unfair verbal warning?

davo10

Bambi wrote: »

Just for giggles though, what actions is she supposed to be accepting the consequences for?

Just for giggles ii'll reply yo that.

Allowing child to go into restricted area, allowing child to create a disturbance at place of work, allowing child to interfere with carrying out of duties during working hours, H&S issues with allowing a child on high seat.

Those sort of actions, ya know, the type that sometimes have consequences for the employee responsible.

adelec

Well i had my meeting.and as many of u suggested i went in cool, calm and collected.apologised once again and made it clear this incident would not happen again...barely able to breathe with the nerves may i add.all that came out of it was is will meet again saturday.so now i wait again..... For people wondering why i came on here to seek advice it was because i was gettig abit stressed last night about it, and after all isnt that was this site is about? Asking peoples opinions on a matter?? Thank you all for your opinions.some very good points have been made

adelec

Little Ted wrote: »

adelec, I feel I should apologise if you got the impression that I think all the blame lies on you. In fact, I do think that the manager is being a bit to uptight about the formality of the process. For a staff member with 9 years service it could have been handled better. I can see from your replies that you value your job and that you are finding it upsetting to be reprimanded so formally. This speaks highly of your character. The fact you care is a good thing.

It also seems that the atmosphere in the workplace has changed since his arrival. Now this could be due to several factors. Not being party to the situation, I don't know what those reasons are. He might be justified in his approach - maybe the store was underperforming and since arriving he sees staff behaviour which he feels is not satisfactory, or that staff have a laissez faire attitude. Perhaps he is young and hungry and wants to make his mark. Maybe he is asserting his authority and you are this weeks target. Maybe he is just plain an simple a dick who bullies people. But regardless of why, he is your manager and no matter how you wish you had your old one back, he is what you are stuck with for now. After 9 years with the same management attitude it surely comes as a shock and that is understandable. But the sad fact is you are not always going to like or get on with your boss. But you can't let that stop you from earning a living. You need to pick your battles and play them at their own game.

That is what I was saying by advising you not to add fuel to the fire. You have every right to express your disappointment that the matter could not have been handled informally, and I think you should do that. I just really think you should avoid pointing fingers or make comparisions between the time you were there in a personal capacity (halloween) and last week. It just makes you look like you are desperate to avoid blame. This might not be the case, but appearance is everything.

I think you are probably winding yourself up about this and the more you think about it and analyze it the more indignant you feel. All totally normal reactions. But again, my honest advice is to take on board what The Mustard says about being prepared to defend your job, and at the same time recognise that sometimes the best way to defend your job is to pick your battles.

I think your acknowleding that you did mess up in allowing what happened shows maturity and fairness on your part. Be the bigger person to an extent and don't get dragged into a situation with your manager which you don't want. If he is planning on making you his new target, make it hard for him - if you engage in tit for tat then you will only give him the opportunity he craves. Your union rep will be with you. This means that the manager will be forced to play by the rules. It might actually be to your benefit that he is being so formal, as it means it is on record - no case of your word against his. At this meeting he can ONLY discipline you for the matter in hand - he can't drag up other things. And this is why I advise keep it calm, succinct, to the point. Don't offer explainations or excuses unless you are asked for them. Only answer what you are directly asked. That way, it will be much harder for him to make a bigger matter of it. If he tries to, then it will be on the record that you accepted your reprimand and had moved on. It puts the burden of proof back on him.

Play clever and smart. Don't let your emotions walk you into a trap.

Good luck and I honestly do hope it goes ok. My personal gut feeling is that it is all something of nothing. An opportunity for a relatively new manager to flex his muscles and send the message that his is not afraid to discipline.

