EAT hearing WHEN you decide to sue these morons.

They cannot 'fast track' a final written warning - that can only come after proper procedures have been followed and verbal warnings - with the option of a witness of your choice, have been given.

Tell your boss, if he thinks there's something wrong with the blackberry while he's at home etc - to kindly RTFM.

Nody

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

They cannot 'fast track' a final written warning - that can only come after proper procedures have been followed and verbal warnings - with the option of a witness of your choice, have been given.

Beep, wrong answer. They can indeed "fast track" the processs as you call it.

You see the process is designed for "normal" circumstances to give options to the employer depending on the severity of the offence. For example if I was piss drunk at work, took the bulldozer outside which I'm not certified to drive and drove it right into my boss meeting with an important client I could be fired (i.e. final penalty in the disciplinary process). Now if I showed up drunk I might only get a verbal warning instead. All depends on the severity of what I did and what would be considered an "appropiate" disciplinary action accordingly.

In my old company they where even advised to remove the notion of a severe disciplinary breach (it could only result in dismissal and was for stealing company secrets/cash etc.) as it did not allow anything but dismissal (and hence any such offence would by default have the person judged before hand instead of based on the severity of the case).

Dublin_Gunner

Nody wrote: »

Beep, wrong answer. They can indeed "fast track" the processs as you call it.

You see the process is designed for "normal" circumstances to give options to the employer depending on the severity of the offence. For example if I was piss drunk at work, took the bulldozer outside which I'm not certified to drive and drove it right into my boss meeting with an important client I could be fired (i.e. final penalty in the disciplinary process). Now if I showed up drunk I might only get a verbal warning instead. All depends on the severity of what I did and what would be considered an "appropiate" disciplinary action accordingly.

In my old company they where even advised to remove the notion of a severe disciplinary breach (it could only result in dismissal and was for stealing company secrets/cash etc.) as it did not allow anything but dismissal (and hence any such offence would by default have the person judged before hand instead of based on the severity of the case).

Beep - I'm afraid you have the wrong answer.

Sure, for anything considered to be a major breach of conduct, what could be considered gross misconduct, then yes indeed, this may warrant an immediate written warning, or dismissal if the case of misconduct was severe enough.

This is not 'fast tracking'.

For any other circumstance - especially in this case where it is deemed to be performance related, proper disciplinary procedures MUST be followed, else the employer's conduct in dealing with the matter be deemed to infringe on your employment rights.

I've yet to see an EAT to NOT penalise an employer for not following proper disciplinary procedures.