retaliation via disciplinary & suspension after grievance/whistleblowing (autistic)

[BoxOfRocks]

I am a skilled worker with a slight handicap, I am Aspergers Autistic. Essentially I have been bullied at work, encouraged to break DVSA and environmental regs, and indicating other issues of concern to my employer. Around this time I was supporting a colleague with their work, whom was haaving their own mental health issues, essentially doing the work of 2 people. I felt this was mandatory due to the nature of the work, and the ramification of faults going un-noticed. Suffice to say that this was leading to a burnout.

I was later transferred to another depot, to which my employer was expressly aware would have an impact on my deteriorating mental health, as I indicated such. Although not formally diagnosed with Autism at that point, (I am now) I was convinced I had it, and they were expressly aware. In short I knew the staff there had a particular dislike of me, it was an unfamilliar environment, the manager is 'one of the lads', and incurred extra travel time. Needless to say, Lateness became a common thing, and if it wasn't down to poor sleep, it was the traffic.I was subject to harassment, and pressured to break more regs. I wasn't particularly receptive to the pressurisation, and so a disciplinary investigation started into lateness

Upon being transferred back after 2 months, several things came to light which became the proverbial straw. I simply broke down, and was sent home. I was later signed off for 2 weeks, during which I wrote a 15-20 page formal grievance/whistleblowing complaint, and submitted it on my return to work. Within a couple of days, I was put on some kind of pseudo suspension, (presumably so they could figure out a counter attack strategy) and later officially suspended me for a year. The Grievance/Whistleblowing complaint unsuprisingly was mostly not upheld.

The Disciplinary investigation report came back with other allegations bolted on or otherwise ammended, and contains a whole bunch of lies, and to me stinks heavily of collusion, but of course I accept I am biased, and what may be clear to me, is less so to others and vice versa.

Please do not let some of the vocabulary fool you, I am far less competent than I come across. Although I am aware of certain employment law concepts, Identifying the correct ones and applying them is a completely different matter.

Thank you all for your time, I appreciate it is a long read.

[Amethyst]

Hi Box

I'm sorry to hear you have been having a rough time of it at work. I'm tagging Ula and mariefab for you as they be able to help.

A couple of questions which might help them;

How long had you been employed at the company at the time of your suspension ?

What is the current position following the disciplinary investigation report ? Are you still under suspension ( full pay?), how long have you been suspended for now and what are the next steps being taken by the company ?

[BoxOfRocks]

Hello Amethyst, thanks for taking the time to read, i hope it didn't bore you too much.

I have less than 2 years service, I hit that milestone at the end of June. A dismissal would be arguably automatically unfair though. I had 9 months service at the point of suspension, Which has dragged on for a little over a year. Still suspended though with full pay, though being left in limbo is agonising.

There is a formal disciplinary hearing set for the 20th, and the general read of it is that they are are out for blood, and are heading for a very generic 'breach of trust and confidence' or 'damage to employment relationship' type dismissal, (though have no actual indication of dismissal outright) Largely on the basis of lateness and recording under s36. DPA (self defence and whistleblowing reasons) and the other lies they have cunjured up in the meantime (flipping tables and criminal damage, among other things).

Other than psychological warfare (somewhat effective) to stress me to the point of resigning, I see no reason why the suspension has lasted so long. I enjoy the work I do/did, Just not the people/behavious subjected to.

[Amethyst]

Sorry, I also meant to ask when you received your diagnosis - was that after you were suspended ? before or after you submitted your grievance/whistleblowing report ?
Did you make a report to the DVSA as well at the time?

[BoxOfRocks]

I recieved my diagnosis 4 days before the suspension (end of march 17), during the pseudo suspension, athough the report wasn't available until a few weeks later. this was all after the submission of the grievance. A report wasn't made to the DVSA at the time, as I wanted to ensure my employer had opportunity to conduct their own investigation and resolve the issue internally. Similarly I have not yet contacted the environment agency.

I have tried to play fair, but they have not. In fact, I was made to resort to SAR to have access to the documents they relied upon in the grievance investigation, since the investigator was biased. This is something I understand to be an unusual manouver for an employer to pull, since they typically hate SAR. With the disciplinary investigation however, they would not and have not been able to pull this stunt.

[ULA]

It seems like you have been on suspension for a very long time. The general view is that paid suspension should be for as short a period of time as possible.