I agree with EVEYTHING in this post! I went in and kept cool.i had my say and he had his, all very calmly which is a relief!! But nothing really came of this meeting as i have to meet him again next saturday.but to be honest if we both go in with the same attitudes as today it shouldnt be so bad and i feel abit better about the whole situation

adelec

adelec wrote: »

I agree with EVEYTHING in this post! I went in and kept cool.i had my say and he had his, all very calmly which is a relief!! But nothing really came of this meeting as i have to meet him again next saturday.but to be honest if we both go in with the same attitudes as today it shouldnt be so bad and i feel abit better about the whole situation

I got myself way too worked up and stressed about it.i just didnt know what to expect!

adelec

KT10 wrote: »

I reckon the best thing you can do is go into this meeting and not allow yourself to get emotional or defensive. I realise this has caused you a lot of stress but to be honest, the best thing to do is accept it happened, take the rap on the knuckles (a verbal warning is usually not that important) and carry on with your job.

If the meeting is not extremely formal, it'll simply be a case of "OK Edel, you know why you're here, don't do it again, next time its a written warning.". If you can act like you're not fazed or stressed and simply acknowledge your mistake with a simple "Yes and again I apologise, I've taken steps to ensure it doesn't happen again." one of 2 things will happen, both to your advantage.

1. The Manager appriciates your professionalism in the matter and you both go back to work knowing the matter has been dealt with and move on.
2. If the Manager is indeed an out and out bully, you've not risen to his bait and maybe he realises you're not the easy target he had you pegged for.

I spent a few years in Retail Management, I've sat both sides of the table and its not a nice place to be, I didn't enjoy giving out to people (but I did it because it was part of my job and I was responsible at the end of the day) and I didn't enjoy being given out to when the roles were reversed. The point has already been raised but this Manager could be just trying to put his stamp on the place and differenciate himself from the last Manager or he might have been brought in because the shop is under-performing and he has a reputation for turning things around?

From the limited glimpse we see of your workplace through your posts, he just sounds like he's following the rules for situations such as this, I know you said one person has left because of him but you didn't say that he was doing anything particularily vindictive, or if it just a clash of personalities (you'd be amazed how many times I had staff come to me and say "I can't work with person X any more!" but the reasons they gave didn't warrant seperation)

Chin up OP, I reckon most of us have gotten in trouble for something at some stage, try to move past this and it won't have such an effect on your well being.

I went in very calmly and so did he, which was a relief.i had my say and he had his.and i must say i came out feeling more relieved than before i went in! I have to meet him again saturday and hopefully everything will remain cool and calm like today.i definitely got too worked up over it because i didnt know what to expect.i had my defense barriers up because i thought he would be all guns blazing. I think the main reason for his formality is hes young and wants to make an impression that hes not to be messed with.thats just my opinion though.either way i can breathe again for another day

Sir Oxman

adelec wrote: »

I went in very calmly and so did he, which was a relief.i had my say and he had his.and i must say i came out feeling more relieved than before i went in! I have to meet him again saturday and hopefully everything will remain cool and calm like today.i definitely got too worked up over it because i didnt know what to expect.i had my defense barriers up because i thought he would be all guns blazing. I think the main reason for his formality is hes young and wants to make an impression that hes not to be messed with.thats just my opinion though.either way i can breathe again for another day

What's the second meeting about?
Seems a bit ott for what happened.

adelec

Sir Oxman wrote: »

What's the second meeting about?
Seems a bit ott for what happened.

Well today he wanted to hear my version of events which was the exact same as his....i dont know what else he thought i was goin to say.maybe deny it was my child lol.he had another manager with him writing down everything.he then told me it cant happen again,which i agreed and then i apologised again.he then said we will have another meeting saturday which will result in my disciplinary action.today was the second meeting.i had one yesterday to inform me about todays one, and todays meeting informed me about saturdays

Boombastic

adelec wrote: »

Well today he wanted to hear my version of events which was the exact same as his....i dont know what else he thought i was goin to say.maybe deny it was my child lol.he had another manager with him writing down everything.he then told me it cant happen again,which i agreed and then i apologised again.he then said we will have another meeting saturday which will result in my disciplinary action.today was the second meeting.i had one yesterday to inform me about todays one, and todays meeting informed me about saturdays

Having meetings about having meetings - He is perfect management material:D Did he use the phrase 'moving forward'?


You handled it correctly by the sounds of things

adelec

Boombastic wrote: »

Having meetings about having meetings - He is perfect management material:D Did he use the phrase 'moving forward'?


