Neurodiversity and getting people disciplined

[ekm]

Hi Cyndy,

with regards to this:

If you are suspended on full pay, that should continue even if you are also unwell, unless being unwell prevents you taking part in the disciplinary process.

with regards to your post above, would requesting reasonable adjustments i.e responding writing fall under 'unable to take part in the disciplinary priocess' or is this going to be an arguing point?

After some argy-bargying I have my slips and it looks, at the quickets glance that they have put me on SSP, but its hard to understand as there's some OH SP deductions there as well so I need to get my head around it.

I should be on suspension on full pay, but I can't refer to sick pay policies as I can't access them., my contract doesnt cover this eventuality.

 

[Newchodge]

I would send a simple email to HR. "Please explain why, when I am suspended on full pay. I have been paid SSP only since (date)." Don't say anything else, just include the date you think SSP started.

 

[ekm]

Thanks, it does look like they've made an error of some sort so hopefully it wont look too bad on me to question it

 

[ekm]

Just an update to say my solicitor advised me similar as you to raise it, keep it minimal and ask for copies of the sickness policy.
These went through last week but just don't want you to think i've not been receptive to the boards advice - no news as my requests haven't been acknowledged as of yet.

 

[ekm]

Okay so I have an outcome - instant dismissal.

I'm still processing it, they have rescinded the allegation of ym side business not being declared due to insufficient evidence (which makes sense as they lost their own records and the ones they were found everything was declared) however have pushed my team relationship and gone as far to say the reason they didn't consider a warning was because of opinions expressed by team members about having me back.

So I have lost the popularity contest, they have re-affirmed that asking colleagues my condition is something I should consider fit and proper for a thorough investigation.

I have also been told that by accepting their offer to respond in writing I may have harmed my defence by waiving my right to respond in full to allegations - this wasn't clear at the time, a written response was offered in the context of a reasonable adjustment as I was off sick and on medication - I didnt realise accepting this offer would put me at risk of not being able to state my case in full.

I still haven't been given a reason why I've not been able to access systems to build my defence, but they have touched on the point that the outcome is based on my lack of provision of examples or evidence to defend their points. I think this is brutal considering I have umpteen emails asking for access, and I've even had a request for the company sick policy unacknowledged.

They have hammered it all home by sating I will be reported to the regulatory authorities because of my conduct, on the grounds of lack of integrity, which seems a bit brutal since I have been totally honest, I've not done anything to effect the integrity of work except be not popular.

I undersatdn opinions on here will be pragmatic and unemotional but it's a bit of a blow.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

I can't do this
Its such a lot of agro for a business and I would be looking for the easiest route out make no mistake

I have not read through all of this as that is to much

OP my advice for the future
Ask yourself How can I be the best asset to a business, bring it value and then in return give that business the opportunity to value you giving. You the best chance of security
and none of this drama no matter who's fault it is

 

[ekm]

I am sorry you can't do this. You don't have to.


You focus on value but you've intervened a few times so far and I can't see any? I don't want to be accusative here, it's just lets start this at home - I know this aint your type of thread, and I know you don't see the point. That is fab for you, but you are one opinion and if you dont actually want to add anything, or be bothered, that's fine. I just don't know why you need to keep posting it.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

I am sorry you can't do this. You don't have to.


You focus on value but you've intervened a few times so far and I can't see any? I don't want to be accusative here, it's just lets start this at home - I know this aint your type of thread, and I know you don't see the point. That is fab for you, but you are one opinion and if you dont actually want to add anything, or be bothered, that's fine. I just don't know why you need to keep posting it.

My concern is very relevant
How much of UK trade and comerce is held back by this type of thing
I would not have the patience for it and companies don't have the money and recources to waste on these things

 

[Newchodge]

Okay so I have an outcome - instant dismissal.

I'm still processing it, they have rescinded the allegation of ym side business not being declared due to insufficient evidence (which makes sense as they lost their own records and the ones they were found everything was declared) however have pushed my team relationship and gone as far to say the reason they didn't consider a warning was because of opinions expressed by team members about having me back.

So I have lost the popularity contest, they have re-affirmed that asking colleagues my condition is something I should consider fit and proper for a thorough investigation.

I have also been told that by accepting their offer to respond in writing I may have harmed my defence by waiving my right to respond in full to allegations - this wasn't clear at the time, a written response was offered in the context of a reasonable adjustment as I was off sick and on medication - I didnt realise accepting this offer would put me at risk of not being able to state my case in full.

