Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Constructive dismissal?
This involves more than just a contract dispute. I have worked for a company for 29 months. A year ago, a colleague said that we (the two company drivers) should have been paid double time for working after 6pm as the employee handbook said so. The other driver enquired about this and was told the double time clause did not include drivers. We left it at that......untill I happened to be reading the employee handbook myself six months ago. I could not see any reference to any exclusion, drivers or otherwise. I have been pushing my employer on this issue ever since as I believe if the employee handbook does not clearly state any exceptions to the rule, then the company owe me monies going back to January 2007 for all the overtime I did after 6pm. I hoped they would evntually comply but nothing changed and it became a grievance issue four weeks ago. My working life since, has been difficult to put it mildly. I have been accused of upsetting and unsettling my work colleagues. I have been withdrawn from driving and my workplace changed. I have little doubt they (the employer) are trying to either engineer my dismissal or hope I resign through pressure. I was never given a contract. When I enquired about that in February this year, I was told they (the employer) had made an 'oversight'. I was told that has I hadn't got a contract, the employee handbook now constituted as such. So eventually, when I said they should have paid double for overtime after 6pm as 'my contract said so' - they have tried now to make me sign a 'new' contract. Whatever is going on there, I know they are attempting to remove me, I urgently need advise.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by toppo078. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Hopefully Buildersmate will spot this one and help you out.
In the meantime, I can't answer everything but I can give a few pointers from my HR experience.
First, you do have a contract even if you weren't given one in writing, and the Handbook will form part of that.
The company can now ask you to sign a new contract provided they give enough notice, but they can't change it retrospectively.
They could argue you for over 18 months you initially seemed to accept that overtime wasn't payable for these hours.
Good luck. I hope Buildersmate or Buenchico sees this and can help you further.
In the meantime, I can't answer everything but I can give a few pointers from my HR experience.
First, you do have a contract even if you weren't given one in writing, and the Handbook will form part of that.
The company can now ask you to sign a new contract provided they give enough notice, but they can't change it retrospectively.
They could argue you for over 18 months you initially seemed to accept that overtime wasn't payable for these hours.
Good luck. I hope Buildersmate or Buenchico sees this and can help you further.
In law you were entitled to a written statement of your terms and conditions within a set period...not the ad hoc way your employer appears to have attempted.
The offering of a pay slip by an employer would usually be argued by a trade union anyway as constituting a contract. They should have given you a written statement of terms and conditions of your post - name, post title, place of employment, remuneration, frequency, type, holiday leave, company policies (including the handbook). Such document could usually have a clause re: right to vary conditions etc. Document should have been signed and dated by employer. A letter of appointment may/may not have spelled out such items????
On the 'constructive' dismissal - be careful that you can show that you tried, maybe severally, to address these issues with the employer. They are notoriously difficult cases to prove to any satisfaction.
Check with your local citizens centre. Make an appointment. Read their website.
Good luck too.
The offering of a pay slip by an employer would usually be argued by a trade union anyway as constituting a contract. They should have given you a written statement of terms and conditions of your post - name, post title, place of employment, remuneration, frequency, type, holiday leave, company policies (including the handbook). Such document could usually have a clause re: right to vary conditions etc. Document should have been signed and dated by employer. A letter of appointment may/may not have spelled out such items????
On the 'constructive' dismissal - be careful that you can show that you tried, maybe severally, to address these issues with the employer. They are notoriously difficult cases to prove to any satisfaction.
Check with your local citizens centre. Make an appointment. Read their website.
Good luck too.
Both of the above answers are correct. You do have a contract - compromising whatever you were given the company handbook, custom & practice etc. however starmack is correct that you should have been given a written statements of employment particulars.
You title your question 'constructive dismissal' - do you know what that means? It means you resign then take your employer to an Employment Tribunal because it acted in such a dreadful way that you were forced to resign. It's a high risk strategy (depending on the circumstances) because you might not win. If you do win, you'd get compensation for the dirty deeds done to you, but not your job back (as far as I know).
What are you being asked to sign? And what variation of your terms does it propose (given that you seem to have won your way over the overtime issue).
You title your question 'constructive dismissal' - do you know what that means? It means you resign then take your employer to an Employment Tribunal because it acted in such a dreadful way that you were forced to resign. It's a high risk strategy (depending on the circumstances) because you might not win. If you do win, you'd get compensation for the dirty deeds done to you, but not your job back (as far as I know).
What are you being asked to sign? And what variation of your terms does it propose (given that you seem to have won your way over the overtime issue).