Wrongly handled?

[peter p]

Re: Wrongly handled?

I am afraid I cannot see the point of blaming the company, they got caught thieving, they are so lucky the company have not got someone who is clued up, as if the police were involved, your SD is nicked full stop. There is a point where you either accept you did wrong or you try to blame someone else, this could go so wrong, am I missing something here?

Have you read the complete thread?
We are not blaming the company for anything. We are saying they acted improperly at two management levels and this, like proven theft, is not right-simples.
This is also not about two wrongs make it right, all staff at the branch are on the take and the manager has covered up money and stock theft beside other security breaches with keys and alarm codes to save them getting out of bed at 4 am, all against company policy. If it was your company wouldn't you want to know more? I think its more about helping the company rather than blaming them.

[wales01man]

Re: Wrongly handled?

Your making accusations against the companies other employees were these raised before all this started?

[charitynjw]

Re: Wrongly handled?

Have you read the complete thread?
We are not blaming the company for anything. We are saying they acted improperly at two management levels and this, like proven theft, is not right-simples.
This is also not about two wrongs make it right, all staff at the branch are on the take and the manager has covered up money and stock theft beside other security breaches with keys and alarm codes to save them getting out of bed at 4 am, all against company policy. If it was your company wouldn't you want to know more? I think its more about helping the company rather than blaming them.

As wales points out (above).

Are you suggesting that there is a protected disclosure (whistleblowing) issue here?

If so, as the disclosure comes after the 'discovery' of the theft issue, it might be a tough one to argue.

[wales01man]

Re: Wrongly handled?

My thoughts same as above

[smileyculture]

Re: Wrongly handled?

Having read this thread, I can only state what as I see as 2 thieves getting caught and getting away with it. Where else can this crap go. Are they thieves or not? yes, they admitted it, but now they want to blame everyone else for not getting caught. Unbelievable, End of story.

[charitynjw]

Re: Wrongly handled?

One of the problems with a lengthy thread such as this one is that you don't always read back from the beginning every time, you tend to only read the 'latest' post, & possibly a few preceding ones.

However, I have on this occasion gone back to the original post & read the thread in it's entirety.

First, some clarification.

In post #16, OP states that there wasn't a dismissal.
Presumably because SD resigned.
Technically, from a contract law pov, SD tendered the resignation, the employer accepted same, & has dismissed her from her contractual duties.

Re the alleged 'illegal' search, as far as I can see, this has not been confirmed or admitted by the employer.
If it was discussed in the private meeting, it would be 'without prejudice', therefore not admissible in court.
To legitimise this search, all the employer would have to say is that they had a reasonable suspicion of the theft.
They might get a slap on the wrist, but as the colleague has admitted to the theft & has implicated SD, I doubt that the criminal position re illegal searches would count. Res ipsa loquitor.
The investigation into the alleged breach of privilege does not affect the issue of theft.

Re the 'whistleblowing', as it did not occur until after the theft, & is therefore not a causal feature of the dismissal, strictly speaking it doesn't apply; however, it might persuade the employer to give the sought-after 'decent' reference.

ET is now a pretty expensive pastime, especially on a case with limited prospects.

Re the making public of private information, it is an entirely separate subject to the alleged theft.

That said, I do not support smileyculture's viewpoint (post #55 above); it's a highly subjective personal statement which, in my view, adds little to the thread.

[wales01man]

Re: Wrongly handled?

in the first post we are told one admitted to theft and implicated the other so we have one thief the other the SD a suspect?. Maybe its time for the SD to move on put this behind her and forget any whistleblowing that seems to rearing its head after the event.A lesson to the SD and their friend next time they might be in court and get a criminal record.

[Inca]

Re: Wrongly handled?

I live in a small place where everyone knows everyone elses business if you let it happen.
What your SD needs to remember is gossip only festers if it's carried on.Otherwise todays news is tomorrows chip wrapping.
I can't see any mileage in 'whistle blowing'..it'll only keep the issue alive. And I 100% guarantee that the shop staff are sticking rigidly to the rules since this kicked off and will continue to long after it's over.Why should your SD do their work for them? Let them uncover (or not) any wrong doing.
Your SD did something foolish but it's hardly the crime of the century is it? My advice is..move on...lifes too short to get hung up on minutae..it's happened....don't let it ruin her life.

[labman]

Re: Wrongly handled?

That said, I do not support smileyculture's viewpoint (post #65 above); it's a highly subjective personal statement which, in my view, adds little to the thread.

Tiny correction! :beagle:

[peter p]

Re: Wrongly handled?

My SD was "party" to theft by not ringing in all the goods that were being taken home by her colleague. This action was the norm at the shop as everyone did it. At interview she admitted nothing and pending her hearing after the company investigation she resigned. We live in a very small market town and my SD is 4th generation born here. Gossip goes around like wildfire and whilst suspended member's of the public, who knew her, stopped her in the street and asked her if it was true she had been suspended this then turned to sacked, the final straw was being told this by a lady on a Tesco check out. It was the clear to her that her dismissal had been preconceived and even if not, how could she ever return to work again? Remaining staff have since told her that they were told she has been suspended, then the next day why and then the next day she was going to be dismissed on the instructions of the area manger, hence she resigned. It is this last part of this saga that is the point here. She is willing to be a whistle blower, most if not all staff purchases are buy one get one free, the manager has covered up a Ł200 theft because she like the member of staff, unauthorised staff have been given keys and the alarm code to go in at 4am to sort deliveries against company policy, the manager and the deputy help themselves to free drinks off the shelf etc etc. From what I hear and have seen the whole shop is on the take and make and this should be stopped. There was no way she could have said anything,whilst employed,against the manager and senior staff. She felt pressured to go with the flow of what other members of staff were doing as she needed this job being a single mum. This was her first job after bringing up her son alone and her first proper job since leaving school, she was a private Nanny before having her family. I would say she had to go with the flow or stand out and possibly loose the job she so desperately wanted and needed. Naive maybe, easily lead-possibly, a follower-defiantly, prolific thief-never, a stupid girl-without doubt. "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"!

[wales01man]

Re: Wrongly handled?

can she prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt does bringing up a child on her own excuse the behaviour,as for everyone else was doing it if they were standing in front of a fast train would she do the same. I think your looking for excuses or justification here as you say do you think (not ringing items on the tiil) unlawful,as harsh as my words are im not condeming her jus tthink its time to move on look after her family and live again the past is the past look to her future

[charitynjw]

Re: Wrongly handled?

One thing that puzzles me here.

If all the staff are/were 'at it', why has SD been singled out like this?

[labman]

Re: Wrongly handled?

One thing that puzzles me here.

If all the staff are/were 'at it', why has SD been singled out like this?

I took it to mean all the staff were participating in 'dubious' practices. This was not dubious, it was clear theft (not by the OP's SD, who just aided the crime). That may explain the fact these two were singled out.

[wales01man]

Re: Wrongly handled?

The proof is?

[labman]

Re: Wrongly handled?

I agree she has been very stupid and is guilty as sin

In general she realises she has been stupid

It's in the posts - just read them. That does NOT mean subsequent events have been handled correctly though.