I still haven't been given a reason why I've not been able to access systems to build my defence, but they have touched on the point that the outcome is based on my lack of provision of examples or evidence to defend their points. I think this is brutal considering I have umpteen emails asking for access, and I've even had a request for the company sick policy unacknowledged.

They have hammered it all home by sating I will be reported to the regulatory authorities because of my conduct, on the grounds of lack of integrity, which seems a bit brutal since I have been totally honest, I've not done anything to effect the integrity of work except be not popular.

I undersatdn opinions on here will be pragmatic and unemotional but it's a bit of a blow.

Whatever else you do, you MUST appeal the decision. If you don't you won't have much chance at tribunal.

Did you ever contact the Regional Equalities Officer at UNISON?

 

[ekm]

Whatever else you do, you MUST appeal the decision. If you don't you won't have much chance at tribunal.

Did you ever contact the Regional Equalities Officer at UNISON?

I never ever got a response, I sent a complaint email and they've sent me a formal complaint letter - they haven't actually acknowledged the reason for the complaint as of yet, they just sent me the forms so I could.

I've submitted but heard nothing - because of all that drama I've thrown everything at my solicitor, and we are getting a review of the case - I'm a bit conscious though because I think we're running out of time. The good thing is, whilst my budet will be squeezed I have costed the dispute in terms of their typical fees and we are good to go and I am not entirely without income (and getting interview offers, so I do expect if I can keep my mood upbeat which is the hardest bit, I will be able to keep momentum). I'm a bit occupied but really I need to look again at this whole union communication chain because it has been horrible and this can't be normal, maybe I've contacted the wrong people? (we know that tbh but we've not been able to get through to the right ones and so forth)

Asking abouit the point of appealing was something I had on my radar to ask my solicitor (problem is you can wait for calls - still better than the unuion - so I do think this thread has purpose even if just confirming what is a good question to ask) - whether to bother appealing. Your confidence in that tells me enough xD I shall do that. I think it's futile but I suppose it would be bad optics not to.

I am actually surprised how well I've stood this, and if I actually beleived or knew I'd done something intwentionally wrong that merited all this, I'd probably be crushed and a bit of a wreck rather than standing my ground. It's actually the unfairness that is propping up my mood.

Thanks for your response, the basis of any claim is going to be on the treatment rarther than the dismissal -- again a talking point with my soliciotor as to how we structure this now we've been dismissed - the invesrtigation process and treatment, cutting of pay etc throughout is simply further examples of it - so it likely won't be 'core' but we will do everything as proper as we can and if appealing is a good call then it will be done.

 

[Newchodge]

I never ever got a response, I sent a complaint email and they've sent me a formal complaint letter - they haven't actually acknowledged the reason for the complaint as of yet, they just sent me the forms so I could.

I've submitted but heard nothing - because of all that drama I've thrown everything at my solicitor, and we are getting a review of the case - I'm a bit conscious though because I think we're running out of time. The good thing is, whilst my budet will be squeezed I have costed the dispute in terms of their typical fees and we are good to go and I am not entirely without income (and getting interview offers, so I do expect if I can keep my mood upbeat which is the hardest bit, I will be able to keep momentum). I'm a bit occupied but really I need to look again at this whole union communication chain because it has been horrible and this can't be normal, maybe I've contacted the wrong people? (we know that tbh but we've not been able to get through to the right ones and so forth)

Asking abouit the point of appealing was something I had on my radar to ask my solicitor (problem is you can wait for calls - still better than the unuion - so I do think this thread has purpose even if just confirming what is a good question to ask) - whether to bother appealing. Your confidence in that tells me enough xD I shall do that. I think it's futile but I suppose it would be bad optics not to.

I am actually surprised how well I've stood this, and if I actually beleived or knew I'd done something intwentionally wrong that merited all this, I'd probably be crushed and a bit of a wreck rather than standing my ground. It's actually the unfairness that is propping up my mood.

Thanks for your response, the basis of any claim is going to be on the treatment rarther than the dismissal -- again a talking point with my soliciotor as to how we structure this now we've been dismissed - the invesrtigation process and treatment, cutting of pay etc throughout is simply further examples of it - so it likely won't be 'core' but we will do everything as proper as we can and if appealing is a good call then it will be done.

