be a little less hotheaded and a little more conscientious in the future

could it not be constructive dismissal?

lesson is dont take everything respondent says at face value

doesnt the P45 provide details of earnings?

Princess I wouldnt read too much into it and worry needlessly. Look at it this way - if they were going to sack you then worrying isnt going to stop that. - if they are not going to sack you then you have worried needlessly. So stop worrying. Ask for the charges for the disciplinary so you can prepare. If they dont give you them in advance make sure you highlight that and ask for it to be noted in the minutes. say you are only participate under duress. See if you can get representation/ help from union/colleague/ CAB/ anyone Prepare well - focus only on the issues, not what you wish it to be. Remember it it for them to demonstrate your "guilt" but also remember they have to prove it "on the balance of probability" and not "without reasonable doubt". If they only give you a few days to prepare, ask for a postponement (if the charges are complex). If they refuse to postpone, check with your GP that youre fit to attend. Judging by your posts, you may well find the stress overwhelming, so a sick note may well be appropriate. Once you know what you are to be charged with, seek any help you can to prepare. Regarding you personal issues, I am sorry you had to suffer all that nonsense, but remember not everyone is nasty. Seek professional help. I have never come across anyone who has been through what you describe so dont know how to advise. But dont hesitate to ask for help - its not your doing. Good luck hope things work out. I'll try to advise on the employment issues if I can.

The Leon L Massey?

yes -I was just being pedantic

@cynic09 I am very discriminating -I only eat at certain restaurants. Your view is far too simplistic. Lack of Discrimination is not simply about treating everyone exactly equally. Its more about relative power. If you had a restaurant which had a policy of treating everyone absolutely equally, but someone in a wheelchair could not get in, would you say that is non-discriminatory? If you then replaced the stairs with a ramp, would that then be dicriminatory to those not in a wheelchair? If you had a job vacancy (say school crossing partrol) which does not require great language skills but only advertised in english newspapers, but in your area there are areas of ethnic minorities, would it be discriminatory to post notices in different language in community centres/ shops frequented by ethnic minorities? Public Schools in this country have boarders who pay tens of thousands of pounds for the privilage of being taught by top teachers and give pupils a chance to focus only on studies (I know I went to one). Comprehensive pupils have to put up with less facilities, more pupil numbers in a class and less qualified teachers, with some key subjects not having any teachers qualified in those subjects (my daughters maths teachers only got a C in maths at A levels). So, if someone from a comprehensive gets a B, they actually have overcome more problems than someone who went to a Public School, (they might actually be more capable). If Oxford and Cambridge treated all pupils exactly the same and took the pupil from Public School only, would that be fair? I know many ethnic minorities who have had to overcome mountainous problems and discrimination who achieve on paper similar qualifications to a white person - is the achievement of the ethnic minority worth more? Is the that person not more capable? Positive action is not discrimination, its simply trying to even the playing field.

But sex discrimination does exist

@fletch70 dont be too quick to make judgements. You dont know the facts, so lets have less of these comments which probably have tinges of prejudice (I am sick of people thinking that we play the race card at the drop of a hat) I worked for a Local Authority (over 10,000 employees). At the time of my suspension, they had 28 other staff suspended and throughout the nearly four years I was suspended, there was an average of arounf thirty staff suspended. All others were white except two. Every single investigation was completed within three months, except mine. For me they did not even tell me what I had been suspended for until three years into the suspension, citing PIDA as the reason. The other two non-white staff were also suspended by the same person who suspended me and both of them simply left for other jobs during their suspension. I later found out that at the time of suspension, there was no PIDA complaint (or any complaint at all). The complaint was procured by a particular individual about three weeks after I was suspended, the person complaining was an agency worker. I put in a total of four ET1's. In one of them, I named this agency worker as a respondent (found his company address through Google, as by then he had left). The agency guy was annoyed and hand wrote his ET3 and explained what happened - i.e. he was called into the office of the HR head after I had been suspended and was asked to put in his complaint about me. This agency guy did not realise that his was the only complaint about me - he assumed that I had been suspended because of another complaint. The HR head falsified the date of receipt of the compliant by hand but did not put it through the system (which cant be falsified). The complaint itself was issues like I called him a dinsaur once and I made someone feel "uncomfortable" three years previously - nothing that comes under PIDA. They then pored through my emails and tried to blame me for getting spam about online viagra pills and nigerian cash transfers into my bank account. I also found out that all investigations were complete within five months of my suspension but they did not act on anything until years later. I also found out key emails were deleted by the HR head, who also had been intercepting my emails for years previously. I also found out that about two ywars previous to my suspension, they carried out investigations into another matter using external solicitors and that report stated clearly that I had been racially discriminated against by three senior staff members from HR. They tried to suppress this report which came to light because of someone mentioning it during investigations into the complaint against me. firstly they said it was not relevant, but I asked for a disclosure order anyway. Then they said the investigating solicitor was on sick leave until I came accross her at a semianr I attended (in my personal capacity). On the eve of the disclosure hearing, the document was couriered to me (with sections missing) - I eventually got the full document and saw that the solicitor had recommended disciplinary action against those three HR staff but the council did not do anything. I still have that report scanned on a memory stick and who know if I lost it where it might end up! What I have outlined is merely the tip of the iceberg and theres much much more. It implicated, the Asst Director of Personnel, an Executive Director, the Departmental Head of HR, those three senior HR staff, the Head of Audit, a Council solicitor, an idependent solicitor and four or five others. It started with an attempted fit up and the rest colluded to delay and cover up the issues. In doing so, they lied and falsified documents, including faking notes of a meeting that could not have taken place. Most of those people have been "made redundant" and the department abolished and merged into a bigger department. Unfortunately, the Asst Director and the Head of HR are still there. I eventually signed a COT3 agreement for a six figure sum and a decent reference and am laughing now. So stick that in your pipe before you accuse anyone of playing the race card and quote karma nonsense.

