Meaning of appeal decision.

[62442]

Hi, I have had a few days off work for illness (with proof of this illness) and I was dismissed, I appealed against this decision and have been reinstated 3 months after the dismissal date. In the letter concerning my reinstatement my employer has said "It is our contention that the initial process was flawed.".
What does this mean?

[Buenchico]

Without knowing what the employer is referring to as the 'initial process' it's impossible to say precisely.

All that the statement means is that the employer is of the view that something went wrong, at an early stage, in that proper procedures were not followed. It could mean that they're accepting that they mishandled things but the word 'contention' (rather than something like 'admission') suggests that they hold to the view that your dismissal came about because you didn't follow correct procedures in some way. (For example they might now accept that your illness was genuine but still hold to the view that you didn't complete the correct paperwork - or phone the relevant line manager - to report it).

Chris

[62442]

I don't know the proper dismissal procedure but I got two formal verbal warnings, a written warning then dismissed. My written warning and dismissal both took place on the workshop floor in full view of everyone.
I was asked to return to work next week, they haven't said anything about back pay.
I've been working for this company since April 2007.

[factor-fiction]

We'd need to see the full letter but they seem to me to be saying that they accept the did not follow the correct procedures but perhaps are not saying your absences were acceptable. In other words if it happens again they'll make sure they follow the correct procedures right through to dismissal.

[62442]

<i>Dear ********

Your appeal against the decision of the disciplinary hearing held on 20th October 2009, where the decision was taken to dismiss you, was held on 14th January 2010, in the presence of ******** HR Manager and ******** HR Administration.

At this meeting you were offered the opertunity of having a work colleague present as witness, which you declined.

The basis of your appeal was that you were genuinley ill, and had the pescriptions to prove it. Although most of the documentation provided was dated after you recieved your final written warning for absence, it is our contention tht the initial procces was flawed.

Therfore, I am now writing to confirm that your appeal has been upheld and you have been reinstated. Please return to work on 25th January 2010.

You have now exercised your right of appeal, under the companys disciplinary procedure and this decision is final.

Yours sincerely,

HR Department</i>

The hearing dated 20th October 2009 mentioned in the letter was me being dismissed on the workshop floor with everyone watching.

[factor-fiction]

I'm not impressed by the spelling on HR's letter.
The letter confirms what i thought- they do not accept the arguments you used in your appeal but are nevertheless allowing your appeal because they contend that their own process was flawed.

[62442]

Sorry the spelling mistakes were mine lol.

Does this mean I shouldn't have been dismissed?

If yes should they pay me for the last three months?

[buildersmate]

Having read the whole of the thread, I agree that your employer is saying you shouldn't have been dismissed.
You should have received either notice of your dismissal or money in lieu of notice before - probably not much but at least 2 weeks notice (or money) but maybe more, depending on your contractual notice period.
If the employer is now admitting it shouldn't have dismissed you in the first place, it should re-instate you as you were before and this, I reckon means back-pay (and nay benefits you receive), and pension continuity and employment continuity iu.
Ask for it and see what happens.
Bear in mind that you may have already been paid money in lieu of notice for a small part of the period.

[buildersmate]

By the way, this sounds like an admission of a process flaw. Illness (including proof of it) is not a reason not to dismiss, provided there's been enough of it and the correct dismissal process is followed. So count yourself lucky and try to stay able to get to work.