My cousin is being disciplined in work - was he at fault?

BlinkingLights

Accusing someone of "gross misconduct" when the did no such thing is also something I would be seeing a solicitor about, particularly if it's reputation damaging.

Just saying - it's a mighty big accusation.

ectoraige

Senna wrote: »

No the recording can't be used.
What has happened, has he been dismissed?
Does he feel it was racism?

What makes you think he can't use the recording? Can you refer to legislation, or is that just pulled out of your hat.

My understanding is that it is only illegal to make recordings of conversations where NONE of the people involved are aware that it is being recorded. It is fine once one person involved knows, which obviously is the case here.

kurtainsider

Regarding the recording - I've never heard of undercover RTE reporters being sued for secret recordings.

How about going legal with the racist remark (which I think it certainly was) and have the manager deny it in a sworn statement. Only produce the tape when the manager has dug a nice deep hole for him/herself. This creep deserves no quarter whatsoever.

As an earlier poster said - take a leaf out of Sgt McCabe's book.

Biorra

I'm sorry to say he's screwed by them - it was a set up.
unfortunately the recordings can not be used because they were not legally obtained...but i would seek additional advise on this through citizens advise - he should have been afforded the opportunity to have some form of a rep present! - seek legal advice, admit that the recording was wrong but stree how there was no one to record official minutes or to support him in the meeting.
especially if he is unsure of the workings of our legal fiasco of a system.
my bigger question is why should he have to risk his car insurance to give this person a lift - if something happened, what was to stop the other party from making a claim!! (l was stupidly in a similiar situation once and its not a nice place to be)

Commotion Ocean wrote: »

Warning, long post.

Bit of a background story, he is 19, his mother is Irish and his dad is German (my mam's sister married a German). He grew up in Germany and he is now 18 and arrived in Ireland recently. He wants to spend a year working here and mix with his side of the Irish family.

He is working now for a certain Irish store. He was assigned a task of 'stock checking' which occurs during normal store opening times, although you may voluntarily begin slightly before opening times or finish slightly after store closing, depending on what suits you, as long as you put in nine hours a day over two days. They are not paid extra or given travel expenses, as it says in the contract that you have to commit to working with the sister branch no more than five days a year.

Alongside him, another girl was assigned stocktaking duty, the sister store that they were deployed to is relatively far from the one where they're based normally in terms of public transport (the girl doesn't drive), so he was asked if he'd bring her.

He made it clear that he'd see her at the car park at 07.00 in the morning and make their way to the other store, at work for nine hours after they arrive, then drive back, thus hopefully beating most of the traffic. (She lives in the town of the base store, only walking distance away, he lives a 10-15 minute drive way.

He arrived at the car park a few minutes before 07.00 in the morning and waited for her, 07.15, 07.30, 07.45 .. still nothing, he tried calling her several times but it just kept ringing out and after the fourth or so attempt just went straight to voicemail. At roughly 08.30, she sauntered in and grunted something that resembled 'hey', and she put in her earphones and didn't speak for the journey, no apologies for being late. (Frankly, I think he was mad to wait that long).

Upon arrival, he said that it wasn't cool being late, and that if she wanted to get a lift the next day, she'd have to be on time, as my cousin had arrangements after work that he had committed to and counted on arriving at roughly 07.30 and finishing at 16.30.

He arrived the next day at the car park of the base store and no sign of her at 07.00, so he waited until 07.10, started the car, put it in gear and drove off. Only for her to arrive at 08.10, with no lift.

The next day when he was back at the base store, he was called to the managers office and lambasted for what he had done. He was told that he was going to have a disciplinary meeting later that day with the assistant manager as a witness.

He prepared for this, and brought his phone into the meeting and secretly recorded the meeting. The manager said he committed 'gross misconduct' and that the sister branch was one person down because of his selfishness. She said that in Ireland "7 O'Clock is only roughly and he should have made himself clear and not committed to anything after work" and the he should go to Switzerland to satisfy his 'clock fetish'.

The problem he has is that he recorded the interview without permission or knowledge from the manager or deputy manager and he didn't have a coworker as a witness, nor was he offered an impartial witness as he wasn't made aware of the right to a witness of his choice.

Can he use this recording against the company?

Biorra

I'm sorry to say he's screwed by them - it was a set up.
unfortunately the recordings can not be used because they were not legally obtained...but i would seek additional advise on this through citizens advise - he should have been afforded the opportunity to have some form of a rep present! - seek legal advice, admit that the recording was wrong but stress how there was no one to record official minutes or to support him in the meeting.
especially if he is unsure of the workings of our legal fiasco of a system.
my bigger question is why should he have to risk his car insurance to give this person a lift - if something happened, what was to stop the other party from making a claim!! (l was stupidly in a similar situation once and its not a nice place to be)

Thargor

Biorra wrote: »

I'm sorry to say he's screwed by them - it was a set up.
unfortunately the recordings can not be used because they were not legally obtained.