That basis of claim before the dismissal would have been fine. Now you have to be dismissed I would definitely include that as well as part of the discriminatory behaviour.

Do be very aware of deadlines.

I never ever got a response, I sent a complaint email and they've sent me a formal complaint letter - they haven't actually acknowledged the reason for the complaint as of yet, they just sent me the forms so I could.

That isn't quite clear. Did you write directly to the Equalities Officer asking for advice on how to get your issue dealt with or did you write to make a complaint?

If you sent a formal complaint and nothing has happened you need to contact the Regional Secretary.

 

[ethical PR]

Haha I can't say the name, but they are very british. Don't want to say who - my social media is being monitored (my linkedin is going ping ping ping with manager views) so I wouldn't risk it.

Am a member of unison, following previous experiences but you know what? they have been downright useless. I managed to get a meeting with one but despite lots of followup emails I can't even get a response.

I have got a solicitor, problem is the expense so for simple questions I'm just trying to canvass people with experience, then at least I can go to my solicitor with something.

Have you spoken to ACAS?

 

[ekm]

Sorry a bit of a delayed response - so yeah to tackle the points:

I won't be filling in the ET1 or any of the paperwork myself, as I will instructor my solicitor to do that for fear of making errors and not following process but I am already looking at the form, as I do want to oversee it (bear in mind whilst my solicitor is fully informed of my situation, as a representative they don't have the experience of having being there and I understand it is better to be broad at this stage than too narrow, so I want to ensure nothing is missed. I also do want to look at what this claim will look like in structure, my main complaint will be discrimination (the inconsistent withdrawal of reasonable adjustments - i.e managers failing to turn up to or or reschedule arranged checkins) , harassment (ie colleagues making false clams, an example being reporting to management where I have said I am going to lunch and raising concerns on no further basis that I might not actually be going for lunch), victimisation (the fact an investigation was launched into me on a broadside of trivial, unrelated and aged matters as a result of me asking for my treatment at work to be taken to the level of a formal greivance. IObviously the dismissal I feel is unfair and needs to be included - looking at the form I think I can just tick the box for it, however I don't want to lose focus on the fact the dismissal is itself an example of the companies way of treatment - whilst it's a big part of it - the dispute isn't purely about the dismissal.

So I'm not sure at first glance how to make this clear in the form that it isn't purely an unfair dismissal case, but a group of acts that result in unfair dismissal as one mere albeit gross example of this treatment.

I appreciate your comment about timings, and I actually wonder though it escaped my notice if my employer has tried to time me out by not providing a response/outcome to the disciplinary in nearly two months - my solicitor is fairly on the ball with this which is why we went to early concill and based on my own calculations we are still in time but we are close to the wire so any ET1 needs to be submitted in the next week or so, so will probably not be able to include any appeal outcome.

I know very little about the tribunal process but a book that is proving very helpful about a broad understanding is "The employment tribunals handbook: Practice, procedure and strategies for success' - it won't build a case obviously but it really is being helpful as a bit of a guide in outlining the process and how things can fall down (and it has a whole section on deadlines). You raise a good point about deadlines it is serious business. So apparently is outlining your claim in full which is something, given the complexity and number of events and fact I have been restricted access to evidence may be tricky to even date events, but I am sure there will be a reasonable way to approach this in the interest of justice.

"Have you spoken to ACAS?"

Yeah - we've gone through early concilliation prior to the disciplinary outcome as my complaint is about treatment that leads up to and involves treatment towards me before and during the investigation. my employer did not engage, so we are at the stage of having the case reviewed, and proceeding with a claim if we feel it is merited.

Regarding unions, it's probably worth digging out all the emails i've sent over the last few months and trying to get my head around who I have contacted. I've contacted my local union rep (for want of bad phrasing, this is the rep you are assigned when you contact the hotline to report an issue) however he was very poor, hasn't followed up emails when the investigation was launched nor has he responded to requests for a contact of the regional head of health, I contacted the main union email reuqesting the same, and I raised the matter again to the complaints team who provided me with a complaint form, but did not acnowledge my difficulties with getting a contact.

