# Advice for disciplinary meeting



## rogeroleary (24 Mar 2015)

I work for a large multinational, I was requested to attend a meeting late last year.  I was advised that the was no suggestion I had done anything wrong but I could not talk to anyone about this. It transpired that there was a suggestion of wrong doing (nothing I would have benefited from), and subsequently I found out that quite a lot of other people attended similar meetings.

Now, a long time later, I have been asked to a disciplinary meeting - potentially with serious implications. The invitation has some allegations outlined and quotes from my own meeting. The thing is that although I was not allowed to bring anyone with me to the original meeting, immediately afterwards I wrote my own notes - quite comprehensive (about 4 pages), just in case.

The invite that was sent to me has some clear discrepanices with my own notes. I have asked for a copy of the full report and statements from anyone associated with my case. I am told these are not available to me and I feel that this undermines my defense. 

*My question is, at this stage, should I tell the hearing about my notes and the discrepancies between my notes and the charges.?*

Any advice would be much appreciated,

Roy


----------



## Steven Barrett (24 Mar 2015)

If there are minutes to the meeting, you are entitled to a copy. If there are discrepancies, this should be highlighted to your employer. You are fully entitled to challenge them on incorrect information.

Do not attend any meeting without having all of these issues resolved. 

Do not go to the meeting alone. If you are in a union, get in contact with them immediately. If you are not (which I presume you're not as you are looking for advice here), bring a friend or colleague with you to the meeting. 

When it comes to disciplinary issues, employers usually bully their employees. They have the numbers and resources. Employees tend not to know what their rights are under employment law and what can and can't be done.

Best of luck. 


Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie


----------



## Fisherman (24 Mar 2015)

hrdoctor.ie  (no connection)  .  They can give independent advice at reasonable rate. They can also provide support at meetings if required.


----------



## Leper (25 Mar 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> I work for a large multinational, I was requested to attend a meeting late last year.  I was advised that the was no suggestion I had done anything wrong but I could not talk to anyone about this. It transpired that there was a suggestion of wrong doing (nothing I would have benefited from), and subsequently I found out that quite a lot of other people attended similar meetings.
> 
> Now, a long time later, I have been asked to a disciplinary meeting - potentially with serious implications. The invitation has some allegations outlined and quotes from my own meeting. The thing is that although I was not allowed to bring anyone with me to the original meeting, immediately afterwards I wrote my own notes - quite comprehensive (about 4 pages), just in case.
> 
> ...



I presume you are working for an American company.  Generally, these companies have more rules than any working Irish company. Frankly, I fail to understand how most of them actually operate with everything they strew in the way.

You seem to be a victim of this.  They railroad you into not bringing any kind of witness to any meeting.  I bet at these meetings the management have plenty of witnesses and probably everything is recorded without your knowledge which they will use against you.

You have no union representation and you are being forced to battle alone, which is not as daunting as you might think.  Therefore, play by their rules and always remember surprise is of the essence.  Keep taking notes, don't challenge anything until you have to, record everything even outside of meetings.  And now for your secret weapon . . . purchase a recording device.  They are no bigger than a cigarette box and slimmer and you will be able to furtively record everything live . Ensure you know how to use it and keep it on you at all times to record as much as you can.  Believe me the company will lean on you and as soon as they get an advantage they will pounce.

No time for squeaky bum; buy the device and learn how to use it . . . it will become your best friend, believe me.

These recording devices are not expensive.


----------



## Grizzly (25 Mar 2015)

Personally. I would tell them that I wished to record the meeting because your last meeting ended up with discrepancies between what they are now saying and the notes that you took immediately after the interview.


----------



## Chantilly (25 Mar 2015)

Both Parties have to inform the other prior if any recording of the session is done, and very much advised if you cannot bring a legal advise with you. Agreed with previous comment, if notes were taken they are to produce a copy to you before you can accept the invite. Send them a written note that you have requested a copy of their notes on a specific date and are surprised that you were told they were not available to you,  name also who provided the response and when ( guessing it was your manager). Insist you need the notes to prepare for your interview and understand the reason of the request for an interview.


----------



## Leo (25 Mar 2015)

More importantly on any recordings, both parties have to agree to it in advance. I can't imagine many would allow it.

Get a full copy of the companies disciplinary procedures. You are entitled to a copy of your meeting minutes and details of any allegation, but you are not entitled to minutes of meetings the company held with others.

Not allowing you to bring anyone to the original meeting was fine, but now it has moved to a disciplinary phase, you are entitled to bring along a colleague to act as a witness (they have no active part in the meeting). The person generally has to be an employee of the company, the company are under no obligation to allow external legal representation in internal disciplinary procedures. 

So when asking for the procedures, as others have said, point out the discrepancies between your notes and what they had recorded.


