Disciplinary meeting queries

jimmycrackcorm

muckbrien wrote:

Hi They gave me less than 24 hrs notice and 2 lines about the nature of the meeting

Why do you think you have a right to more than 24 hours notice?

muckbrien wrote:

Do I have a right to see the evidence being presented?

During the meeting. But also then you can state that as this is the first time you've been presented with it that you will need some time to consider it properly before defending your self.

For example if it is as a result of an incident then you would need time to reflect on it to ensure you have revalued any necessary details to present your side fairly.

Avatar MIA

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Why do you think you have a right to more than 24 hours notice?

If only 24 hours notice is given then the WRC would not generally look favourably on it as being fair.

However, not sure the OP has recourse to the WRC given he's on a contract.

I do agree that too much time may be afforded, but normally it's in a company's interest to err on the side of caution.

road_high

OP, I wonder are you entitled to any redundancy payment? Seen as you are planning on leaving anyhow, I'd just hang back and let them make you redundant if they want. Puts you in a much stronger position (social welfare and redundancy) vs if you just quit of your own accord (which they'd dearly love).

Graham

road_high wrote: »

OP, I wonder are you entitled to any redundancy payment? Seen as you are planning on leaving anyhow, I'd just hang back and let them make you redundant if they want. Puts you in a much stronger position (social welfare and redundancy) vs if you just quit of your own accord (which they'd dearly love).

Why would the OP be entitled to redundancy?

There has been no suggestion his role would cease to exist whether his departure was volountary or not.

Pelvis

You refused the first meeting because you didn't have enough notice. Fine.

You refused the second meeting because it wasn't within working hours. Fine.

You refused the third meeting because it doesn't suit you and you need a "couple more days". This is you just taking the piss tbh.

OP it's time to **** or get off the pot.

road_high

Graham wrote: »

Why would the OP be entitled to redundancy?

There has been no suggestion his role would cease to exist whether his departure was volountary or not.

I don't know if they are entitled or not as I don't know the exact circumstances of their employment. That's why I asked the question. But it's certainly worth exploring, ideally with someone well versed in employment law. For starters they appear to have over 2 years continuous service http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/redundancy.html

Samuel T. Cogley

It's not redundancy but an ex gratia payment he should be looking for with a good reference. You'd need someone quite skilled in negotiation to work that one in for you. Either a solicitor or good union rep.

_Brian

road_high wrote: »

I don't know if they are entitled or not as I don't know the exact circumstances of their employment. That's why I asked the question. But it's certainly worth exploring, ideally with someone well versed in employment law. For starters they appear to have over 2 years continuous service http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/redundancy.html

Op is being brought to a disciplinary meeting, redundancies do not fall into this meeting.

Since we have only one side here it’s very difficult to know what has transpired and how this current position has been reached.

It could well be that the employer is a bully and totally incompetent regarding managing employees.
It could also be the case that OP is the employee from hell and that disciplinary measures are warranted.

Continuing to dodge meetings is not the answer.

From what OP has said the employment relationship is about to end, if this is the case I would suggest perhaps some sort of compromise in which op finishes but the company agree to give a reference.

Some employers will fluff a good reference for troubled employees to have them move on, others won’t do this. I’ve always given honest references for employees, providing the good with the bad.

muckbrien

Pelvis wrote: »

You refused the first meeting because you didn't have enough notice. Fine.

You refused the second meeting because it wasn't within working hours. Fine.

You refused the third meeting because it doesn't suit you and you need a "couple more days". This is you just taking the piss tbh.

OP it's time to **** or get off the pot.

Hi
I'm going to the 3rd meeting

Didn't say anywhere I wasn't?

Pelvis

muckbrien wrote: »

Hi
I'm going to the 3rd meeting

Didn't say anywhere I wasn't?

Oh sorry, they gave you a deadline to confirm your attendance to the meeting, but the deadline "doesn't suit" you.

Yeah, that's much better, you're not a piss taker at all.

muckbrien wrote: »

Do deadlines to confirm attendance at disciplinary hearings have any legal standing or can they be ignored.Reason i ask is that the deadline they have now given me doesn't suit me.I need a couple of extra days to get my exit strategy together.

davo10

Pelvis wrote: »

Oh sorry, they gave you a deadline to confirm your attendance to the meeting, but the deadline "doesn't suit" you.

Yeah, that's much better, you're not a piss taker at all.

What's your issue here?

The op was given 24 hrs notice of first meeting and no details of the "charges", the second was arranged for a day on which leave was already granted, the op has very understandable reasons to object to the timing of both.

Pelvis

davo10 wrote: »

What's your issue here?

The op was given 24 hrs notice of first meeting and no details of the "charges", the second was arranged for a day on which leave was already granted, the op has very understandable reasons to object to the timing of both.

