Thanks, tinka. I've had it confirmed today that it was actually an informal chat, despite how officious it came across. I've decided to follow what was outlined in that meeting (daily logs and task lists) for the time being, and see how it goes. After the six weeks are up when the next meeting is scheduled, I'm going to put forward all evidence for my case - paperwork about recommended workloads etc. If before then things escalate despite following these recommendations I'll have no option other than to take things further with the governors and union. I just want to state again how grateful I am to everyone who's offered advice. I felt trapped, but now I can put my thoughts in order thanks to all of you.

That makes sense. I'll compile the relevant documentation to show how much work I have, and how much I should have according to industry recommendations.

Haha ok thank you

If this is just a telling off, how would that affect matters with regard to asking the union's advice? Would you still recommend I do that?

I have no idea. But it was repeated multiple times that I was being given a verbal warning, with three managers there and a union rep. I can't see how to take it any other way.

Nope, nothing. I just went away with what was said, basically "get your act together".

Thank you. I'm going to get on to my union and mention what I've been told here. That way when I approach my managers I can say "following the advice of my union...." to show I'm not being obstinate, but neither will I roll over.

Thanks for the replies everyone, it's a relief to be able to talk to people who can give me sound advice. I should have been more clear earlier. My union rep here did accompany me to the meeting as witness, he was the one that came to get me. As soon as I sat down I was told this was a verbal warning, and and the reasons laid out why. I was allowed input at the end, and but I wasn't in any frame of mind to get a constructive thought out. I wasn't really given much opportunity to respond at any rate, being talked at by three people about my shortcomings. Also, they were all aware of our personal circumstances as I took three weeks off to be with my fiancee. I could have stayed off longer but I felt under pressure to return - nobody said anything, but I knew I'd struggle to catch up. During the meeting a new plan of action was developed where some jobs are given to my line manager and she produces a daily list. But only some jobs, because nobody could clarify what goes to the LM or what comes straight to me. We'll have to see how that pans out. This is all due to be re-investigated in six weeks. Again, thank you everyone. I feel like there's some light at the end of the tunnel now.

This week I received a verbal warning due to under-performance and I need some advice, so here's some background: I work in a school as the sole IT guy, and have done for the last five years. Over those five years my workload has steadily increased, and I've gone from supporting approximately 200 workstations to 300. The requirement for IT in classrooms has also increased. At no point was there a review (at least, I wasn't consulted) as to whether this increase could be effectively supported. To put this into perspective, BECTA (quango that's shut down now, cut funding) issued guidance on the number of ICT technicians needed for IT support. Basically, if you had a modern setup with everything working smoothly it's a 150:1 ratio of computers to technicians. But I don't just take care of the computers - there's software, licensing, PAT testing, inventory, printers, multimedia devices, user support, procurement, network troubleshooting, etc. etc. etc. I even have to check over the CCTV! My line manager has no idea what my job involves, so explaining anything is usually met with a blank expression. It's not been a good year at home, either. Earlier this year, my fiancee gave birth at 24 weeks to our son who was too premature to survive. Seeing your child slowly lose the fight for life when there's nothing you can do but watch and tear your hair out isn't something I'd wish on my worst enemy. Months of comforting your partner, trying to be the 'strong one' is emotionally draining to say the least. Ever since I've had an endless dull ache behind my eyes, and constantly tired. So you can see why being called in front of your line manager and two bosses without any notice and being told in no uncertain terms that you're being given a verbal warning for under-performance, has left me without any idea where to turn. I feel stuck between tears and rage. So the nights since the warning I've been unable to sleep, my mind constantly churning over events. It's like I've got a weight on my chest that I can't shift. Anyway, end of my vent. I don't know if anyone can offer advice, but I needed to get this out somehow. Thanks for reading.

Nearly double what I usually pay.

Apart from the penalties for ending your contract within the minimum term, it only states: "You will be responsible for all Charges up to and including the date that this Agreement terminates." As I transferred my PAC immediately after receiving it, surely it could be argued that I haven't incurred any charges?

I've asked this elsewhere, but it may be more appropriate here. I began a 30-day rolling contract in January after my previous 18 month contract came to an end. The monthly contract was for roughly £13pcm. On the 28th of June I ported my number to GiffGaff. I received my final bill a couple of days ago that stated I owed them ~£20. A Notice Period Charge of £24.xx and a rebate of £4 for what I assume was ending my contract part-way through the month. I sent TMobile an email refuting the charge, and received the following back (the actual mail was more lengthy, this is the meat): Does anyone know what is meant by the 'to ensure you always pay for the next 30 days' nonsense? When I requested the PAC, at no point was I told that I would be charged for using the PAC within 30 days. I know that it's 'only £20', but it's the principle of the matter. The monthly contract was for only £13, and you can't say in all seriousness that clicking a few buttons on the computer leads to administrative costs of £24. Am I right to challenge this charge? I've cancelled my direct debit so there can be no 'oops, we took the money anyway!' mistakes. What are the implications of fighting this? Thanks to everyone who reads this.