Bullying boss - constructive dismissal? Debate???

[krypton]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

teaboy2 your post is littered with assumptions.

For one, the OP has approached HR and they have spoken to the boss regarding the issues. This approach has already been to no avail.

Your advice for someone with anxiety is to face it head on and instigate a further set of circumstances that will invariably increase stress and anxiety. It is indeed highly irresponsible.

Raising grievances and escalating differences against your boss and the prospect of risking the relationship deteriorating to the point of an ET as a course for resolution is in fact very irresponsible. It is one of the most stressful situations for anyone with a livelihood to ever consider or contemplate.

You will of course also be aware that the ET process encourages conciliation and settlement to the point very few cases ever reach tribunal stage. So, to encourage to say that someone will 'win' from the outset beggars belief.

Once you go down the path of grievances and ET an individual invariably has to leave the job. An ET can never award the job back even if you did 'win'.

No one has told the OP to quit. They have been prepared to walk already. The best advice is don't just walk. Make an exit strategy and find yourself another job.

Life is full of people and colourful encounters including people you get on with and some you don't. If you don't get on with someone for whatever reason, it is fruitless and counter productive wasting your time and energy. Far better to move on to a better suited job and environment.

[des8]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

I'm sorry, but this arguing about whether the duty of care is contractual or tortious is akin to medieval philosophers arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the point of a pin and about as helpful to the op.
My understanding has always been that employer/employee relationships are governed by the law of contract AND the law of tort.
The concept of the duty of care is an implied term in a contract of employment, but it also arises from common law

And I'm not rooting for any poster in particular
The OP's interest is signified by his single post

[stevemLS]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

des, I entirely agree - it does remain incumbent on us though to correct mistaken posts.

It is of slightly more importance though to disabuse the OP of the view that they have a cause of action under the Equality Act 2010.

I seek only to assist the OP and regret any "bickering" if that is how it is seen - I do think it is important that advice on this forum is correct.

Best regards

Steve

[teaboy2]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

teaboy2 your post is littered with assumptions. No thats just your assumption. My advice is, and always is based, on law and correct procedure! Yours is based on what?! - Character assassination like you did with trev?!! Yes you destroyed that thread too (link provided below)! Though fortunately for you and for LB Trev is still receiving help (Site team are aware). Your not just representing yourself on these forums, your representing LB! Remember that, because if you don't, it will not just bite you on the ass, but LB as well!! In other-words don't assume anything, its either there in the OP's post already or its not! Example. Just look at my reply to the OP's first post, compared to your replies. Think you will find i was the only one to actually give the advice the OP was asking for or in need off!!

And am sorry but telling someone to quit is not advice, its just an easy way out for you! I.e. if they quit you don't have to give them more advice. Its an easy way out for the adviser! 70-80 posts, most posted non employment sections of this forum and first i saw i you in the employment section was seeking confirmation on their view in regards to redundancy, yet weeks later, your questioning the advice on the person who gave you the confirmation you were asking for. Even referring to whislte-blowing and protected disclosure to substantiate your character assassination of Trev (op seeking advice) when such instance of whistle blowing never occurred and was your mere fantasy! Grow up! - Yep your the first person i'd take advice off...Not!

For one, the OP has approached HR and they have spoken to the boss regarding the issues. This approach has already been to no avail.

Again and how may more times do i need to say this?! that was an "informal" approach - That resolved those matters for the time being! This matter is about bonus pay! Yes maybe connected to the previous bullying and harassment, but is it worth bringing that up and complicating the issue when the the OP is the only employee to have not received the full bonus? no its not! Its can however be brought up later, if needs must!

Your advice for someone with anxiety is to face it head on and instigate a further set of circumstances that will invariably increase stress and anxiety. It is indeed highly irresponsible. If you have not suffered anxiety, which clearly you have not, then your in no position to state otherwise. Your advise would clearly be to give up - How does that help, other than to give in to your symptons?! Like i said, best way to deal with anxiety is to fight it head on! otherwise you might as well curl up in a ball in a corner somewhere, in the hope someone solves your problems for you! Advising ignorance is the worse advice anyone could give!!

Raising grievances and escalating differences against your boss and the prospect of risking the relationship deteriorating to the point of an ET as a course for resolution is in fact very irresponsible. It is one of the most stressful situations for anyone with a livelihood to ever consider or contemplate.

