Gross Misconduct Investigation Meeting

[JandJC]

I am seeking professional advice concerning a Gross misconduct investigation meeting that our family Ltd company recently conducted.

As this is the first occasion we've ever had to conduct this type of process, we do have an inkling that we have been railroaded into decreasing the original charge.

From our initial research and consultation with ACAS the objective of the meeting was to gather information from the employee concerned.

However we encountered his representative who essentially spun us in circles and eventually pushed us into a corner where we felt trapped.

He asked a series of questions that were not relevant to the issue in question and asked questions about a senior managers personal life which we didn't reply to as we thought this was a line of questioning aimed at defamation of character.

I would like to know if such questions are expected in this type of investigation?

I am prepared to converse with professionals in this field as we are intending to dismiss this employee.

 

[Blood Lust]

I am seeking professional advice concerning a Gross misconduct investigation meeting that our family Ltd company recently conducted.

As this is the first occasion we've ever had to conduct this type of process, we do have an inkling that we have been railroaded into decreasing the original charge.

From our initial research and consultation with ACAS the objective of the meeting was to gather information from the employee concerned.

However we encountered his representative who essentially spun us in circles and eventually pushed us into a corner where we felt trapped.

He asked a series of questions that were not relevant to the issue in question and asked questions about a senior managers personal life which we didn't reply to as we thought this was a line of questioning aimed at defamation of character.

I would like to know if such questions are expected in this type of investigation?

I am prepared to converse with professionals in this field as we are intending to dismiss this employee.

Sounds like you had fun.

With it being your first time you probably expected a more professional approach from the solicitor. Most aren`t like that, they do get stuck in rattling your cage. And if you sack the employee and it goes to early conciliation it will be just as bad. The only time they behave professionally is in front of a judge.

The solicitor is saying `I will make you poop your pants if you carry on` or `I will do your head in so much you will drop the case` or `I`m going to come at you from every legal angle possible if you take this any further`. It makes employers back down.

Make sure you have followed all ACAS guidelines, that the employee is 100% in the wrong, and you have strong evidence to prove it, and there is 100% no other reason they could use for you terminating them, and then sack them.

In the meantime you get revenge by stretching it out as long as possible. Remember, that employee is paying the solicitor at £295 per hour. Evaporate the sods savings by having lots and lots and lots of meetings with the solicitor. At some point they will click what you are doing but until then empty that employees bank account.

If the employee has a BS case he can only take it to a tribunal with a solicitor if he pays for it. No solicitor will touch it on a no win no fee unless there is a good chance of winning. He would end up having to go on his own.

And if he does there is one more step to take:
1. In the pre-trial hearing submit a motion to the judge to strike the case out stating why the employee has no reasonable chance of success. The employee then has to put up £1000 as a deposit to carry on.

If they dont have the money left for it then tough, its striked out. If they do and the judge agrees after hearing the case it was BS then he will make the employee liable for your costs.

 

[Mark T Jones]

It sounds very much like you need to take advice/support from a professional in the field.

Stark reality and life and business- investigations are always more about pinning blame than getting balanced facts.

 

[WaveJumper]

Not trying to be harsh but it sounds like you let the meeting get out of hand, it takes experience to conduct interviews and if you have not carried any out recently it can be very daunting. As above you can string things out, you can have as many interviews as you like, don't loose focus you are there to gather the facts relevant to the case you are looking at. Someone may raise other issues, ok note them, but if in the end they are not relevant to inquiry your making then you will just dismiss them further down the line.

If you are really unsure of how to proceed further ( and not confident) and by obviously asking the questions here I would seek your own legal advice before going any further.

 

[Frank the Insurance guy]

Hi @JandJC

Have you got legal expenses or Management Liability cover? If so, get them involved as they will provide bespoke legal advice and support for you. In addition, if you seek and follow their advice and things progress to a tribunal etc, they will usually pay all the costs and compensation (up to the policy Limit) if you lose the case!

 

[Newchodge]

1. If this was an investigation meeting there was no legal right to representation. So why was there a rep present?
2. When there is a right to a rep it is limited to a workplace colleague or an accredited TU rep. What status was thie rep?
3.You are running the meeting, you control the participants. If a question is asked that is inappropriate tell them so and ask themn to move on.

I am prepared to converse with professionals in this field as we are intending to dismiss this employee.

Why hold an investigation meeting, seek advice or hold a hearing if you have already decided on the outcome? This makes any decision to dismiss unfair.