Attending disciplinary meeting

[Deleted member 36193]

For obvious reasons, I can't give any specifics on the case, but I've been asked to attend a disciplinary meeting as someone's witness.
As it's gone from being with the immediate superior on one day to two days later with the regional manager, I can only see it resulting in dismissal. If so, a claim for unfair dismissal is likely to result.
Does anyone have any experience of this? Is there anything I should or should not say or do?
Does the employee HAVE to sign any documentation and if so should it be marked "without prejudice"?
Is it easy/cheap to take a national company to a tribunal (the person involved has no savings and would become unemployed), and is this something you can do yourself or do you need legal representation?
I've read some of the stuff on the ACAS website and a few other places, but any experiences shared would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.

 

[branny]

Are you attending as a witness (ie giving YOUR version of events) or as a companion / representative (ie addressing the meeting on the behalf of your colleague)? The 2 are very different and confer different rights.

In terms of an ET, they are very easy to lodge - an ET application can be obtained either from the ET website or ACAS website. They do not cost an employee unless they choose to go for a paid for legal representative. An employer can lodge a claim for costs but it extremely rare that an ET awards this as a) they do not want to discourage employees and b) most claims have some merit - only claims that are vexatious tend to result in costs.

Thanks
B

 

[quarry2006]

Your union will decide if an ET is worth the money and the effort. Before that, though - indeed, long before that - there will be stages to be followed as part of the disciplinary process (and management must ensure they follow them to the letter - more often that not, action is halted because the TU rep (who invariably knows the process far better than management, simply because the rep will take the time to read every single page of it) has exposed a failure to follow procedure. The new ACAS rulings make it a simpler procedure for the issue to be escalated to an ET (but as I say, this will be decided by your TU Branch).

 

[Phil57]

Your union will decide if an ET is worth the money and the effort. Before that, though - indeed, long before that - there will be stages to be followed as part of the disciplinary process (and management must ensure they follow them to the letter - more often that not, action is halted because the TU rep (who invariably knows the process far better than management, simply because the rep will take the time to read every single page of it) has exposed a failure to follow procedure. The new ACAS rulings make it a simpler procedure for the issue to be escalated to an ET (but as I say, this will be decided by your TU Branch).

Major flaw in you post, the assumption that the person involved is in a trade union.
A more reasonable assumption would be that the person is not in a trade union.

 

[Deleted member 36193]

I'm attending as a witness. The employee is allowed to have someone there with him, and that's me.

There is no union involved.

This is the first time the employee has been up for any disciplinary action, but he fears he is going to be accused of something which would, if proven, result in instant dismissal. But there is definitely no proof, nor even any evidence.

From what I've been told, somebody majorly screwed up, and the employee is the one who will have to take the fall instead of someone higher up.

I don't know if this matters, but the employee has never been given a copy of his contract, and he has been there over a year full time (though his agreed hours are for 16), and was part time before that.

I just don't want to do anything which could jeopardise any future proceedings.

Thanks for the replies so far-keep them coming!

 

[quarry2006]

There is no union involved? Why?

 

[PoochJD]

Hi Lostinspace,

If you are a witness, I'd do the following:

1) Agree with your friend, what you are happy for to be said; in what way you intend to say it (specifics are important), and what you are willing to answer, and what you aren't.

2) Whatever you agree to say, keep the answers straight to the point, and don't include anything unnecessary. Also, make sure your answers are neutral in regards to your friend, so that you don't accidentally give a negative answer.

For example:

Between you and your friend, you might agree that you will only discuss actual conduct regarding whatever it is he is being "questioned" over, but nothing else. Hence, if the people holding the meeting ask you to give an opinion on your friend's work conduct, you may decide it best to not respond to that question at all, and state to them, that it would be inappropriate for you to offer up anything that may be used against him.

Although Disciplinary's can be informal, some companies will treat it very formally, and people you thought were quite nice, can suddenly turn into real bumholes! Never assume that someone who's pleasant to you in their role, will treat you and your mate in the same, positive way during a disciplinary. In such meetings, all bets are off, and you should treat it as a semi-formal type of interrogation. Anything you do say, could come back to haunt you at a later date!