----------



## Sue Ellen (25 Mar 2015)

Perhaps you might benefit from a chat with some at [url]www.workplacerelations.ie[/URL]


----------



## Leper (25 Mar 2015)

I'm looking at some posts here and many are naive, to say the least.  If we look at what the original poster is saying you will see that the employee is being treated unfairly and lies seem to be the order of the day in that company.  Somebody suggested you ask that proceedings be recorded (even by both parties) as if this was ever going to be a runner, come on!  Wake up, smell the coffee there is subterfuge afoot here.  Use the recording device like I said.  OK you might never be able to produce it in court, but you will have a verbatim account of what is being said against you. If nothing else it will help with your notes.

You can ask for full regulations, accusations, minutes of meetings and the Gospel according to St-Luke (as George Hook might say; I bet he will . . .) you can't beat a bit of devilment. cop on and intelligence.  These companies thrive on kinds of bullying, subterfuge and lies.  They know that you are probably not a member of a trades union and think they can deal with you any way they like.  If you are serious about representing yourself to the best of your ability, spend the few bob on the recording advice (€30.00 or so), it will pay good dividends.


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

SBarrett said:


> If there are minutes to the meeting, you are entitled to a copy. If there are discrepancies, this should be highlighted to your employer. You are fully entitled to challenge them on incorrect information.
> 
> Do not attend any meeting without having all of these issues resolved.
> 
> ...



Thank you Steven, I appreciate the feedback. I know now that I am one of a large bunch of people invited to these meetings - all quite senior people in the organisation.

I have decided to go to the meeting, I had serious reservations. I have arranged for a good colleague to come along as scribe. 

I believe I have done nothing wrong (and others I have spoken to are exactly the same) and the whole thing boils down to something an investigator felt we should have done (.ie get HR approval) when there is no policy that states this and none of us have ever heard of this before (most people involved have 20-30 years service)

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Fisherman said:


> hrdoctor.ie  (no connection)  .  They can give independent advice at reasonable rate. They can also provide support at meetings if required.



Thanks Fisherman - hadn't heard of them, I might give them a call.

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Leper said:


> I presume you are working for an American company.  Generally, these companies have more rules than any working Irish company. Frankly, I fail to understand how most of them actually operate with everything they strew in the way.
> 
> You seem to be a victim of this.  They railroad you into not bringing any kind of witness to any meeting.  I bet at these meetings the management have plenty of witnesses and probably everything is recorded without your knowledge which they will use against you.
> 
> ...



Thank you Leper - I appreciate the detailed feedback, yes it's an American company and yes the level of bureaucracy it unbelievable to extent that sometimes the requirements are conflicting so it's a no win situation in the event of a process audit. Complicating factors are matrix management where managers in Dublin manage team in Europe / US and Asia while employees in Dublin work for managers in the US and China - sometimes local custom and practice is hard to understand for people from other geographies.

I hear what you are saying about the recording device - pity I hadn't thought of that for the original meeting but I do have a very good colleague to scirbe - she's like a rottweiler, she misses nothing.

Thank you,

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Grizzly said:


> Personally. I would tell them that I wished to record the meeting because your last meeting ended up with discrepancies between what they are now saying and the notes that you took immediately after the interview.



Thanks Grizzly - they definitely wont allow that but I have my scribe teed up and I have told them I do not accept their notes as representative of the original meeting.


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Chantilly said:


> Both Parties have to inform the other prior if any recording of the session is done, and very much advised if you cannot bring a legal advise with you. Agreed with previous comment, if notes were taken they are to produce a copy to you before you can accept the invite. Send them a written note that you have requested a copy of their notes on a specific date and are surprised that you were told they were not available to you,  name also who provided the response and when ( guessing it was your manager). Insist you need the notes to prepare for your interview and understand the reason of the request for an interview.



Thanks Chantilly, they wont give me the minutes. I have asked on 3 occasions at this stage (in writing), and I have screamed it out that I need these to prepare my defence. All that said I do not want to give them an opportunity to say I failed to adhere to their process so I will be attending with my scribe and reserving my position as the company has not facilitated my request.

thank you for the feedback & advice,

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Leo said:


> More importantly on any recordings, both parties have to agree to it in advance. I can't imagine many would allow it.
> 
> Get a full copy of the companies disciplinary procedures. You are entitled to a copy of your meeting minutes and details of any allegation, but you are not entitled to minutes of meetings the company held with others.
> 
> ...



Thanks you Leo for the feedback - I appreciate it.

- I agree, I would be 99.99% sure they wont allow a recording
- They have provided disciplinary procedures - very, very, very high level
- They won't give me minutes of my own meeting.
- *I believe I am entitled* to minutes of other peoples meetings where it is alleged allegations were made about me. I understand from the people in question that they made no such allegations.
- Scribe is agreed in advance at this stage
- I have highlighted the discrepancies and my dissatisfaction with same

Thank you,

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (25 Mar 2015)

Sue Ellen said:


> Perhaps you might benefit from a chat with some at www.workplacerelations.ie



Thanks Sue Ellen, never heard of them and I'll check that out in the morning,

Roy


----------



## thedaddyman (26 Mar 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> Thanks Chantilly, they wont give me the minutes. I have asked on 3 occasions at this stage (in writing), and I have screamed it out that I need these to prepare my defence. All that said I do not want to give them an opportunity to say I failed to adhere to their process so I will be attending with my scribe and reserving my position as the company has not facilitated my request.
> 
> thank you for the feedback & advice,
> 
> Roy


I'm wondering if you would have an entitlement under Freedom of information for the minutes.?


