UK rioters - would you sack them?

[NewTime]

I have recently had some issues at work that have inlucded both a employee who was late (because he went to watch England in Germany) and blamed someyhing else and information come into us that shows a employee at riots. None of the images that we received were showing this individual involved in disorder, but he looked a 'interested' individual.

In a tough place regarding this, would you choose to let the individual(s) go?

 

[Newchodge]

WHY? Have they been employed for at least 2 years? If so, what is the potentially fair reason for dismissing them? Have they been arrested? Have they been charged?

As abhorrent as I find the mindless thugs who were involved in the riots, you cannot just dismiss someone (please don't use the puerile term 'letting them go - you had not detained them against their will, had you?) without proof that you have a potentially fair reason for doing so.

If they had less than 2 years' service and you dismissed them they could probably claim discrimination against their beliefs.

Sorry, just in case it is not clear, my response is No.

 

[Ozzy]

Would bringing the company (employer) name into disrepute not be sufficient @Newchodge ?

What about if customers refuse to have any dealings with the individual, so they find themselves unable to carry out their duties because customers are choosing not to want to deal with the individual because of their involvement with activities such as riots, etc, outside of work?

I actually agree, reluctantly, with your answer above but I'm pondering these scenarios.

 

[Newchodge]

Would bringing the company (employer) name into disrepute not be sufficient @Newchodge ?

What about if customers refuse to have any dealings with the individual, so they find themselves unable to carry out their duties because customers are choosing not to want to deal with the individual because of their involvement with activities such as riots, etc, outside of work?

I actually agree, reluctantly, with your answer above but I'm pondering these scenarios.

You would need evidence of both scenarios. And it would need to be a reasonable response. 1 customer making a fuss would not be enough.

 

[Newchodge]

Giving it some more thought, I think that if an identifiable employee, wearing employer's uniform, were shown throwing missiles at the police, dismissal would probably be fair, both on the grounds of bringing their employer into disrepute and being too thick to hide their identity/employer.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

I would deal with this situation myself and take them out in the yard and taser them with a Police person officer type Taser weapon

 

[Nico Albrecht]

In a tough place regarding this, would you choose to let the individual(s) go?

The issue lies in how you handled the situation, not in the actions of your staff.

Regarding the riot concerns, it's important to recognize that the media can sometimes be quick to label events as riots if it fits their narrative. You should exercise caution before calling something a riot. There's a delicate line between a peaceful protest and a riot. If this individual attended a peaceful demonstration that later turned into a riot, it doesn't automatically make them guilty of anything when he tries to leave the riot. They have the right to participate in a demonstration, even if you disagree with the cause.

Instead of making assumptions, speculating, or discussing the situation in a forum, why not approach the person directly? On Monday morning, invite them for a casual coffee outside of the workspace and have an informal, friendly conversation without taking notes. Let them know that while you respect their right to demonstrate, you're concerned about how their involvement in a particular situation might reflect on the business. Explain your perspective and ask them what actually happened.

With this firsthand information, you'll be in a better position to make an informed decision rather than relying on guesses or assumptions. Unless you have solid evidence that this person engaged in violence, simply attending a gathering doesn't mean they've broken any laws.

 

[WaveJumper]

So they went to a football match but never returned to work on time, so this maybe an issue on its own sit them down get the facts. They may have been caught up in some demo etc unless this has as mentioned above a direct impact on your company or maybe they were arrested, perhaps further action would be needed, but above all else gather the facts from the horses mouth first

 

[Porky]

In short NO

Unless they are doing something outside whilst representing the business or damaging your business reputation it’s none of your business. You can’t sack someone because you don’t like what they do in their spare time.

Slightly related: I had a situation once whilst out on a works event, a Christmas party, two employees that didn’t like each other, had too much to drink and started an argument and wanted to fight each other, it was ridiculous. I took them both to one side, said it was unacceptable behaviour and sent them both home early in a taxi each to sober up. They were my responsibility as although it was after working hours they were still on a company event.

Some weeks later, the same two outside of working hours met up to fight and gave each other a good kicking. Total pointless and came back to work looking like a bus had hit them both. This was not my concern, they were not client facing, it was not on company time, nor were they representing the business and quite honestly although I wanted to sack both of them but I didn’t, within a week or so later they were laughing and joking together - they had cleared the air and problem solved. All very school boyish but it happens.

In your case, you might not like it that the individual was possibly out looking for trouble but it’s really not your concern, as I say, he was not representing you or your company so it’s NOT a sackable offence.

The joys of employing staff eh....

