18

Trade Union representation in grievance

Hi All, Please could I ask for any pieces of advice from those of you who have dealt with a TU rep accompanying an employee (ex- employee depending on how you look at it) to a grievance meeting. Completely understand the right to be accompanied. The company does not recognise a TU. What should I expect? I’ve only ever heard negative comments about them and I desperately don’t want it to be a completely negative experience for myself or the others involved. Thanks.

8567 views
  • In reply to Robey:

    Hi Robey,

    Thanks for your response - Appreciated.

    If the union knows that an ex employee can't submit a grievance but have done so anyway then I would agree that it would appear they are in hope of agreeing to a settlement agreement. So far, the union outlines that the grievance has been raised concerning her treatment by the company during the probationary period, which culminated in dismissal on 2 weeks ago from todays date. The submission was received by the company from the union exactly 1 week following dismissal - Therefore sits within the 3 months and a day timeframe.

    Re: Audit trail, there is clear records of the employee's probation, extensions, and dismissal. On the topic of review meetings - the company is small (under 25) and the manager has 3 weekly stand up meetings which questions are put to the ex-employee "How are you doing, do you have any blockers, is there anything they need help/support with" which is often met with "All good".

    The employee only declared the disability to the employer but no concerns during employment, at time of hire the employer explained that they are willing to support the employee and would look to them to suggest any accommodations they would require for the employer to make the adjustments (none were), however the employer does tick mostly all the boxes the medical advise from the ex-employees doctor letter which was given. At no given time were any adjustments rejected in fact quite the opposite, it was encouraged but was met with radio silence.

    Finally, the union does not agree with the probation ending 2 weeks earlier - The extended probation period ended two week's before the end date, the decision to end the ex employee's probation early was made due to ongoing concerns about their performance and their ability to meet the expectations of the role. Despite the extension of the probationary period, the employer did not see the significant improvements that were anticipated during that time. The manager was required to travel on a business trip at the time and therefore the company made the decision to bring clarity to the situation as soon as possible, rather than leaving the employee in a state of uncertainty for an additional two weeks. The intent behind this decision was to avoid causing her unnecessary worry.
  • In reply to Nala:

    The submission was received by the company from the union exactly 1 week following dismissal

    Did you offer the employee the opportunity to appeal the dismissal? Because the other way to address this would be to ask if they would like to simply appeal the dismissal if they haven't yet done so and you offered them that option (or if you forgot to offer them that option).

    Whilst they aren't legally entitled to appeal with less than two years' continuous service, it's often recommended as good practice as a protective measure to ensure that you don't have rogue managers dismissing people for discriminatory reasons, but also to make sure that anyone who doesn't take advantage of the right to appeal gets a Polkey deduction on any eventual award of damages.

    Finally, the union does not agree with the probation ending 2 weeks earlier

    This is mostly a red herring.

    Is this one of the big, professional unions? Or is this one of those penny-ante teeny-weeny jobs? Because there can be quite a variation in professional knowledge between regional officers even in the big unions. In the little unions, I've often found that they are big on moral indignation and short on actually knowing how the law works and often count on the former to get results that are precluded by the latter.
  • In reply to Robey:

    I'd agree with the red herring saying and it honestly is in this case.

    The union who has reached out is not considered one of the big traditional trade unions in the UK, like Unite, Unison, or GMB. However, it has gained a strong reputation for representing workers in precarious and gig economy jobs, such as couriers, cleaners, and private hire drivers. It is known for its grassroots activism and legal challenges rather than being a large professional union with extensive resources.