unfair treatment at work

[teaboy2]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi ftf,

If you do just turn up at 10:30, you might, by action alone, be seen as affirming the new contract (or that term of it).
If it were me, & they insisted on 10:30, I would write to them (recorded delivery), saying that in doing so I am acting on their recent instruction, but it does not mean in doing so that I accept the new contract.

End the above letter with - I DO NOT ACKNOWELDGE OR CONSIDER THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT

[bluebottle]

Re: unfair treatment at work

A piece of information was imparted to me by ACAS which may be of use to you.

If you are given a new contract which supersedes your existing contract, in accordance with the general principles of Contract Law, both parties have to be in agreement with the terms therein.

In the case of a Contract of Employment, there is an interesting variation to this, viz.:-

EMPLOYEE REFUSES TO ACCEPT NEW CONTRACT

Apart from re-negotiating any contentious terms, the only course of action open to the Employer is to terminate the Employee's employment and re-engage on new terms only. However, this can backfire on the Employer and result in proceedings for Unfair or Wrongful Dismissal.

EMPLOYEE DOES NOT SIGN NEW CONTRACT

In the case of an Employee not signing a new contract, by so doing, the Employee is deemed to have accepted the new contract by default.

Do bear in mind Mjrowski -v- Guys and St Thomas's NHS Trust 2005 in your case as it certainly appears to be relevant to your circumstances.

Best of luck, anyway.

[fivethumbsfrank]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi guys I have an update. I finally got a coherent reply following the last letter I sent them on the advice of members here [copy in this thread] in short they have offered me a meeting with the chairman and their legal rep [lawyer]

3 days notice, they have said I can bring a trade union rep or work colleague, it hardly gives me enough time to find someone to accompany me, so looks like I will be alone.

I need some advice on how to handle this. I forsee two possible scenarios.

1. they offer a compromise
2. they try to bully me into thinking I am in the wrong.

how do I approach this guys? what is the best way for me to handle it?

thanks in advance.

On bluebottles advice I did again contact Acas re the minimum wage, they informed me that in my line of work it is a grey area dependent on adequate sleeping facilities provided, what constitutes adequate sleeping facilities is the grey area. I explained that the room provided was actually inaccessible leaving me no choice but to sleep in the office on the floor, they told me that this case would depend on the employer being honest...or not.
As I said before I have several photos taken over a period of time proving the room was full of ex residents belonging making the room inaccessible.

my potential claim for holiday pay in line with the hours I work would then also depend upon whether the nmw claim goes in my favor.

The very fact that the new contract now pays nmw indicates to me that they realize they are treading on unstable territory and possibly indicating that they are worried.

on top of the basic claims for mnw and holiday entitlement, there are of course possible bullying and harassment claims due to all the false promises made and the fact that I have been ostracized by their constant failing [until now] to reply to my letters requests, and questions.

Do I go to the meeting, take notes and hear what they have to say. Tell them I will go away and consider their responses and get back to them?

I have continued to arrive at work at the normal time [not their new hours] basically I have continued as I have for the last 5 years, they have payed me the latest rate of pay [nmw] as of this months payslip. If they raise the new contract, how should I respond?

thanks again in advance.

[bluebottle]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi guys I have an update. I finally got a coherent reply following the last letter I sent them on the advice of members here [copy in this thread] in short they have offered me a meeting with the chairman and their legal rep [lawyer]

3 days notice, they have said I can bring a trade union rep or work colleague, it hardly gives me enough time to find someone to accompany me, so looks like I will be alone.

I need some advice on how to handle this. I forsee two possible scenarios.

1. they offer a compromise
2. they try to bully me into thinking I am in the wrong.

how do I approach this guys? what is the best way for me to handle it?

thanks in advance.

Under ACAS procedures, they are within the five-days required. However, they must give you a reasonable opportunity to secure the attendance of a trade union rep or work colleague. You need to ask them to give you a reasonable opportunity to secure the attendance of a TU rep or work colleague at the meeting. If they refuse, they may be in breach of statutory procedures under employment legislation.

When you say they may offer a compromise, could you elaborate on this, please?

Trying to bully you into thinking you're in the wrong is a common tactic. They do so at their own risk because that amounts to harassment. The fact they have allowed an unsatisfactory situation to continue without doing anything about it and failing to respond to any correspondence you may have sent them puts them in breach of their obligations to you.