This is just my opinion, based on going through a Disciplinary Meeting as a witness, a while back, and nothing more.


Pooch

 

[Mep]

There is no union involved? Why?

could it be they are not members of a union by any chance?

OP, in my experience of this (I was called as one in a previous job) you are being called as a witness to the disciplinary meeting and not the events leading up to it......you shouldn't need to say anything.

 

[Liquid101]

OP, in my experience of this (I was called as one in a previous job) you are being called as a witness to the disciplinary meeting and not the events leading up to it......you shouldn't need to say anything.

I agree, unless you are some way involved in the accusations you needn't say anything. If your friend has asked you to be there as support, then you'll probably not be able to say aything in their defense anyway, you're just there to witness the proceedings to ensure they are fair.

I have taken part in several disciplinary hearings - usually as the investigating officer. They can be fairly formal, starting with the purpose of the meeting and the possible outcomes. They will probably ask the investigating officer to list the allegations, and supply the relevant supporting evidence. The accused party will then have a chance to respond or defend themselves.

Anybody that is listed as a witness to either support or defend the allegations should be interviewed separately. Then a copy of the statements from all parties should be supplied to the defendant to aid any potential appeals.

Unless this is a gross misconduct offense, then they should follow the verbal, written and final written warning procedure. Not following this kind of pattern could leave themselves wide open.

I would obtain a copy of their disciplinary policy and read it carefully to ensure you completely understand it. If they don't have one, ask for a copy of the guidelines they will be following.

if you are at all worried, then speak to the HR manager, or the person responsible for these matters to help you clear up your concerns.

 

[Phil57]

There is no union involved? Why?

I'll get back to you later with a possible answer, meanwhile perhaps you could come up with a few suggestions!!...

 

[quarry2006]

No, Phil. The question was not rhetorical.

I can't imagine anyone who works in a place where there is a union in existence (and some employees still do not enjoy the privilege of a union at some workplaces) not being a member. TU reps will invariably have more experience in disciplinary procedures and will have had the appropriate training in attending hearings and getting the best outcome for staff. Lostinspace, you haven't answered as to why the union have not been involved (smart alec responses from other posters notwithstanding) but - and it's behaviour that I don't approve of - many staff don't join a TU until they need one so I'm surprised your colleague still hasn't joined. You've got your work cut out but I wish you the best of luck and I'd be interested in the outcome.

Liquid101, HR will always side with management on these issues; I don't think Lostinspace will get the help he needs in approaching them to be honest.

 

[wormvortex]

No, Phil. The question was not rhetorical.

I can't imagine anyone who works in a place where there is a union in existence (and some employees still do not enjoy the privilege of a union at some workplaces) not being a member.

I was never a member of the union for my previous job and never once did a situation arise where I'd wished I was. Even when I had a disciplinary meeting, speaking of such I had someone sit in with me and they weren't allowed to say anything. They were just there to make sure it was fair.

 

[quarry2006]

Astonishing. And you have a shakey grasp of procedures, chief. Ergo, TU reps can speak for the member if the member so desires but they may not answer questions aimed directly at the member. Reps can raise objections, ask questions, call adjournments and are, overall, essential in meetings with management as they have considerable experience and learning in these areas. Plus they are backed by their TU and therefore have an immense body of knowledge to fall back on for advice and support. The very best TU reps are invaluable to management (many of whom will also be members of the union in said workplace) as they work with and not against them to achieve the best outcome.

 

[Ed Selley]

No, Phil. The question was not rhetorical.

I can't imagine anyone who works in a place where there is a union in existence (and some employees still do not enjoy the privilege of a union at some workplaces) not being a member.

I have never worked in a place where a union is in existence. I do not consider myself to be missing out either.

TU reps will invariably have more experience in disciplinary procedures and will have had the appropriate training in attending hearings and getting the best outcome for staff.

My partner's experience of Union reps is that if given some time alone to think they might find their own arseholes with a map. Might mind you.