You statement above suggests there might be sexual discrimination here. But remember my I had been suspended for three and a half yeats before I took an ET1 against my employer, not just a matter of weeks. The advice from other is good - proper investigations normally would take several months. In my role as a manager, I had cause to suspend employees several times (on child protection issues) and I always tried my very best to have the issues investigated as quickly as possible, but I never managed to deal with any case in less than 4 weeks. I could never arrange all the relevant meetings with witnesses etc., have their statements typed up and signed within that period. People have lots of other things in their lives and rarely will they see their interview by the company on a matter they are not directly affected as being a priority, so even if managers want to sort the investigations out, they cant do it in such a short period. So be patient and try to be less passionate and more analytical. I know from experience that its hard, but if you want to succeed, you must.

The way I "forced" them is submitted an ET1 for race discrimination stating that they have not suspended anyone for such a long time without holding a disciplinary and the suspension therefore, far from being a neutral act waas an act of discrimination. I invited the ET to hear the disciplinary themselves. Two days before the hearing, they set a date for the disciplinary and I therefore stayed that particular ET1.

the "error" is being committed in usa, so us laws will apply- maybe google/wiki research on us data protection laws ?

princess you are lucky - I was suspended for nearly three and a half years. They charged me with 36 separate offences ranging from hurting someones feelings by not looking at them three years before the suspension to calling someone a dinosaur. I forced them to hold disciplinary hearing and was found to be not guilty on all 36 charges. eventually left with a tidy sum - enough to pay off the mortgage and more. So my advice is to sit tight and wait for disciplinary- if they dont pay you, take them to ET.

no it is not. We all have a duty to raise important issues and employers have a duty to investigate them. If those suspicions prove to be erroneous, then the accused returns to work. If the suspicions were raised maliciously the emplyer has to act against the malicious person. That doesnt mean compensation is payable

It wasnt the money for me either, but the point in in these matters, an apology and money are the only remedies available - I wouldnt have gone back to work for my previous employers for anything. But the fact that I got a good sum from them means tough questions will have to be answered by certain individuals and they will have to explain the costs to district audit.

I would suggest you go for it. Its not that daunting Look for help from this forum and get hold of ETclaims:tactics and precedents and use their website. I did it in 2007 and eventually settled my case for a good sum and an excellent reference. My career is now flying partly because the experience taught me many transferable skills. Best thing I have done.

ali read this chain - its a schedule of reasons

to be honest, I'd not be inclined to give an employer the benefit of the doubt due to: my direct personal experience of having been suspended without any reason for nearly three years before the employer being forced to divulge the complaints that led to the suspension, and turns out those complaints were procured several weeks after suspension (my ET hearing was scheduled for 30 days before we had a CA - would have loved to have my day and it would have hit national headlines, but the offer was too good) more importantly the general issue that employers are always the more powerful patry in any contract of employment (we have employment laws to level the field a little bit).

**EDIT*** This is a consumer site You are a consumer If you think this site sucks then post useful/helpful information here instead of being a jerk Clearly there will be many people who are reticent about taking drastic action but there will be some who do Obviously those that dont take action because they are fearful/ nervous/ anxious will continue to talk about the issues befoire some of them take action - this is not wrong!! FYI I have changed my bank after nearly 20 years with Halifax - I moved to HSBC Premier account which has a much better deal, but you only qualify if you have quite a bit of asset or income. So it is not correct that we dont do anything Other banks may well be more appropriate for those who are not lucky enough to have adequate savings to qualify, but I would urge everyone to move their accounts Consumers of the world unite!! ps my mother used to tell me that if you have nothing positive or constructive to say, then dont say anything - maybe some of us need to take that lesson

The second point is about your legal insurance - have a careful read through of the documentation to see if youre covered. Their first attempt is always to deny liability, so its worth wrting to the insurance company pointing out the specific clause that shows you to be covered under the policy - worth a try anyway

Hi OP you seem to be getting some good advise- way better than anything I could suggest. However, just two points - firstly, you could simply state in your evidence that and existing employee has told you that the new employee actually wanted the upgrade and this is simply a case of the company trying to force you to pay the upgrade costs of the new employee. Also state that the person advising you of this information did so anonymously as they were fearful of their position. Than state that the original signed vehicle request form of the new employee would clear up the issue. This may force them to disclose the form and also call the new employee as a witness. This part of your statement, because its hearsay, will carry less weight, however together with the other points, may strengthen your case. Secod point in the next post.

If they employ people in UK (i.e. pay NI, TAX etc.) then UK employment law will apply and UK courts will have jurisdiction.

having been the subject of a similar situation, I entirely concur with Uncertain

Even then, sadly, you have the problem of policing the reference. They would be stupid indeed to put anything different in writing. But the grape vine and how they respond to phone calls is almost impossible to control. Yes but if you have an agreed reference then it would be easier to take legal action if they breach the terms.