Yes its so irresponsible that parliament thought that giving the employee the right to raise a grievance was so important, along with protecting them from detrimental treatment for asserting their rights a priority. Please, carrying on, your making yourself look an idiot!! Fact is the right to issue a grievance and not be treated less favorably by doing so (victimised), is a powerful tool for resolving employment disputes with employers or other employees. its is used day in and day out! If you don't agree, then this is not the forum you!

You will of course also be aware that the ET process encourages conciliation and settlement to the point very few cases ever reach tribunal stage. So, to encourage to say that someone will 'win' from the outset beggars belief.

Hang on, where did i say the OP would win at ET!! I never did, i specifically advised them against ET, in favour of grievance. it was you that brought the question of ET back in to the equation with your reference to merit, risk and reward. despite the facts so far being unknown and only a generalised back story! Also was it not myself that stated after grievance procedure is exhausted there is ACAS alternative dispute process and it was unl;ikely this matter in this thread would go as far as tribunal. Ohh thats right, yes it was me!! Sorry if i did not understand that what i have already explained to you!! But you do take talking to the wall to a whole new level!

Once you go down the path of grievances and ET an individual invariably has to leave the job. An ET can never award the job back even if you did 'win'.

Again, who mentioned ET, did i advised ET, no i merely advised the OP to raise a grievance in in regards to the bonus issue!! Like i said early, we in early stages, no one, especially myself is even thinking or considering ET. Though you clearly are! Also just because you issue a grievance it does not mean, as matter a fact, that they will have to leave their job. it may have been the case in your experience, but on the contrary many have saved their jobs and carried on being employed for years to come in the same job quite happily!!

No one has told the OP to quit. They have been prepared to walk already. The best advice is don't just walk. Make an exit strategy and find yourself another job.

No thats you assumption they are prepared to walk. They specifically asked if they should walk and claim constructive dismissal or if their was an alternative!! That in no way states they are prepared to walk. on the contrary it states they are prepared to stay and stand up for their rights and quitting would only be as a last resort! I agree, should they wish to leave they need a strategy to do so (i.e. a actual job to walk in to). but can you provide such a strategy, that takes in to account the possibility of years being unemployed or potentially 1-3 years in same employment prior to finding alternative employment. No you can't! Is there room for such optimism? No there's not as it doesn't serve the OP! It only serves you own need to be seen or to feel as though you have given advice!

Life is full of people and colourful encounters including people you get on with and some you don't. If you don't get on with someone for whatever reason, it is fruitless and counter productive wasting your time and energy. Far better to move on to a better suited job and environment.

I agree with all but your last sentence, you should bear that in mind when advising in these forums!! Your basing that assumption on the fact its easy to just give up and walk away and find work elsewhere. in reality it is not that easy, there is no gurantee they will find work elsewhere! So i ask you, what are they to do in between to make sure they can fulfill their financial commitments?! But you can not answer that, because you don't know the answer! how would you when you not considered asking the OP of what the implications on them would be should they quit!

See above in red.

I'm sorry, but this arguing about whether the duty of care is contractual or tortious is akin to medieval philosophers arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the point of a pin and about as helpful to the op.
My understanding has always been that employer/employee relationships are governed by the law of contract AND the law of tort.
The concept of the duty of care is an implied term in a contract of employment, but it also arises from common law

And I'm not rooting for any poster in particular
The OP's interest is signified by his single post

I agree but atlas its i open to interpretation. And yes the OP's needs were expressed in their First and only post and those needs were answered!!

des, I entirely agree - it does remain incumbent on us though to correct mistaken posts.

Mistaken on who's opinion, authority? Please correct any mistakes with any legislation to support your assertion!! Good luck, i look forward to this argument! DO NOT accuse someone of being mistaken unless you can substantiate your allegation there and then. Especially when i literally explained to you in the last post just what victimisation was, despite no one actually mentioning it withing the same breath of the equality act 2010 and when its clear victimisation can be the result of treating one less favorably or unfairly in response to an action they take to assertt any legal right they have in law! Such as the right to not be bullied or harassed at work!