When they suspended you were you formally notified in writing and given timescales as to when they intended to let you know the outcome? Have they also kept you regularly informed of the delays in their process over the last year?

Did you attend a grievance meeting? Was the outcome formally notified to you and were you given the right to appeal?

Sorry to ask more questions but your response to them would be really useful.

[BoxOfRocks]

Hello ULA,

I attended a meeting in which i was presented a letter detailing the suspesion (not the pseudo suspension), and was verbalkly given a timescale of a 'a couple of weeks'. They have not regularly informed me as to progress or lack therof, or reasons for it, though have done so very occasionally. once every couple of months.

That being said, I have pointed out that the suspension is inextricably linked to the submission of the complaint, though as expected they deny it. They seemed to press ahead with the grievance/whistleblow issues first in the hopes of finding issues they could contort and add to the disciplinary investigation. They insisted that the suspension was related to the disciplinary investigation, yet insisted on entirely segregating it from the grievance process (much to my dismay) although several of the events are interrelated. In essence, there was no real progress into the disciplinary investigation, until after the grievance hearing, which was some 7 months later.

I attended the grievance, essentrially everything was either ignored, minimised, not upheld or otherwise swept under the carpet, and it was essenttially said that I 'had to be given instructions more clearly in future, and managers are to ensure that I have understood them'. I am not stupid, I am fully aware of when I am being being encouraged to, or whether it is implied that I shoud cut corners with a task. I have been working in the trade long enouh to know what happens 'behind closed doors' and how to read such requests.

An appeal didn't change much, they only conceeded that the process (grievance) had already taken far longer that it should have, and would make no comment on the diciplinary process. They also conceeded that they should have made an occupational health referral many months earlier (when i requested it of my manager) and that they should be more perceptive/receptive of mental health issues. this was formally communicated to me.

With the all too common phenomena of everybody closing ranks when you 'rock the boat' (something i was specifically warned by management not to do BTW, (and have made a quasi formal admission to doing so)) I resorted to recording under S36. DPA, which is one of the main disciplinary issues at the moment.

[Amethyst]

A report wasn't made to the DVSA at the time, as I wanted to ensure my employer had opportunity to conduct their own investigation and resolve the issue internally. Similarly I have not yet contacted the environment agency.

Slightly off subject, my apologies - Are you being asked to overlook issues with HGV's, PSV's on testing ? ( just as you mentioned DVSA and I mentioned it to my other half who is an HGV technician and has had ' conflict ' in the past regarding being requested to 'cut corners') Rocking the boat is sometimes a neccessity.

[ULA]

You say that the suspension was inextricably linked to the submission of the grievance and I am not saying that it is not but I would be interested in what the company detailed in your letter of suspension as being the reason they were taking this course of action.

In summary of the timeline of events - the disciplinary investigation was initially about lateness and recording under S36 of the DPA - I presume this is about the fact you recording conversations? Was any action taken against you at the time because it seems like 2 months later when you transferred back nothing further had happened - is that correct? You then had time off for sickness, went back to work and raised your grievance, then are suspended, then a disciplinary investigation report is sent to you which contains issues other than the lateness which was the original reason for the investigation. The grievance took 7 months to deal with and in the meantime the disciplinary process was effectively put "on hold"

There is no legal guidance set out as to how a company should deal with a grievance raised while there is a disciplinary. My view is that if they felt they were interlinked then this may have been the reason for them deciding to deal with the grievance first. Again I have to say that this process seems to have taken longer than necessary. Did you get any written correspondence following the grievance appeal detailing the issues that they conceded on have they agreed to a referral to occupational health?

In regard to the disciplinary meeting on 20th I presume you have been formally written to, provided with any documentary evidence they are using to support the allegations, the right to be accompanied and given an indication of any disciplinary action that may be taken in the event they believe action should be taken?

[BoxOfRocks]

I have the role of being both a HGV tech, and class 4, 5L & 7 MOT tester. I had been 'heavily encouraged' to fudge the MOTs i performed, and take shortcuts on HGV inspections. I was similarly told to pour waste antifreeze down the drain.

The disciplinary investigation started in regard to lateness once I had already been transferred. I knew i was going into a hostile environment. I had already been encouraged to complete HGV inspections half-heartedly before I went, at my usual depot, and I knew where I was going the staff and management were a little less 'by the book' to say the least. During this investigation meeting I attended alone since i felt nobody else was appropriate, as breach of confidentialuity was commonplace and there was nobody I could trust. Since i was re-stating issues of concern, and blowing the whistle in a more formal setting, i recorded under s36 DPA, and this was unknown to them at the time.