You handled it correctly by the sounds of things

Oh good god that is his FAVOURITE phrase.he cant finish a conversation without getting that phrase in somewhere!!!

Dyr

Did you attend with a union representative, If so, did either of you take any minutes or notes? Do you understand your companies disciplinary procedure? Do you know what type of misconduct your being investigated/disciplined for, if any?

You seem to have the manager who instigated the disciplinary action also carrying out the investigation and sanctioning that maybe the procedure in there but it's unusual.

Pat Mustard

adelec wrote: »

Oh good god that is his FAVOURITE phrase.he cant finish a conversation without getting that phrase in somewhere!!!

He sounds like a complete tw@t.

adelec

Bambi wrote: »

Did you attend with a union representative, If so, did either of you take any minutes or notes? Do you understand your companies disciplinary procedure? Do you know what type of misconduct your being investigated/disciplined for, if any?

You seem to have the manager who instigated the disciplinary action also carrying out the investigation and sanctioning that maybe the procedure in there but it's unusual.

Yes my union Rep came with me...and looked like he couldnt give a rats ass as to what was going on it still wasnt explained as to what type of miscoduct im being investigated for but i will definitely ask,nicely, at the next meeting before i accept any warning

monkeysnapper

Wow , if I read this thread backwards I'd have thought you'd have stollen money , or clocked in and went off to Spain on holiday. This isn't right. Their completely over reacting .

MadsL

monkeysnapper wrote: »

Wow , if I read this thread backwards I'd have thought you'd have stollen money , or clocked in and went off to Spain on holiday. This isn't right. Their completely over reacting .

Agreed. This could have really been dealt with by a quick word in private. Manager seems inexperienced and afraid of saying the wrong thing.

adelec

monkeysnapper wrote: »

Wow , if I read this thread backwards I'd have thought you'd have stollen money , or clocked in and went off to Spain on holiday. This isn't right. Their completely over reacting .

I think so too.but this manager is young and trying to make a good impression with the big guys in head office.i think thats what the extremity of the warning boils down too.its me this week and maybe someone else next week....

Pat Mustard

monkeysnapper wrote: »

Wow , if I read this thread backwards I'd have thought you'd have stollen money , or clocked in and went off to Spain on holiday. This isn't right. Their completely over reacting .

That manager probably watched Dredd over the weekend and figures he's the Laaawww.

adelec

The Mustard wrote: »

He sounds like a complete tw@t.

Trust me he his...if not worse.just a boy trying to impress the big men

Dyr

adelec wrote: »

Yes my union Rep cake with me...and looked like he couldnt give a rats ass as to what was going on it still wasnt explained as to what type of miscoduct im being investigated for but i will definitely ask,nicely, at the next meeting before i accept any warning

Are you a union member? If you are you should ask to meet with him beforehand and go over the procedure rather then him just showing up to sit in. He might not have any actual experience mind you.

You should have a staff handbook or similar that contains the company's disciplinary procedure, ask your union rep or HR for a copy. If you don't understand the process then you can be just strung along, you could find the process is all very amiable and easygoing until you wind up with a more substantial reprimand than a verbal warning. It could turn out to be a minor issue but I wouldn't leave any of this chance or the managers whim.

adelec

Bambi wrote: »

Are you a union member? If you are you should ask to meet with him beforehand and go over the procedure rather then him just showing up to sit in. He might not have any actual experience mind you.

You should have a staff handbook or similar that contains the company's disciplinary procedure, ask your union rep or HR for a copy. If you don't understand the process then you can be just strung along, you could find the process is all very amiable and easygoing until you wind up with a more substantial reprimand than a verbal warning. It could turn out to be a minor issue but I wouldn't leave any of this chance or the managers whim.