 

[Newchodge]

Sorry a bit of a delayed response - so yeah to tackle the points:

I won't be filling in the ET1 or any of the paperwork myself, as I will instructor my solicitor to do that for fear of making errors and not following process but I am already looking at the form, as I do want to oversee it (bear in mind whilst my solicitor is fully informed of my situation, as a representative they don't have the experience of having being there and I understand it is better to be broad at this stage than too narrow, so I want to ensure nothing is missed. I also do want to look at what this claim will look like in structure, my main complaint will be discrimination (the inconsistent withdrawal of reasonable adjustments - i.e managers failing to turn up to or or reschedule arranged checkins) , harassment (ie colleagues making false clams, an example being reporting to management where I have said I am going to lunch and raising concerns on no further basis that I might not actually be going for lunch), victimisation (the fact an investigation was launched into me on a broadside of trivial, unrelated and aged matters as a result of me asking for my treatment at work to be taken to the level of a formal greivance. IObviously the dismissal I feel is unfair and needs to be included - looking at the form I think I can just tick the box for it, however I don't want to lose focus on the fact the dismissal is itself an example of the companies way of treatment - whilst it's a big part of it - the dispute isn't purely about the dismissal.

So I'm not sure at first glance how to make this clear in the form that it isn't purely an unfair dismissal case, but a group of acts that result in unfair dismissal as one mere albeit gross example of this treatment.

I appreciate your comment about timings, and I actually wonder though it escaped my notice if my employer has tried to time me out by not providing a response/outcome to the disciplinary in nearly two months - my solicitor is fairly on the ball with this which is why we went to early concill and based on my own calculations we are still in time but we are close to the wire so any ET1 needs to be submitted in the next week or so, so will probably not be able to include any appeal outcome.

I know very little about the tribunal process but a book that is proving very helpful about a broad understanding is "The employment tribunals handbook: Practice, procedure and strategies for success' - it won't build a case obviously but it really is being helpful as a bit of a guide in outlining the process and how things can fall down (and it has a whole section on deadlines). You raise a good point about deadlines it is serious business. So apparently is outlining your claim in full which is something, given the complexity and number of events and fact I have been restricted access to evidence may be tricky to even date events, but I am sure there will be a reasonable way to approach this in the interest of justice.

"Have you spoken to ACAS?"

Yeah - we've gone through early concilliation prior to the disciplinary outcome as my complaint is about treatment that leads up to and involves treatment towards me before and during the investigation. my employer did not engage, so we are at the stage of having the case reviewed, and proceeding with a claim if we feel it is merited.

Regarding unions, it's probably worth digging out all the emails i've sent over the last few months and trying to get my head around who I have contacted. I've contacted my local union rep (for want of bad phrasing, this is the rep you are assigned when you contact the hotline to report an issue) however he was very poor, hasn't followed up emails when the investigation was launched nor has he responded to requests for a contact of the regional head of health, I contacted the main union email reuqesting the same, and I raised the matter again to the complaints team who provided me with a complaint form, but did not acnowledge my difficulties with getting a contact.

Your basic claim is disability discrrimination which has occurred in a number of incidents over a period of time, culiminating (so far) with dismissal. The time limit for a discrimination claim runs from the last act of discrimination and you can include all earlier acts of discrimination. As long as you are including the dismissal as an act of discrimination the time limit for submitting an ET is 3 months from the date you were notified of the dismissal. So if you were notified of the dismissal on Monday 24 March you MUST ask ACAS for early conciliation over the dismissal by 23 June and you MUST lodge the claim by the later of 23 June and a week after you get the ACAS cerificate of Early Conciliation.

 

[ekm]

Thanks, just a quick query on that - because I started early conciliation befor ethe outcome, now we have the outcome, is the deadline to your knowledge extended as a reslt of acts of discrimination continuing?

Its likely a moot point as we should file in time anyway, it's a good question though as early conciliation has already concluded, yet events are obviously still happening around us

 

[Newchodge]

Thanks, just a quick query on that - because I started early conciliation befor ethe outcome, now we have the outcome, is the deadline to your knowledge extended as a reslt of acts of discrimination continuing?

Its likely a moot point as we should file in time anyway, it's a good question though as early conciliation has already concluded, yet events are obviously still happening around us

I would need to check the case law. One of the boxes to be ticked on the ET1 is unfair dismissal. You have not had early conciliation over unfair dismissal, so I think it is required. In fact, depending on your solicitor's advice, I would request it today and state that you do NOT want your employer to be contacted. It is a nonsense of the system that the Claimant MUST ask for Early Conciliation to get the reference number that must be on the E£T1 for it to be accepted, but can refuse to allow ACAS to contact the employer.