 

[NewTime]

1) Your job is politically motivated

2) Your told to stay impartical at all times (mainly social media wise)

3) You're attending a questionably politically motivated 'event'

4) The pictures show individual at event, but not committing any crimes, but most certainly not 'caught up' in it and 100% there in support

 

[Porky]

Is this for a university project you are doing?

If it’s for real, ignore the advice / opinion given here and Sack them them if that’s what you want to do, just don’t come crying back on here if you end up on the receiving end of an unfair dismissal claim.

You have your answer - NO

 

[NewTime]

Is this for a university project you are doing?

If it’s for real, ignore the advice / opinion given here and Sack them them if that’s what you want to do, just don’t come crying back on here if you end up on the receiving end of an unfair dismissal claim.

You have your answer - NO

haha, I don't want to sack them and I don't want the hassle. the problem is how important impartiality is and what message it sends out whether or not this person is moved on etc.

but anyway.

 

[WaveJumper]

What are you going to do about him being late for work

 

[japancool]

You can’t sack someone because you don’t like what they do in their spare time.

Not even if they're exchanging child pornography via Whatsapp?

 

[japancool]

1) Your job is politically motivated

2) Your told to stay impartical at all times (mainly social media wise)

3) You're attending a questionably politically motivated 'event'

4) The pictures show individual at event, but not committing any crimes, but most certainly not 'caught up' in it and 100% there in support

Does your employment contract contain anything to this effect?

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

A friend pulled up outside the local railway station to drop his missus off. It took less than 30 seconds but a couple of days later he received a ticket as the Police were having a purge and enforcing the no stop zone. He challenged the charge on the basis that the road markings weren't clear and the signage wasn't visible and was made aware by his employer that the heightened publicity in doing so could jeopardise his job.

Arguing that he was driving his own car in his own time fell on deaf ears but he went ahead anyway.


His job? A Copper!

 

[Porky]

Not even if they're exchanging child pornography via Whatsapp?

If they are actually prosecuted of same,proven that’s what they were doing was illegal AND moreover, their employment contract contains the clause as they are a public profile and representing the business then yes, totally get your point.

But, In this example, he has no proven evidence the Guy was involved in any disorder, he wasn’t prosecuted of same and unless there is something in his contract about being a representative of the business outside of hours I don’t see how he can sack him fairly in these circumstances.

My view is that he would be within his rights to bring about a claim for unfair dismissal if he was sacked in the OPs example.

 

[Mark T Jones]

Separate reality from conjecture.

Outside of work, his 'offences' appear to be attending a demonstration (but not joining in rioting) and 'looking a bit dodgy'. To the best of my knowledge neither of those is a legitimate reason to get rid.

Inside work, they would appear to be unreliable, which may well be.

 

[Newchodge]

Not even if they're exchanging child pornography via Whatsapp?

Company WhatsApp? If so it should be covered in company use of it policy.

If done purely personally it isn't gross misconduct in the employment sphere. If there were punlicity and the connection with the employer could be made then dismissal for bringing the company into disrepute. If charged and sentenced to prison, then dismissal for being unable to fulfill the contract (unless you permit working from cell).

 

[WaveJumper]

Ill mention it again what have you done about the late return to work, have you spoken to them about it, have you made a record of it. or can any Tom Dick or Harry on the payroll go to a football match, concert, beer festival or whatever and turn up (maybe even with a hangover) late on a Monday.

Next post will be 'why do I have so much bad time keeping from my employee's', nip it in the bud now

 

[Newchodge]

Ill mention it again what have you done about the late return to work, have you spoken to them about it, have you made a record of it. or can any Tom Dick or Harry on the payroll go to a football match, concert, beer festival or whatever and turn up (maybe even with a hangover) late on a Monday.

Next post will be 'why do I have so much bad time keeping from my employee's', nip it in the bud now

I don't think the football fan and the riot fan were necessarily the same employee.

 

[fantheflames]

This is a tough one! I'm all for protests and agree with many statements for anti-establishment to some degree, but I think it's the violence and damage to property which is something that's hard to justify in my books!

If my employee was part of it, it depends on what extent. If they were attending and were pictured in the crowd, then there's not really any concerns. It would be if there was evidence of violence or damage to property that would be a concern for me as an employer.

With the lateness, is it a serious issue? If it's once or twice, I think you should let it go if it's not a regular habit. Sometimes it's not always black and white.

 

[HFE Signs]

What you suspect they are doing might not sit well with you, however you can't just sack them or you'll find yourself with all kinds of problems.

 

[NewTime]

This is a tough one! I'm all for protests and agree with many statements for anti-establishment to some degree, but I think it's the violence and damage to property which is something that's hard to justify in my books!