I rang a union head this morn for advice and he gave me notes to write down and take with me, basically telling me not to give in.i also brought my handbook to the meeting.i went to speak to my union rep after and told him what the union head had advised me.the answer i got was "Take the verbal warning because he (the manager) was really pissed off about it".that left me abit deflated but then i started questioning myself and whether i should just do what he tells me.even though the union rep is known for suggesting you just agree with the manager.i think i will have to contact the Union head again before the next meeting

monkeysnapper

After you've spoken to your union rep the next person to speak to is joe Duffy !!!!( ok half joking there)

I think you need to get 100% facts/ advice, even if you told them to hold off your next meeting because your in the process of getting professional advice. And I truly believe this is the route you need to go on . Obviously don't pay out a load of money that you'll never see again.

But I agree with you that you don't deserve to be treated like this and you will be angry for rest of your life if you let him walk over you. You sound like your the mature one and he's the child pretending to live in a adult world.

You need to get your house in order, and quickly

Procrastastudy

Sir Oxman wrote: »

What's the second meeting about?
Seems a bit ott for what happened.

Boombastic wrote: »

Having meetings about having meetings - He is perfect management material:D Did he use the phrase 'moving forward'?


You handled it correctly by the sounds of things

There should be a two stage process. An investigation to establish what happened and the a formal 'charge' should be made and all the evidence given to the OP. Following that a formal disciplinary hearing takes place. If the union rep knew the first meeting was just an investigation there is not a lot he can do in that meeting, some retailers don't even allow representation at an investigatory meeting.

The OP is going to find it very hard to challenge a decision if fair procedures are being adopted. I still think he should have brought up that the manager said he will get a warning, but it's probably too late now. I assume that you're not 100% if he said will or may OP?

tatli_lokma

I know people are saying he is a twat, over reacting, meetings for meetings sake, but in reality all the manager is doing is following the procedure to the letter. The correct steps are advise of the upcoming investigation, then hold an investigation, then make a decision and advise employee of the outcome (warning or not). So the manager a) called OP aside to tell her that there would be an investigation possibly leading to a warning then b) held a meeting to investigate and get her side of things and give her an opportunity to explain her actions and now finally c) there will be a final meeting on Saturday to advise her of the outcome of the meeting. Yes, all very convoluted in a way, but as OP says, the manager is young and probably wants to show the staff that he won't be a push over and that he knows what the formal procedures are and will follow them to the letter.

As always, we are only hearing one side of things, and while the OP seems very decent, it is still a biased report. Maybe dealing with it informally would have been better, we really don't know - maybe this is the tip of the iceberg? maybe there are lots of other issues (not necessarily with OP but with staff in general) which means the manager feels he needs to be assertive and take decisive action for all future infractions.

I know OP said that they were told they were getting a warning, and possibly this is true, but OP admits to being very stressed and distressed about the whole thing so possibly misunderstood. The manager might have said "there will be a meeting to investigate and I need to warn you it may lead to a disciplinary action/warning" or something to that effect.

Ultimately, I think this will all blow over, so don't fret too much OP. But do make sure it is clear as to exactly what actions you are being disciplined for and what it is classed as (not observing H&S, not following procedures, gross misconduct etc). Hopefully it will be one of the first two (or possibly both) and not the third - I do think that would be very OTT.

Good luck OP and let us know how Saturday goes.

tatli_lokma

Also, to those advising to bring solicitors and reps, I would like to point out that if you bring a solicitor or a rep to the initial stages of the process, there are there literally just to observe and take notes, and act as a witness. During the initial counselling and/or investigation stages of a disciplinary process solicitors and reps are not there to 'represent' you or speak for you nor advise you what to say (this should be done beforehand). It is only when it gets to the actual warning stage that a rep can actually start to 'act' on your behalf.

I just thought it important to point that out, as a lot of people seem to think that they can bring in a solicitor to an investigatory meeting and it will end up like a scene out of A Few Good Men or something!