Lostinspace, you haven't answered as to why the union have not been involved (smart alec responses from other posters notwithstanding) but - and it's behaviour that I don't approve of - many staff don't join a TU until they need one so I'm surprised your colleague still hasn't joined. You've got your work cut out but I wish you the best of luck and I'd be interested in the outcome.

I imagine that if this is at the level I suspect it is, this is because it is an industry where unions are essentially not present.

Liquid101, HR will always side with management on these issues; I don't think Lostinspace will get the help he needs in approaching them to be honest.

Again the OP's position doesn't seem as simple as "them" and "us".

 

[Mep]

No, Phil. The question was not rhetorical.

I can't imagine anyone who works in a place where there is a union in existence (and some employees still do not enjoy the privilege of a union at some workplaces) not being a member. TU reps will invariably have more experience in disciplinary procedures and will have had the appropriate training in attending hearings and getting the best outcome for staff. Lostinspace, you haven't answered as to why the union have not been involved (smart alec responses from other posters notwithstanding) but - and it's behaviour that I don't approve of - many staff don't join a TU until they need one so I'm surprised your colleague still hasn't joined. You've got your work cut out but I wish you the best of luck and I'd be interested in the outcome.

Liquid101, HR will always side with management on these issues; I don't think Lostinspace will get the help he needs in approaching them to be honest.

Apologies for my smart alec remark but I have never worked anywhere where there has been a union and I've never felt the need for one.

 

[quarry2006]

Accepted, Mep

I hope you never do need one, either, chief.

Ed Selley, I find some of your comments regrettable.

 

[Liquid101]

Liquid101, HR will always side with management on these issues; I don't think Lostinspace will get the help he needs in approaching them to be honest.

I'd say that was a slightly cynical attitude to have. Perhaps I'm lucky, but I genuinely think that our HR section is even handed, and is very careful to ensure that any procedure is fair, and all parties are furnished with all the relevant information.

Astonishing. And you have a shakey grasp of procedures, chief. Ergo, TU reps can speak for the member if the member so desires but they may not answer questions aimed directly at the member. Reps can raise objections, ask questions, call adjournments and are, overall, essential in meetings with management as they have considerable experience and learning in these areas. Plus they are backed by their TU and therefore have an immense body of knowledge to fall back on for advice and support. The very best TU reps are invaluable to management (many of whom will also be members of the union in said workplace) as they work with and not against them to achieve the best outcome.

I think it really depends on the union rep. Some are completely ineffective, and do nothing but sit there and listen without offering any support or advice. You also need them to recognise any issues and pull in support from the union directly - doesn't always happen.

I'm not a member of a union, which is quite unusual in my workplace. Having seen the way they operate, and the way they can do little to help people (in disciplinary situations at least) I'd rather take my chances.

As you say, unions generally don't look to kindly on people joining a week before they need help - so in the OP's case, there is probably little point approaching them now. EDIT: just noticed you didn't really say that - sorry.

I would be very interested to hear what the allegations are. If there really is no evidence, I can't see it going anywhere.

 

[Ed Selley]

Ed Selley, I find some of your comments regrettable.

I am sure you do. It doesn't change the fact that the old fish/bicycle interface is an accurate description for many of us of unions in 2009.

 

[quarry2006]

Liquid101, my opinions on HR are based only on my experience of them, both as a member of staff seeking advice and as a TU rep. And that has been in several workplaces. That said, one should never generalise and I am pleased that your HR behave with a lack of bias and put staff first.

I do agree that some reps are indeed useless. Some are in it purely for the prestige, others abuse their position, some try and create an "us and them" environment and there are some reps who see the role as a way to get time off work. I have experienced all these behaviours to the extent where I do wonder whether the good reps are actually in the minority.

Also, from my own experience, staff who join the union when they need them get the same level of representation as they would if they'd been members for some time. But, I accept this may not be the rule with every TU or in every workplace.

Lostinspace, you're going to need to give us more to go on if you want more informed advice I'm afraid.

 

[jay mc]

We are currently going through problems with the mrs employer, i cant post details at the moment but i promise you wont beleave the route cause of it all when i do spill the lot.

