# Unfair dismissal claim, affect future legal employment



## Thrifty1 (21 Oct 2008)

Hi, i am considering taking a claim for unfair dismissal against last employer.

I am currently studying for FE1's and will be seeking an apprenticeship with a solicitors soon.

I am unsure if a potential employer (solicitor) could 
a) find out i took a claim against a previous employer and 
b) if so, if it would be looked upon unfavourably.

I have been dealing with Citizens Advice and have been told i have a good chance at being successful and with my knowledge of employment law i too think i have grounds so the claim is not frivolous but obviously there is no guarantee of success.

While on one hand i want to pursue this i dont want to jeopardise my future career.

Any advice would be appreciated.


----------



## ajapale (21 Oct 2008)

Moved from Askaboutlaw to Work, Careers

Are you a member of a trade union or professional body?


----------



## Calebs Dad (21 Oct 2008)

Should have no bearing on future prospects, unless that is you are taking a claim against a solicitor, its a small world. Also bear in mind the type of reference you will get


----------



## Mizen Head (21 Oct 2008)

Of course it will affect your your future employment unfavourably. Would you employ someone who had taken an unfair dismissal case against a previous employer?


----------



## Diziet (21 Oct 2008)

Mizen Head said:


> Of course it will affect your your future employment unfavourably. Would you employ someone who had taken an unfair dismissal case against a previous employer?



I must say I would have a lot of respect for someone who stands up for themselves so the answer would be yes.

To the OP, the success depends on the specifics of your case. How important is it to you, and what would be the likely benefit? These things take a psychological toll and eat up time. A mediated route may be better for all concerned.


----------



## Thrifty1 (22 Oct 2008)

Thanks for the replies. I am not a member of any TU or professional body.

Diziet, i have been considering this for 2 months now my main reason for procrastinating being the emotional toll it may take, however a recent move by the company not only strengthened my case but my desire to seek legal recourse.
I can go to a mediator and if successful can seek compensation (E3,000), re engagement or re instatement.
Its not about the money its really a meagre amount ,its more about getting justice (hopefully).

My main concern was if a potential employer especially being a solicitor would have any means to check i have taken this action.
Or if it was normal for a solicitor to carry out such a check when considering taking on an apprentice.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Oct 2008)

Thrifty1 said:


> My main concern was if a potential employer especially being a solicitor would have any means to check i have taken this action.
> Or if it was normal for a solicitor to carry out such a check when considering taking on an apprentice.



I don't think that EAT hearings are held in camera. Some get reported in the newspapers. 

I would take the view that if there is even a small risk that it will damage your career, the case will not be worth taking no matter how much you stand to gain. And you hardly want a "skeleton in the closet" either that might be used in an attempt to embarrass you at some unexpected point in the future?


----------



## Lomond (22 Oct 2008)

Hi there, 

Regarding visibility of EAT cases, they are sent out to most legal firms, institutes, HR, etc  - I receive the case law twice a month.

I wouldn't  let that though stop you from pursuing a non frivolous claim - its up to you to weigh all the factors.


----------



## foxylady (22 Oct 2008)

ubiquitous said:


> I don't think that EAT hearings are held in camera. Some get reported in the newspapers.
> 
> I would take the view that if there is even a small risk that it will damage your career, the case will not be worth taking no matter how much you stand to gain. And you hardly want a "skeleton in the closet" either that might be used in an attempt to embarrass you at some unexpected point in the future?


 

EAT hearings arent held in camera but can be if a valid request is made to the tribunal. Go to [broken link removed] for more information.


----------



## Diziet (22 Oct 2008)

For 3K, I personally wouldn't put yourself through the mill of an EAT.

Re-instatement rarely happens and justice is a very fluid concept. 

Don't underestimate the psychological toll.


----------



## nuac (26 Oct 2008)

You say your proposed unfair dismissal claim is not for the money but to secure justice.

I know of many cases where plaintiffs start off by saying that it is not the money but the principle. Often as the situation developes it turns out that it *is* the money..

You can sue in the courts but the onus of proof is on you, and of course it is public. Apart from the courts own jurisdiction limits there would be no other limit on the award.

You can go the EAT route, with the option of a meeting with the RIghts COmmissioner which is private.

An EAT hearing is public. In some areas it can take longer to get a case before the EAT than to get a case into the Circuit COurt. They also have a practice of part hearing a case then adjouning for a few months. Because the three members of an EAT tribunal all have other occupations it is often some time before the adjourned hearing.    Most courts will try to finish the case once started rather than hearing it piecemeal.

The onus of proof the that dismissal was fair is on the employer in EAT cases, but there is a cap on awards of twice your total annual "Emoluments" i.e pay and all the trimmings.

So if you do cmmence an action it is likely to be on for some time unless it is decided on a Rights Commissioner recommendation.

