Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

[mariefab]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

The issue appears to be that the solicitor believes that there is insufficient connection between your daughter's reasons for resigning and the employer's fundamental breach.
Do you have a copy of your daughter's resignation letter?
If so, can you post it, in full, here?

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

TWO redacted resignation letters herewith.

Thank you

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

The issue appears to be that the solicitor believes that there is insufficient connection between your daughter's reasons for resigning and the employer's fundamental breach

I believe my daughter could have done nothing differently than she did.

11 February she was assaulted, the police wrongly recorded the time of my phone call as being received 14 minutes later than it was received. Consequently a counter allegation made by the assailant's girlfriend was wrongly assumed to be the first call received and police - with no evidence whatsoever and without taking statements - blamed my daughter. No charges were brought. Her assailant and his girlfriend conducted a harassment campaign against my daughter until 29 June when he committed a further offence against her, for which he was later found guilty. Simultaneously daughter was accused of misconduct, her multiple spoken and written requests for temporary transfer were refused. She became not only stressed, anxious and depressed but in fact became totally traumatised. (As I was. What was happening to her was totally incomprehensible). The "missing link" came to light soon after examination of the bundle of documents received by daughter on 16 November for use at her 4 December misconduct meeting.

When I reported the original incident on 11 February, I believed the police enquiry officer told me to expect police contact within two days. We were both very badly shaken and when we didn't hear from the police by early evening of 13 February, I complained. My complaint was recorded on 23 February against TDS Sxxby. PSI Fxx attended my home in the morning of 23 February, at which time daughter challenged her insistence that the 11 February incident was civil and nothing to do with the police. That same afternoon, 23 February, TDS Sxxby (PSI Fxx's manager) told PSI Fxx to write a report about daughter's conduct. The next day, 24 February, TDS Sxxby used PSI Fxx's report to complain about daughter's fitness for employment in her job as a Force Enquiry Officer. On 25 February, daughter's manager in overall charge of the 101 Call Management dept, T/Insp Pxxxxs sent the complaint to Professional Standards. On 27 February, Professional Standards instigated the misconduct procedure against daughter. T/Insp Pxxxxs was solely responsible for refusing daughter's reasonable requests for temporary redeployment out of the 101 Call Management department on medical grounds.

Near the end of November, when daughter knew that her manager, T/Insp Pxxxxs, had not only sent a complaint to Professional Standards that she wasn't fit to do her job but also had actively prevented her temporary redeployment to a different job, she realised that she had no choice other than to resign. It would have been impossible for her to continue to work under the control of a manager - a police Inspector - who set her up to fail by intending to make her work in a job in which she was alleged to be unfit to be employed.

Her grievance about this was found in daughters favour by a Chief Inspector, who wrote "I have looked at this issue and do uphold the grievance....You had been a call taker and worked within Call Management for a number of years. I believe that you were more than capable of dealing with any calls that you would take in that work. However, the opportunity to work elsewhere would have given you some breathing space. T/Insp Pxxxxs was correct that you would have had to return to FEC at some point but to give you the best opportunity to return to work, this option should have been explored further".

[Openlaw15]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

It just feels 'fishy'

Why would a solicitor be offering advice via the Unison bod?

I would have thought they'd want to deal with daughter directly. (I don't know for certain, mind}

Unison have their own solicitors...the Union are not legal experts.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

I believe my daughter could have done nothing differently than she did.

11 February she was assaulted, the police wrongly recorded the time of my phone call as being received 14 minutes later than it was received. Consequently a counter allegation made by the assailant's girlfriend was wrongly assumed to be the first call received and police - with no evidence whatsoever and without taking statements - blamed my daughter. No charges were brought. Her assailant and his girlfriend conducted a harassment campaign against my daughter until 29 June when he committed a further offence against her, for which he was later found guilty. Simultaneously daughter was accused of misconduct, her multiple spoken and written requests for temporary transfer were refused. She became not only stressed, anxious and depressed but in fact became totally traumatised. (As I was. What was happening to her was totally incomprehensible). The "missing link" came to light soon after examination of the bundle of documents received by daughter on 16 November for use at her 4 December misconduct meeting.

