I work for one of the big 4 accountancy firms and resigned to join a competitor on 15 June this year. I am on a 13 week notice period and it was mutually agreed that I could leave on 9 September. Last Wednesday I was suspended on full pay following an allegation that I had downloaded a large volume of confidential data (client and firm data) and the firm is now conducting an investigation which will involve, amongst other things, the Forensic IT team coming to my house on Wednesday to scan my home PC for the files that I am believed to have taken, email accounts to verify that I have not sent them to a third party and then to delete the files to their satisfaction. I have told them that the reason for the download was to back up files as a precaution when I believed that my work laptop was about to fail. This happened a) before I resigned and b) before I even had an offer from my new employer. I am confident that none of this has been sent anywhere and I am really not bothered about the data at all - they are welcome to that. What concerns me most is that this may be followed by a disciplinary hearing and dismissal for gross misconduct. What I am hoping for is to be able to delay any disciplinary hearing beyond 9 September as I know that they can't sack me after I've left. I want to use any legitimate means possible to achieve this. I am helped by having w/c 15/8 and w/c 22/8 booked as holiday and can't be contacted during that time. Realistically they will not complete the investigation this week so that leaves w/c 29/8 and w/c 5/9 (9 working days) for them to get me to a disciplinary hearing. I have thought of the following: Sickness - I am able under the firm's policy to self certify myself sick for 1 week. I understand that they should re-arrange once if I am off sick. Companion - If my chosen companion for the hearing is unavailable they have to rearrange if they are available within 5 working days. I suspect that she is on holiday during w/c 5/9. Extended holiday - is there anything to stop me extending my holiday or shifting it to eat into more of the time at the end of the notice period? This would be easy to do as it not something that has been booked. Any other suggestions? Given that I am going to a competitor I'm not convinced that they will be willing to believe my reason for taking the backup in the first place. Thanks.

Hello All I'm new to the forum but hoping some of you might be kind enough to read comment on my post. Below is just a run down of events so far, for a bit of background; I'm a female receptionist at the company 5 years, never any grievances/disciplinarys, appraisals all good etc Senior manager over the years making increasingly innapropriate remarks, always regarding my chest/cleavage, increasingly embarassing and harassing. Afraid to make a complaint about him as I knew (first hand, not rumour or hearsay) that a young male colleague made a formal complaint against this manager(let's call him IC) for bullying & harassment in which he involved his union and labour relations to come into work to try to sort out (IC) and the following year an ET1 arrivied in from a young female who left on the grounds of Bullying + sexual harassment by IC. My views then, as now, is that the company are aware of IC's behaviour but haven't seen to be doing anything about it, so what's the point in complaining. It would also be my word against his. On a work night out before Xmas, IC made his usual sexist remarks but not just to me but to my sister! I wanted to go home right away but she thought we shouldn't let the oul pervert ruin our night. So we stayed til the end of the game and I tried not to think about it but it led to an exchange of words later in the evening. Initially I had planned to bring my bro, wish I had as IC would never have made his sexist/leering comments if I had my bro instead of sis. First thing Monday I put in a written grievance, giving details of the incident and saying that is it wasn't a first occurance but a continuation of the way he speaks to me in work and because it also envolved a third party (family member) he had totally crossed the line this time. I told them his remarks to me were often accompanied by winking and/or calling me darlin' - which I am sure he doesn't do to male colleagues. Investigation got under way, Summary of Findings agreed that he calls a few females darlin, and winks at a further few and while they agree this was innapropriate, it wasn't enough to warrant disciplinary proceedings. No mention that they upheld (or not) the on going sexist comments. For this and a few other points I appealed. The appeal for my grievance against IC was held with less than 24 hrs notice. No effort was made to obtain statements from outside (key)witnesses! No minutes were provided. No witness statements were given for me to review/refute. The director who chaired the appeal seemed to be reading from the Summary of Findings and said a Letter of Concern being put on IC's file wasn't just a slap on the wrist - there was no mention of this LOC on my summary so this (and a few other things) make me think that information has been selectively shared or purposefuly omited. The appeal outcome will de given to me next week but I doubt they will discipline him. Obviously the above is only a very limited description and as I plan to send an ET1 shortly, no doubt I will come on here pestering you folks for some more advice. BTW, I have already served an SD74 Questionnaire to which I've no response (but it's still withing the time frame requested) The reason for todays post concerns a counter greivance raised by IC about my reaction to the incident outside of work (a Sat nite in December). I felt this was in retaliation for my complaint against him and made this point. Still work insisted and so to co-operate (and get it over with because it was the week in between my grievance and subsequent appeal) I went in to the investigation meeting with the same lady who conducted mine against him and gave further details. The exchange of words that I mentioned earlier was in the last 10 mins of the game, when IC and his wife started berating my sis (ok, she was a little drunk but I was not as all in attendance agreed on). I couldn't believe that he had a cheek to do this, after the earlier remark to us both and ofcourse his ongoing treatment of me. It was all too much and it really got to me! From the very first meeting I had stated that when IC and his wife started on my sis, I sat facing forward, not opening my mouth. At this meeting I gave further detail as in, the reason I sat saying nothing was because I physically couldn't. I could feel a panic attack coming on because I was stressed to hell. Usually they come on without warning but I know the signs. All my focus then is internal, trying to concentrate on breathing. I was barely aware of anything go on around me but anything being said was between my sis, IC and his wife. The game ended, I was still trying to get control of myself when I stood up, put my coat over my arm and walked over the far side of the room. My sis was still talking with IC, his wife was beside him but staring at me. It must have looked so cowardly that I let them talk down to my sis without defending her and this was just something else for me to feel bad about but I thought I couldn't walk away without having said anything at all so I went over and told her she had no business talking to my sister in the way that she had. IC didn't like that I was speaking with her and so he said (in his usual threatening manner) that "all this" would be brought up with HR on Monday to which I replied "Good because I will have a lot more to say about you then and I know that I'll not be the only female to have complained about you". His grievance about me was 1. how was I able to know about that et1 directed at him - 2. that I was shouting and behaving in an unbecoming manner. 3. that someone said, her friend said, that I said ... ( a swear word when talking about his wife). My replies 1.my job involves opening post adressed to the company with no idividual name, such as an ET1 and I saw it with my own eyes. I have never broadcast about this or anything else in all my time at the company and confidentiality has never been an issue. My remarks were directed to IC and about IC. - 2. at the very end yes my voice might have been raised but it was due to the stressful situation, brought on by IC himself! 3. this (hearsay) lie was by the same person who works under IC and who was found to have been spreading rumours that my sis and I were frogmarched out out by security = again lies which was confirmed by the venue. Today I got the Summary of Findings for his grievance against me, detailed in 2 parts. It did not uphold the breach of confidentially as they reasonably found that anyone can make a slip under extreme pressure and that in usual circumstances I would never have mentioned knowing about his prior harassment. However, it upheld that the raised voiced and the alleged swear word (which I flatly deny!) in ref to the wife were unbecoming and warranted disciplinary for gross misconduct. Iwas neither told I could appeal not did it state this on the written summary. How can they say on one hand, my words concerning the et1 etc are excusable because of the extreme circumstances and yet my raised voice etc were not? It's a complete contradiction as it was all the same incident. Up until those last few minutes, everyone can confirm I was neither drunk, rude, abusive etc. Yes, under duress I said something I wouldn't have ordinarily but why excuse what I say not not the way it's said? I wasn't being nasty, just distressed. I think they are trying to bully me because I served the SD74 and am about to lodge an ET1. There is no way a raised voice (I wasn't screaming or anything like that) constitutes gross misconduct? The swearing things is just nonsense and hopefully I can prove that this heresay came from a malicious source. Please help

