Resign or be sacked?

[Mouldylocks]

My daughter has a disciplinary hearing next Wednesday, when it is likely she will be dismissed. She was considering attending the hearing, stating her dissatisfaction with the process and unfair treatment, and then resigning. I think there is no benefit in this course of action, as she will still have the sacking on her employment record. Should she resign on Monday?
Many thanks for any advice you can offer.

[NWHC]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

Even if she resigns it may not be accepted and the disciplinary followed through

I think, if you are willing, a few more details .

Even basic details such as how long she has been employed and what she has been accused of might mean others can give better advice

[mariefab]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

I understand that resigning may affect her entitlement to benefits.

There's nothing to stop her employer writing that she resigned pending disciplinary action that was likely to lead to her dismissal in a reference.

What have they done wrong process and treatment wise?

[Kati]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

how long has she been employed?? She could (if eligible) claim benefits under the Employment On Trial scheme - https://www.gov.uk/moving-from-benef...d-volunteering

[MIKE770]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

reason for interview etc would help to see best route?

[Kati]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

[MENTION=19071]teaboy2[/MENTION] [MENTION=70489]judgemental24[/MENTION]??

[leclerc]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

How long has she had the job?
Is she eligible for benefits?(sacking is better than resigning because they can still follow through and sack her despite her resignation).
If she is quite young ie 18-25 then the the sacking might have no issue with gaining employment because she can remove it from her CV if is on procedural issues and not violence or police involvement.....

[Mouldylocks]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

My daughter has a disciplinary hearing next Wednesday, when it is likely she will be dismissed. She was considering attending the hearing, stating her dissatisfaction with the process and unfair treatment, and then resigning. I think there is no benefit in this course of action, as she will still have the sacking on her employment record. Should she resign on Monday?
Many thanks for any advice you can offer.

(Sorry if I've added this info wrongly) She works for a bookmaker and all shops are video and sound recorded with direct transmission to control. The shop was visited for a disciplinary matter regarding another member of staff while my daughter (the manager) was out at lunch, and a bottle of alcohol was seen in the kitchen area. She was interviewed, then called in for a disciplinary, which lasted for 5 hours. At the end of that process, no decision was made and she was suspended on full pay. There is no suggestion the alcohol was hers, or that she or anyone was drinking on the premises, but the deputy manager resigned shortly afterwards. When the other two members of staff who were present were called in for their disciplinaries, one said my daughter had no knowledge of the alcohol (dismissed) and the other said she did (final warning). Since those disciplinaries, additional charges have been added to her notice of matters included in the disciplinary. The other matters might be considered minor to other employers (using cell phone during work hours, gulping down a salad before taking lunch etc) but this company routinely issues final warnings for such matters, so it's inevitable that she will be sacked. She is over 25.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

5 hours disciplinary including interview is outrageous for a manager (extremely patronising and humiliating for the reasonable adult but young female) in relation to a relatively trivial matter involving alcohol present on the premises, which evidence is merely circumstantial. We live in England, not IS provinces. I would have reported them to a tribunal for potentially a Human Rights' Act/ ECHR Article's violation. This is just quite disgraceful. It is a violation of Article 3 to treat someone in a degrading or inhuman way. Some employers are just completely dangerous and need to he sued as they owe her duty of care. Even the police are regulated by PACE 1984 in relation to keeping people at the police station.

[mariefab]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

Does she have a copy of the Company's disciplinary procedures?
Are any of these matters (alcohol on premises, using cell phone or eating during working hours) against the Company's (written) policies?

[mariefab]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

How on earth did they manage to spend 5 hours talking about one bottle of booze?
I'm guessing that she's worked there for over 2 years as they suspended her then added a couple of additional charges.

[Mouldylocks]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

She doesn't have a copy, and the Company does not issue one as a matter of course. The eating issue was counted as extra lunch break although she works a lot of unpaid time that can be evidenced. Alcohol on premises is a breach, although it was brought in without her knowledge or agreement and would have been gone before she came back from lunch (someone brought it in while checking their rota but not working)

- - - Updated - - -

Some of that time was the 'third degree' - repeatedly asking the same questions and querying the answers and some was waiting outside for more than an hour at a time while 'discussions' took place. She has worked their for more than 2 years and has an excellent record.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

She doesn't have a copy, and the Company does not issue one as a matter of course. The eating issue was counted as extra lunch break although she works a lot of unpaid time that can be evidenced. Alcohol on premises is a breach, although it was brought in without her knowledge or agreement and would have been gone before she came back from lunch (someone brought it in while checking their rota but not working)

- - - Updated - - -

Some of that time was the 'third degree' - repeatedly asking the same questions and querying the answers and some was waiting outside for more than an hour at a time while 'discussions' took place. She has worked their for more than 2 years and has an excellent record.