If my employee was part of it, it depends on what extent. If they were attending and were pictured in the crowd, then there's not really any concerns. It would be if there was evidence of violence or damage to property that would be a concern for me as an employer.

With the lateness, is it a serious issue? If it's once or twice, I think you should let it go if it's not a regular habit. Sometimes it's not always black and white.

If people don't turn upto riots, as just a bystander, is there ever going to be a riot? Do you watch a very small amount of people attacking a hotel, or is around hundreds of others?

The people that attend perhaps not as bad as ones who went too far with violence and the thuggery, but they are partially (in my eyes anyway) responsible for inciting this violence.

If it was upto me I would sack the employee if I could - I despise every single person that was involved in those riots whatever their role. It isn;t as simple as that through, but they also know about staying impartial. Attending this was not impartial.

I have asked to not be involved in dealing with this matter as I don't think I have a clear enough mindset past what I think of people attending those riots.

And the football fan and rioter are two different people.

I am not in the same department as the football fan, I am told that not only did he turn up late, but also lied about attending the game and what was uncovered on socials.

 

[WaveJumper]

What's your actual status in this company that has you so concerned about performance issues of others

 

[Newchodge]

If people don't turn upto riots, as just a bystander, is there ever going to be a riot? Do you watch a very small amount of people attacking a hotel, or is around hundreds of others?

The people that attend perhaps not as bad as ones who went too far with violence and the thuggery, but they are partially (in my eyes anyway) responsible for inciting this violence.

If it was upto me I would sack the employee if I could - I despise every single person that was involved in those riots whatever their role. It isn;t as simple as that through, but they also know about staying impartial. Attending this was not impartial.

I have asked to not be involved in dealing with this matter as I don't think I have a clear enough mindset past what I think of people attending those riots.

And the football fan and rioter are two different people.

I am not in the same department as the football fan, I am told that not only did he turn up late, but also lied about attending the game and what was uncovered on socials.

What are your views on peaceful protest? Personally I think the right to protest peacefully, even if it causes disriuption and inconvednience to others, is a fundamental right. Disgracefully, in this country, that right has been removed and peaceful protest is now a criminal offence. However people may have attended the riots without any violent intention or knowledge that it may become violent, because thye wished to protest peacefully. Mush a sI hate their views, I defent their right to protest.

 

[japancool]

Suppose for a moment, I had an employee who had been rioting against immigrants.

Now, given that I am an immigrant, how do I fire him/her/them/xem?

 

[Newchodge]

Suppose for a moment, I had an employee who had been rioting against immigrants.

Now, given that I am an immigrant, how do I fire him/her/them/xem?

How do you know they had been rioting against immigrants? What is your proof?

 

[Ozzy]

How do you know they had been rioting against immigrants? What is your proof?

For the purposes of this argument I'm going to say we will need to assume that @japancool actually saw them throw a petrol bomb on a news report on TV and recognised them throwing said petrol bomb at the police without any doubt it was said employee.

We've established that just being present in the background of a riot or protest is no grounds at all to dismiss someone. Personal feelings are irrelevant.

 

[Newchodge]

IF there is proof of someone carrying out a violent criminal act the employer should report them to the police.

This explains the position a little better than I can:

UK riots | Can you dismiss employees for conduct outside of work? | esphr

Employees are entitled to their private lives but, on occasion, their conduct outside of work can have a direct impact on the employer.

esphr.co.uk

Para 31 of the ACAS code of practice sates the following:
If an employee is charged with, or convicted of a criminal offence this is not normally in itself reason for disciplinary action. Consideration needs to be given to what effect the charge or conviction has on the employee’s suitability to do the job and their relationship with their employer, work colleagues and customers.

Conduct is just one of the five fair reasons for dismissal laid down in the legislation and these type of activities might give the employer ‘some other substantial reason’ to also consider dismissal. This is a sort of catch-all category which employers may be able to rely on if none of the other potential reasons for dismissal (capability or performance concerns, conduct, redundancy or a breach of statutory duty) apply. For example, if relations with colleagues, suppliers or customers are adversely affected, or if the business itself has been brought into disrepute, as was the suggestion here, dismissal may be justified.

 

[japancool]

How do you know they had been rioting against immigrants? What is your proof?

The riots were about immigrants.
They were rioting.
Ergo, they were rioting about immigrants.

As to how I know they were rioting, let's say, for the sake of argument, they were caught on TV.

 

[japancool]

For the purposes of this argument I'm going to say we will need to assume that @japancool actually saw them throw a petrol bomb on a news report on TV and recognised them throwing said petrol bomb at the police without any doubt it was said employee.

