how do i prove my innocents?

[KateCB]

Or hanging.
But still you weren't expecting sense was you Earl?

Mmm, I did go back and amend that 'haning' to hanging, but thought that the 'save' was taking a long time - obviously didn't save - it lied to me!

Sentence......oh dear - another case of brain faster than fingers....point made though - But....I don't claim to have 12 GCSE's, 6 A Levels and various other qualifications....so its doesn't count

 

[mariefab]

Dani
You could phone HR, first thing in the morning, and say that you are unable to attend the disciplinary because you don't drive and can't afford the costs of public transport to a meeting 100 miles away.
If they haven't provided you with copies of the evidence they intend to use at the discplinary point this out and tell them that you need to receive this before any meeting.
Also, you have the right to be accompanied by a work colleague or union rep. So, ask that they give you reasonable notice of the date of the meeting to enable you to arrange this.
Request that the meeting be postponed and relocated to a site near you.
(You might also follow the phone call up with an email covering what was said in the call.)

I'm not sure that I've understood the contract/holiday issue correctly but you seem to believe that the current disciplinary is a sham and that the real reason for their action is your refusal to agree to change your contract.
Did they want you to agree to change your contracted hours from 40 to 15 but still expect you to continue to normally work 40+ hours per week; which would then allow them to only pay you for 15 hours for each week's holiday?
If so, I'm not surprised that you refused?
When did they propose this contract change and when did you refuse?

 

[E Storey]

Well, if I were them I'd fire you just for saying that. For all you know it's just a meeting to discuss what happened, and let you give you side of events. They may decide they agree with you and let you get back to work with no black mark on your name - and here you are a) jumping to conclusions, and b) slagging them off in a public forum.

Some loyal employee you are - they'd probably be much better off without you.

Totally disagree, the OP has simply stated the facts. she is facing a disciplinary because money has gone missing on her watch, and she claims to have no knowledge of the theft. (if indeed there was a theft).

That can in no way be viewed as jumping to conclusions or slagging anyone off.

 

[Frictiontech]

The moral of this story is, ''Don't get caught with your fingers in the cookie jar''

Kev

 

[WordOfMouthLocal]

Good luck OP. I can't really add anything to what's been said already except to reiterate the calls for caution over what is written here

If the company monitors their brand online this thread will show up due to another poster naming them. Then they'll see an employee criticising them here too. It's likely your contract already has a clause covering your actions online so as another poster said, they could sack you for that

Speak to HR, get it sorted properly

 

[Price-Tracking]

Totally disagree, the OP has simply stated the facts. she is facing a disciplinary because money has gone missing on her watch, and she claims to have no knowledge of the theft. (if indeed there was a theft).

That can in no way be viewed as jumping to conclusions or slagging anyone off.

She referred to her employer, little chef, as "little thief" - how is that not slagging off her employer?

And she suggested that she would just be fired rather than receive a fair hearing, and that the whole thing might just an excuse to sack her because of an unrelated issue... so 2 conclusions jumped to with no facts to back them up...

 

[KateCB]

I think all employees look on the black side, its a scary prospect for anyone, and i have to say that the employers have not been very fair with the hearing set the day after a bank holiday, with the letter arriving on the previous Saturday givbing no time to contact union etc AND holding at 100 miles away from the OP's place of work.....

Calling them the 'little thief' may not be as bad as it first appears, I have heard the term before, and it is commonly used by people who feel 'robbed' by the charges!

As for stating that she thinks it is an excuse to sack her, she is just airing her views, although this is a public forum, people come for advice, to vent, to get a point across etc, and don't always think of the implications and we are all entitled to our opinion, even if it gets us into trouble!

 

[Price-Tracking]

I didn't say I disagreed with the OP, I was just disagreeing with this comment - "That can in no way be viewed as jumping to conclusions or slagging anyone off."

 

[mhall]

Dani
Did they want you to agree to change your contracted hours from 40 to 15 but still expect you to continue to normally work 40+ hours per week; which would then allow them to only pay you for 15 hours for each week's holiday?

I don't know if Karl or anyone equally as good is around but can anyone give me clarification on this point ?

I have been led to believe that, no matter what the contract says, holiday entitlement is based on the actual hours worked - that is certainly how we do it and it seems fair to all - we work on 12.5% holiday entitlement with the minimum entitlement being the contracted hours.

A few people have told me that Asda, Tesco and the like are reducing contracted hours to reduce holiday entitlement - If this is true perhaps we should also look at this. If it's good for the goose....

 

[AngelaE]

I don't know if Karl or anyone equally as good is around but can anyone give me clarification on this point ?

I have been led to believe that, no matter what the contract says, holiday entitlement is based on the actual hours worked - that is certainly how we do it and it seems fair to all - we work on 12.5% holiday entitlement with the minimum entitlement being the contracted hours.

A few people have told me that Asda, Tesco and the like are reducing contracted hours to reduce holiday entitlement - If this is true perhaps we should also look at this. If it's good for the goose....

Yes, if your contract says 20 hours and you have worked 40 hours for around 5-6 months plus, then this is viewed as custom and practice in that the employee has accepted they work 40 hours and have come to expect it and the employer has allowed this to happen therefore agreeing to it by their very actions. The contract around working hours is therefore superceded by the custom and practice.

 

[mariefab]

There was a case, years ago, where it was suggested that unscrupulous employers might seek to manipulate contracted hours in order to avoid paying the correct amount of holiday pay.
The Court pretty much scoffed at the idea that they would do such a thing.