----------



## Leo (26 Mar 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> Thanks you Leo for the feedback - I appreciate it.
> - They won't give me minutes of my own meeting.
> - *I believe I am entitled* to minutes of other peoples meetings where it is alleged allegations were made about me. I understand from the people in question that they made no such allegations.



No problem, happy to help.

You're entitled to the allegation details, but not the minutes of meeting with others, even if those people made allegations against you.

The fact that they refuse to give you minutes of your own meeting weakens their case should it ever proceed further. Document all this, and get their refusal in writing. You could try the FOI approach as suggested above, a refusal there would also look bad for them.


----------



## rogeroleary (26 Mar 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> I'm wondering if you would have an entitlement under Freedom of information for the minutes.?



Brilliant thedaddyman - never crossed my mind, I'll check that out.

Thank you!

Roy


----------



## Steven Barrett (27 Mar 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> I'm wondering if you would have an entitlement under Freedom of information for the minutes.?



The Freedom of Information applies to the public service but good idea. 

Under the Data Protection Act, you are entitled to see a copy of the file they have on you. Look up the Data Protection Commissioner as there is a procedure you have to follow and you have to word your letter in a certain way. It doesn't happen quickly by the way. 

I am almost sure under Employment Law you are entitled to see copies of the minutes taken in a disciplinary meeting. You should look it up. 


Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie


----------



## Grizzly (27 Mar 2015)

If there is an original complaint against you then that's fine. If the company is now fishing/enticing/encouraging information from third parties to support the original complaint then that is not on. They will keep going until they get a negative comment from someone to present at their next meeting.
If this is the case then you will have the right to ask "did anyone say anything positive about me or are you just presenting the negatives here today". Then ask to see the positive comments in addition to the negative comments. Otherwise they are demonising you.


----------



## rogeroleary (27 Mar 2015)

SBarrett said:


> The Freedom of Information applies to the public service but good idea.
> 
> Under the Data Protection Act, you are entitled to see a copy of the file they have on you. Look up the Data Protection Commissioner as there is a procedure you have to follow and you have to word your letter in a certain way. It doesn't happen quickly by the way.
> 
> ...



Thanks SB - I'll check that out - much appreciated,

Roy


----------



## rogeroleary (9 May 2015)

I work for a very large multinational organisation, because of it's size and complexity matrix management is quite normal ie. managers manage teams in several countries & continents. In some cases managers also perform local administrative duties for employees whose functional manager is in a different geography.

*Some roles require employees to work unusual hours eg. supporting west coast of US or maybe Asian timezones*. Where people are required to do that the have been paid shift payment. The process has been quite simple, the employee completes an electronic form for shift payment and the local manager will approve and it goes to payroll for processing. *This has been the process for many years.*

Simple!..... until about 8 months ago when an investigator from the US arrived to interrogate some such employees and then the local managers about these payments. The result being that *a large number of managers being hauled into disciplinary hearings 6 months later and charged with not getting approval from HR / functional managers etc etc.* Several managers asked for a copy of this procedure / policy - it has never been forthcoming.

*HR have confirmed that there is no such policy, there is no education of managers on any such policy, there is no review of such processes etc etc.* Still, 6 weeks after the hearings a large number of managers are awaiting the outcomes of these hearings which carry a sanction "up to and including dismissal".  

This has been going on altogether for 8 months now and has been very distressing for employees and managers caught up in this debacle.

Any advice would be appreciated,

R.


----------



## Sue Ellen (10 May 2015)

Hi Roger,

Is this matter related to this previous thread?

Would recommend these people again http://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/


----------



## rogeroleary (10 May 2015)

Sue Ellen said:


> Hi Roger,
> 
> Is this matter related to this previous thread?
> 
> Would recommend these people again http://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/



Hi Sue Ellen, yes it is the same case - in hindsight I should have just posted an update to that thread so my apologies for that.

It seems do have dragged on for an inordinate period of time without any sign of a decision which make the lives of all those caught up in it a misery because it's impossible to plan ie. applying for new roles within the org., making major investments like moving house etc when this is hanging over people.

R.


----------



## Sue Ellen (10 May 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> Hi Sue Ellen, yes it is the same case - in hindsight I should have just posted an update to that thread so my apologies for that.
> R.



Hi Roger,

I've merged the two threads as it makes more sense.

Hope things work out for everyone as it seems to be a very stressful situation.