I had recorded on a few occasions prior, such as when I was instructed to pour waste antifreeze down the drain (at the new depot). In short, I was aware that things would be difficult at the depot I was transferring to, and i took measures to protect myself. As i resisted the unethical stuff being asked of me, and this resistance was obvious, this is when they launched the disciplinary investigation into lateness. At one point during the transfer, i was warned not to rock the boat by the manager, or my 'overtime could be taken away'. (he was in direct control of the rota)

Their issue with recording covertly was a bolt-on, once i submitted a transcript of the meeting, having disagreed wioth the notes taken by HR during the meeting. I wanted it abundantly clear that i had public interest concerns, and in doing so I forced their hand.

Staff were regulary discussing my personal and work situation behind my back, and certain members of staff were posing questions relating to issues discussed within a supposed confidential meeting.

It also turned out that the tech that I swapped in for, was also being paid for his additional travel time, and often left early. They are very cagey about his remuneration for that period.

Upon being transferred back, this is when the pay issue had come to light, and that my entire personal circumstances had been discussed with the new apprentice they had employed a week or so before. Within 3 days of my return to my usual depot, and more and more things came to light, I contacted the EASS during my break to try and figure out exactly where I stood. I had not been diagnosed as autistic at the time, however, I had made my employer expressly aware of the fact that I had it, many months before. They were also expressly aware I was suffering with depression and had a history of it.

Long story short, there was an altercation in the workshop regarding me being on my phone still, as I had overrun tea break. It wasd only an issue because it was me that was on the phone. All the technicians were often on their phones, and often in full view of management, and this was either games or social calls. I rarely used my phone, and in this case it was stuff in and around work, and by that point management had already authorised my phone use since I stated it was work related.

I Had already contacted the doctor the day before and was simply told to 'hang in there'. I was at the point where I was of no use to anybody, and if anything I was a liability as i could not function. I retreated back to the tea room to calm down after the altercation, to gather my thoughts.

The manager came in and kept pestering me, mid breakdown (allegedly has a relative with AS, so theoretically should know how to conduct himself in a meltdown/breakdown situation) It was more implosive and hysterical than explosive, I directly challenged him about his breach of confidentiality, and instructing me to fudge a HGV inspection. I was sent home.the GP and was signed off sick for 2 weeks.

A couple of days into my return, I submitted the transcript for the meeting, and was confronted, alone by the 2nd managfer whom chaired the investigation meeting, at the close of the very same day. (after travelling all the way from his depot for the sole purpose of grilling me for recording him). I cited that there was no workplace policy agaijnst it, and dis so under s36, as i had serious concerns as toi what was going on, and he was quite franky unapproachable. I also challenged him, as i had done with the other manager, about discussing contents of a formal meeting in front of those weo were not in attendance, nor had any legal or operational interest in it's content. After his rant, and when I was allowed to leave, my manager sent me home early, but still on breakdown standby.

The 2nd manager contacted me at 9pm that evening and revoked the standby/overtime i had already commenced, and I challenged him on the fact it was retaliatory and he had his own personal agenda, as he was in direct control of the rota.

I added this to the 17 page formal grievance I was gearing up to submit, and submitted it that evening.to his superior, copying in the MD.

A few days following i was told to "refrain from work" and sent home. After that I was suspended so they could investigate "lateness" and "inappropriate/disruptive behaviour", with no actual details given.

Now the investigation has concluded, we have lateness, damage to property, behaving at work in an unacceptable manner (allegedly throwing tables (yet nobody actually witnessed, only "heard") and threatening to punch staff (one of whom is a boxer? yeah right). We also have Recording of a meeting without consent, and recording colleagues without consent. I wish to make clear that my phone was on my person at all times whilst recording, and were conversations I was actually privy to. No recordings have been sent to anyone, and only one has been transcribed thus far.

The referral to occupational health only occured following the submission of the grievance, as I had entered it as one of the issues being that although visibly deteriorating, and asking to be referred, i was outright ignored by management, and the general attititude as being 'if it isn't on paper, it does not exist'.

They have sent me a bundle detailing the allegations and their "Evidence", and regarding the bogus allegations, and some of it is fabricated. I'm trying to go through it and pick out all the contradictions and holes, but im just burnt out.

Again, I am sorry for the long read.