It is of slightly more importance though to disabuse the OP of the view that they have a cause of action under the Equality Act 2010. - Do they, and who mentioned eqaultity act 2010. No one! You were first to reference it! This is nothing to do with the equality act 2010, its a simple case of victimisation by bullying/harassment

I seek only to assist the OP and regret any "bickering" if that is how it is seen - I do think it is important that advice on this forum is correct.
I agree with that statement, and personal disagreements aside it is best to debate things (though not necessary in the thread itself but in its own tread created for that purpose), but there has to be a limit. In this case the OP was seeking advise as to claiming back what he/she thought they were entitled to as their bonus that had been paid to others but not to them. They asked if quitting and seeking constructive dismissal was a viable option , or if there was an alternative route?! I advised them off the only alternative route and that quitting and claiming constructive dismissal was basically not an option. How the employer reacts is up to them, if they react unfairly then ET they are likely to end up at. Though no one mentioned ET as an option at this stage, and it is unlikely to even get that far. I even made it clear we are only at grievance stage and no one was even considering ET as of yet. Shame others, can not see that!

Best regards

Steve

Too you both (Stevemls and Krypton).

I will stand by my side of the argument as long as i have too. So question is, are either of you willing to you stand by your arguments and risk this thread being destroyed? Either way, no matter what happens to this thread, the OP will be supported regardless of what they decide to do. I remind you of how the linked to thread was destroyed, by one members character assassination of the OP- http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...at-is-going-on - All because of one person!

It either stops now, or its likely action will be taken by the site team.

I am all for anyone giving advice, on the condition they do no flame others by openly questioning or wrongly interpreting the advice/approach others have given. Especially when that person is well known for their knowledge on such issues! And when the advice given is beneficial to the OP, regardless of who gives the advice. So its up to you guys, either drop it (i.e your brinkmanship), or loose! You won't be the first (elousie the fraudulent self confessed barrister) or the lasts! But ultimately i am asking for the benefit of this thread, to put aside your differences with myself, whether you do that or not is up to you?! End of the day what have you to gain by it (other than point scoring) what has the OP to gain or more to the point what do they stand to loose?!

Now am open to debate, but there's debating and then there is deliberate castration and attempts to bait another! If you want to play along those lines, go ahead, you will loose. If you wish to disagree then at least provide legislation or something to substantiate your view that your right and others are wrong! At the moment neither of you have provided anything to substantiate your disagreement with mine or others advice (Stevemls - No one referred to Equality act 2010 before you did so that's a non argument for a start). If you can not do that, then all we have is what we have here. Brickmanship! I don't have to substantiate my advice as neither of you have provided anything to substantiate your reasoning for disagreement! Plus my advise was simply to issue a grievance which is standard procedure when you have a dispute with the employer. And my advise and is only what i advised in my initial post. The other posts are irrelevant, as they are not in response to the OP!

So if there's anything where you do not agree with myself or with others on, then start a thread about it, so it can debated by all without it subtracting or damaging any thread in particular where a person is seeking advice - And therefore preventing that person getting the advice they actually need!

I am personally quite happy to debate things, just like anyone here is, but not at the expense of an on going thread. In this case the OP hasn't been back to the thread to post. but in the thread i linked above to they had, and they walked away, in disgust. Not because of my actions or my advice but because of kryptons actions and content of his/her posts, and even other members called krypton out because of it - To no avail.

So come one, you guys want to play the one up-manship game with me, then fine, start a thread, state you issues with me. Lets have it out in the open for all to see! DO NO however destroy the thread created by others seeking help, just to satisfy you own needs. End of day i care about the OP's not whether you or anyone else agrees with the advice i give. And off course ultimately i care for LB as a whole - Question is do you guys, or does your own need overtake that?!

My advice to you guys is learn employment law in and out, before advising on it. Kryton you made amatuer mistake in the other thread with the assumptuion Trev may have been grassed up as part of a protected disclosure, i,e, whislteblowing. Where protected disclosure only applies to public disclosure of wrong doing by employer that is in the public interest. Yes an colleague may have made an allegation to such effect but its by far not a protected disclosure!

Stevemls - You need to read up more on what duty of care as an implied term of contract is - Heres a hint... Google it and read! As any one reading this thread can easily do the same, and realise you are wrong. Its is an implied term under contract of employment!

[stevemLS]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

Teaboy - I agree that the priority has to be the OP and helping them sort out their issue.