 

[ekm]

I'm glad you've raised that, I've had the barrister report and it states that whilst an appeal has good grounds, a claim is unlikely to succeed due to not meeting the thresholds required.

So might be a case of deciding whether to go it alone, or not to bother - but I do want to digest the reasons why I don't meet the thresholds in this matter because I thought asking my colleagues to disucss the genuity of my condition, as well as discussions on how to get me out and what lies I must have told my doctor to be declared sick with stress would be pretty damning, but I am not a solicitor and just an emotional entity. I haven't read the report, just been verbally informed at this stage but it doesnt fit right - how slam dunk does it have to be?

They totally agreed with me that the conduct has been poor and that there is solid grounds to appeal and the arguments used for the outcome are inconsistent and based on evidence that I haven't had sight of etc, so there is apparently a LOT we can respond/appeal with but they will likely apparently just move to dismissal over SOSR.

So yeah, idsdapointing, I will try and be realistic with the feedback but I do want to query how bad things should have got with regards to the above before a threshold would be met, I'm sure I have read tribnal decisions that have been far more subjective.

 

[Grace Pariser]

Hi everyone

I thought about asking this a few days ago and decided against it because I don't want to post anything too far away from the running a business theme, but I would love an employers opinion. This popped up which got me thinking about MH issues with work again, so thought I'd ask. Don't shoot me, this is taking courage

When you are doing an investigation into the conduct a member of staff, who has been diagnosed with mental health conditions, who is being assessed for further mental health conditions, and has been identified as disabled as per an OH referral by the companies OH team prior - is it okay to ask their colleagues doing interviewing (non-medical office role) to give an opinion if the persons way of working and conduct matches what they would expect from someone suffering the specific conditions they have claimed to have?

I'm looking at this from three potential angles - taking up medical matters with colleagues from a data privacy point of view, the validity of a non-medical opinion of a medical matter, and finally the impacts it might have on the employee whos medical matters was discussed with staff, who has had to see this play out in interview notes post-investigation with a view to any stigma or concerns of altered viewsreputation/etc they may come back to.

The second question I have is a bit of confusion I have with the equality act 2010, as the criteria for disability does not appear to need a formal diagnosis. However, the investigation does require the employee to confirm they do not have a neurodiversity diagnosis (anxiety and depression confirmed). There is a lot of confusion about what neurodiversity actually is, and whether it has to be formally diagnosed to be adjusted for. The employee has been described as disabled in OH reports due to their mental condition, , but not specifically for neurodiversity. The employee has always claimed to be neurodiverse, and has joined the company internal neurodiverse community, and throughout the year has asked reps within this group to contact management on his behalf to look into problems with the support provided. However, due to doubts about the employees genuinity with his mental state the employee has been asked during the investigation to confirm if they have been diagnosed as neurodivergent.


On a less health related note, how acceptable is it for a company, if management are made aware of concerns but decide to take no action (and opt not to even inform the person that a complaint has been made) to include these events into a dossier in order to prove a case against the employee. The timeframe between management decision of no initial action to presenting it to the employee is going to be just shy of a year.




I am coming at this from an employees perspective, but would love insight from an employers perspective. If you doubt the genuinely of someones neurodiversity in the face of OH guidance, how far would you push, how would you push, and how far back would you pull up 'previously closed' incidents to build your case, and would the employee making repeated requests for support (without response) change your view at all?

As always, devils in the details so I don't expect too specific thoughts, but I would love broad or otherwise opinions.

Thanks as always.

The definition of a disability under the equality act is a substantial and long lasting condition that has an impact on the normal day to day activities of an individual. As an employer, the main concern in disciplining someone with a disability is that the poor conduct is caused by the disability, and if it is, disciplinary action may be discriminatory.

Medical data is sensitive and should be handled very carefully. I wouldn’t advise an employer to discuss a medical condition with another individual without express consent. The only evidence that I would rely on to determine a disability is from occupational health.

Hope this helps!

 

[ekm]

Thankyou it does, after considering options ive dubmitted my ET1 but ill focus on rebuilding in the meantime.

I am going through tge appeal aswell but ive requested reasonable adjustments as to which im struggling tobelicit a response. Just take it as it comes.

