Post termination victimisation

[Miss2024!]

Following a strange series of events I am currently seeking advice regarding the above. A 10 minute call would be ideal.

As a research based individual I’ve found this to be a complex area of employment law.

Facts of the matter are it seems a client has held employer to ransom with their alleged conflict (Ive previously asserted legal rights with a former employer, in the old boys network)
Now I’m aware that SOSR may be used however my question is fact specific - the conflict with the client relates to asserting my legal rights (not due to something I have done)

An interesting question for legal professionals specialising in employment law (the types who like complexity and not run of the mill vanilla cases it seems are extremely rare)

 

[Newchodge]

Following a strange series of events I am currently seeking advice regarding the above. A 10 minute call would be ideal.

As a research based individual I’ve found this to be a complex area of employment law.

Facts of the matter are it seems a client has held employer to ransom with their alleged conflict (Ive previously asserted legal rights with a former employer, in the old boys network)
Now I’m aware that SOSR may be used however my question is fact specific - the conflict with the client relates to asserting my legal rights (not due to something I have done)

An interesting question for legal professionals specialising in employment law (the types who like complexity and not run of the mill vanilla cases it seems are extremely rare)

I am sorry, I don't begin to understand what you are talking about.

However, this is a forum for business owners. If, as seems likely, you are asking for assistance as an employee may I suggest that you contact your trade union or Citizens' Advice.

 

[pentel]

I am sorry, I don't begin to understand what you are talking about.

However, this is a forum for business owners. If, as seems likely, you are asking for assistance as an employee may I suggest that you contact your trade union or Citizens' Advice.

Makes no sense to me either......

 

[Miss2024!]

I am sorry, I don't begin to understand what you are talking about.

However, this is a forum for business owners. If, as seems likely, you are asking for assistance as an employee may I suggest that you contact your trade union or Citizens' Advice.

Thank you for your response. Are legal professionals not business owners?

 

[Blood Lust]

Following a strange series of events I am currently seeking advice regarding the above. A 10 minute call would be ideal.

As a research based individual I’ve found this to be a complex area of employment law.

Facts of the matter are it seems a client has held employer to ransom with their alleged conflict (I`ve previously asserted legal rights with a former employer, in the old boys network)
Now I’m aware that SOSR may be used however my question is fact specific - the conflict with the client relates to asserting my legal rights (not due to something I have done)

An interesting question for legal professionals specialising in employment law (the types who like complexity and not run of the mill vanilla cases it seems are extremely rare)

You`ll need to provide more information.

Bullying/harassment, discrimination, and victimisation, need to be based on a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.

That means it needs to be based on age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race (this includes caste), religion or belief (this includes political belief if it amounts to a philosophical belief), sex, sexual orientation, and sexual harassment.

As you terminated them, the emphasis at a tribunal will be your business proving it was within its legal right to sack them. That means you need to have documented the grievance process as set out by ACAS meeting acceptable legal standards.

The ex-employee will need to prove victimisation (that they were actually terminated due to a protected characteristic, and/or having made a complaint based on them). The standard of evidence is lower at a tribunal, they are civil cases. All they need to do is lob the probability more in their favour than yours and they will win.

You`ll need to provide a brief overview of the history with the employee, and what they allege. If you don`t understand where something has come from please also tell us that. A lot of managers handling these cases aren`t fully aware of everything the ex-employee said went on.

 

[Miss2024!]

You`ll need to provide more information.

Bullying/harassment, discrimination, and victimisation, need to be based on a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.

That means it needs to be based on age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race (this includes caste), religion or belief (this includes political belief if it amounts to a philosophical belief), sex, sexual orientation, and sexual harassment.

As you terminated them, the emphasis at a tribunal will be your business proving it was within its legal right to sack them. That means you need to have documented the grievance process as set out by ACAS meeting acceptable legal standards.

The ex-employee will need to prove victimisation (that they were actually terminated due to a protected characteristic, and/or having made a complaint based on them). The standard of evidence is lower at a tribunal, they are civil cases. All they need to do is lob the probability more in their favour than yours and they will win.

You`ll need to provide a brief overview of the history with the employee, and what they allege. If you don`t understand where something has come from please also tell us that. A lot of managers handling these cases aren`t fully aware of everything the ex-employee said went on.

You`ll need to provide more information.