How was she assaulted, was it assault shouting in face with threatening gestures...or actual contact ie battery?

When I reported the original incident on 11 February, I believed the police enquiry officer told me to expect police contact within two days. We were both very badly shaken and when we didn't hear from the police by early evening of 13 February, I complained. My complaint was recorded on 23 February against TDS Sxxby. PSI Fxx attended my home in the morning of 23 February, at which time daughter challenged her insistence that the 11 February incident was civil and nothing to do with the police. That same afternoon, 23 February, TDS Sxxby (PSI Fxx's manager) told PSI Fxx to write a report about daughter's conduct. The next day, 24 February, TDS Sxxby used PSI Fxx's report to complain about daughter's fitness for employment in her job as a Force Enquiry Officer. On 25 February, daughter's manager in overall charge of the 101 Call Management dept, T/Insp Pxxxxs sent the complaint to Professional Standards. On 27 February, Professional Standards instigated the misconduct procedure against daughter. T/Insp Pxxxxs was solely responsible for refusing daughter's reasonable requests for temporary redeployment out of the 101 Call Management department on medical grounds.

Did you report the assault to your local police station as a crime?

"Near the end of November, when daughter knew that her manager, T/Insp Pxxxxs, had not only sent a complaint to Professional Standards that she wasn't fit to do her job but also had actively prevented her temporary redeployment to a different job, she realised that she had no choice other than to resign. It would have been impossible for her to continue to work under the control of a manager - a police Inspector - who set her up to fail by intending to make her work in a job in which she was alleged to be unfit to be employed."

Constructive dismissal here possibly

Her grievance about this was found in daughters favour by a Chief Inspector, who wrote "I have looked at this issue and do uphold the grievance....You had been a call taker and worked within Call Management for a number of years. I believe that you were more than capable of dealing with any calls that you would take in that work. However, the opportunity to work elsewhere would have given you some breathing space. T/Insp Pxxxxs was correct that you would have had to return to FEC at some point but to give you the best opportunity to return to work, this option should have been explored further".

Constructive dismissal here potentially also, as it was simply oppressing for the employee where she felt she had no other alternative but to leave as she needed a break from this counter-productive environment, and the Chief had actual and constructive knowledge of this. If she were not to leave it would have worsened her anxiety.

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

11 February she was assaulted,
How was she assaulted, was it assault shouting in face with threatening gestures...or actual contact ie battery?
A male who she had never seen before (but who we later found out was cohabiting with his girlfriend, the new tenant in a ground floor maisonette) kicked a council recycling bin at her hitting her on the leg, he put his head right in her face (she could feel his breath on her face) so close that both she and I believed he was going to head-butt her and spit in her face, he shouted at her using aggressive threatening and abusive language, he prevented her getting into her car by getting into his own car and opening his car door across the door of her car, he threatened to make an untruthful allegation to the police that I a disabled pensioner had thrown a council wheelie bin at him, he kept us prisoner inside her maisonette for about 20 minutes whilst he remained outside and we were too frightened of him to attempt to leave.

Did you report the assault to your local police station as a crime?
Whilst we were confined inside daughter's maisonette, I used her mobile to phone 101, so yes - I reported the incident as a crime. Police initially advised they were looking at assault on her and public order on me. I understand that in this area anyway, you cannot report an offence at a police station - you either ring 999 for a current emergency or 101 for something the police will investigate via their Resolution Centre, giving you a time in which you can expect police contact.

Near the end of November, when daughter knew that her manager, T/Insp Pxxxxs, had not only sent a complaint to Professional Standards that she wasn't fit to do her job but also had actively prevented her temporary redeployment to a different job, she realised that she had no choice other than to resign. It would have been impossible for her to continue to work under the control of a manager - a police Inspector - who set her up to fail by intending to make her work in a job in which she was alleged to be unfit to be employed."