----------



## Deiseblue (11 May 2015)

Roger , perhaps  the forthcoming legislation , due to be passed before the summer recess on collective bargaining rights , may assist ?
As well as the option for a group of employees to seek clarification of their terms & conditions via the Labour Court this legislation provides for employees who are being victimised .
I have posted more info on this under the " economic issues " forum.


----------



## thedaddyman (11 May 2015)

It's not unusual in an American multi-national to have different policies in place around the world to suit local requirements. It's also not unusual for Head Office in the US not to understand some of those processes

Based on what has the OP posted, it would seem that there is an undocumented policy around approval but also potentially an undocumented policy/practice around the payment of out of hours allowances. I note the OP has also said some of these workers work in other juristictions. Some questions that should be answered


Did any of the employees getting this allowance transfer into the company from another org via a takeover or outsourcing? Potentially they may have transferred in T&C's not covered under normal comp policy
Has anyone checked the contracts of the employees in question to see if they have any rights to the payments.?
Have HR in the relevant country got a documented policy around this payment? Local HR policies in Ireland may be irrelevant
What are your own managers saying about the issue.? Are they being supportive?
As for the potential that collective bargaining rights might assist?. With all due respect to the person who posted about that  and speaking as someone who has worked for American IT companies over the year, let's just say that this would not provide much encouragement for the company to either retain an office in Ireland or to have someone in Ireland managing overseas staff when that could easily be done in another country.


----------



## Steven Barrett (11 May 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> This has been the process for many years.



That is what you have to argue. It is practice and has been done for years. And surely HR knew about this practice? I presume they are the ones doing payroll? Why didn't they stop it? 

If there are a number of you involved in this, why not group together and hire a good employment law solicitor? 

Employment law is so complex, it is impossible for employees to stand a chance against organisations with vast resources. Pay for expertise and get this knocked on its head. 

Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie


----------



## Deiseblue (11 May 2015)

The legislation to which I referred has been approved by cabinet & presumably as such will be enacted before the Dail summer recess as promised.

Most multi nationals appear quite pragmatic & indeed have little problems locating in countries where Unions have far more legislative rights than here - perhaps our tax system is a far bigger carrot ?

Despite any debate on the above , perhaps the most important point from the OP's point of view is that this forthcoming legislation may prove to be of assistance ?


----------



## Leo (11 May 2015)

Not sure how the collective bargaining legislation will help in this case, or with a disciplinary action. Certainly may be of value in negotiating terms in future, but in this case, you should push the company to provide documentary evidence of what the policy is around these payments. Even if they have a policy in place, they will then need to prove they communicated the policy in sufficient detail to staff in order to take disciplinary action on it. The EAP will not look favourably on an org that relies on undistributed policies to dish out disciplinary action.

Does the work contract deal with or mention this shift work or allowances in any way?


----------



## rogeroleary (8 Jun 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> It's not unusual in an American multi-national to have different policies in place around the world to suit local requirements. It's also not unusual for Head Office in the US not to understand some of those processes
> 
> Based on what has the OP posted, it would seem that there is an undocumented policy around approval but also potentially an undocumented policy/practice around the payment of out of hours allowances. I note the OP has also said some of these workers work in other juristictions. Some questions that should be answered
> 
> ...


 *agreed, it's a disasterous experiment. The web of legislation, local practices that a manager would need to be aware of across many countries is unmanagable.*


----------



## rogeroleary (8 Jun 2015)

SBarrett said:


> *Hi SB - please see responses in bold below*
> 
> That is what you have to argue. It is practice and has been done for years. And surely HR knew about this practice? *Local HR are running scared on this denying they were aware - even though they have to approve every job posting which would have stated "must be prepared to work 2nd shift"* I presume they are the ones doing payroll? *No they don't do payroll, that's done in another geography *Why didn't they stop it? *Because everyone thought that working 2pm to 10pm or 3 to 11pm was considered shift until someone from America came up with a different idea and now people are running scared. *
> 
> ...


----------



## rogeroleary (8 Jun 2015)

Grizzly said:


> If there is an original complaint against you then that's fine. If the company is now fishing/enticing/encouraging information from third parties to support the original complaint then that is not on. They will keep going until they get a negative comment from someone to present at their next meeting.
> If this is the case then you will have the right to ask "did anyone say anything positive about me or are you just presenting the negatives here today". Then ask to see the positive comments in addition to the negative comments. Otherwise they are demonising you.



*Hi Grizzly, it seems like it's just gone out of control and has become a monster. All of the managers in question (that I am aware of) have had a very much upward trajectory in their managerial careers, at least half would be top 10% in terms of ratings with peers. Average service is 20+ years, average Mgt experience would be 15+ years. Nobody is suggesting that anyone made 1 cent from what was very much custom & practice. All that remains to be decided is what the monster has to deliver some collateral damage *


----------



## Purple (9 Jun 2015)

It seems bizarre that someone can be disciplined for following a course of action which was established as “custom and practice” where there was no documented process or procedure to the contrary. For you or your colleagues to be disciplined your employer would have to show that you broke the law or breached a published policy or procedure on pay structures.


