Leaving job - Vindictive employer trying to start disciplinary WEEK LEFT

[paulfoel]

Well its my wife. She joined this company 2 years ago. At the time, someone she knew who used to work there warned her off and said how toxic they were,

BUT she started anyway and it was OK for a few months. Then the bullying started. In the last year or so shes raised several grievances that have all been ignored. She had to get her union in at one point and, it seems, her employer were not happy.

Xmas time she got offered a new job. Was definitely the best option. She advised them at the time (and they agreed) to a slightly shorter notice period and to draw a line under it all.

Got a week left now and her employer have found a social media post from a few weeks ago. Not the cleverest idea to be honest but it named no names and was more of a reflection on how her job had affected her mental health.

They now want to start disciplinary action because of "breach of social media policy". A WEEK TO GO.

Question is - if she leaves can they still continue the disciplinary action? If so, to what end? Obviously the concern at this point is they're going to be vindictive and try and contact her new employer.

Shes speaking to the Union again but any suggestions?

[atticus]

Does your wife need a reference from these people? If not, my suggestion involves raising two fingers.

[paulfoel]

Does your wife need a reference from these people? If not, my suggestion involves raising two fingers.

Like I said she handed in her notice just before xmas so all references were done then so I assume a standard one went off to new employer.....

I think the concern is they may try to contact her new employer with "new information". Obviously, they know who the new employer is because they will have sent them the initial reference.

[atticus]

Maybe Mrs F can pre-empt this with an explanation to her new employer. How ill-advised was the wording of the social media post? Can you quote the wording here to see what we think of it?

[paulfoel]

Maybe Mrs F can pre-empt this with an explanation to her new employer. How ill-advised was the wording of the social media post? Can you quote the wording here to see what we think of it?

I can't get the exact wording now because shes deleted it.

It was basically, a new year new job post (on LinkedIn) talking about how she wanted to get back to doing something else, how her mental health had suffered etc and how it was worth taking a new job with less money. How she wanted to work in an environment where patients were more important than money (she works in healthcare).

Nothing direct - not even mention of employers name and certainly no details or anything like that. The post was 90% a "about me" post.

Of course though, on LinkedIn, click on profile - current employer so its easy to link. (Although since she has done agency/bank work in the past alongside her main employment)

It was ill-advised. I would have been more careful to be honest but it wasn't that bad.
Of course, she realises now LinkedIn is not like facebook where you can lock down who can see your posts.....

[atticus]

She could ask them to produce the post which they claim breaches policy because she is not aware of having written any such thing.

[paulfoel]

Ah got it now... Its rather long so rather than post the entire thing (like I said 90% of it is about her and stress)


"I watched my boundaries fade as work crept into every part of my life. I was torn between what I knew was right and what I was pressured to accept. corner-cutting, unrealistic expectations, constant scrutiny and an environment that valued targets and profit more than patient or staff well-being".

Not that bad surely. HR asked her to remove it which she did immediately.

[atticus]

That paragraph does not reflect at all well on the company, whose identity will have been clear from Mrs F's LinkedIn profile. So I do not agree that it is "not that bad".

I am going to tag ULA for an additional opinion.

My advice to students, junior lawyers etc has always been never to post online anything you would not want to be seen by your spouse, parents, employer, police, editor of the Daily Mail...

[paulfoel]

That paragraph does not reflect at all well on the company, whose identity will have been clear from Mrs F's LinkedIn profile. So I do not agree that it is "not that bad".

I am going to tag ULA for an additional opinion.

My advice to students, junior lawyers etc has always been never to post online anything you would not want to be seen by your spouse, parents, employer, police, editor of the Daily Mail...

OK thanks.... Yes I would agree with your advice.....

It wasn't the clever thing to do at all. (Wife has ADHD BTW - part of the reason shes leaving is the way the company have not supported or helped at all - means she can be impulsive and make bad decisions)

[ULA]

Sorry to say and I appreciate your wife has ADHD but her post was not the wisest move even though she was in her notice period when she posted it on LinkedIn. By the very nature of that platform a person's employer history can be traced if she has kept her employment history up to date. A lot of employers do "scout" platforms such as LinkedIn and Facebook to see if employees are posting about their employer and whether this is done so by staying in the boundaries of any social media policy that may be in place.

Has you wife been invited to a disciplinary meeting and has this been set for whilst she is still employed? They will have to follow a fair process and that means allowing time which they may not have depending on her leaving date.

[paulfoel]

Sorry to say and I appreciate your wife has ADHD but her post was not the wisest move even though she was in her notice period when she posted it on LinkedIn. By the very nature of that platform a person's employer history can be traced if she has kept her employment history up to date. A lot of employers do "scout" platforms such as LinkedIn and Facebook to see if employees are posting about their employer and whether this is done so by staying in the boundaries of any social media policy that may be in place.

Has you wife been invited to a disciplinary meeting and has this been set for whilst she is still employed? They will have to follow a fair process and that means allowing time which they may not have depending on her leaving date.

Of course, she realises now it wasn't the cleverest thing to be doing.....

Been invited to a fact finding meeting. She was unable to attend today because she was extremely busy with her patient (her job). They've now suggested this fact finding for monday.

Is it in her interests to try and get the fact finding meeting done asap or wait until monday?

I know it sounds like a cop out but could they proceed with anything at all if she, for instance, phoned in sick for her last week?

To be honest, this wouldn't be a lie. Shes a health care professional dealing with very ill people at home - at the moment mentally she's not doing well - I did wonder today whether she was wise going to work. Make a drug error or worse next week when, mentally, shes not on the ball, and it could all get very much worse.

[paulfoel]

Well, she did consider calling in sick for her last week but, in the end, didn't.

Employer waited a few days then decided to drop it all after all - completely nuts.

Turns out a manager of someone she'd complained about had raised this issue. Think this was a vindictive action.....

Last day today glad shes out of it.....

[ULA]

paulfoel thank you for coming back with an update.

Good on your wife for sticking it out and not going off sick and glad to hear it was dropped. Hope all goes well in her new job.

[paulfoel]

Well, she did consider calling in sick for her last week but, in the end, didn't.

Employer waited a few days then decided to drop it all after all - completely nuts.

Turns out a manager of someone she'd complained about had raised this issue. Think this was a vindictive action.....

Last day today glad shes out of it.....

Yes she was really busy last week getting everything sorted for handover - she didn't want to let anyone down. Not that they deserved it.
Still don't know what the company were hoping to gain because they jeopardised all of this work in the last week and she could have left them high and dry.