alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[sandeman]

This is the highlight of a more complicated case than i explain, but seeking some advice on what can be done. This is taking place in a large college.

One employee is claiming that he was assaulted a few months ago by another. The one who claims to have been assaulted has now recently made a formal complaint about the incident and it is scheduled to come to a disciplinary hearing. He states in his complaint that at the time he told his manager in confidence about it, on the understanding no action would be taken. An investigation for a different complaint, which seems likely to be spurious and possibly can be proved so has now had this second/earlier complaint added on to it. (so the second complaint being investigated was actually the first to happen)

This all makes matters more complex. The initial investigation came to the conclusion that since there were two outstanding allegations, both of which were one person's word against the other, that there being two complaints, it was probably true. The person alleged to have done this was not told most of the details about the allegations, so that it was impossible to say anything meaningful to disprove them. The investigation therefore did not consider any of the evidence which would have been available at least in the case of the first complaint, which might well have proved it false. The deferred allegation does not have any apparent circumstantial evidence which might prove or disprove it. The investigation failed to look into, eg colleagues evidence of the accusors behaviour, which could have proved in the first complaint that claims in his statement were seriously wrong. Instead, they only interviewed witnesses suggested by the accusor. The accused, having no idea who the accuser was, could not suggest anyone to talk to.

Firstly, had the accused been able to produce this evidence at the time, that charge would have been disproved, and this might even have counted in his favour to have the entire investigation dismissed, since he had been the victim of a false allegation. Because he was not told the details, he could not do this. Is this unfair on the part of the employer?

Second, the investigation seems to have been botched, the employer simply going along with what the accuser suggested. Is this grounds for complaint?

Third, the accusor made his allegations to a drinking chum, who then passed them on to higher management. A third drinking chum chimed in with helpful suggestions of the right people to talk to. It would seem the main management contact point with the accuser was therefore a mate of his, not someone impartial who might consider more carefully his story. Is this relevant? (the investigation was conducted by someone else)

Fourth, the drinking chums may have a grudge against the accused themselves, but this was not considered.

The evidence folder given to the accused contains no statement from the manager who received the first confidential information. This seems to be an obvious omission, but management dont seem to think this is a problem. Standing guidance to management is that if they know of any information of this nature, then they must report it, though they should warn someone in advance that this is what they must do. So it may be that in fact this information was passed on, but now management is refusing to comment. Is that grounds for complaint?

The fact that this matter was not investigated at the time now means that even the actual date is uncertain. people who might have seen someting have forgotten, and there possibly could have been video evidence. (though probably not of the main event). Does the fact that management failed to investigate immediately count in the accused's favour?

ALthough in principle there are cameras, at best footage is only kept for 28 days, but in the first complaint was actually destroyed after only 4 days, and thus was unavailable then too. Is that a cause for complaint?

The initial investigation was supposed to be confidential. However, certain interviews were conducted in a cafe, with the result they were overheard and information spread round the establishment. How does this affect matters?

The accused now faces a disciplinary hearing facing two charges, one of which probably should have been dismissed already. However, because the two are still being heard together it seems quite possible the two against one rule will still be applied. Although the charge where there is some evidence could fall in the category 'probably false', it may still be taken as possibly true and used to overtop the standoff in the other case. Comments on proper decision making?

Does the accused have grounds to now bring allegations himself against various people who have cocked up, or generally made his life more difficult by failing to investigate properly? Even if it is decided that he probably did commit one of the offenses, sufficient to get him sacked, does he have any comeback because of the inadequate process?

Does he have any rights to demand a reinvestigation at this point, before the hearing, to make good the shortcomings in the management investigation evidence?

Does he have rights to demand more time to try to investigate himself?

Oh, I left out the sexual element. it might be the case that the assault about which there was some evidence was invented by a spurned suitor, who in retrospect could be seen as having stalked the accused for years. Even if the first case is found to be proved, and the man dismissed, does he have comeback against the college/suitor?

Clocks ticking, help!

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

This is the highlight of a more complicated case than i explain, but seeking some advice on what can be done. This is taking place in a large college.

