Click Legal Advice ::

 Free Legal Advice

08/09/2011 20:20:56 storm Posts: 1	A customer were i work made a complaint against four members off staff i was suspended from work along with two other colleagues while an investigation for mis- conduct was taking place there was a fourth member of staff involved that did not get suspended but was also under investigation. and no explanation why she was still working, i had no choice to resign along with another colleague as a breach of confidentiality on their side was breached, i have contacted the HR department and haven't heard anything back, I had a meeting with HR which was tape recorded which i have asked for a copy but to no avail , i have also asked the company how to return the uniform and key fob , and my manager said she would arrange this , It has also come to attention that the fourth member off staff that was under investigation has been working with the customer who made the complaint because of staff shortages and the company has let this happen. I had a meeting with someone from head office and voiced my concerns that i had been unfairly treated and management had failed in there duty of care towards myself as an employee , there was no risk assessment in place for this customer or a designated parking spot for them so we should not have been doing the task any way , where do i stand?
	• permalink • reply with quote
22/09/2011 10:58:35 www.clicklegalservices.co.uk Administrator Posts: 374	I think the first thing that you should be aware of is the fact that you have to lodge any claim to the employment tribunal within 3 months of the "effective date of termination" of your employment if you feel that you had no choice but to resign because of the employer's breach of contract (and were therefore unfairly dismissed). In terms of "conduct" an employer does not have to be certain of the "guilt" of the employee - but have a reasonable belief and reasonable grounds to have that belief. Also, it can suspend more than one person for example if it would be difficult to single out the individual "perpetrator". The leading case still is a case called BHS Stores v Burchell. However, to suspend 3 and allow the 4th - who could in theory have been the actual "guilty" party - seems bizarre and arguably smacks of pre judging the issue. I am unsure as to what the "task" was that is referred to, nor how this relates to the suspension/resignation.
	• permalink • reply with quote

---