Definition of predetermined Outcome ET

[LN1893]

Following a recent dismissal of an employee for Gross Misconduct following mis-use of company bank cards not in the employees name for a period of 7 years for personal purchases and selling company items on Ebay. Having followed all disciplinary procedures and reported to Action Fraud.We have received notification of an ET on the basis that the claim is for an inability to login to company emails during the deliberation period claiming that the email box had been blocked.This is actually not correct and proof was provided at the appeal.Sadly still claiming this reason as a definition of a pre-determined outcome claiming that it is unfair.

Any advice would be welcome.

[Retromau5]

Do you have a company policy that covers a grievance procedure?

Was the employee suspended during the deliberation period?

Did they request access to the email box, or notify you that they couldn't access it?

Is the employee claiming they did not misuse the company credit card or sell company property? Or are they just claiming the process was unfair?

Answering these questions will give people a better understanding of your situation.

[ULA]

LN1893 I see you already have a thread running about this. Please can you cut and paste this new post on that thread which I have linked to below:

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...legal-position

It is more helpful for those of us advising to have all questions running on one thread.

Many thanks

[LN1893]

Do you have a company policy that covers a grievance procedure?

Was the employee suspended during the deliberation period?

Did they request access to the email box, or notify you that they couldn't access it?

Is the employee claiming they did not misuse the company credit card or sell company property? Or are they just claiming the process was unfair?

Answering these questions will give people a better understanding of your situation.

Thank you yes we do have a grievance procedure, the employee wasn't suspended at the time, he had accessed his emails prior to the meeting.There was no mention at the time when he returned to the room following the deliberation period.

It is our normal policy to remove access once a staff member has been suspended which was the case 2 hours after leaving the building following the disciplinary and deliberation hearing.

It formed part of the appeal where company email reports demonstrated access was gained during the deliberation period and prior to the final meeting.Attempted to gain witness statements from staff but none provided.

There is no denial of the misuse of company debit cards not in his name but its not mentioned in the ET1 the claim is it being unfair due to email blocking which is not the case.

[ULA]

LN1893 pleaae can you put all your posts from this thread onto your original thread linked to below as you now have advive bring posted on 2 threads which is very confusing for those of us advising you.

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...legal-position

I am going to close this thread down