----------



## thedaddyman (9 Jun 2015)

Maybe it's time to throw a bomb at your HR people or whoever is leading this and file a grievance.

I'm not surprised with your local HR people either and they failing to take any responsibility. Par for the course from what I've seen of HR people in similar multinationals


----------



## rogeroleary (9 Jun 2015)

Purple said:


> It seems bizarre that someone can be disciplined for following a course of action which was established as “custom and practice” where there was no documented process or procedure to the contrary. For you or your colleagues to be disciplined your employer would have to show that you broke the law or breached a published policy or procedure on pay structures.



Thanks Purple - in 25 years of mgt I've never seen anything like it, even if someone was suspicious I would have thought it could have been cleared up in a couple of days - max 1 week, but 9 months and counting........... Actually, since it arose 1 of us has been going back to Legal each month to ask if the payments should be approved - every time the answer is yes!! So now, even though we stand accused the Legal guys have instructed on 8 or 9 occasions to keep approving the payments..... as Bertie would say - it's get bizarrer all the time


----------



## rogeroleary (9 Jun 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> Maybe it's time to throw a bomb at your HR people or whoever is leading this and file a grievance. *I'm reluctant to break ranks and go out on a limb unnecessarily daddyman.  I think there will be a bomb though if there is any sanction.*
> 
> I'm not surprised with your local HR people either and they failing to take any responsibility. Par for the course from what I've seen of HR people in similar multinationals


Sadly I agree. When it's just in country issue they have a swagger about them, but when there's anything from Corporate they run for cover and leave you dangling on your own 

Roger


----------



## Leper (12 Jun 2015)

Hi Roger, don't waste your time.  Freedom of Information has its limits.  What might exist inside or outside your file does not guarantee that you will see it.  No organisation worth its salt will leave you near anything questionable recorded on disciplinary matters. Keep your notes (and remember you don't have to show them to your employer either).

Organisations such as yours will treat your apparent naivety with contempt.


----------



## rogeroleary (18 Jun 2015)

Incredibly 3 months after the "disciplinary hearing" and 9 months after we were first invited to a meeting we have heard absolutely nothing back on our situations. There is talk that HR are now being audited / investigated but no feedback for the managers. I mentioned previously how stressful this has been, sadly it appears that one of the people involved has developed a serious illness that is life threatening, the implications for this person are enormous - potentially they could lose their job (and their life cover) within a relatively short period of time


----------



## rogeroleary (16 Nov 2015)

Latest update:

The managers who were under investigation were individually told to attend disciplinary hearings with "Independent" Managers to explain themselves. Half were dealt with by Independent Manager (A) and half with Independent Manager (B). A decided to dismiss charges against all the managers he investigated while B decided to impose sanctions (warnings) against all the people he investigated.

B decided the managers were guilty in spite of that a) *there was no formal process defining the requirement to *monitor actual hours worked b) there* was inadequate guidance for managers on the definition of shift* or the application of shift premium and c) the* only guidance provided was on the intranet site* and referred to shift payment "_in consideration for *working unusual hours* or patterns". 
_
So, after 13 very long months, the managers found "guilty" now have a right to appeal as the last stage of this process. However, the company refuses to release copies of the investigations report, witness statements, even minutes of our own original meetings with investigators.

It turns out that the person who will hear the appeals used to manage the person who carried out the "independent investigation" so there's a possible question mark over hour unbiased that can be - I'm wondering, in the event of a negative result internally what the best next steps should be to have my name cleared as I now have loads of evidence to provide employees I approved worked what could only be considered very very "unusual hours".?


----------



## Purple (17 Nov 2015)

Time to get a solicitor involved.


----------



## thedaddyman (17 Nov 2015)

Does your company disciplinary process state that you are allowed to see the reports.? If it does and they are refusing to do so, suggest you file a grievance using the grievance process

Just wondering as well, does your company have a corporate ethics and compliance division. (many US multinationals will have something like this). if so, is it worth filing a case with them on grounds of unethical behaviour by manager B and in relation to everything that led up to it.


----------



## Seagull (17 Nov 2015)

I think the question at this stage is becoming how large a hole can your employer manage to dig, and how much will it cost them to get out of it. The fact that the independent managers found in completely different directions across the board means that everyone who went through manager B can claim unfair process.


----------



## cremeegg (17 Nov 2015)

How can anyone with the slightest self-respect work for an organisation like this ?


----------



## Gerry Canning (17 Nov 2015)

We wonder why we need unions ? In a unionised workplace there is no way matters would get to this mess.
...........................
Roger.
Looks like employer has royally broken all sensible rules.

Pay a few euro and get advice from a known workplace solicitor before you do anything else.(as per Purple)
............................................................................

Whatever else = keep your cool & your powder dry.
With luck things will resolve.
.........................
Creemeg,
Answer = make a living.


----------



## rogeroleary (17 Nov 2015)

Purple said:


> Time to get a solicitor involved.