I mentioned the Equality Act as you started talking about discrimination and victimisation, I merely pointed out that discrimination, per se, is not unlawful other than in the context of the Equality Act.

I will leave it there.

[enaid]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

The op has posted once and once only on this thread, the rest of the thread is deciding who is trying to give the correct advice. I would not be surprised if the op does not return, as I wouldn't myself if I were to have to read everything posted only to be left not knowing what to do at all.
I am no expert at all on what the op should do for the best but imho it seems he can leave his position or follow the correct grievance procedure before any other action can go forward.
Please in future can you start a discussion thread and only post when a proper and correct solution is formed.
Then the op can decide what is the best course of action to take as in the end it can only be his decision.
Thank You
Enaid x

[teaboy2]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

Teaboy - I agree that the priority has to be the OP and helping them sort out their issue.

I mentioned the Equality Act as you started talking about discrimination and victimisation, I merely pointed out that discrimination, per se, is not unlawful other than in the context of the Equality Act.

I will leave it there.

Thanks for that and apologies if i misinterpreted your point, as your that is correct where protected characteristic are concerned. But you also have victimisation as a result of harassment or bullying that's not covered by equality act, but can be just the result of unfair treatment or in breach of employment rights sct (so its dependent on circumstance etc) which is relevant to the past issue here of bullying and harassment, which indeed is connected to the bonus the OP got being less than what others got. But i see no point bringing it all up at this early stage, as it is just about bonus at moment.

[stevemLS]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

I'm happy to say that to that extent I agree. I also apologise if I have disagreed inappropriately, where I see advice I consider to be wrong, I thought the correct place to disagree was on the thread.

Plainly, OP can take a view on which advice they prefer.

I have no wish to fall out with anyone at all, but the nature of this site is that there will be differences of opinion and if I have expressed those inappropriately I regret it.

I am going to report this thread and ask the site team if I have done anything wrong. I certainly do resent the assertion that I am in some way serving my own ends, I seek only to assist.

[enaid]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

Okidoki

This is now your thread to debate and solve your differences as the OP seems to have gone. If they do return I will split the thread and he can start over.
Keep it clean and on topic please for everyone's benefit.
Thanks
Enaid x

[teaboy2]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

I'm happy to say that to that extent I agree. I also apologise if I have disagreed inappropriately, where I see advice I consider to be wrong, I thought the correct place to disagree was on the thread.

Plainly, OP can take a view on which advice they prefer.

I have no wish to fall out with anyone at all, but the nature of this site is that there will be differences of opinion and if I have expressed those inappropriately I regret it.

I am going to report this thread and ask the site team if I have done anything wrong. I certainly do resent the assertion that I am in some way serving my own ends, I seek only to assist.

I have no problem with people pointing out what they believe is wrong advice, though best way to correct someone is to point to legislation, case law etc. I had no issue with yourself, here on in any other threads. Though i was a bit perplexed as to the equality act 2010 being brought up. And likewise i do not hold any grudges either, against anyone for matter. And i certainly am not saying i am right all the time, as am not always right, after all i am human like everyone else.

My main issue is when others question my advice or anyone's advice and approach without bringing anything with them to support their assertions or that would actually benefit the OP, or basically taking over the thread to have their opinion heard. Here in this thread i merely advised the OP to issue a grievances where as others advised the op to consider quitting and/or finding work elsewhere, without considering what impact quitting would have on the OP's life and finances, or what impact carrying on employment whilst seeking over work, without taking any action against those that wronged the OP would have.

At least by issuing a grievances it makes things formal and will be documented, and therefore would likely stop any more harassment or bullying from occurring, which by the sounds of what the OP said, had ceased anyway, and things had improved considerable since new line manager came in. So what would be the need or reason for quitting considering those issues have been resolved?! Yes the bonus issue is clearly connected, but advising someone to quit based on past issues of harassment and bullying that have already been put a stop too, isn't going to help the OP get his/her fair share of the bonus that they should have got in the first place. The bonus issue came about purely out of spitefulness from the boss towards the OP and done on the sly, as the boss clearly knew they could not act like they had towards the OP in the past anymore, without getting into trouble themselves. Don't forget the boss is an employee themselves if this is a limited company, which sounds like it is! So even the boss can be disciplined and dismissed/removed, so to speak, by the company/board! Though people seem to forget that, and mistakenly belief that because HR duty is to protect the company thats they will protect the boss too, leaving the company open legal action - They will not!