If anyone is going through a rubbish time, i really do recommend hitting the gym, im not fit but my doc has got me a referral which gives me free temp access and its being wonderful for starting a day with a small win

 

[FreddyG]

If anyone is going through a rubbish time, i really do recommend hitting the gym, im not fit but my doc has got me a referral which gives me free temp access and its being wonderful for starting a day with a small win

Good man! "Mens sana in corpore sano."

 

[ekm]

Cheers, Im breaking all the rules at the moment, even aside from work I had two main rules in life:

1) never eat cauliflower
2) never enter a gym

And i've completely trashed both this last few weeks, but I tell you something the gym, whilst it sucks whilst your there does set you up for the day - I've been dealing with days with a lot more structure, for example:

1) Gym
2) check for any new jobs
3) design electronics (product idea I had)
4) work on firmware for a few hours
5) apply for roles that have come up during the day
6) update my little business social media page, keep on top of requests

Also got loads of other stuff done, like rebuilding my website, and booked an exam for some professional certs.

It does lead me into a sense that I feel I'm doing everything a reasonable person can do, and so whilst I have a lot of stress and anxiety, I also feel like im pushing back with structure and a plan, which I need.

 

[ekm]

Should also add that because I have a side hustle that is quite technical and high value service that a lot of people do as a full time business, if I could just be a bit better on my business accumen there's absolutely no need that I would have to even replace the job, I mean I always preferred it as a hobby/side hustle, but I have premises, I have gear if only I was a better marketeer in theory I could take my time with the job search and just ride the dip out.

 

[japancool]

Sorry, it seems ridiculous that you can't discipline someone if their behaviour was caused by a disability, if that behaviour causes an issue for other members. Teamwork is an essential part of most businesses, and if they are causing issues with that, I don't see why that's a problem.

But don't appoint them to a role that requires teamwork? OK, but you can't refuse to hire them because of a disability either.

What if someone sexually assaults someone because they are neurodiverse? (and before you all start shouting at me, I personally know someone who did that. I'm not being theoretical)

I'm not suggesting the OP did anything like that. My point is what the law can lead to.

 

[Newchodge]

Sorry, it seems ridiculous that you can't discipline someone if their behaviour was caused by a disability, if that behaviour causes an issue for other members. Teamwork is an essential part of most businesses, and if they are causing issues with that, I don't see why that's a problem.

But don't appoint them to a role that requires teamwork? OK, but you can't refuse to hire them because of a disability either.

What if someone sexually assaults someone because they are neurodiverse? (and before you all start shouting at me, I personally know someone who did that. I'm not being theoretical)

I'm not suggesting the OP did anything like that. My point is what the law can lead to.

Of course you can discipline someone if their behaviour causes harm to other team members. But would you discipline someone because a team member was offended by the fact they had dark coloured skin?

Causing a team membr an issue needs considering - I have an issue if someone uses profane language in my presence and continues to do so, despite being asked not to. What if the 'profane' language is the word 'bloody'? Is that something to discipline someone over or to have a conversation about treating everyone with dignity and respect?

If someone commits a sexual assault of course they should be dealt with, even if in their 'culture' or in their head the behaviour was aceptable.

But you cannot just require that everyone in a workplace conforms to some arbitrary norm.

 

[japancool]

But would you discipline someone because a team member was offended by the fact they had dark coloured skin?

False equivalence. Aggressive or unsettling behaviour *directed at* someone is not the same as having an immutable physical characteristic.

 

[Newchodge]

False equivalence. Aggressive or unsettling behaviour *directed at* someone is not the same as having an immutable physical characteristic.

Aggressive behaviour directed at someone can be a disciplinary matter. Unsettling behaviour needs unpicking.

A disability is exactly the same as having an immutable physical characteristic.

 

[japancool]

A disability is exactly the same as having an immutable physical characteristic.

And if that disability causes them to act aggressively towards others?

 

[Newchodge]

And if that disability causes them to act aggressively towards others?

Then it can be dealt with by disciplinary sanctions. As here https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...fair-dismissal-case-after-lunch-tampering-row

 

[japancool]

Then it can be dealt with by disciplinary sanctions. As here https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...fair-dismissal-case-after-lunch-tampering-row

So you CAN discipline someone if their misconduct is caused by a disability. And yet, we have someone saying:

As an employer, the main concern in disciplining someone with a disability is that the poor conduct is caused by the disability, and if it is, disciplinary action may be discriminatory.

And as for unsettling behaviour - an employee, let's say a female one but it could equally be male, comes to you and says X keeps staring at me, and they feel unsafe. X tells you it's because they're neurodiverse. Then what?