Thanks Purple, I have done so. Solicitor says case is compelling but I have to exhaust the internal process first, then possibly Rights Commissioner / LRC.

Having said that solicitor questions how hard I want to push it because of cost, potential reputational damage and possible backlash (and I understand all of that).

However, having a sanction could also have impact such as performance rating, salary increase, bonus, promotion ruler out and possibly even on job security so for me it's very important to win this.

Thanks for the advice,
R


----------



## rogeroleary (17 Nov 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> Does your company disciplinary process state that you are allowed to see the reports.? If it does and they are refusing to do so, suggest you file a grievance using the grievance process - *apparently not, these "investigator" reports are not shared with anyone which I would have thought was a denial of my constitutional rights (eg. not allowing me to see minutes of MY meeting with them)*
> 
> Just wondering as well, does your company have a corporate ethics and compliance division. (many US multinationals will have something like this). if so, is it worth filing a case with them on grounds of unethical behaviour by manager B and in relation to everything that led up to it.


* Good point, I'm off to check that out. I'm sure there is some blurb on some website *


----------



## rogeroleary (17 Nov 2015)

Seagull said:


> I think the question at this stage is becoming how large a hole can your employer manage to dig, and how much will it cost them to get out of it. The fact that the independent managers found in completely different directions across the board means that everyone who went through manager B can claim unfair process.



*At this stage I'm more worried about how much it's going to cost me to get my name cleared *


----------



## rogeroleary (17 Nov 2015)

cremeegg said:


> How can anyone with the slightest self-respect work for an organisation like this ?



*Believe me - I've asked myself the very same question many times over the last 14 months !!*


----------



## rogeroleary (17 Nov 2015)

Gerry Canning said:


> We wonder why we need unions ? In a unionised workplace there is no way matters would get to this mess.
> ...........................
> Roger.
> Looks like employer has royally broken all sensible rules.
> ...



Thanks Gerry - advice taken....and acted upon,

Roger


----------



## Leo (18 Nov 2015)

Roger, please stop inserting your comments into the quotes of others, it's becoming a little confusing and misleading. If you want to quote pieces of another post, use the +Quote button to set up a multi-quote. When finished, ensure the other poster's comments are surrounded by the (QUOTE) and (/QUOTE) tags, substitute square brackets for the round there...

To clarify one point above, you do not have any constitutional right to someone else's minutes of a meeting, regardless of the topic.


----------



## rogeroleary (18 Nov 2015)

ooops apologies Leo 

in relation to "you do not have any constitutional right to someone else's minutes of a meeting, regardless of the topic." Surely I would be entitled to a copy of the minutes of *MY *first meeting where I was ambushed? I was told "_These meetings are routine and please be assured that my request to speak with you *carries absolutely no implication that you have done anything wrong*", _I was not allowed to bring a witness / representative and then basically suggestions of collusion and essentially fraud were put to me. Am I not entitled to those? And also, if they were taking evidence from people which were then to be used as "evidence"against me - would I not be entitled to them?

*SI 146 states  as follows:*
6.  The procedures for dealing with such issues reflecting the varying circumstances of enterprises/organisations, must comply with the general principles of natural justice and fair procedures which include:

•  That employee grievances are fairly examined and processed;

•  That *details of any allegations or complaints are put to the employee concerned;* (I was refused copies of the full report and all interviews *including my own*)

•  That the employee concerned is given the opportunity to respond fully to any such allegations or complaints;

• That the employee concerned is *given the opportunity to avail of the right to be represented during the procedure*;

• That the employee concerned has the right to a fair and impartial determination of the issues concerned, taking into account any representations made by, or on behalf of, the employee and any other relevant or appropriate evidence, factors or circumstances.

7.  These principles may require that the allegations or complaints be set out in writing, that the source of the allegations or complaint be given or that the employee concerned be *allowed to confront or question witnesses*. (this was never afforded to me)

Roger


----------



## Gerry Canning (18 Nov 2015)

Roger , you state {important you win}
Maybe not so.
By now your employers must realise they have goofed up ,and now might be the time to let matters rest, not because YOU are wrong but if you push matters too much ,all future employers will consider you a trouble maker (fault of companies nature!).
Maybe just put your (hurt) in writing , ask them to acknowledge your note and request that matters be closed.
If their brain cells are connected = happy days , if not , methinks inhouse hassle /legal etc but you have a paper trail showing reasonableness.


----------



## Leo (18 Nov 2015)

I think there's no doubt that proper procedures have not been followed here. You are absolutely entitled to get any and all complaints presented to you in writing, but that does not mean you will get a full transcript of allegations made by others, or that you are automatically entitled to another person's notes of any meetings you were in. They could be sought in court though if it goes that far, but you could find that some or all of them never made it onto your file.

Take a look through the [broken link removed] to date to get a sense of how those cases worked out. 

You need to consider what end result are you hoping for, what your long term plans are and any potential impact on your career in that company or otherwise. If the case goes beyond the EAT and on to court, you're likely going to need to be able to prove what damages you have actually suffered. The EAT awards don't suggest there's many windfalls to be had pursuing cases like these.