One employee is claiming that he was assaulted a few months ago by another. The one who claims to have been assaulted has now recently made a formal complaint about the incident and it is scheduled to come to a disciplinary hearing. He states in his complaint that at the time he told his manager in confidence about it, on the understanding no action would be taken. An investigation for a different complaint, which seems likely to be spurious and possibly can be proved so has now had this second/earlier complaint added on to it. (so the second complaint being investigated was actually the first to happen)

This all makes matters more complex. The initial investigation came to the conclusion that since there were two outstanding allegations, both of which were one person's word against the other, that there being two complaints, it was probably true. The person alleged to have done this was not told most of the details about the allegations, so that it was impossible to say anything meaningful to disprove them. The investigation therefore did not consider any of the evidence which would have been available at least in the case of the first complaint, which might well have proved it false. The deferred allegation does not have any apparent circumstantial evidence which might prove or disprove it. The investigation failed to look into, eg colleagues evidence of the accusors behaviour, which could have proved in the first complaint that claims in his statement were seriously wrong. Instead, they only interviewed witnesses suggested by the accusor. The accused, having no idea who the accuser was, could not suggest anyone to talk to.

Firstly, had the accused been able to produce this evidence at the time, that charge would have been disproved, and this might even have counted in his favour to have the entire investigation dismissed, since he had been the victim of a false allegation. Because he was not told the details, he could not do this. Is this unfair on the part of the employer?

Second, the investigation seems to have been botched, the employer simply going along with what the accuser suggested. Is this grounds for complaint?

Third, the accusor made his allegations to a drinking chum, who then passed them on to higher management. A third drinking chum chimed in with helpful suggestions of the right people to talk to. It would seem the main management contact point with the accuser was therefore a mate of his, not someone impartial who might consider more carefully his story. Is this relevant? (the investigation was conducted by someone else)

Fourth, the drinking chums may have a grudge against the accused themselves, but this was not considered.

The evidence folder given to the accused contains no statement from the manager who received the first confidential information. This seems to be an obvious omission, but management dont seem to think this is a problem. Standing guidance to management is that if they know of any information of this nature, then they must report it, though they should warn someone in advance that this is what they must do. So it may be that in fact this information was passed on, but now management is refusing to comment. Is that grounds for complaint?

The fact that this matter was not investigated at the time now means that even the actual date is uncertain. people who might have seen someting have forgotten, and there possibly could have been video evidence. (though probably not of the main event). Does the fact that management failed to investigate immediately count in the accused's favour?

ALthough in principle there are cameras, at best footage is only kept for 28 days, but in the first complaint was actually destroyed after only 4 days, and thus was unavailable then too. Is that a cause for complaint?

The initial investigation was supposed to be confidential. However, certain interviews were conducted in a cafe, with the result they were overheard and information spread round the establishment. How does this affect matters?

The accused now faces a disciplinary hearing facing two charges, one of which probably should have been dismissed already. However, because the two are still being heard together it seems quite possible the two against one rule will still be applied. Although the charge where there is some evidence could fall in the category 'probably false', it may still be taken as possibly true and used to overtop the standoff in the other case. Comments on proper decision making?

Does the accused have grounds to now bring allegations himself against various people who have cocked up, or generally made his life more difficult by failing to investigate properly? Even if it is decided that he probably did commit one of the offenses, sufficient to get him sacked, does he have any comeback because of the inadequate process?

Does he have any rights to demand a reinvestigation at this point, before the hearing, to make good the shortcomings in the management investigation evidence?

Does he have rights to demand more time to try to investigate himself?

Oh, I left out the sexual element. it might be the case that the assault about which there was some evidence was invented by a spurned suitor, who in retrospect could be seen as having stalked the accused for years. Even if the first case is found to be proved, and the man dismissed, does he have comeback against the college/suitor?

Clocks ticking, help!

Hi,
It seems this case is flawed from the onset, to some degree, but there are several points in the run up to any disciplinary proceedings that must be followed.

You asked, 'Does the fact that management failed to investigate immediately count in the accused's favour?'

The ACAS code of practice states,
It is important to carry out necessary investigations of potential

disciplinary matters without unreasonable delay to establish the facts of the case.

With regards to your statement about the employee receiving a folder with omitted evidence, the code of practice states.......