Can any of the people who constantly make this claim on Boards back it up in any way? It seems like the minute you mention a recording on this forum a few people always jump in to say it's illegal, but when asked to cite the law they just disappear.

AndrewJRenko

Thargor wrote: »

Can any of the people who constantly make this claim on Boards back it up in any way? It seems like the minute you mention a recording on this forum a few people always jump in to say it's illegal, but when asked to cite the law they just disappear.

This senior lawyer supports your view;

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/oliver-connolly-is-wrong-sgt-mccabe-broke-no-laws-with-his-secret-recording-30073914.html

"McCabe broke no laws with his secret recording"

FreshCoffee

Covert recordings by employees are perfectly legal. It's up to an employment tribunal whether to allow them in evidence:
www.mcdowellpurcell.ie/news/covert-recording-in-the-workplace/

IIRC McCabe (directed by his legal team) had the recordings transcribed to paper and produced the transcriptions as an accurate record of the meetings making it clear they were from recordings. I don't recall if anyone asked for the actual recordings to be produced, perhaps they did but as long as the transcriptions were accurate this would be a non-issue.

FishOnABike

The following news report also indicates a recording by one of the people party to the conversation can be used
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/farmer-who-told-repo-men-to-strip-and-get-in-with-boar-is-found-guilty-28950217.html
The evidence included 22 minutes recorded on one of the people's mobile phone.

Elmo

So as a late person who hates punctual people you cousin was good and even in Ireland 7am does not mean 8am.

7am means from 6:45 to 7:15 after that your cousin was free to head on on his own.

It was a favour for his colleague nothing to do with work.

When she found her own way in without telling him he was right to assume that she found her own way in the following day.

Tell him to find a new job.

dubrov

As he is there less than a year the employer can let him go with no reason.

The problem here is that they have accused him of gross misconduct without a valid reason. For me that is pretty dodgy ground. I'd run it by a solicitor to get an opinion.

Chuchote

dubrov wrote: »

As he is there less than a year the employer can let him go with no reason.

One reason (of many) to join your union…

screamer

The gross misconduct largely depends on his contract terms. If he was being paid mileage etc then he was working otherwise he wasn't. He was doing a favour and work has no right to get involved. It's obvious the girl hung him out to dry so as not to get in trouble. No good deed goes unpunished eh? Anyways he can pursue this and in the basis that he can be let go for no reason anyways as he's in probation I'd be bloody minded and pursue it. He has nothing to lose. Sound like a horrible company to work for anyways so he's best to move on. Surely being fluent in German there are better opportunities out there too.

bmwguy

Elmo wrote: »

So as a late person who hates punctual people you cousin was good and even in Ireland 7am does not mean 8am.

7am means from 6:45 to 7:15 after that your cousin was free to head on on his own.

It was a favour for his colleague nothing to do with work.

When she found her own way in without telling him he was right to assume that she found her own way in the following day.

Tell him to find a new job.

It only means 7:15 if something uncontrollable happened and a text or phone call was made to explain. How can 7 o clock have a 30 minute spread like that?

If I decided to be early and you decided to be late, I could be left sitting for 30 minutes which is not fair.

Off topic, but people should be where they are meant to be when they are meant to be there.

My job consists mainly of calling to clients during their busy days. I'm always on time. Would never leave anyone waiting for me. Ever. Clients tend to be pretty punctual too. No time for messers.

Chuchote

I'm gobsmacked at this, honestly.

• Worker 1 arrives in time, ready to work, waits an hour and a half for colleague without any message or contact from her.
• Worker 2 sleeps it out and is an hour and a half late the first day, is an hour and ten minutes late the second day.
• Worker 1, not Worker 2, is disciplined.

Something seriously wrong with the work ethic in this company.

dubrov

Or we are not getting the full story

BlinkingLights

This notion that time is flexible in Ireland only applies to social situations like going to a party or the pub.

I've found Irish people as much sticklers for punctuality as anywhere else I've ever worked.

The comment made by the boss is absolutely ridiculous and targeting someone because of their nationality with a mocking stereotype.

I guarantee you that if he arrived into work 30-45 mins late, there would be huge problems.

Basically his colleague didn't get up, missed her lift to work and somehow the boss blames the person giving her a lift ?

