Tweet
The company i worked for claimed that they were struggling financially and they wanted the workforce to change their terms and conditions.
The workforce had a ballot and the proposals were heavily rejected.
Around christmas time the company wanted a meeting with the employees,at the meeting each employee was issued with a form entitled survival plan.It went on to tell us either accept the new conditions or leave,it also went on to say if you left it would not be through redundancy.
The shops stewards tried to get in touch with the trade union officals,but they woudnt return the phone calls.
The option for us next was to check the trade union handbook,entitled can my employer change my contract.
It was very ambiguos and confusing,it looked as though the company could change your contract by just imposing it.
It also went onto say that unfair dismissals are almost difficult to win in unilateral change of contract situations.
After reading this most of the employees started signing the new contract.
I went to a local lawyer,i told him i wasnt signing the new contract,he gave me a letter for the company telling them that ive looked at the option form,not agreed to that and telling that that im going to continue working to my existing terms and conditions.
After receiving the letter from my lawyer,the company had a few meetings with me trying to get me to change my mind,after i kept stating that i would continue to work to my existing contract,they sacked me.
When i went back to my lawyer and told him id been sacked,he said they just cant sack you did they offer me redundancy?when i said no,he said theyve got to or their in breach of contract.
Then id heard theyd started offering employees redundancy.as you can imagine i wasnt happy,when i went to the appeal it got a bit heated,i accused them of trying to cheat us and id see them in court.
At the employment tribunal the company brought in a Qc,one of the big legal firms, their management team and my trade union official turned up as a witness for the company.
As you know for a company to defend an unfair dismissal case theyve got show the tribunal their financial position,theyve got to show they consulted with employees about the change and theyve got to get the employees agreement.
This trade union official stated that the union and the employees were behind the changes.
When the the local human resources manager was questioned by my lawyer,she was asked, after you made the others redundant,was the rest of the workforce behind the changes?she replied one hundred per cent,my lawyer said can you look at this,it was protest letters from the rest of the workforce saying theyd been forced into this contract and it was not by mutual consent.
At this the tribunal chairman asked me if i wanted my job back,i replied yes,he then asked the managing director if he'd reinstate me,he replied no,he then asked him if he'd re-engage me,he said no.
Six weeks later i got the decision from the tribunal,for some reason they ommitted the protest letter and claimed because i was the only one to refuse the contract i was not unfairly dismissed,and they went onto say that my post was not redundant so i was not entitled to a redundancy payment.(strange as this lawyer had stated they had to give me a redundacy payment to avoid a breach of contract)
It would appear that this company was not prepared to pay the compensation for not reinstating me to my job,also they were not prepared to pay the unfair dismissal claims for breach of contract for the employees who'd signed the protest letters.
Is it legal to ommitt evidence thats important?do you think it perverse for me to be sacked and my witnesses were redundant?
The workforce had a ballot and the proposals were heavily rejected.
Around christmas time the company wanted a meeting with the employees,at the meeting each employee was issued with a form entitled survival plan.It went on to tell us either accept the new conditions or leave,it also went on to say if you left it would not be through redundancy.
The shops stewards tried to get in touch with the trade union officals,but they woudnt return the phone calls.
The option for us next was to check the trade union handbook,entitled can my employer change my contract.
It was very ambiguos and confusing,it looked as though the company could change your contract by just imposing it.
It also went onto say that unfair dismissals are almost difficult to win in unilateral change of contract situations.
After reading this most of the employees started signing the new contract.
I went to a local lawyer,i told him i wasnt signing the new contract,he gave me a letter for the company telling them that ive looked at the option form,not agreed to that and telling that that im going to continue working to my existing terms and conditions.
After receiving the letter from my lawyer,the company had a few meetings with me trying to get me to change my mind,after i kept stating that i would continue to work to my existing contract,they sacked me.
When i went back to my lawyer and told him id been sacked,he said they just cant sack you did they offer me redundancy?when i said no,he said theyve got to or their in breach of contract.
Then id heard theyd started offering employees redundancy.as you can imagine i wasnt happy,when i went to the appeal it got a bit heated,i accused them of trying to cheat us and id see them in court.
At the employment tribunal the company brought in a Qc,one of the big legal firms, their management team and my trade union official turned up as a witness for the company.
As you know for a company to defend an unfair dismissal case theyve got show the tribunal their financial position,theyve got to show they consulted with employees about the change and theyve got to get the employees agreement.
This trade union official stated that the union and the employees were behind the changes.
When the the local human resources manager was questioned by my lawyer,she was asked, after you made the others redundant,was the rest of the workforce behind the changes?she replied one hundred per cent,my lawyer said can you look at this,it was protest letters from the rest of the workforce saying theyd been forced into this contract and it was not by mutual consent.
At this the tribunal chairman asked me if i wanted my job back,i replied yes,he then asked the managing director if he'd reinstate me,he replied no,he then asked him if he'd re-engage me,he said no.
Six weeks later i got the decision from the tribunal,for some reason they ommitted the protest letter and claimed because i was the only one to refuse the contract i was not unfairly dismissed,and they went onto say that my post was not redundant so i was not entitled to a redundancy payment.(strange as this lawyer had stated they had to give me a redundacy payment to avoid a breach of contract)
It would appear that this company was not prepared to pay the compensation for not reinstating me to my job,also they were not prepared to pay the unfair dismissal claims for breach of contract for the employees who'd signed the protest letters.
Is it legal to ommitt evidence thats important?do you think it perverse for me to be sacked and my witnesses were redundant?