The fact you have a meeting with the chairman is something, because he/she is ultimately responsible for what goes on and, if the proverbial hits the air conditioning, it is the chairman who is first in line to cop it. Believe it or not, the Charity Commissioners have the power to remove paid and unpaid officers of a charity if the need arises.

The presence of your employer's "legal advisor" raises a question. I am going to PM a question and would be grateful if you could respond to it by PM. Thank you.

Bluebottle

[fivethumbsfrank]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Under ACAS procedures, they are within the five-days required. However, they must give you a reasonable opportunity to secure the attendance of a trade union rep or work colleague. You need to ask them to give you a reasonable opportunity to secure the attendance of a TU rep or work colleague at the meeting. If they refuse, they may be in breach of statutory procedures under employment legislation.

When you say they may offer a compromise, could you elaborate on this, please?

Trying to bully you into thinking you're in the wrong is a common tactic. They do so at their own risk because that amounts to harassment. The fact they have allowed an unsatisfactory situation to continue without doing anything about it and failing to respond to any correspondence you may have sent them puts them in breach of their obligations to you.

The fact you have a meeting with the chairman is something, because he/she is ultimately responsible for what goes on and, if the proverbial hits the air conditioning, it is the chairman who is first in line to cop it. Believe it or not, the Charity Commissioners have the power to remove paid and unpaid officers of a charity if the need arises.

The presence of your employer's "legal advisor" raises a question. I am going to PM a question and would be grateful if you could respond to it by PM. Thank you.

Bluebottle

Thanks BB. The offer of a compromise scenario is just me thinking of all the scenarios. their solicitor has obviously seen my last letter and based on that it's possible He has advised them to offer a payout to prevent a possible tribunal?

thanks for your response I'm just trying to get all the possible angles. so would you advise me not to go into the meeting alone? I'm not a member of a trade union and I don't know any union reps, also the colleague thing is a bit of a strange one because they would feel put on the spot if I asked them. and i'm sorry to say it but some people are like jellyfish and don't stand up even when they know something is wrong because they might only be interested in protecting their own interests if you get my drift.

[bluebottle]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Thanks BB. The offer of a compromise scenario is just me thinking of all the scenarios. their solicitor has obviously seen my last letter and based on that it's possible He has advised them to offer a payout to prevent a possible tribunal?

thanks for your response I'm just trying to get all the possible angles. so would you advise me not to go into the meeting alone? I'm not a member of a trade union and I don't know any union reps, also the colleague thing is a bit of a strange one because they would feel put on the spot if I asked them. and i'm sorry to say it but some people are like jellyfish and don't stand up even when they know something is wrong because they might only be interested in protecting their own interests if you get my drift.

I'll PM you.

Bluebottle

[teaboy2]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Firstly they should not have a lawyer present without advising you to do the same, and secondly if they do offer a compromise then they will be in deep **** if they try to get you to sign it without instructing you to have a legal representaive of your own (solicitor/lawyer) to advise you on it prior to you signing. It is an abuse of legal positions i believe , if they do not intruct your to bring you own legal representative (trade union rep won't cut it i believe) with you to the meeting, and or have them go over any agreement prior to you signing.

So know simply state your case calmly make it known you have the photos of the the room etc. And then simply take note and ask them to sent you a transcript of the meeting within 7 days. Then come back here and tell us what was said etc.

[fivethumbsfrank]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Firstly they should not have a lawyer present without advising you to do the same, and secondly if they do offer a compromise then they will be in deep **** if they try to get you to sign it without instructing you to have a legal representaive of your own (solicitor/lawyer) to advise you on it prior to you signing. It is an abuse of legal positions i believe , if they do not intruct your to bring you own legal representative (trade union rep won't cut it i believe) with you to the meeting, and or have them go over any agreement prior to you signing.

So know simply state your case calmly make it known you have the photos of the the room etc. And then simply take note and ask them to sent you a transcript of the meeting within 7 days. Then come back here and tell us what was said etc.

Yes I'm actually very tempted to attend the meeting and play it on the down low, then depending how the meeting goes inform them after the fact that I should have been offered proper legal representation attend the meeting with me. they have not informed me in the letter that I am entitled to that. is the onus on me to know this? besides their letter explicitly states TU rep or work Colleague, it also asks me to name the person prior to the meeting.

I am seeing this meeting as an opportunity for me to see how the land lies and to see if they are wanting to make an offer or otherwise.