1. This is nothing to do with the boss.
2. There's an accusation of "gross misconduct" when, at least according to what was mentioned here, no misconduct happened.
3. The use of a private car for work purposes is usually a violation of the insurance policy. If the boss insists that this is part of the guy's work duties then he needs to compensate him for the mileage and the car insurance upgrade.
4. Hurling what reads as a very nasty comment based on someone's nationality is something covered under the interpretations of the Equal Status Acts and could be investigated by the relevant authorities.

Little CuChulainn

They could have just let him go and that'd be that but instead they decided to fabricate gross misconduct proceedings and go for the nationality angle. If it was me I'd be going for a consult with a solicitor who has experience in employment matters. Might cost a few quid but he'll know where he stands.

jimmycrackcorm

pilly wrote:

If your cousin is still in a probationary period he has little or no rights to be honest. Anyway, sounds like a horrible place to work, he will find somewhere else handy enough at the moment.

Even in a probationary period you still have some rights and you can only be let go of the employer follows the rules.

If it did come to that I'd be trekking the employer about the recording and especially the references they made about nationality.

I'd also tell the manager I hope he enjoys his YouTube stardom.

pilly

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Even in a probationary period you still have some rights and you can only be let go of the employer follows the rules.

If it did come to that I'd be trekking the employer about the recording and especially the references they made about nationality.

I'd also tell the manager I hope he enjoys his YouTube stardom.

There are some rights and I'm not saying in any way whatsoever what the employer did was right, the manager is an arsehole obviously.

But in practical terms, in my experience, anyone going to see an employment law solicitor without a years service will be told that it's not worth pursuing.

What could he possibly get out of it?

Chuchote

Joining the union, on the other hand...

WhiteM

Well 7am is 7am. If you're giving a lift to someone, it's up to the person receiving the lift to have basic respect and courtesy and be waiting BEFORE the arranged time!!! The car owner/driver is doing the other person or people a favour. I have no time for people who don't have basic manners or respect. I'd have driven off it were me!!!

However recording conversations WITHOUT the knowledge of people who are being recorded is actually ILLEGAL as far as I know, would be thrown out, could not be used as evidence.

Boardnashea

Whose daughter is she. Local manager or higher up?

FishOnABike

WhiteM wrote: »

Well 7am is 7am. If you're giving a lift to someone, it's up to the person receiving the lift to have basic respect and courtesy and be waiting BEFORE the arranged time!!! The car owner/driver is doing the other person or people a favour. I have no time for people who don't have basic manners or respect. I'd have driven off it were me!!!

However recording conversations WITHOUT the knowledge of people who are being recorded is actually ILLEGAL as far as I know, would be thrown out, could not be used as evidence.

Nope, it's perfectly ok to use a recording, providing the recording is made by one of the parties to the conversation. See posts, 38, 39 or 40 in the thread.

ZeroThreat

Boardnashea wrote: »

Whose daughter is she. Local manager or higher up?

knowing Ireland, I'd have to guess that she has some sort of connection. It's always about who you know here.

BlinkingLights

FishOnABike wrote: »

Nope, it's perfectly ok to use a recording, providing the recording is made by one of the parties to the conversation. See posts, 38, 39 or 40 in the thread.

The only legal requirement is that you can't blindside someone with evidence. So a copy would have to be given to the other party so they could defend themselves.

Keepingitreal

I think its clear to say no he is not in the wrong, that is a no brainer.

My question is what does he plan to do with the recording? Has he been let go? Does he have to attend an investigation/disciplinary meeting with said company?

He can of course say (in these meetings) that he recorded the conversation but I suppose I am wondering what does he hope to achieve?. Does he want to stay working there? Or are you looking to address through WRC?

Water John

Would people stop saying it's illegal to record a meeting. That is patently untrue as put on by posters above, in relation to Sgt McCabe. That's black and white.

I'd have waited the 15 mins, my OH would have waited 2 mins. I say 15 mins because you wait 15 mins for a quorum for a company meeting or for a Director to be present at a Board meeting before being marked absent. It has some legal legs, so to speak.
Anyone can get delayed a little, occassionally, but nowadays, you text or phone.

jimmycrackcorm

pilly wrote:

What could he possibly get out of it?

Some satisfaction.

WhiteM wrote:

However recording conversations WITHOUT the knowledge of people who are being recorded is actually ILLEGAL as far as I know, would be thrown out, could not be used as evidence.

Who needs evidence when you have YouTube.

BabySlam

I think it is OK to record the meeting, whether on paper or electronically - it is any subsequent broadcast which would need to be thought about - motivation? time, place? audience?.....