Constructive dismissal here possibly

Her grievance about this was found in daughters favour by a Chief Inspector, who wrote "I have looked at this issue and do uphold the grievance....You had been a call taker and worked within Call Management for a number of years. I believe that you were more than capable of dealing with any calls that you would take in that work. However, the opportunity to work elsewhere would have given you some breathing space. T/Insp Pxxxxs was correct that you would have had to return to FEC at some point but to give you the best opportunity to return to work, this option should have been explored further".Constructive dismissal here potentially also, as it was simply oppressing for the employee where she felt she had no other alternative but to leave as she needed a break from this counter-productive environment, and the Chief had actual and constructive knowledge of this. If she were not to leave it would have worsened her anxiety.

At the point where she handed in her resignation she was completely broken. and within a few days of actually leaving (as opposed to handing in her notice) I noticed she was mentally much stronger. Incidentally she was not always a call taker - she joined as a call taker, moved to be a Controller dealing with 999 emergencies, and moved back to being a force enquiry call taker about 2 ˝ years ago because of an ear condition that prevented her using the police Tetris radio. As someone who was used to running several emergency incidents simultaneously including (during a period of about four hours in one evening) two knife incidents including a threat-to-kill, a concern for welfare missing person incident, and a car going over a cliff into the sea in a double suicide pact, she is a strong person and not someone who was so weak that she could not cope with a nasty comment made by another employee. It was the whole situation, and what finally did it for her was knowing that the Temp Inspector (her manager) was solely responsible for refusing her reasonable request for temporary redeployment out of FEC 101 centre. She became ill with stress anxiety and depression, and firmly believes (as I do ) that the illness would not have occurred, or at least not have been so severe, had she been transferred temporarily out of what she calls "that toxic environment".

I have checked with the ACAS negotiator, who confirmed they identified constructive unfair dismissal, breach of contract and disability discrimination (not sexual discrimination, which must have been a slip of the tongue).

Thank you for your response.

[charitynjw]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

Unison have their own solicitors...the Union are not legal experts.

http://www.thompsonstradeunionlaw.co...ts/content.htm

[Openlaw15]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

"11 February she was assaulted, the police wrongly recorded the time of my phone call as being received 14 minutes later than it was received. Consequently a counter allegation made by the assailant's girlfriend was wrongly assumed to be the first call received and police - with no evidence whatsoever and without taking statements - blamed my daughter. No charges were brought. Her assailant and his girlfriend conducted a harassment campaign against my daughter until 29 June when he committed a further offence against her, for which he was later found guilty. Simultaneously daughter was accused of misconduct, her multiple spoken and written requests for temporary transfer were refused. She became not only stressed, anxious and depressed but in fact became totally traumatised. (As I was. What was happening to her was totally incomprehensible). The "missing link" came to light soon after examination of the bundle of documents received by daughter on 16 November for use at her 4 December misconduct meeting."

What does have to do with her job? How was this said to be misconduct?

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

"11 February she was assaulted, the police wrongly recorded the time of my phone call as being received 14 minutes later than it was received. Consequently a counter allegation made by the assailant's girlfriend was wrongly assumed to be the first call received and police - with no evidence whatsoever and without taking statements - blamed my daughter. No charges were brought. Her assailant and his girlfriend conducted a harassment campaign against my daughter until 29 June when he committed a further offence against her, for which he was later found guilty. Simultaneously daughter was accused of misconduct, her multiple spoken and written requests for temporary transfer were refused. She became not only stressed, anxious and depressed but in fact became totally traumatised. (As I was. What was happening to her was totally incomprehensible). The "missing link" came to light soon after examination of the bundle of documents received by daughter on 16 November for use at her 4 December misconduct meeting."

What does have to do with her job? How was this said to be misconduct?

My daughter owns but does not live in a maisonette that we visited on 11 February intending to put it up for sale. An incident occurred that I reported to the police, who said they were looking at it as assault on my daughter and public order on me. Two PSI's, one the investigator, the other (we later learned) brought along as a witness, came to my house on 23 February supposedly to discuss the 11 February incident. As soon as she came into my house, the lead PSI said that no charges were being brought, that there was no evidence, generally treated my daughter as though she was the instigator and insisted that the events complained about were entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. Although I had reported the matter, I was more-or-less ignored. My daughter was off work sick with a trapezius muscle disorder (a repetitive strain injury that affected her neck, shoulders and upper back) and taking three kinds of prescribed medication including pain killers. Part of her job description was to advise the public on points of law. In other words, she knows what is criminal for the attention of the police. She became very upset by the PSI's attitude and perceived aggression towards her and argued that the PSI was wrong in saying that the matter was entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. My daughter left the room in tears and considerable distress and I told the PSI's to leave my house.