So basically if people disgree with advice given, then they should provide links to legislation of case law and explain why they don't agree with advice given. It shouldn't be for the person whos advice they are questioning to provide links to support their advice!

[krypton]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

I will stand by my side of the argument as long as i have too. So question is, are either of you willing to you stand by your arguments and risk this thread being destroyed?

Have you even considered that it is perhaps your advice and argumentative stance that is wrongly based and causing the issues ?

Another thought for you to ponder on....Do you realise in every case there are two sides of a situation to consider in order to establish the merits?

[teaboy2]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal?

Have you even considered that it is perhaps your advice and argumentative stance that is wrongly based and causing the issues ?

Another thought for you to ponder on....Do you realise in every case there are two sides of a situation to consider in order to establish the merits?

I have not been argumentative (and how was my advice wrong?), i was not the one questioning the advice given by others or their approach that they employed when advising others! The correct procedure to follow in this case was to issue a grievance! Your advice was for the OP to consider quitting, despite the OP specifically asking for advice on how best to handle the issue and basically get the bonus he/she should have got originally! You then proceeded to question my approach, so who was being argumentative, not myself, as i have tried to be constructive at every point and not bite back!

Its funny how you can accuse someone of being argumentative when the only person that was making assumptions/accusations against or questioning the advice/approach given by another poster was yourself? Not to mention playing devils advocate being by its very nature, argumentative! Not only that, when playing devils advocate your basing your view on your opinion or assumption of what the employers side of the story is or assumption as to what the facts of their side of the story it. That does nothing to help the OP, it confuses the situation, and is mere speculation and nothing more. That's why people find it so infuriating, as its distracts from the actual facts being provided by the OP and that's when arguments start. And its usually the person playing devils advocate that causes the arguments and is argumentative, because they simply don't no when to stop as evidenced in Trevs thread.

Yes i am aware their are two sides of a story. But playing devils advocate doesn't help the OP. Our job is to help them based on the facts they give us. If they hide certain things or lie about something that they have told us. Then they are responsible for that and the consequences, not us or the advice we give them in regards to something they lied about, or when they failed to tell us something! Where here to help the OP not the employer, unless they happen to be the employer. Would a solicitor help the other side in regards to the other sides arguments, not they would advise the OP in regards to arguments the other party puts forth, and seek the OP's side of the argument in order to counter the other parties side!

Sop the merits we need to establish are done over the course of a thread, not done within the first few posts or first page. Whole point of grievance/disciplinary procedure is to not just resolve the situation, but because everything it documented including any evidence, is to get access to the evidential facts of the case. How else is the OP and those of us trying to help them, going to get all the facts?

Your advice has been to decide the outcome by your own opinion/assumptions of what has simply been stated in the first few posts, or on what the OP (trev in another thread) had been accused off, completely dismissing fact the evidence itself was speculative and led to more questions, questions designed to actually get facts about how that evidence was gotten and who took the picture or when, not to mention if the serial number on the box pictured matched that of the actual missing Tablet! All vital pieces of information! Yet you proceeded to question his guilt/innocence, where not here to do that, or judge people! Even other members expressed their concerns about your posts, to no avail! And here you have the audacity to accuse me of being argumentative! There's a big difference between being argumentative and having a constructive debate, and i have kept to constructive debate at all times.

Perhaps you can explain why you think issuing a grievance, a tool and procedure that is given to employees as right of their employment that is designed to settle disputes between employees and between employee and employer, is not the correct course of action here? And why quitting is the better options? bearing in mind the OP stated that the new line manager had, in fact, reversed the damaged done by the boss and therefore the OP was happy there, in general, and was merely seeking advice as to an alternative to quitting and claiming constructive dismissal, as evidence by their last sentence!!

I bet not many members here would support your view that the OP should quit, when they could simply issue a grievance and actually get their bonus!! If we all didn't bother standing up for what was right or didn't demand fair treatment, which is what you have effectively advised in this thread and in Trevs, then we'd loose those rights!

[krypton]

Re: Bullying boss - constructive dismissal? Debate

I've come to the conclusion from reading your posts and viewpoint not only do you tend to shoot from the hip without always fully reading and understanding OP's posts, you appear actively to be a protagonist of a litigious society.