Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

[wales01man]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

I cant understand this BT order in someone elses name.presuming the order was at an adress of the OP who has a phone line in their name why would Bt accept an online order for broadband in another name without the payment detalis when we ordered broadband we confirmed all our details?without making any assuptions on the honesty of the OPall of this again looks like someone who for some reason feels the company has it in for them?
Having always been self employed and only earning when i did the work im begunning to wonderbwhat some people expect for their pay?

[kevjampip]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

hi to all who have replied, you are all misunderstanding what im claiming, my employers sacked me on 27th march and have still not given me written confirmation as to why i was dismissed, for the moment the bt order is not the issue that is my employers defence, there was never any gross misconduct against the company the defence that my employers are using has nothing at all do to with the company itself, and they do not dispute this its because the order was made while i was on shift and they did not go looking for it, as due to the nature of the business the history is checked every 4 weeks, they however have (what they believe) found something which they can use to sack me because they have somehow found out i was making a claim against them for unauthorised deductions from wages (which i have had confirmed in black and white from the child support agency) and also i had submitted a regulation 72 claim, im not claiming anything other than unfair dismissial my query was for advice on the fact that i was only given 5 mins notice of a disciplinary hearing, they are stating they never sacked me until 01/04/13, but on my p45 they have put my leaving date as 27/03/13 and also on the tribunal response form my employers have stated on section 3.1 that the dates i have given are correct.

[wales01man]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

So the BT order has nothing to do with the dismisal why was it brought into the thread?

[Eloise01]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

I'm sorry but this is making less and less sense as it goes on. I strongly recommend that you get your thinking in better shape for the hearing. If tribunals cannot make sense of the argument, they will not try. It's your job to make sense, not theirs to make sense of it - and that isn't happening here, so you need to take this on board in how you present your case to the tribunal.

As far as I am able to see, the BT order is an issue because it is the employers reason for dismissing you! They are, you have argued, suggesting that placing an order in someone elses name is suggestive of attempted fraud, and that you did this on company time on company equipment, using the details of a self-employed client - that is certainly the employers business! If deductions from wages were demanded by the child support agency, then they would be unauthorised - they have the legal right to instruct an employer to deduct payments. It would therefore seem that the dispute you had was with the CSA and not the employer? In any case - the CSA is not an authorised body to determine whether a deduction from wages is legal or not. Their concern is to set the appropriate level of support and to ensure that you pay it. The only way an employer would be involved in this matter is if the employer has been instructed to make deductions. A discrepancy of a few days can be attributable to error and does not in any way undermiine the actual arguments about the fairness of a dismissal.

You simply aren't getting it - you say your were given five minutes warning of a disciplinary hearing but they say that is not true and that they can prove this with a witness. Simply saying they are lying does not demonstrate that they are lying.

You keep referring to the employers comments on the response form... by now, a day before the hearing, you must have exchanged evidence bundles including witness statements? Surely that evidence tells you exactly what is being said and by whom.

[kevjampip]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

we have not been instructed by the tribunal to prepare bundles, i have spoke to the tribunal and this is a very straight forward case, my employers DID NOT follow any form of disciplinary procedure before or after they sacked me, regards to the csa and court order was made against my employers to deduct 10 pound per week from my wages and send it to the csa however last sept my employers changed my deductions to 30 per week and said they had been instructed to do so by the csa, to which after an investigation i have found out they were not authorised to do this, so thats were the unauthorised deductions from wages comes into it, this is the reason i believe they sacked me because i had found out and was in the process of claiming against them. this is a claim regarding unfair dismissial, they state that i was given notice of the disciplinary (which i was not) and that i asked for a fellow worker to accompany me which is also untrue

[CleverClogs]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

they are stating they never sacked me until 01/04/13

No comment.

[Eloise01]

Re: Help needed urgently applies to employment tribunal (scotland)

OK, I am trying this one more time:

we have not been instructed by the tribunal to prepare bundles,
The tribunal have not asked either party to produce any evidence or to exchange that evidence? I feel an Employment Appeal Tribunal in the wind. This is patently in breach of all tribunal procedures and the Employment Tribunal cannot simply suspend such procedures.

i have spoke to the tribunal and this is a very straight forward case, And when did they say this - at the CMD? At the PHR? Tribunal judges do not meet individually with either party, so when did they tell you this? And what do you think it means? Because I can see nothing that suggests that a contested case of unfair dismissal in which one party claims no due process and the other claims there was and has witnesses to that effect is "very straight forward".

my employers DID NOT follow any form of disciplinary procedure before or after they sacked me,
So you have said. Several times. Unfortunately the employer says you are lying. And is producing a witness to evidence that.

regards to the csa and court order was made against my employers to deduct 10 pound per week from my wages and send it to the csa however last sept my employers changed my deductions to 30 per week and said they had been instructed to do so by the csa, to which after an investigation i have found out they were not authorised to do this, so thats were the unauthorised deductions from wages comes into it, So - you found that a mistake in the deuctions had been made, and you pointed out the evidence that you had to support this and asked the employer to sort it out and refund the money due? And they said what? No? Why? They had nothing to gain since they were passing the kmoney on to the CSA. This was a simple mistake. Something that could be resolved. And you were planning to go straight off to the ET and HMRC? Why? And how on earth would they have known this? On a claim of this kind the law requires you firstly to try to resolve the matter through the grievance procedure. You did this?

this is the reason i believe they sacked me because i had found out and was in the process of claiming against them. Ditto, see above - why claim when it could have been sorted with the employer without doing so?

this is a claim regarding unfair dismissial, they state that i was given notice of the disciplinary (which i was not) and that i asked for a fellow worker to accompany me which is also untrue So you say. And they say different.

I can, however, now see why you are failing to understand why the reason for your dismissal is relevant. You are depending solely on procedural errors in your claim. The law does not work like that and their solicitors will know this fact. If the employer makes serious procedural erros in a dismissal then they may technically be found to have unfairly dismissed someone. But if the outcome of a fair procedure would have resulted in the same outcome - i.e. the reason for the dismissal was fair - then they will argue, even if you win on technical grounds, for a reduction in your award which could all but wipe out anything you get, on the basis that the dismissal was "your fault".