 

[Newchodge]

So you CAN discipline someone if their misconduct is caused by a disability. And yet, we have someone saying:



And as for unsettling behaviour - an employee, let's say a female one but it could equally be male, comes to you and says X keeps staring at me, and they feel unsafe. X tells you it's because they're neurodiverse. Then what?

Then HR talks to X and explains why such behaviour is unacceptable and the possible consequences of it continuing.

As an employer, the main concern in disciplining someone with a disability is that the poor conduct is caused by the disability, and if it is, disciplinary action may be discriminatory.

May be discriminatory. Andmay not be.

 

[ekm]

I don't think anyone has an issue with people with a disability being accountable.

I think the issue is when it's unfairly biased against them.

I'll give you an example of where I feel things go a bit unfair - in my own disciplinary outcome it was found that whilst they acknowledged I needed support, my employer had met it's obligations for providing support by way of 1-2-1 meetings and checkins with my manager.

Now, this falls apart because I have raised, since early march 2024, concerns about my manager not attending these, and asking if we can can cancel them altogether. And this has escalated with me asking a variety of people in different places over the year, and snowballed until eventually someone did listen, they did raise a greivance on my behalf.

This greivance, despite my dismissal was never concluded - what it did trigger though was an investigatio into my entire work history which is what has led to them finding all these little 'nothings' that they have used to justify a disciplinary against me - for example my side business, which my ex manager used to be a part of.

If you actually look at these allegations they are laughable - for example when I asked for the records for conflict of interest declarations so I could see where I had not declared my business they had to admit to having lost several years records - so you ask 'on what basis makes you think I didn't declare?' and they have no answer for it.

So yeah, when I'm talking about discrimination, I'm not talking about not being accountable for specific actions I may have done that need answering to, it's more about why asking for your reasonable adjustments to actually be eforced causes a massive dig to find out all the things you've done historically wrong etc.

 

[japancool]

Then HR talks to X and explains why such behaviour is unacceptable and the possible consequences of it continuing.

And if X says he can't help it due to his neurodiversity?

 

[japancool]

May be discriminatory. Andmay not be.

And as an employer, you leave yourself open to the risk that it may be. Which is the point. You could be screwed either way. It's a ridiculous situation.

 

[ekm]

We're wandering a bit - I mean it's a fair conversation but I don't think this applies in my case.

Whilst people have said I've been agressive, the company haven't actually been able to provide any examples, in fact one of my appeal points has been in response to the point 'do you acknowledge people have felt uncomfortable with you when attending meetups'

my answer to that was of course 'as a remote worker, I have yet to meet my colleagues'

So please understand, I know youre not singling me out with your above discussion, but I my situation is very far removed from it. I have no intention of trying to 'get away' with anything, but at the same time I'm not big on witch hunts either and I do think when accomodations aren't made, after being agreed it does cause problems.

 

[Newchodge]

And if X says he can't help it due to his neurodiversity?

Then if the behaviour warrants it, the employment cannot continue.

 

[japancool]

Then if the behaviour warrants it, the employment cannot continue.

And then be taken to an employment tribunal.

 

[japancool]

We're wandering a bit - I mean it's a fair conversation but I don't think this applies in my case.

Whilst people have said I've been agressive, the company haven't actually been able to provide any examples, in fact one of my appeal points has been in response to the point 'do you acknowledge people have felt uncomfortable with you when attending meetups'

my answer to that was of course 'as a remote worker, I have yet to meet my colleagues'

So please understand, I know youre not singling me out with your above discussion, but I my situation is very far removed from it. I have no intention of trying to 'get away' with anything, but at the same time I'm not big on witch hunts either and I do think when accomodations aren't made, after being agreed it does cause problems.

Yes, you're right. Sorry, I'll stop derailing your thread now.

 

[Newchodge]

And then be taken to an employment tribunal.

An employer can be taken to an employment tribunal by anyone who is unhappy about their treatment, at any time. Why are you picking on the disabled?

 

[ekm]

Yes, you're right. Sorry, I'll stop derailing your thread now.

You're fine, it's a perfectly valid discussion point and as it can affect people running businesses it is not something that i have any issue with discussing.

I just want to make it clear I don't go around abusing or threatening staff xD I'm actually quite a nice chappie! Some complex things are easy, some more taken for granted things are just hard and people don't tend to understand.