If you win, your former employer is unlikely to give you a glowing reference or more importantly to be very helpful to you if a prospective employer makes a phone enquiry. Many employers do not take references at face value but make check up phone calls.

If you lose your credibility is affected.

It is better to have a positive reference from every past employer. Prospective employers would be put off by the fact that you had taken a claim against a previous employer, unless that employer had a very bad reputation in that area.

Therefore unless there is a lot of cash involved or some suggestion or query about your performance there as an employee I would suggest you forget about it, and instead seek a positive reference from that employer.


----------



## Thrifty1 (27 Oct 2008)

Thanks all for your replies. I was considering either the EAT or the Rights Commissioner.

nuac, i was thinking the RC as it is more informal and i didnt think these cases were reported so if i lost it wouldnt be public knowledge.

As regards a reference this company have a poor reputation and i was warned about working for them but it was a role i really wanted to get into.
I ended up leaving on bad terms with them as 2 days after i left they advertised a role in the same dept as me which i contacted them about (on advice from Citizens advice).
I had a very unpleasent meeting with 2 managers who told me i didnt have the required 3yrs experience for the role but i could apply for it and they would review it with the other 250 CVs they got it.
I found out a few weeks later the job was given to a guy with no experience at all, he worked for another of their business's and started there well over a year after i began working for them.

I am trying to find cases on unfair dismissal which dealt with offers of alternative work, do you know where i could access some?

I think i have burned my bridges with them anyway.

There would be no question of poor performance, before i went on maternity leave i had always been praised for my work .

As regards money well with the RC its only E3,000 but if the cap in EAT is twice your annual salary(incl bonus) then its up to E100k.

As an aside, another part time employee (also not long back off maternity leave) was made redundant and they will be advertising her role shortly.


----------



## gillarosa (28 Oct 2008)

If you have a case of unfair dismissal, I can't imagine that you would want to work for a Solicitor in the future who may believe you are not employable as you had used legal redress to sort out a problem with a past Employer? It kind of flies in the face of whom the law applies to and for?

In regard to your case though what is your actual complaint? Is it that you (and another?) were discriminated against during Maternity leave, you left (or were made redundant?) then applied for another role within the department you had worked in, which was advertised after your departure. Members of Management met you (or interviewed you?) were unpleasant and told you you weren't qualified due to lack of experience but later appointed a similarly 'unqualified by experience' person. Is your belief the fact you had a child or worked part time was the factor in your mistreatment by your Employer?


----------



## Thrifty1 (28 Oct 2008)

gillarosa said:


> If you have a case of unfair dismissal, I can't imagine that you would want to work for a Solicitor in the future who may believe you are not employable as you had used legal redress to sort out a problem with a past Employer? It kind of flies in the face of whom the law applies to and for?


 
I dont understand your point. Do you mean that if i wish to pursue a career in law i cant sue anybody now?

As regards my case the main crux of it would be based on the fact that there was alternative work available which i requested a trial at and i was unreasonable refused.
They got rid of the other girl as she was being paid too much and have decided to advertise her job at half her salary. Obviously that doesnt affect me but it does show the type of company they are.


----------



## gillarosa (28 Oct 2008)

Thrifty1 said:


> I dont understand your point. Do you mean that if i wish to pursue a career in law i cant sue anybody now?


 
No, I mean you would hardly want to work for a legal firm who may discriminate against you for taking legal action in the past against an Employer who was in contravention of labour law.


----------



## Thrifty1 (28 Oct 2008)

gillarosa said:


> No, I mean you would hardly want to work for a legal firm who may discriminate against you for taking legal action in the past against an Employer who was in contravention of labour law.


 

I understand you now. I would imagine if the case was frivilous then they might but i feel i have genuine grounds.


----------



## Caveat (28 Oct 2008)

From previous experience, and from the experiences of another, I wouldn't have too much faith in the rights commissioner BTW.


----------



## bond-007 (28 Oct 2008)

I have been told many times that the rights commissioners are about as useful as a chocolate fire-guard. 

I would simply not tell any employer about any legal action. I would also say that a reference is unavailable form company x.


----------



## Thrifty1 (28 Oct 2008)

Is the rights commissioner too informal ? I found some cases online and a lot seemed to be appeals from RC.
After looking into it i think if im going to go ahead with it then the EAT might be the best route.
There seems to be very little info on the "offer of alternative work" aspect, anything i find is based on the employee refusing the offer not on the employer refusing to offer an alternative vacant position.
Does anyone know would it be classed as unreasonable to refuse to offer the 4 week trial when making a person redundant when there is a similar position available.
They only reason given for the refusal was the lack of experience, i had 18 mths they were looking for 3 yrs, they then subsequently employed someone with no experience.

Would saying a reference is not available be akin to saying i know they will give a bad reference.
Unfortunately the previous 2 companies i worked for have either closed or ben taken over so the references from those are a problem too.


----------