[BoxOfRocks]

The only actual issues they conceeded was the process had taken far too long, and that they should have made an OHU referral sooner. Regarding their failures, their finding is allegedly down to my interpretation of the events, and thus managment should be 'clearer with the instructions they give me' and 'ensure i have fully understood instructions given', essentially playing on one of the more known asperger traits of taking things too literally, and misunderstanding instructions.

For example, when I am doubleteamed by the 2nd manager, with one of the techs and asked why (asked with blatant condecention) I am completing a full MOT inspection on a vehicle I had just safety inspected (customer requires faults to be found and rectified before commencement of MOT, so they do not reflect on test report), I know very well what is being asked of me. Besides the fact I am just as huiman and fallible like everyone else, my state of health was deteriorating, and I effectively had 2 cracks at the whip. Additionally It is both what the customer pays for, and is required by law under such circumstance.

An old HGV I previously inspected and prepared for MOT (which passed) during it's last inspection period, was due to be inspected again I was tasked with doing said new inspection. (this would be its final inspection before being sold). After 30 minutes, My manager came and asked me if it was done, and I stated that it wasn't and i'm trying to get vehicles moved so that i could get it onto the pit. He stated with a breif pause... "i'm not telling you not to do the full inspection, i'm just telling you to be sensible with it." Again, i knew precisely what was being asked of me. My inspection routine, or items found should not vary just because I am told to "be sensible" with it.

Being told to pour antifreeze down the drain is pretty self explanatory.

[BoxOfRocks]

Summary. Aversion to getting with 'their programme' at the 2nd depot. investigation into lateness started. No official action was was taken in relation to it until the suspension, which was after the written/formal grievance and whistleblowing. It is even stated by HR in an email after my return from the 2nd depot, and after my breakdown, that in their opinion there was insufficient grounds for a suspension. The only things to have changed since that point was the submission of the transcriipt, which was dealt with personal abuse of power by management by revocation of breakdown standby at 9pm at night and when he probably had a few drinks, and the submission of the formal grievance. After a few days, upon disemination, I was put on garden leave, and then suspended.

Grievance/whistlebowing process, all brushed under carpet. Disciplinary investigation concluded and allegations invented to fit the generic "inappropriate/disruptive behaviour" on their formal suspension letter.

[BoxOfRocks]

Well, thanks for the help, hearing is tomorrow morning.

[Amethyst]

Ula mariefab

[Amethyst]

I had a chat with my other half ( an HGV technician )... He says you followed procedures and done the job you're tasked to do, not cut corners ( like it's been implied you should do ) - maybe you've been a bit over keen but there's nothing wrong with that - you've highlighted environmental issues ( like chucking stuff down the drain which is clearly against regulations and could result in a massive fine against the company so you're protecting the firm in that respect) - you want to argue the case that you have done your job correctly to cover both your own, and your companies arse should there be any comeback if/when the vehicle is sold or there's an accident etc ( think of the bin wagon that went out of control and killed innocent people - the mechanics and bosses were held liable ). Even though the vehicle had just been Mot'd it's a minimum standard and only guarantees roadworthiness at that point in time, plus MOT testers could miss things as they aren't on the MOt test list that could be dangerous - and things can happen between the MOT and the inspection you're doing in any case ) so you're asked to do a full inspection and you're doing a full inspection which is absolutely correct. The behaviour issues ( kicking tables over etc ) IF they happened out of frustration/anger etc, yes it would put you in the wrong. The lateness issues depends on your shift patterns and whether rest periods and hours are compliant (11 hours off between shifts and so on ) - the outcome would be dependent on any previous warnings unless gross misconduct ( and that will depend on the table tipping over issues - the violence part could be deemed gross misconduct - but if others have done similar and not been sacked - argue that point.). It does sound like they want to get rid of you and all you can do is fight your corner and be prepared to make concessions if you want to keep your job ( reasonable adjustments on both sides ) - but they cannot fault you for doing your job properly ( in light of recent high profile cases etc ). You've done your job to best of your abilities and the highest standard you can, and they shouldn't expect any less of you. I think you likely know all of that already though as it is common sense.

My other half is a bit anal when servicing wagons too and has had countless arguments with employers about similar particularly on safety issues as when it comes down to it, if something goes wrong, it's on your head.

I hope that makes a bit of sense anyway. I've tagged Ula and Mariefab in the previous post re the disciplinary procedures.