Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

[bluebottle]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Hi Eggbound

A very helpful site regards bullying is:
http://www.bullyonline.org/
Or just google 'Tim Fields, Bullying'

Hope you find this of some help.

All the best
Gur

I can endorse the website you mention. It is very good. I've been on it myself. Give it a look.

[Eloise01]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Strangely, Eloise, I know a solicitor in my hometown who specialises in Employment Law and she has said to me, in the past, exactly what you have said in your last post about legal professionals working in the area of Employment Law.

What is funny is having a solicitor or barrister come up to a uniformed police officer in the public area of a magistrates court or a Crown Court and start asking them about the Criminal Law. I had that happen to me a number of times when I was in the police force. Priceless.

Employment law regulates human behaviour between people more than any other form of law. There are few absolutes and often, few truths either. There is no such thing as a "reasonable" murder or a "reasonable" theft. In most courts a person must be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - in employment law an employer only requires reasoanle belief to be on solid ground. But I promise not to ask you anything about criminal law!

[Eggbound]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Next - you say that others have also failed to meet targets. How do you know this and what evidence can you produce to show it is true? And have the failed to meet targets to the same degree as you? If they have not failed "as much" then this would conceivably be an argument for different treatment - can you actually evidence that people in the same position of you in terms of sales have been treated differently?

I know others have failed to meet targets because we get everyones sales figures, 3 times a week and at month end, on a spreadsheet. So I have copies of everyones month end figures for the past year. I have spoken with 2 people who have failed to hit 100%, 5 months out of 6 and neither have had disciplinaries.

I had a disciplinary in August for my performance in July (when they decided not to take any action). As far as I'm aware 1 other person was disciplined also out of 70+ employees for the same.

I had another disciplinary in December for not hitting 100% in Sept-Oct-Nov and got a Verbal Warning. I wasn't given a timescale for improvement in August just told, the company expect you to buck up sort of thing.

So yes, I've had 2 disciplinaries, where others have got away with it.

The company are all over the place with targets. We were told that in November we had a revenue target to achieve, not based on hours worked, the target's the target regardless; I had a pre-booked holiday that month so didn't 100%.

Then they changed the goalposts for December and decided there would be a pro-rata hours worked element. In December again I had pre-booked holiday but my target was higher than my store colleague even though I worked less hours so didn't hit 100% as my target wasn't reduced.

Now they've decided Nov/Dec wasn't working and bought in another target system for January, which means my target is once again 1k more than my store colleague. Confusing to say the least.

Yes I agree, sometimes I can be like a dog with a bone and nit pick, but if I see something wrong in the workplace, I'm going to tell them. Sods Law it'd be me told off for not bringing it to the company's attention ! After last nights mention, I had a look at our 'Risk Assessment' (rather basic) from 2011 where the ASM stated he'd bring a step ladder to help us work in store at height. Still waiting...

[bluebottle]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Employment law regulates human behaviour between people more than any other form of law. There are few absolutes and often, few truths either. There is no such thing as a "reasonable" murder or a "reasonable" theft. In most courts a person must be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - in employment law an employer only requires reasoanle belief to be on solid ground. But I promise not to ask you anything about criminal law!

I can tell you that a number of employers who I had dealings with as a policeman who had accused employees of Theft got an awful shock when they were told they were wrong and the employee was advised to seek legal advice.

One incident I went to went to court and a stipendiary magistrate (now called District Judges) threw the case out on account of inconsistencies in the testimony one of the witnesses, a supervisor, gave under oath. Even the force solicitor queried what the supervisor said. During an adjournment, the force solicitor asked me about what the supervisor had said at the time of the incident. It turned out to be an attempt to get rid of an employee that, spectacularly, back-fired on the employer. As we left the court-room, one of the CID officers from my station was waiting to go into one of the other court-rooms and asked me how I had got on. When I told him what had happened, he disappeared for a few minutes, then came back and said, "Don't let them (employer and supervisor) leave the building." The last I can remember of that case is one of the Detective Inspectors from the station arriving with another CID officer and telling me to "p*ss off". I can only surmise they took the employer and supervisor away for a "meaningful chat" somewhere.

[Eggbound]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Eloise01 the company make a big beef about "expecting 100%" in all their round-robin memos. On this basis, 50 plus people fail every month. My argument is that when they say they're being "fair & consistent" they aren't. Why discipline 50 people when they can just discipline me.

[bluebottle]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

Is your employer one of the major supermarket operators?

[Eggbound]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

No, its the retail arm of a manufacturer/wholesaler. Each store has 2 'managers' who split the shifts...talking of which I'm working at 6am so better get some shut-eye soon.

[Eloise01]

Re: Bullying (Harassment) in the workplace

I know others have failed to meet targets because we get everyones sales figures, 3 times a week and at month end, on a spreadsheet. So I have copies of everyones month end figures for the past year. I have spoken with 2 people who have failed to hit 100%, 5 months out of 6 and neither have had disciplinaries.

I had a disciplinary in August for my performance in July (when they decided not to take any action). As far as I'm aware 1 other person was disciplined also out of 70+ employees for the same.

I had another disciplinary in December for not hitting 100% in Sept-Oct-Nov and got a Verbal Warning. I wasn't given a timescale for improvement in August just told, the company expect you to buck up sort of thing.

So yes, I've had 2 disciplinaries, where others have got away with it.

The company are all over the place with targets. We were told that in November we had a revenue target to achieve, not based on hours worked, the target's the target regardless; I had a pre-booked holiday that month so didn't 100%.

Then they changed the goalposts for December and decided there would be a pro-rata hours worked element. In December again I had pre-booked holiday but my target was higher than my store colleague even though I worked less hours so didn't hit 100% as my target wasn't reduced.

Now they've decided Nov/Dec wasn't working and bought in another target system for January, which means my target is once again 1k more than my store colleague. Confusing to say the least.

Yes I agree, sometimes I can be like a dog with a bone and nit pick, but if I see something wrong in the workplace, I'm going to tell them. Sods Law it'd be me told off for not bringing it to the company's attention ! After last nights mention, I had a look at our 'Risk Assessment' (rather basic) from 2011 where the ASM stated he'd bring a step ladder to help us work in store at height. Still waiting...

Hany on, hang on. You have not had two disciplinaries - the first one wasn't actioned, so that was nothing but an informal warning. They brought to your attention a failure to perform to required standards and made it clear what the required standard is. That is all. And that is perfectly correct in law. And you are also saying that you are not the only person to be receiving warnings about under performance, and that you actually do not know whether other people have or not. What you actually know is that two people you spoke to haven't yet! So this is beginning to shape in a quite different way from the way you painted it. This is what I meant by being objective and ruthless in terms of the information and evidence that you have. Far from being able to prove that you are the only person being managed to these targets, you know that you are not - because you know that at least one other person has also been, and "not knowing" whether there are others is not evidence that there are not others, since many people tend not to run around saying they've been warned or disciplined.If you are going to insist on nit picking - start with your evidence. There are reasons why the majority of cases at tribunal lose - one is because many people insist they have evidence of something that they actually don't have any evidence of at all. If other people - and people without disabilities - are being treated in the same way in relation to targets, then your argument falls.

However, that does not mean that you should not still do as I suggested and formally ask for a reasonable adjustment and see what happens.