We've established that just being present in the background of a riot or protest is no grounds at all to dismiss someone. Personal feelings are irrelevant.

Something like that, or they posted it on their social media or something. This is all hypothetical, of course. I don't actually have any employees.

 

[japancool]

What about if it causes a breakdown in the working relationship with me?

 

[Ozzy]

What about if it causes a breakdown in the working relationship with me?

You are a colleague as per @Newchodge reply above.

 

[Newchodge]

What about if it causes a breakdown in the working relationship with me?

The answer to all of these hypothetical situations is - it depends.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

What are your views on peaceful protest? Personally I think the right to protest peacefully, even if it causes disriuption and inconvednience to others, is a fundamental right. Disgracefully, in this country, that right has been removed and peaceful protest is now a criminal offence. However people may have attended the riots without any violent intention or knowledge that it may become violent, because thye wished to protest peacefully. Mush a sI hate their views, I defent their right to protest.

There is no fundamental or moral right to disrupt and inconvenience others and many protests particularly target such in order to garner more publicity. At what point is it acceptable to intentionally block the roads when a father is trying to get to hospital to attend the birth of his baby, for a wife to be prevented from attending the funeral of her husband?

When the Just Stop Oil protesters were glueing themselves to the road a 'victim' who had been unable to attend a funeral, apparently found out that one of the protesters was getting married a few weeks later. She asked the question on social media as to whether she could peacefully protest against peaceful protests that caused disruption, by chaining herself to the church doors, blocking the nearby roads or spraying the brides dress orange!
Most considered it acceptable on first reading but quickly had their minds changed.

 

[Newchodge]

There is no fundamental or moral right to disrupt and inconvenience others and many protests particularly target such in order to garner more publicity. At what point is it acceptable to intentionally block the roads when a father is trying to get to hospital to attend the birth of his baby, for a wife to be prevented from attending the funeral of her husband?

When the Just Stop Oil protesters were glueing themselves to the road a 'victim' who had been unable to attend a funeral, apparently found out that one of the protesters was getting married a few weeks later. She asked the question on social media as to whether she could peacefully protest against peaceful protests that caused disruption, by chaining herself to the church doors, blocking the nearby roads or spraying the brides dress orange!
Most considered it acceptable on first reading but quickly had their minds changed.

Peaceful protest is pointless unless it causes disruption. No-one notices it and it has no effect.

Do you recall 2011 (I think) and the fuel price protests when truck drivers and farmers caused massive nationwide disruption including delaying emergency ambulances, preventing hoispital appointments, delaying funerals etc. Lasted for DAYS all over the country. No-one was prosecuted for obstruction, most people appluaded their move and they won their point on fuel duty.

I think a small local protest aimed at raising public understanding of the need to prevent this planet becoming uninhabitable for (at least) the majority of humans is more than justified. The fact that those who planned it got 5 years in prison which none of the violent rioters have got yet is a disgrace.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Peaceful protest is pointless unless it causes disruption. No-one notices it and it has no effect.

A protest is not peaceful if the purpose is to intimidate others into thinking differently by causing disruption.

Fuel protests over the years have typically been about fuel duty and outside/overseas influences. Increased fuel costs effect everybody directly and immediately and will always gain the support of the majority of the population who despite personal indifference can at least understand the bigger picture.

The courts put out a strong message to those causing significant financial loss to the economy. Financial crime often carries a higher sentence. Public opinion and the need to stop such actions in the future drove the outcome.

 

[fisicx]

Peaceful protest is pointless unless it causes disruption. No-one notices it and it has no effect.

Standing at the station with banners is a peaceful protest as it doesn't prevent use of the service. If I can't get to work and lose my job because protesters have blocked entry to the train station it's no longer a peaceful protest, it's discriminatory action against those who need to use the service.

 

[NewTime]

What are your views on peaceful protest? Personally I think the right to protest peacefully, even if it causes disriuption and inconvednience to others, is a fundamental right. Disgracefully, in this country, that right has been removed and peaceful protest is now a criminal offence. However people may have attended the riots without any violent intention or knowledge that it may become violent, because thye wished to protest peacefully. Mush a sI hate their views, I defent their right to protest.

The problem is that we all know how right-wing protests go, even the most peaceful one had two dozen arrests, before the riots.

We can all go in the middle of the street with a placard - the problem is that any protest against immigration is not placards, but just an excuse for people to make a mess.

These people who attended the riots and was violent are no worse than those who went as the audience, without that audience Dave from the car wash wouldn’t have been setting a bin on fire and sending it into a hotel. These people are dregs on society.

There are more successful protests out there and they don’t lead to such disorder.