----------



## rogeroleary (18 Nov 2015)

Leo said:


> You need to consider what end result are you hoping for, what your long term plans are and any potential impact on your career in that company or otherwise. If the case goes beyond the EAT and on to court, you're likely going to need to be able to prove what damages you have actually suffered. The EAT awards don't suggest there's many windfalls to be had pursuing cases like these.



Thanks Leo - the outcome I am looking for at this stage is simply someone to take a truely independent view of what has happened from Day 1 and I believe in doing so I will have my good name back. Bear in mind that people who report to me were interviewed about me in the hope that something would stick so in their eyes I have been damaged, the same applies to the other managers who were "investigated". So, I'm not interested in windfalls - I've been a manager for > 20 years and I don't want to have some corporate seagull staining my reputation.

R


----------



## dereko1969 (18 Nov 2015)

What's your view of a "win" here. Whilst your employers have definitely made an absolute haims of the whole thing it would seem to me that the likelihood of you receiving another warning is likely very low so will it really make that much of a difference to your career where you (presumably) have been happy enough for the past good number of years. Or do you think this may be the start of further disciplinary proceedings?


----------



## rogeroleary (18 Nov 2015)

Hi Derek, I don't think this may be the start of further disciplinary hearing but as I said before having a sanction could also have impact such as performance rating, salary increase, bonus, promotion ruler out and possibly even on job security so for me it's very important to win this. There's also the small matter of clearing my name within and outside the company. And I also question the fairness of *some managers being sanctioned for some wrongdoing (ie. signing off on a payment) while the employees who submitted the forms and received the payment have no sanction against them - is this not a double standard?*


----------



## Leper (18 Nov 2015)

Hi Roger (again) There is much going on on this thread and I am getting a little confused.  Without informing us of what company you work for, can you say how much you earn and the extent of your working responsibilities?  I am  asking this just so that I can get a handle on what type of manager you are. If you supervise people, how many?

. . . and just to throw a spanner in the works . . . if you do not come out of this favourably, what will be your losses?  And probably to offend you a bit more, if you win what are the consequences?  Is there middle ground for settlement?


----------



## Purple (19 Nov 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> *some managers being sanctioned for some wrongdoing (ie. signing off on a payment) while the employees who submitted the forms and received the payment have no sanction against them - is this not a double standard?*


I don't see why that would be the case. The manager signed off on something therefore the other employee could safely presume everything was kosher.


----------



## Gerry Canning (19 Nov 2015)

Roger,

Your name is rightly very important .
Can I suggest send a short and well worded letter to the MD.
Outline your overall concern, particularly on your professional good name and simply request that all previous and current (disciplinary) action be scrubbed .
Advise him that @ this stage you request full closure and an end to this. 

Suggest ,do not go into (he said,she said,I said ), that's the road to more of a row ! because from experience your detractors will try to re-defend.
Try to keep your cool, (from the thread you are far too hot)

I ain,t saying you are wrong but least said = easier mended.


----------



## Leo (19 Nov 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> Thanks Leo - the outcome I am looking for at this stage is simply someone to take a truely independent view of what has happened from Day 1 and I believe in doing so I will have my good name back. Bear in mind that people who report to me were interviewed about me in the hope that something would stick so in their eyes I have been damaged, the same applies to the other managers who were "investigated". So, I'm not interested in windfalls - I've been a manager for > 20 years and I don't want to have some corporate seagull staining my reputation.



In a private company, it will never be possible to get a truely independent view. You can see how hard it it in the various public bodies from the tribunals of the last number of years, there is no mechanism to get where you want to in a private company.

If a manager has a complaint made against them, it's standard practice to interview their reports. That is done even if senior management believe the complaint is without foundation just to gather facts. I'd be more worried if they didn't. If you're a good manager and look after your team, they'd most likely back you up.


----------



## Leo (19 Nov 2015)

Purple said:


> I don't see why that would be the case. The manager signed off on something therefore the other employee could safely presume everything was kosher.



Agreed, it would be unfair on the employee if they were sanctioned for something their manager approved. That is the purpose of multiple layers of approval/ oversight.


----------



## rogeroleary (19 Nov 2015)

Leper said:


> Hi Roger (again) There is much going on on this thread and I am getting a little confused.  Without informing us of what company you work for, can you say how much you earn and the extent of your working responsibilities?  I am  asking this just so that I can get a handle on what type of manager you are. If you supervise people, how many?
> 
> . . . and just to throw a spanner in the works . . . if you do not come out of this favourably, what will be your losses?  And probably to offend you a bit more, if you win what are the consequences?  Is there middle ground for settlement?





Leper said:


> Hi Roger (again) There is much going on on this thread and I am getting a little confused.  Without informing us of what company you work for, can you say how much you earn and the extent of your working responsibilities?  I am  asking this just so that I can get a handle on what type of manager you are. If you supervise people, how many?
> 
> . . . and just to throw a spanner in the works . . . if you do not come out of this favourably, what will be your losses?  And probably to offend you a bit more, if you win what are the consequences?  Is there middle ground for settlement?