We have used a union rep and have found both there hr people to be one sided and the union rep on the day to be a waste of time. Shes more going on the grounds of what our case is if we take it further. We will do this as they have made some huge errors in there papper work and fact finding befor sacking. We have also lost our house over it.

One point that anoyed me is after insisting she had some one more sensibal as here witness the rep did not sit and take notes at all on the day. But then her mate who ive nick named rent a gob would probaly made things worst.

Our biggest problem is all the managers involved have sided together to cover up a major bullying and securtiy issue.

 

[quarry2006]

I am sure you do. It doesn't change the fact that the old fish/bicycle interface is an accurate description for many of us of unions in 2009.

I don't think you know what you're talking about. What you do have to say (redundant as it is to Lostinspace) comes from your partner's own bias, presumably based on personal experience but hardly what could be called an informed opinion on your part. Likewise, your claim to speak for "many of us" is rather suspect.

Can I ask, then, that you move on from whatever agenda it is you have here and be a bit more constructive with your remarks?

 

[quarry2006]

We are currently going through problems with the mrs employer, i cant post details at the moment but i promise you wont beleave the route cause of it all when i do spill the lot.

We have used a union rep and have found both there hr people to be one sided and the union rep on the day to be a waste of time. Shes more going on the grounds of what our case is if we take it further. We will do this as they have made some huge errors in there papper work and fact finding befor sacking. We have also lost our house over it.

One point that anoyed me is after insisting she had some one more sensibal as here witness the rep did not sit and take notes at all on the day. But then her mate who ive nick named rent a gob would probaly made things worst.

Our biggest problem is all the managers involved have sided together to cover up a major bullying and securtiy issue.

The rep isn't required to take notes. That's what the minute taker is for.

And your partner can, at any point in the meeting, ask for an adjournment if she feels the rep is not doing their job. Sorry to hear that she didn't do that.

I hope she gets the outcome she wants.

 

[Ed Selley]

I don't think you know what you're talking about. What you do have to say (redundant as it is to Lostinspace) comes from your partner's own bias, presumably based on personal experience but hardly what could be called an informed opinion on your part.

He has stated unions are not involved. As such- as a declared union rep, whatever you have to say is not relevant to his issue. My partner's experience with the waste of breathable air that is the GMB seems oft repeated these days as well.

Likewise, your claim to speak for "many of us" is rather suspect.

Union membership is at an all time low. What does that tell you?

Can I ask, then, that you move on from whatever agenda it is you have here and be a bit more constructive with your remarks?

As opposed to say- trying to involve an organisation that at best hasn't been involved up 'till now and probably isn't even present?

 

[Liquid101]

I do agree that some reps are indeed useless. Some are in it purely for the prestige, others abuse their position, some try and create an "us and them" environment and there are some reps who see the role as a way to get time off work. I have experienced all these behaviours to the extent where I do wonder whether the good reps are actually in the minority.

This is interesting. Having had a think about my own workplace, several of the union reps who have been effective and productive have been promoted to the point where they have no longer had time to partake in union activities. Is this the management's way of controlling them, or just a reflection of their general aptitude. I think the latter, but more cynical might think the former.

For information, we have 3 unions in our workplace with (I think) 3 reps each.

 

[Steven]

quarry2006, being a TU member is not the be all and end all. And the OP and the person he is 'hypothetically' speaking of probably does not give the proverbial right now

lostinspace - the person in question has to get hold of the disciplinary procedure. I cannot believe he is going into this so exposed. He should ordinarily have the right to have the details of the complaint made against him outlined so that he can prepare his defence, with copies/details of the evidence to be used against him. And the right to necessarily call upon his own witnesses or obtain written statements from those who cannot attend as part of his defence

That would make me believe this is merely a prelimiary hearing, something to be adjourned for another day... I would be amazed if this business would do something so reckless as to leave themselves open to unfair dismissal

A company would ordinarily have a witness there to ensure procedure is being followed... I would presume that is your own role, but the answer is in the company disciplinary procedure