If it is decided that there is a disciplinary case to answer, the employee

should be notified of this in writing. This notification should contain
sufficient information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance
and its possible consequences to enable the employee to prepare
to answer the case at a disciplinary meeting. It would normally be

appropriate to provide copies of any written evidence, which may include
any witness statements, with the notification.

This is what should happen with any disciplinary procedure...
Firstly, the employer should hold an investigation to establish the facts, not here-say.
If he has reason to believe, from the evidence gathered, that there is a case to answer. He should notify the employee, in writing that a disciplinary hearing is to be held, and he should also supply sufficient information, as stated above.
The employee should be told of his right to be accompanied at the hearing, either by a Union Rep, or by a work colleague.


At the hearing, management should put forward the allegation/s and the employee should be given the right to answer.
Very much like a court of law, management should put to the employee, any and all evidence to substantiate the charge.
If any statements / evidence is disclosed that the employee needs time to digest or study in order to defend himself, and in order for justice to prevail. Then he has the right to ask for an adjournment in order for him to be able to do this.
You asked.
The initial investigation was supposed to be confidential. However, certain interviews were conducted in a cafe, with the result they were overheard and information spread round the establishment. How does this affect matters?
Unless you can provide evidence to support this statement, it will be difficult to prove.

The fact that investigation into both allegations was not carried out for some time, I would argue that there is a case for dismissal of the allegations, on the grounds that evidence that would have been available at the time, which could establish innocence (cctv), is now lost.
Also that facts and recounts of events that happened at the time, are now vague and therefore would not give the employee a fair outcome to the allegations.
You state that there are now two allegations....
Firstly, each allegation must be heard on it's own merits, with evidence provided for and against the employee.
The Employer is not allowed to mix the two together, and must give the employee the right to answer both allegations separately.
The employee could be guilty of one charge, but entirely innocent of the second.
Only the facts and evidence supplied, can establish the outcome to each allegation.
Two against one rule? No such thing my friend.
Justice could never be done, and be seen to have been done, if that applied.

The employee should obtain copies of the companies disciplinary, appeals and grievance procedures from management.
At the hearing notes MUST be taken by the union rep or colleague.
This will help the employee if an appeal or grievance is considered.
At the hearing, only accept hard facts not here-say statements.
Attached is the ACAS code of practice.
Read it and if management do not follow it, then a tribunal may very well take a very dim view of this fact.

[sandeman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

]The ACAS code of practice states,
[/SIZE]It is important to carry out necessary investigations of potential disciplinary matters without unreasonable delay to establish the facts of the case.

Can i take it then that this is interpreted as meaning a full investigation of factors both supporting and contradicting the allegation? In this case, esentially the investigation just went into evidence suggested by the accusers. Is that then a glaring fault in the investigation?

This notification should contain sufficient information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance and its possible consequences to enable the employee to prepare to answer the case at a disciplinary meeting. It would normally be appropriate to provide copies of any written evidence, which may include any witness statements, with the notification.

In this case, the evidence does not contain a statement which might have been expected to exist, but the index does not list any such statement, nor anything refer to it. it is just that as the person in management who had first knowledge of this, one would expect such a statement to have been taken. It isnt mentioned, so either it was never taken, or it has been deliberately left out. Is there a right to demand it, or demand that such a statement now be taken?

Firstly, the employer should hold an investigation to establish the facts, not here-say.

In this case, no attempt seems to have been made to test the statements, ie look for witnesses who might contradict them, just accepted them. Is that acceptable?

Very much like a court of law, management should put to the employee, any and all evidence to substantiate the charge.

But what about evidence which disproves the charge? Does management have a right to withold it, and if you believe they are, what can you do about it?

You asked:

The initial investigation was supposed to be confidential. However, certain interviews were conducted in a cafe, with the result they were overheard and information spread round the establishment. How does this affect matters?
Unless you can provide evidence to support this statement, it will be difficult to prove.

Three witness known of, one who is making a statement. She saw a procession of people talking to a senior member of staff in the cafe in turn, and realised that an investigation was going on. then started asking about it and discovered who was being investigated. This cafe is a franchise actually within the college building in an area open to the public as well. How many witnesses would be enough?