Hi Lep, this is a very large organisation - one of the largest in Ireland...actually one of the largest in the world. Like the other managers involved I would earn > €100k p.a. and we all manage teams in 3 or 4 geos, in addition to this we would be cardholder (admin manager) for a bunch of people in Ireland (most of who never come into the office as they work remotely...which is the case in question). So, responsibility for c.40 worldwide in my case.

If I don't come out favourably my performance rating could be impacted, salary increases affect, annual bonus eliminated, promotion prospects canned for 3 years - to be brutally honest I can live with all of that....*it really does come down to my good name*. If I win I get back my good name and I'd like to think someone up the food chain will do a serious post mortem as to how this was allowed to go out of control. 

If I have to go to a 3rd party, in the event of any compensation being awarded I would be more than happy for that to be donated to a charity. So, there is LOADS of middle ground, the problem is that these Corporate Investigators have to show a deliverable and unfortunately in this case it's likely to be myself and some colleagues.

This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language happens


----------



## rogeroleary (19 Nov 2015)

Purple said:


> I don't see why that would be the case. The manager signed off on something therefore the other employee could safely presume everything was kosher.



I don't agree Purple, if an employee was not working shift but submitted a form indicating they had surely that's a disciplinary issue? This is not the case here but I'm making the point that if the investigation determines that the manager approved a payment that was not warranted, surely by extension the employee is implicated also by the fact that they are making a false claim.


----------



## rogeroleary (19 Nov 2015)

Gerry Canning said:


> Roger,
> 
> Your name is rightly very important .
> Can I suggest send a short and well worded letter to the MD.
> ...



I understand where you are coming from Gerry but sadly it wouldn't get anywhere in this mothership.

Thanks all the same.


----------



## rogeroleary (19 Nov 2015)

Leo said:


> In a private company, it will never be possible to get a truely independent view. You can see how hard it it in the various public bodies from the tribunals of the last number of years, there is no mechanism to get where you want to in a private company.
> 
> If a manager has a complaint made against them, it's standard practice to interview their reports. That is done even if senior management believe the complaint is without foundation just to gather facts. I'd be more worried if they didn't. If you're a good manager and look after your team, they'd most likely back you up.



Fully agree Leo  and just to clarify - no employee has made a complaint against me, quite the opposite in fact. I wanted to get a copy of witness (employee) statements because what was made available we very short extracts from the investigators report and from talking with employees they tell me their words were twisted and they were being quoted out of context. I do believe that because I have seen a short extract of my own and it's not correct, the wording is selective at best but doesn't reflect a 45 minute meeting where individuals were ambushed.


----------



## Purple (20 Nov 2015)

rogeroleary said:


> I don't agree Purple, if an employee was not working shift but submitted a form indicating they had surely that's a disciplinary issue? This is not the case here but I'm making the point that if the investigation determines that the manager approved a payment that was not warranted, surely by extension the employee is implicated also by the fact that they are making a false claim.


Sure, but I presumed we are not talking about deliberate fraud.


----------



## rogeroleary (20 Nov 2015)

Purple said:


> Sure, but I presumed we are not talking about deliberate fraud.



absolutely......by either the employee *or *the manager


----------



## Leper (21 Nov 2015)

Hi Roger, Thanks for being so patient with my last post.  I note you started this thread in March 2015 and referred to a series of company meetings going back into 2014 concerning earlier work practices.  Lots have happened with other employees in your company being interviewed about some ongoing allegations and subsequently one senior company official cleared all his interviewees and the other company official fingered you as a wrong-doer.

We don't know the seriousness of your alleged transgressions, but your professional reputation within the company is at stake. You earn around €100,000.00 per annum.  I hope I called your situation correctly.

The company probably wants to close the subject and I think you need the matter closed too.  Is there any chance of a 0 - 0 draw on the matter? Justice delayed is Justice denied.  Let's say you play hard-ball and win - will the company do you harm in the future?  If you lose - what have you lost?  If this is just a matter of jam on your face, you haven't lost much and perhaps you can be elevated by your colleagues as an unjustly smitten company martyr. For a moment, let's cast inhibitions aside; I'd be thinking of the €100,000.00. Remember, you cannot eat principle.

The above being the case, you continue to work but probably not at the pace you have been.  Has it dawned on you that some of your work colleagues have something to gain by your situation?  Is it likely that they have used all available means to discredit you?  Perhaps it is time for a closed mouth, opened eyes and primed ears? If you take what is happening on the chin, you don't have to leave the matter die.  I have found (even in the public service) that many will use any means at their disposal to improve their earnings and if this is climbing unjustly on the back of innocents, their conscience isn't even budged.

I have always felt that the truth always emerges.  It will take time but it will come and perhaps you can then retaliate aggressively?


----------