Procrastastudy

There is no right to bring a solicitor in at any point. I'm not actually sure how that crept into this thread because it wasn't from the OP.

tatli_lokma

Well it's kind of a general thing that people seem to think a solicitor can represent you, but most company policies only allow officially allow a colleague or a union rep. Anyone else you bring in must be with the agreement of both parties. But regardless of who you bring in, they are not there to intercede, make objections etc, they are literally there as a witness on your behalf. If your union rep wants you to speak/act/reply in a certain manner then they should be advising you of this before the meeting/hearing

Procrastastudy

Little Ted wrote: »

Well it's kind of a general thing that people seem to think a solicitor can represent you, but most company policies only allow officially allow a colleague or a union rep. Anyone else you bring in must be with the agreement of both parties. But regardless of who you bring in, they are not there to intercede, make objections etc, they are literally there as a witness on your behalf. If your union rep wants you to speak/act/reply in a certain manner then they should be advising you of this before the meeting/hearing

Well I think there is some debate there - but I could be wrong. I think the union rep can have some involvement in the meeting, but in practise they do not. If a conference is needed they can always request a recess. In my experience requests for recesses are never denied but then my experience is less than half a dozen employers.

tatli_lokma

Its the word 'rep' I think which confuses people - the whole 'represet' concept. But from legal advice we have been given, along with advice seminars from employer and business organisations I have attended, the advice was always that at those stages do not allow a witness to railroad the procedings by speaking on behalf of the staff member, nor allow them to 'object' etc. As you say, a recess is a good compromise if it is needed or requested by the staff member.

I suppose that if your union rep is doing what they should before you ever get into the room they should be advising you on how to handle the situation, what approach to take. But equally, the investigation process is that - not an interrogation process to intimidate or scare an employee. So if the management is performing these investigations correctly, then there should be no need for a union rep or any other witness to be jumping in anyway.
(Unless s/he has a lifelong dream of having a Tom Cruise 'you can't handle the truth' moment! :P )

Dyr

Little Ted wrote: »

Anyone else you bring in must be with the agreement of both parties. But regardless of who you bring in, they are not there to intercede, make objections etc, they are literally there as a witness on your behalf.

Once again, assumption.

along with advice seminars from employer and business organisations I have attended

Which would explain why your advice is putting the OP at a disadvantage.

tatli_lokma

Bambi wrote: »

Once again, assumption.

where is the assumption?? on the basis of a disciplinary hearing being conducted in a fair manner, then both parties involved have the right to approve who attends as a witness if they are outside of the agreed witnesses permitted as per your diciplinary procedure in your company handbook. This makes absolute sense as it wouldn't be to anyones advantage to allow Johnny to bring his mammy in to a meeting and have her shout the odds. Equally, it's not fair on the employee if the manager brings in a crony or yes-man who the employee believes will not be unbiased.

Most companies agree that a colleague or union rep is an acceptable witness. Anyone other than that is subject to acceptance by both parties. I am not assuming all companies are the same - I am saying that on the basis of my 20 odd years of experience and having worked for several companies and being active in keeping my knowledge of best and standard practice up to date by consulting with like-minded businesses, the norm is for anyone outside the stated accepted witnesses is at the prior agreement of both parties.

Which would explain why your advice is putting the OP at a disadvantage.

I think you will find that OP has found my advice to be helpful and has been re-iterated by others. And I notice that you left out the first part - the part where I said first and foremost based on LEGAL advice.

It really is a case of you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't with some people. If a manager/supervisor doesn't attend seminars, advice meetings, courses on employment law and practice etc etc they are slammed for not keeping their knowledge up to date. If they do go, then they are accused of being unhelpful and disadvantageous to their employees. :rolleyes:

Pat Mustard

At an early stage of a disciplinary process, it may or may not be overly confrontational to bring a solicitor to represent one's interests. In many cases, it's a bit OTT. However, if people choose to bring a solicitor to a disciplinary hearing, then they will. If people want to being union representation, then they will.

A solicitor is not going to attend a disciplinary hearing as a witness. He may be silent and take notes, but he is there to represent his client. He may have questions for witness to an incident forming the subject of a complaint.

I haven't come across a situation of a solicitor being excluded from attending a disciplinary hearing, but if it were to happen, then lack of fair procedures would be argued should matters proceed to the EAT.

EDIT: There is a possibility of judicial review proceedings being brought against a management decision to exclude an employee's solicitor from a disciplinary hearing.