At the end of April, she was told that she was subject to misconduct allegations concerning her conduct during the PSI's attendance in our home on 23 February. Near the end of May, she was provided with a copy of a report that the PSI had written on the afternoon of 23 February. The report is full of inconsistencies and says "From speaking to Mxxxxa I am aware that she is a member of staff at FEC. It concerns me that someone with her aggression and general behaviour is employed by HC to deal with members of the public" and "It is my opinion that Mxxxxa has both started and fuelled this disagreement by her behaviour at the time. She is completely unreasonable and if her behaviour today is anything to go by she is responsible for causing issues at the address".

My daughter and I were both completely shocked - not only was she the innocent victim of an unpleasant assault on 11 February but the civilian police investigator blamed my daughter, no charges were brought against her assailant, and the police pursued my daughter for months on what seemed to be "trumped up" charges that on 23 February she was aggressive and rude to the PSI, finding her guilty on 4 December and on 25 January rejecting her appeal.

One thing she did admit - and was found guilty of - is that she was so shocked and distressed by police failures and charging her with misconduct that she posted on Facebook that the police "had let her down again".

[charitynjw]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

Hi justace

No-one's been found 'guilty', neither has anyone been 'charged' with anything (except for the assailant, but that's a different case).

But I can see how it feels like it!

[Openlaw15]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

My daughter owns but does not live in a maisonette that we visited on 11 February intending to put it up for sale. An incident occurred that I reported to the police, who said they were looking at it as assault on my daughter and public order on me. Two PSI's, one the investigator, the other (we later learned) brought along as a witness, came to my house on 23 February supposedly to discuss the 11 February incident. As soon as she came into my house, the lead PSI said that no charges were being brought, that there was no evidence, generally treated my daughter as though she was the instigator and insisted that the events complained about were entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. Although I had reported the matter, I was more-or-less ignored. My daughter was off work sick with a trapezius muscle disorder (a repetitive strain injury that affected her neck, shoulders and upper back) and taking three kinds of prescribed medication including pain killers. Part of her job description was to advise the public on points of law. In other words, she knows what is criminal for the attention of the police. She became very upset by the PSI's attitude and perceived aggression towards her and argued that the PSI was wrong in saying that the matter was entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. My daughter left the room in tears and considerable distress and I told the PSI's to leave my house.

At the end of April, she was told that she was subject to misconduct allegations concerning her conduct during the PSI's attendance in our home on 23 February. Near the end of May, she was provided with a copy of a report that the PSI had written on the afternoon of 23 February. The report is full of inconsistencies and says "From speaking to Mxxxxa I am aware that she is a member of staff at FEC. It concerns me that someone with her aggression and general behaviour is employed by HC to deal with members of the public" and "It is my opinion that Mxxxxa has both started and fuelled this disagreement by her behaviour at the time. She is completely unreasonable and if her behaviour today is anything to go by she is responsible for causing issues at the address".

My daughter and I were both completely shocked - not only was she the innocent victim of an unpleasant assault on 11 February but the civilian police investigator blamed my daughter, no charges were brought against her assailant, and the police pursued my daughter for months on what seemed to be "trumped up" charges that on 23 February she was aggressive and rude to the PSI, finding her guilty on 4 December and on 25 January rejecting her appeal.

One thing she did admit - and was found guilty of - is that she was so shocked and distressed by police failures and charging her with misconduct that she posted on Facebook that the police "had let her down again".

Here's me thinking it's the Crown Prosecution Services, and the police who bring criminal charges. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Hmm, nope it's doesn't say PSI. My question, where is PSI legal powers, which statute gives them their legal powers? What qualifications does a PSI need, merely 3 GCSEs...no particular subject, no particular grade. 3 U grades in soft subjects would be sufficient.