The fact that investigation into both allegations was not carried out for some time, I would argue that there is a case for dismissal of the allegations, on the grounds that evidence that would have been available at the time, which could establish innocence (cctv), is now lost.

thats interesting. What counts as a long time, and how would you go about arguing this and get it accepted?

Firstly, each allegation must be heard on it's own merits, with evidence provided for and against the employee.

interesting...So what about statements included in support that on entirely different occasions the accused had behaved in a similar way, if less severe (when no complaints had been made)? The idea being to give the impression the accused was habitually prone to assaulting people. And as for the last point, how would you go about ensuring that each item is considered in isolation as part of a case investigating the two complaints at the same time, and with the same side issues, not actually complaints in themselves, being included as evidence of something?

The Employer is not allowed to mix the two together, and must give the employee the right to answer both allegations separately.

You mean as completely different hearings with different judges? Only directly relevant evidence being presented?[/quote]

Two against one rule

? No such thing my friend.

well i'll quote briefly from the investigation conclusions. "1no supporting evidence that allegation 1did or did not take place. 2. no supporting evidence that allegation 2did or did not take place. 4. (no 3) evidence that there was inappropriate behaviour on different unrelated occasions. 5 the two allegations were apparently unrelated. 6. based on the above, the investigating officers conclude that, on balance of probability, the allegation of assault can be upheld."

You seem to have said that their conclusion was wholly wrong, based on their own statment that neither allegation by itself could be proved probably to have happened. Their conclusion is entirely based upon a pattern of behaviour.

Attached is the ACAS code of practice.

Read it and if management do not follow it, then a tribunal may very well take a very dim view of this fact.

So you still get sacked, and take them to a tribunal. What comeback, exactly does that give you? What I mean is, if they just dont care and railroad the allegations anyway, what do they lose? The alleged perpetrator has still lost his job because of untrue allegations?

Now, there is a further twist to this. I have no evidence, but I suspect neither alleged victim may have wanted to make the allegations. Management have held back all the documents which might shed light on the circumstances of the accuser who did not want to formalise the allegation. I suspect that he was told about the allegation which happened later and persuaded to make his allegation because someone else had now complained about the same person. The investigation contains the peculiar sentence 'During the course of the investigation, we became aware of another allegation that had been made to a senior manager on the understanding that it was not persued. We then sought, and were given permission, to interview X[that first person]'. It has been reported, that would be heresay, that this complainant and his manger do not get on for some reason.

Oh, and time pressure is off because HR have agreed to a delay. And thanks.

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

Can i take it then that this is interpreted as meaning a full investigation of factors both supporting and contradicting the allegation? In this case, esentially the investigation just went into evidence suggested by the accusers. Is that then a glaring fault in the investigation?

It means exactly what it says.........
Facts of the case are facts from both sides, as both sides are involved in the case.


In this case, the evidence does not contain a statement which might have been expected to exist, but the index does not list any such statement, nor anything refer to it. it is just that as the person in management who had first knowledge of this, one would expect such a statement to have been taken. It isnt mentioned, so either it was never taken, or it has been deliberately left out. Is there a right to demand it, or demand that such a statement now be taken?

NEVER DEMAND........ Always request
This is a matter for the hearing, if a statement is produced, ask for an adjournment in order to study the statement and to better prepare your defence.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.

In this case, no attempt seems to have been made to test the statements, ie look for witnesses who might contradict them, just accepted them. Is that acceptable?

This again is for the hearing, where you can contest a statement and request an adjournment in order to gather evidence to refute the statement if you do not agree with it.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.


But what about evidence which disproves the charge? Does management have a right to withold it, and if you believe they are, what can you do about it?

If you have absolute proof that they have information which disproves the charge, the you can request at the hearing, that management produce it.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.


Three witness known of, one who is making a statement. She saw a procession of people talking to a senior member of staff in the cafe in turn, and realised that an investigation was going on. then started asking about it and discovered who was being investigated. This cafe is a franchise actually within the college building in an area open to the public as well. How many witnesses would be enough?

How long is a piece of string?
The more witnesses, the stronger your case.

thats interesting. What counts as a long time, and how would you go about arguing this and get it accepted?