If she is sacked I would claim 'wrongful dismissal' but if she resigned of her own accord, unfair dismissal. Unfair dismissal is constructive in that the employee (her) could no longer work there owing to such a serious breach of employer-employee relationship by the employer, whose conduct is quite shocking actually: section 95, Employment Rights Act 1996. Remedy: tribunal, seek compensation (and possibly reinstatement in an another branch of the company where possible). An employer cannot just interrogate or give the 'third degree' to employees. If there is evidence for it, and the employer is male look into a sexual discrimination claim too. In the case of wrongful dismissal it means a dismissal by the company which is wrong based on law. Given her 2 year service record and possibly promotion to manager in this period too implies there is a talented employee whose career with the bookmaker has been impeded. She also has a deputy manager who will be credible witness. I would claim for all losses where possible including loss of earnings. Has she suffered significant stress or does she have any existing medical conditions? If so, I would claim for all these losses.

Perhaps he was a traffic warden in a former life. Who the heck would want to work for a control freak, a lawyer wannabe, like this apparently narcissist employer. What is the procedure for complaining about staff, ie senior managers? Is there a head office, where she can make a complaint owing to being treated like a criminal. This man needs a good disciplining himself, may be a slap or two along the way. I would leave this employ if i were her and owing to the unreasonable behaviour of the employer and make a claim to a tribunal for unfair dismissal: s.95, ERA 1996.

[NWHC]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

5 hours disciplinary including interview is outrageous for a manager (extremely patronising and humiliating for the reasonable adult but young female) in relation to a relatively trivial matter involving alcohol present on the premises, which evidence is merely circumstantial. We live in England, not IS provinces. I would have reported them to a tribunal for potentially a Human Rights' Act/ ECHR Article's violation. This is just quite disgraceful. It is a violation of Article 3 to treat someone in a degrading or inhuman way. Some employers are just completely dangerous and need to he sued as they owe her duty of care. Even the police are regulated by PACE 1984 in relation to keeping people at the police station.

Alcohol in any workplace is not a trivial matter and for a bookmaker is very serious as the branch could be forced to cease trading.
You are talking complete twaddle and I suggest you actually read up on the areas of law that you pretend to know so much about .
I also find your comments incredibly sexist, as you say we live in the UK with equality (supposedly) and it should make no difference if the person is a man or woman, in fact if they treated her more favourably because she was a woman the company would be in breach of the equality act


How long has she been employed? For claims of unfair or constructive dismissal there needs to be at least two years service (unless it because of a protected characteristic) . Constructive dismissal is far more difficult to prove than unfair dismissal and sadly thanks to the right wing government we have , increasingly expensive .

Sorry finally, dismissal or resignation will have no effect on benefits as they will both be classed as making yourself intentinally unemployed
Thanks IDS et al.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Resign or be sacked?

Alcohol in any workplace is not a trivial matter and for a bookmaker is very serious as the branch could be forced to cease trading.

The material point that the OP wanted dealt with are the issues related to 'resign' or 'sack'. It is trivial in the criminal law sense as there was no correlation to the female and her drinking of alcohol and in the employment law sense, it is unreasonable conduct by the employer by having a 5 hour session as though it were the gestapo or the Spanish inquisition.

"You are talking complete twaddle and I suggest you actually read up on the areas of law that you pretend to know so much about."

I just cited the relevant law which is this case is s.95, Employment Rights Act 1996. Stick to the Op's question. This was the point of the relevant area of law, of which the OP enquired. The alcohol is a minor point is what I meant not that i was remotely suggesting that having alcohol was trivial matters in terms of the employee's duty to the employer or employees owing the other duties, or in terms of the company's trade being affected. I suggest you stick to the material point.

"I also find your comments incredibly sexist, as you say we live in the UK with equality (supposedly) and it should make no difference if the person is a man or woman, in fact if they treated her more favourably because she was a woman the company would be in breach of the equality act."

The material point is the victim here is a woman and if the employer were male and the facts were commensurate with sexual discrimination owing to the EU heavily influencing the Equality Laws in the UK then a claim for such should be pursued. So, I find it redundant to answer your point about 'incredibly sexist.' On the contrary Equality law would prefer and would not withstand a positive discrimination as the idea of equality law is to balance the economy so that there is not an over-representation of males in certain industries.


"How long has she been employed? For claims of unfair or constructive dismissal there needs to be at least two years service (unless it because of a protected characteristic) . Constructive dismissal is far more difficult to prove than unfair dismissal and sadly thanks to the right wing government we have , increasingly expensive ."

The facts suggest the female has been employed for 2 years. Protected characteristic relates to discrimination law which is a different matter and therein claim to 'unfair dismissal.' No it is not difficult to prove where there are material witnesses, ie deputy manager. If it were pursued as discrimination matter in the court the Equality Commission could assist with the legal fees. Losses in the tribunals are restricted but it court the address for losses are extensive.

Sorry finally, dismissal or resignation will have no effect on benefits as they will both be classed as making yourself intentinally unemployed
Thanks IDS et al.

If there were successful claims for losses of earnings then entitlement to benefits will not be material. In the scenario of DWP benefits there is gulf of a difference between intentional unemployment and being made unemployed by the unreasonable employer (compared with the hypothetical reasonable employer in the same standard, ie the objective standard) or being constructively dismissed wherein the female employee has no choice but to leave owing to the employer breaching any faith you were to have in him (assuming it's a him). In any event, the DWP regional supervisor would rapidly overturn any Wednesbury unreasonable decisions by DWP clerks as they know that it will give rise to a matter for the Parliament Ombudsman or tribunals for benefit claimants.