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

Here's me thinking it's the Crown Prosecution Services, and the police who bring criminal charges. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Hmm, nope it's doesn't say PSI. My question, where is PSI legal powers, which statute gives them their legal powers? What qualifications does a PSI need, merely 3 GCSEs...no particular subject, no particular grade. 3 U grades in soft subjects would be sufficient.

When I complained about the way the police investigated and decided to take no further action re the 11 February incident, the training Inspector dealing with my complaint answered:-

"You question whether Police Staff Investigators (PSI's) can over-rule a police officer's decision. You should know that the objective decision making ability of all members of Hampshire Constabulary staff are valued equally. The law makes provision for different powers to be applied (around arrest etc) but common sense and sound judgement of our staff is an asset we enjoy without distinction".

Does this answer reassure you about where are PSI legal powers and what statute gives them their legal powers?

No??? Me neither. They should, in my opinion, come with a health warning.

[charitynjw]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

Hi justace

Did you get to the bottom of whether Thompson's were actually involved?

[Openlaw15]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

My daughter owns but does not live in a maisonette that we visited on 11 February intending to put it up for sale. An incident occurred that I reported to the police, who said they were looking at it as assault on my daughter and public order on me. Two PSI's, one the investigator, the other (we later learned) brought along as a witness, came to my house on 23 February supposedly to discuss the 11 February incident. As soon as she came into my house, the lead PSI said that no charges were being brought, that there was no evidence, generally treated my daughter as though she was the instigator and insisted that the events complained about were entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. Although I had reported the matter, I was more-or-less ignored. My daughter was off work sick with a trapezius muscle disorder (a repetitive strain injury that affected her neck, shoulders and upper back) and taking three kinds of prescribed medication including pain killers. Part of her job description was to advise the public on points of law. In other words, she knows what is criminal for the attention of the police. She became very upset by the PSI's attitude and perceived aggression towards her and argued that the PSI was wrong in saying that the matter was entirely civil and nothing to do with the police. My daughter left the room in tears and considerable distress and I told the PSI's to leave my house.

At the end of April, she was told that she was subject to misconduct allegations concerning her conduct during the PSI's attendance in our home on 23 February. Near the end of May, she was provided with a copy of a report that the PSI had written on the afternoon of 23 February. The report is full of inconsistencies and says "From speaking to Mxxxxa I am aware that she is a member of staff at FEC. It concerns me that someone with her aggression and general behaviour is employed by HC to deal with members of the public" and "It is my opinion that Mxxxxa has both started and fuelled this disagreement by her behaviour at the time. She is completely unreasonable and if her behaviour today is anything to go by she is responsible for causing issues at the address".

My daughter and I were both completely shocked - not only was she the innocent victim of an unpleasant assault on 11 February but the civilian police investigator blamed my daughter, no charges were brought against her assailant, and the police pursued my daughter for months on what seemed to be "trumped up" charges that on 23 February she was aggressive and rude to the PSI, finding her guilty on 4 December and on 25 January rejecting her appeal.

One thing she did admit - and was found guilty of - is that she was so shocked and distressed by police failures and charging her with misconduct that she posted on Facebook that the police "had let her down again".

Did you make a complaint about these pseudo police officers (PSIs) to the relevant organisation, and the police to the IPCC, as to the way your daughter was treated so badly?

[Guest]

Re: Difference of opinion between Unison and ACAS

Hi justace

Did you get to the bottom of whether Thompson's were actually involved?

Unison say the solicitor is Godric Jolliffe, based in the Thompsons Office in London.

He has not contacted my daughter and the Unison regional office area organiser still maintains that there is no case with which to go to tribunal and if daughter thinks otherwise, she must do it herself. I'm wondering if daughter would phone him.

Godric Piers Savigear JolliffeSolicitor Admitted as a solicitor: 15/11/11
SRA ID:481287SRA Regulated

Tel: 0208 947 4163
Email: enquiries@thompson.law.co.uk show
Assistant at:Thompsons Solicitors LLP
22-24 Worple Road,
Wimbledon,
London,
SW19 4DD,