The second after the CCTV footage was lost.
You would state that CCTV footage which could have established your innocence has been removed, and request the date it was removed.
Also state that in the interests of justice, the case should be dismissed, because of the missing evidence.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.


interesting...So what about statements included in support that on entirely different occasions the accused had behaved in a similar way, if less severe (when no complaints had been made)? The idea being to give the impression the accused was habitually prone to assaulting people. And as for the last point, how would you go about ensuring that each item is considered in isolation as part of a case investigating the two complaints at the same time, and with the same side issues, not actually complaints in themselves, being included as evidence of something?

Object straight away to the statement.
What may or may not have happened in the past, is just hearsay, unverified and thus unproven.
It is also irrelevant to the case in hand.

You mean as completely different hearings with different judges? Only directly relevant evidence being presented?

Just like in a court of law.....
The judge can hear all cases, but he must deal with each case separately, weighing up all the evidence to establish guilt or innocence. Unless of course you admit the charge/s.


well i'll quote briefly from the investigation conclusions. "1no supporting evidence that allegation 1did or did not take place. 2. no supporting evidence that allegation 2did or did not take place. 4. (no 3) evidence that there was inappropriate behaviour on different unrelated occasions. 5 the two allegations were apparently unrelated. 6. based on the above, the investigating officers conclude that, on balance of probability, the allegation of assault can be upheld."

You seem to have said that their conclusion was wholly wrong, based on their own statment that neither allegation by itself could be proved probably to have happened. Their conclusion is entirely based upon a pattern of behaviour.

That's the way I see it, and you must point this out at the hearing. These are on allegations and have never, ever been given body of proof. Therefore in accordance to the accepted principals of justice you must be presumed innocent of these allegations, until and unless proven otherwise. And they should not be allowed to be presented at the hearing.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.

Good luck.......
Be firm, do not raise your voice, and be sure to object straight away, if you think a statement they are reading is irrelevent.



So you still get sacked, and take them to a tribunal. What comeback, exactly does that give you? What I mean is, if they just dont care and railroad the allegations anyway, what do they lose? The alleged perpetrator has still lost his job because of untrue allegations?

Unless you have been employed for two years or more, you can take the case to a tribunal
If you have, and you do go to tribunal. They will weigh up both sides evidence.
If your employer has worked outside of the ACAS code of practice, then they are likely to take a very dim view of it.
This will reflect on the costs and compensation awards.

Now, there is a further twist to this. I have no evidence, but I suspect neither alleged victim may have wanted to make the allegations. Management have held back all the documents which might shed light on the circumstances of the accuser who did not want to formalise the allegation. I suspect that he was told about the allegation which happened later and persuaded to make his allegation because someone else had now complained about the same person. The investigation contains the peculiar sentence 'During the course of the investigation, we became aware of another allegation that had been made to a senior manager on the understanding that it was not persued. We then sought, and were given permission, to interview X[that first person]'. It has been reported, that would be heresay, that this complainant and his manger do not get on for some reason.

Oh, and time pressure is off because HR have agreed to a delay. And thanks.[/QUOTE]

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

Hi Sandeman,
You stated quote:
During the course of the investigation, we became aware of another allegation that had been made to a senior manager on the understanding that it was not persued. We then sought, and were given permission, to interview X[that first person]'. It has been reported, that would be heresay, that this complainant and his manger do not get on for some reason.

If the allegation against the senior manager,has been made by the person you interviewed, then it is not hearsay evidence, if you produce a statement from that person. So is admissible at the hearing.
The hearing may establish if the content is hearsay or not.
If it is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal or grievance.

[sandeman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[QUOTE=Johnboy007;456450]Just like in a court of law.....
The judge can hear all cases, but he must deal with each case separately, weighing up all the evidence to establish guilt or innocence./quote]maybe i'm being thick but im beginning to feel like i'm talking to an expert and the vocabulary doesnt have quite the same meaning. you mean, even where there is one trial/disciplinary hearing, the judges must separate out the facts relating to one allegation from those relating to the other, and consider each set separately?