[bluebottle]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Yes I'm actually very tempted to attend the meeting and play it on the down low, then depending how the meeting goes inform them after the fact that I should have been offered proper legal representation attend the meeting with me. they have not informed me in the letter that I am entitled to that. is the onus on me to know this? besides their letter explicitly states TU rep or work Colleague, it also asks me to name the person prior to the meeting.

I am seeing this meeting as an opportunity for me to see how the land lies and to see if they are wanting to make an offer or otherwise.

I would strongly advise you to contact ACAS today and seek their guidance. They are impartial and their advice is free. Do it this morning if you can and let us know what they advise.

Bluebottle

[teaboy2]

Re: unfair treatment at work

TU rep and work colleague is standard for disciplinary meetings, so it would seem thay have used the same letter template for arranging the meeting. It may even be a disciplinary, though having their lawyer/solicitor present would go against them if it is, and likely a breach of disciplinary guidelines.

But as you said, going to the meeting is the only way of knowing where the land lines, so i would go to it, but if you can, get your solicitor to go with you and by the way, any compromise agreement being offered by them should include fees for your solicitor.

And as blue bottle suggest, you should ask what ACAS has to say about it all and ask what they think about them wanting you to attend a non disciplinary meeting with their lawyer/solicitor present with no invitiation to you for you to have your own solicitor/lawyer present.

[fivethumbsfrank]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi guys I just got off the phone with ACAS briefly outlined the situation etc the lady advised me to go to the meeting and play it by ear, see what they have to say, write to them after the meeting and ask for the minutes of the meeting [copy] from their angle [employer] offer them notes from my angle [colleague]

She told me the employer is in the the legal realm by having their solicitor present, they don't have to [at this stage] offer me the same.

Based on what I described of the situation and the failed responses etc She advised me to continue to do the right thing keeping copies of everything and keeping the paper trail as I have been doing.

So I need to attend the meeting on the employers terms at this stage, she said if I feel satisfaction is not achieved, then I should consider to take it to a tribunal, they ACAS would offer an Intermediary service if I wished to try that before a tribunal.

[charitynjw]

Re: unfair treatment at work

My understanding of 'companion' rules is that at this stage you can only insist on legal representation in very limited circumstances

http://www.personneltoday.com/articl...ciplinary.html

I have known of an occasion where the appointed 'note-taker, who is supposed to be completely impartial (ie just taking a record of the meeting), was in fact part of the firm's in-house legal team, & in fact was orchestrating the entire meeting, including the preliminary setting-up, choice of venue/time etc, etc.

[teaboy2]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi Frank

While i don't agree with them having a legal professional present, due to it being an abuse of legal prosition that is likely to be an attempt to prejudice you. Hence why legal professional should not be present unless both sides have one. I do agree that you should go ahead witht he meeting, take a TU or colleague with you asking them to take notes of what has been said. The employer should also have someone there taking notes, if not ask them who is taking notes on their side as you will be requesting a copy of the meeting minutes from their side, and if they do not have anyone available to take notes on their side, you should request the meeting be delayed to a later date where they have someone to take minutes on their side too, as those minutes will prove very useful in the end if it goes all the way to tribunal.

By the sounds of things i don't think it will goto tribunal and that they are looking at a compromise situation here, but you never know, they may like to play a bit of poker and show us their final hand, though you are the one with all the aces, not them.

[bluebottle]

Re: unfair treatment at work

Hi Fivethumbsfrank,

It sounds like ACAS have given you good advice. Yes, ACAS do offer a mediation service to try and resolve disputes before it reaches an ET and under Civil Procedures Rules, you and your employer are required to attempt to resolve any disputes before resorting to an ET.

Let us know how things go at the meeting.

[teaboy2]

Re: unfair treatment at work

My understanding of 'companion' rules is that at this stage you can only insist on legal representation in very limited circumstances

http://www.personneltoday.com/articl...ciplinary.html

I have known of an occasion where the appointed 'note-taker, who is supposed to be completely impartial (ie just taking a record of the meeting), was in fact part of the firm's in-house legal team, & in fact was orchestrating the entire meeting, including the preliminary setting-up, choice of venue/time etc, etc.

Interesting article, though i think the because this is not a disciplinary hearing, unless frank knows otherwise, then clearly he should be allowed legal representation is any legal meetings are being held, were legal matters such as compromise agreements etc are likely part of any discussion. I think thats what you will trying to point out too when you said "you can only insist on legal representation in very limited circumstances".