I'm not talking about either of those occasions.

jimmycrackcorm

Avatar MIA wrote:

If only 24 hours notice is given then the WRC would not generally look favourably on it as being fair.

I don't believe there is any basis for that statement. How much time should be required? Do you really think for an issue that might be classified as gross misconduct for example, that they're should be any delay?

Samuel T. Cogley

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe there is any basis for that statement. How much time should be required? Do you really think for an issue that might be classified as gross misconduct for example, that they're should be any delay?

The time given needs to be reasonable to present a defence to the evidence submitted.

splinter65

muckbrien wrote: »

Looking likely that's what I'll do

Self employment is likely my next move down the road anyhow ,so I'm not particularly concerned about job prospects but I'd be looking for social welfare short term

If your so stressed that you can’t deal with work then you need to apply for Illness Benefit from SW.
your GP has the application form because he/she needs to sign it.
write a short letter of resignation to your employer asking them to forward you any monies owed and your P45.
Do not put any parting remarks in the letter that may come back to haunt you later.

splinter65

road_high wrote: »

I don't know if they are entitled or not as I don't know the exact circumstances of their employment. That's why I asked the question. But it's certainly worth exploring, ideally with someone well versed in employment law. For starters they appear to have over 2 years continuous service http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/redundancy.html

Why do you think he’s being made redundant? Did you read the article you linked too?

Avatar MIA

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't believe there is any basis for that statement. How much time should be required? Do you really think for an issue that might be classified as gross misconduct for example, that they're should be any delay?

Only what I've been told by HR professionals* that have been through the WRC process.

Re Gross Misconduct, yes of course - but then again, if it's proved to be incorrect then the company is in trouble. Not everyone that has been fired for Gross misconduct has had that opinion upheld.

*By which I mean senior people and not a HR manager.

jimmycrackcorm

Samuel T. Cogley wrote:

The time given needs to be reasonable to present a defence to the evidence submitted.

It's not a murder case with a book of evidence to be analysed.

Samuel T. Cogley

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's not a murder case with a book of evidence to be analysed.

There is absolutely a book or at least a brown envelope with the evidence they are intending to use. It should contain the issues, proof of those issues and any relevant policies.

The employee should be given ample time to review and prepare a defence to the issues put forward. Doing anything else is a home run for the OP in terms of unfair dismissal.

muckbrien

Not sure what one or 2 posters were on about here

I legitimately refused the first 2 meetings and queried whether arbitrary deadlines to confirm attendance at meetings is acceptable practice.

Reason being I was so stressed I was undecided whether to seek time off work and the meeting.


Anyway I attended the meeting with a colleague and decide to contest all the allegations I disagreed with and accept any allegations that were factual.

I felt I was being steamrollered all the way through the meeting and my replies were being cut short and the agenda was moved on to the next point and smart comments made at times to my replies.

Evidence was introduced I was unfamiliar with and I asked to see the documents so I could respond and this was refused.

I came away from the meeting satisfied that I had fought my corner without losing the rag and could hold my head high.The upshot was a written warning and improvement order type arrangements.

Avatar MIA

muckbrien wrote: »

The upshot was a written warning and improvement order type arrangements.

Usually there's a verbal warning (also written strangely enough). It seems you accepted some level of underperformance, and they only issued a first warning.

Also, it looks like you're happy to stay there for now. Best to see if you can improve on what they asked you.

Good luck with it. Oh, and thanks for coming back with an update - quite a number don't bother.

muckbrien

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Usually there's a verbal warning (also written strangely enough). It seems you accepted some level of underperformance, and they only issued a first warning.

Also, it looks like you're happy to stay there for now. Best to see if you can improve on what they asked you.

Good luck with it. Oh, and thanks for coming back with an update - quite a number don't bother.

I was mainly satisfied that I stood my ground and refused to be browbeaten.

I was prepared to be sacked or finish the contract , either outcome

Case closed for me now ,I'll toe the line till I'm gone

AndrewJRenko

Good to hear you survived, OP. This thread sprang to mind when I saw this article today;

https://fora.ie/readme/unfair-dismissal-employer-advice-3897077-Mar2018/

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Usually there's a verbal warning (also written strangely enough). It seems you accepted some level of underperformance, and they only issued a first warning.

Also, it looks like you're happy to stay there for now. Best to see if you can improve on what they asked you.

Good luck with it. Oh, and thanks for coming back with an update - quite a number don't bother.

Op posted early in the thread that they already had a verbal warning

Avatar MIA

Stheno wrote: »

Op posted early in the thread that they already had a verbal warning

Sorry, forgot.

Stheno

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Sorry, forgot.

No worries