You seem to have said that their conclusion was wholly wrong, based on their own statement that neither allegation by itself could be proved probably to have happened. Their conclusion is entirely based upon a pattern of behaviour.That's the way I see it, and you must point this out at the hearing.

Is there anything official I can refer to explaining how such things should be judged?

These are on allegations and have never, ever been given body of proof.

sorry, but again didnt understand that. 'on allegations'? 'been given body of proof'?

Therefore in accordance to the accepted principals of justice you must be presumed innocent of these allegations, until and unless proven otherwise. And they should not be allowed to be presented at the hearing.
If this is refused, make a note and be prepared to lodge an appeal, or raise a grievance.

Erm,... I think you just said that if the initial investigation finds that individual allegations are not proven, then no evidence about them should be presented at the disciplinary hearing? If thats the case, then there is nothing to have a hearing about? Again, if thats what you meant, where might I find some reference to quote about this? (its a funny thing dealing with a monolith organisation, it isnt necessarily against you, more just an elephant which will run you over without noticing, unless you can get it somewhere with a very sharp stick and make it pay attention to what is happening)

This will reflect on the costs and compensation awards.

So what size amounts are we talking?

[sandeman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[QUOTE=Johnboy007;456453]
If the allegation against the senior manager,has been made by the person you interviewed, then it is not hearsay evidence, if you produce a statement from that person. So is admissible at the hearing.[/quote]I'm afraid its just a comment someone overheard some time ago.

The part i was concerned about was management bringing pressure on someone to make a complaint and to what exent this might be taken into consideration. It seems quite possible that someone mouthing off has been blown up into an allegation because no one is willing to back down and admit they made it up. So an initial unwise claim, maybe in self defence about the situation, has been pounced upon by management, who have then insited it be taken seriously when that that was never the intention of the person who said it first.

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

Just like in a court of law.....
The judge can hear all cases, but he must deal with each case separately, weighing up all the evidence to establish guilt or innocence./quote]maybe i'm being thick but im beginning to feel like i'm talking to an expert and the vocabulary doesnt have quite the same meaning. you mean, even where there is one trial/disciplinary hearing, the judges must separate out the facts relating to one allegation from those relating to the other, and consider each set separately?

Of course he must, otherwise the hearing would become complicated and certain facts omitted, or confused with the other allegation.
Imagine a trial where an accused has seven different charges against him/her.
If the judge/jury heard the evidence of all of them in one go, they would never reach a conclusion.

Is there anything official I can refer to explaining how such things should be judged?

Try this site...... (legal) http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-...strates-court/
Or contact ACAS for employment advice

sorry, but again didnt understand that. 'on allegations'? 'been given body of proof'?

I allege you shot your cat. You do not have a cat. So no proof shown, or the allegation hasn't been given 'body of proof'
Erm,... I think you just said that if the initial investigation finds that individual allegations are not proven, then no evidence about them should be presented at the disciplinary hearing? If thats the case, then there is nothing to have a hearing about? Again, if thats what you meant, where might I find some reference to quote about this? (its a funny thing dealing with a monolith organisation, it isnt necessarily against you, more just an elephant which will run you over without noticing, unless you can get it somewhere with a very sharp stick and make it pay attention to what is happening)

If any evidence relevant to the allegations, cannot be substantiated, or proven, then it cannot be produced in the hearing.
So what size amounts are we talking?
It depends on how serious the tribunal thinks the evidence warrants.
Not following the ACAS code of practice by an employer, can add a percentage to any compensation

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[QUOTE=sandeman;456484]

If the allegation against the senior manager,has been made by the person you interviewed, then it is not hearsay evidence, if you produce a statement from that person. So is admissible at the hearing.[/quote]I'm afraid its just a comment someone overheard some time ago.

The part i was concerned about was management bringing pressure on someone to make a complaint and to what exent this might be taken into consideration. It seems quite possible that someone mouthing off has been blown up into an allegation because no one is willing to back down and admit they made it up. So an initial unwise claim, maybe in self defence about the situation, has been pounced upon by management, who have then insited it be taken seriously when that that was never the intention of the person who said it first.

Unless you have proof of the allegation or the person is willing to testify at the hearing, then best leave it alone.