Bullying/harassment, discrimination, and victimisation, need to be based on a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.

That means it needs to be based on age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race (this includes caste), religion or belief (this includes political belief if it amounts to a philosophical belief), sex, sexual orientation, and sexual harassment.

As you terminated them, the emphasis at a tribunal will be your business proving it was within its legal right to sack them. That means you need to have documented the grievance process as set out by ACAS meeting acceptable legal standards.

The ex-employee will need to prove victimisation (that they were actually terminated due to a protected characteristic, and/or having made a complaint based on them). The standard of evidence is lower at a tribunal, they are civil cases. All they need to do is lob the probability more in their favour than yours and they will win.

You`ll need to provide a brief overview of the history with the employee, and what they allege. If you don`t understand where something has come from please also tell us that. A lot of managers handling these cases aren`t fully aware of everything the ex-employee said went on.

Thank you dismissal was due to client pressure (the pressure arising a business purchased by the client being the subject of an ongoing ET.

Can the client conflict/commercial issue to business be used as some other substantial reason SOSR as a fair reason for dismissal if the employee has done no more than assert rights in an employment tribunal and the client has issues with this?

 

[Blood Lust]

Thank you dismissal was due to client pressure (the pressure arising a business purchased by the client being the subject of an ongoing ET.

Can the client conflict/commercial issue to business be used as some other substantial reason SOSR as a fair reason for dismissal if the employee has done no more than assert rights in an employment tribunal and the client has issues with this?

Your reply isn`t clear what you are saying.

Are you saying Business A sacked the employee who then went to a tribunal. In the meantime they got a job at Business B, who has Business A as a client. And because of pressure from Business A then Business B have also sacked them?

If so that ex-employee has engaged in a `Protected Act` for which they should not have been dismissed by Business B for. They still need to prove that their case was due to a Protected Characteristic, and prove that`s why the new employer sacked them. But if they do, yes both companies will get hit for compensation.

Proving the second part will be very easy if they prove the first.

 

[Miss2024!]

Employee has psychological impairment, a disability under EQA

Employee subjects employee to an invented redundancy; in reality it is due to disability and a disclosure in public interest - ET with employer A (in progress)

Employee starts new employment with employer B (who are put under pressure by clients who have coincidentally purchased employer A’s business)

Employee is dismissed from Employer B for SOSR described as conflict with a client (the new owners of employer A.

However the conflict seemingly amounting to no more than punishing an employee for asserting rights in the ET

 

[Blood Lust]

Employee has psychological impairment, a disability under EQA

Employee subjects employee to an invented redundancy; in reality it is due to disability and a disclosure in public interest - ET with employer A (in progress)

Employee starts new employment with employer B (who are put under pressure by clients who have coincidentally purchased employer A’s business)

Employee is dismissed from Employer B for SOSR described as conflict with a client (the new owners of employer A.

However the conflict seemingly amounting to no more than punishing an employee for asserting rights in the ET

Yes Business B has sacked the employee for engaging in a Protected Act and that does mean they are liable under victimisation.

Now, its a case of can they prove the first case, to then prove the second?

Assuming the employee was with the second employer for a short amount of time the compensation they win from them is unlikely to be significant. Business B might want to just settle it to avoid costly legal fees. I`d offer then £200 and a reference to go away. If they wont then their case against Business B isn`t going to be worth anymore than a few grand. I wouldn`t offer more than £500 until I had seen the evidence bundle.

Business A is going to get hit for a lot, that`s really poor behaviour from them.

 

[Miss2024!]

Yes Business B has sacked the employee for engaging in a Protected Act and that does mean they are liable under victimisation.

Now, its a case of can they prove the first case, to then prove the second?

Assuming the employee was with the second employer for a short amount of time the compensation they win from them is unlikely to be significant. Business B might want to just settle it to avoid costly legal fees. I`d offer then £200 and a reference to go away. If they wont then their case against Business B isn`t going to be worth anymore than a few grand. I wouldn`t offer more than £500 until I had seen the evidence bundle.

Business A is going to get hit for a lot, that`s really poor behaviour from them.

Thank you, I really appreciate you taking the time to respond!

 

[Newchodge]

Thank you for your response. Are legal professionals not business owners?

Yes, I am, but I cannot legally advise employees.

Can you clarify, please:

Are you asking for advice for an employee?