Personal Injury caused by employment conditions?

[Openlaw15]

Re: Personal Injury caused by employment conditions?

Two Police Civilian investigators (PSI's) came to my house about an incident that police originally advised was being looked at as assault on my daughter and public order act offence against me. The lead PSI insisted that the matter was nothing to do with the police, was entirely civil. My daughter (whose job was to offer advice to the public on points of law) disputed the PSI's opinion. the PSI complained to her manager a police sergeant who told the PSI to write a report about my daughter, which he then used to invoke the misconduct allegation. For those conspiracy theorists, it seems as though the Sergeant's actions may have been a tit-for-tat response to a complaint I had made that the police were not taking the assault/public order offences seriously (which I have since found out was recorded as a complaint against the sergeant even though it was a general complaint about no one specific, and at the time I complained I had never heard of the sergeant.

Advice from a solicitor some time ago was that any case they take against the police was based on Article 3 Human Rights (freedom from torture etc) and in their opinion my daughter did not have a sufficiently strong case. It is fair to say that at that time the employment issues had not escalated as they eventually did.

She has been "advised" throughout by Unison who, in my opinion, have not been helpful - born out by their own helpline, which has informed that Unison reps don't like to take cases against the police. This morning she has received the below e-mail from her Unison rep, which downplays all that has happened and is nothing like the opinions that are coming through on this thread.

Re-engagement with the employer is a decision I cannot advise on it is a matter for you to decide on.
I am sure there are many factors to take into consideration. What I can do is remind you of the salient points:

Proving a case for constructive dismissal can be a difficult thing to do at an Employment Tribunal (ET) but not impossible.
Winning at tribunal can also be difficult. Typically I believe the figures from ET payout are around the £4000 mark this information is circa 2013/14 and is a figure for unfair dismissal claims. A claim for damages in a county court may present you with different figures which I cannot provide.

Medical redeployment cannot be ultimately guaranteed but is something I am confident maybe able to be negotiated.
It maybe the case that you would accept the following terms of re-engagement:

Medical redeployment to a similar role on the same scale without having to apply ( automatic placement)
A further OH assessment that you are fit for duty in a new role.
Employment record of 11 years continuous service to stand with all benefits allocated to that amount of service I.e 222 hours of a/l.

An apology letter from HR about the failure of procedure during your misconduct procedure.

Please note that these are terms I would suggest to ask for not anything that has been offered. That I would look to negotiate on your behalf.

Would you like me to engage on your behalf?
You do have some time to think this over but not a lot of time. If you can please make a decision by this Friday

£4,000 is very low for unfair dismissal and seems like the lower brackets. Anxiety/ depression, if a recognised medical condition by itself is potentially worth several thousand alone. Muscular injuries too ...hmm

[Guest]

Re: Personal Injury caused by employment conditions?

Thanks for this advice and I will start another thread.

This entire matter had started from (provable) police failures in connection with assault and public order offences and incidentally we are in court soon because the same offender went after my daughter again.

The employment matters soon took over and we lost track of the original cause.

[Guest]

Re: Personal Injury caused by employment conditions?

In fact my daughter already negotiated this for herself until, at the final stage, HR (who previously stated a conflict of interest) refused to agree.