[sandeman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[QUOTE=Johnboy007;456498]

Unless you have proof of the allegation or the person is willing to testify at the hearing, then best leave it alone.

Ah, but the thing is, is it worth trying to find proof? No point wasting effort trying to talk to people unless there is some benefit to be had at the end of it. If it can be shown that an employer put pressure on someone to make an allegation, is that a factor to be taken into account when considering the validity of allegation?

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

[QUOTE=sandeman;456517]

Ah, but the thing is, is it worth trying to find proof? No point wasting effort trying to talk to people unless there is some benefit to be had at the end of it. If it can be shown that an employer put pressure on someone to make an allegation, is that a factor to be taken into account when considering the validity of allegation?

Of course it is, putting pressure on someone to make an allegation, may very well make the allegation null and void.
In fact if that can be proven, then the employer could be in serious trouble.
There is such a thing as making a statement under duress.
Duress is pressure exerted upon a person to coerce, (or the practice of forcing that person) to act in an involuntary manner, to perform an act that he or she ordinarily would not perform.
So yes the allegation of putting pressure on the employee, is to be taken into account.
And you should submit that this statement is inadmissible, in evidence.

[sandeman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

i had a brief if I suppose interesting conversation with the ACAS helpline. They rather said all this talk of justice and assessing evidence is complete ********, and an employer can do what they like. The only comeback is if the matter then goes to an employment tribunal, but ACAS declined to be drawn on whether a tribunal would distinguish separate allegations or equally lump them together so that a pattern of offending becomes evidence of guilt. They mostly seemed to be saying they give advice on procedure, not justice, or even how the assessment would work. Their advice, hire a lawyer. Which rather brings us back to the question of how much compensation anyone might get as opposed to the cost of trying to get it.

As to the question of applying pressure, both complainants had to be talked into making a complaint by management. It says so in their statements. The question is, how much.

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

i had a brief if I suppose interesting conversation with the ACAS helpline. They rather said all this talk of justice and assessing evidence is complete ********, and an employer can do what they like. The only comeback is if the matter then goes to an employment tribunal, but ACAS declined to be drawn on whether a tribunal would distinguish separate allegations or equally lump them together so that a pattern of offending becomes evidence of guilt. They mostly seemed to be saying they give advice on procedure, not justice, or even how the assessment would work. Their advice, hire a lawyer. Which rather brings us back to the question of how much compensation anyone might get as opposed to the cost of trying to get it.

As to the question of applying pressure, both complainants had to be talked into making a complaint by management. It says so in their statements. The question is, how much.

Well my friend, it all depends on what you believe......
Justice and assessing evidence being complete********, if so, then why ask me?
I was a Senior Shop Steward working in the largest retail chain in the country.
I stuck to procedure, took them to a tribunal and won.
So my assessing the evidence, preparing my case, got me the justice.
And it proved that a company cannot just do what they like.
So you decide.
A little tip for you.....
Forget the question of how much compensation should you expect.
You haven't won the case yet, and I wouldn't want you to end up disappointed.

[ironman]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

i must agree, the employer does not have to decide guilt of innocence.

All the employer has to is on the balance of probability that the incident occurred, that is all

Having a good rep is gold dust as it makes them think twice as they know you have the option of a Tribunal

Compensation from a Tribunal is De minimis in reality to what you think you are entitled to. The average is 6k

And ACAS are a total waste of space

[Johnboy007]

Re: alleged assault, forthcoming disciplinary

i must agree, the employer does not have to decide guilt of innocence.

All the employer has to is on the balance of probability that the incident occurred, that is all

Having a good rep is gold dust as it makes them think twice as they know you have the option of a Tribunal

Compensation from a Tribunal is De minimis in reality to what you think you are entitled to. The average is 6k

And ACAS are a total waste of space

Unfortunately, before you can go to Tribunal, you have to got to ACAS
And probability is based on the evidence available.
Pretty much like in the County Court in front of a Judge.
I agree that strict proof is not a requirement, unlike in a criminal case.
I got 2k but that was about 15 years ago..........
The best thing was I was able to prove the disciplinary charge against me, was fabricated and completely false.
So that was my Justice, my satisfaction.
The money was secondary, to clearing my name.