The company that I worked for (Company A) had a contract to supply a labour resource to a major organisation (Company B). Company B control and decide the structure of the resource and also manage the resource on an day to day basis. As the contract with Company A came to an end, Company B decided to split the contract into two parts (Operations and Management), put the contracts out to tender and invited potential suppliers to quote for the contracts. This resulted in a new company (Company C) winning the Contact for the operational part. The management element has not yet been awarded and is still supplied by company A and controlled by company B My post was transferred into Company C on the basis that; a. The majority of my role was with the operations part.(disputable) b. The requirement for my position no longer existed with the management part of the contract. as Company B had told me that the main objectives of my role no longer existed within the management side; although my role involved management of all of the original scope of contract (Operations and Management). Following my transfer, I was verbally told by Company C that my role did not exist within their organisation structure, and 2 months later, have still not had my role clearly defined. I was told a few days ago that Company B had reviewed their position and decided that there WAS a requirement for achievement of my original role objectives, despite me being originally told the contrary. They have stated that as a result of the contract split, the role is not deemed to be managerial because of its diminished scope however this could be disputed as the role requires a managerial responsibility. The TUPE transfer has resulted in a loss of benefits and entitlements for myself in real terms. Had my post stayed with the management side of the contract this would not have happened. also, because company B has changed their approach regarding my role, is there any comeback ? Any thoughts ??? If I raised a grievance, who would I raise it against ??

I will try and be brief. In August 2010 a number of us had some deductions made from our salaries only for a compensating amount to be paid back within the same pay statement. Shortly afterwards, we all received letters alleging overpayments of allowances stretching back many years. Many thousands of £ are involved. The letters were not specific regarding which of 3 criteria were allegedly not being satisfied in order to justify payment of the allowance. The allowances were also stopped being paid immediately. We all responded in a similar way, refuting the allegations and asking for further details to which we received no responses. I should state here that none of the employees ever submitted a formal written claim for this allowance. Over the years the process has changed a number of times, but very broadly the Line manager submitted a case for payment of the allowance. In early December 2010, having not heard anything about our refuted allegation and worried that we may miss any chances of airing grievances over the issue itself and the handling of it we raised the appropriate forms, sent to HR, and received acknowledgements back within days. The grievance procedure states that we should be offered interviews by the investigating officer within 2 weeks of receipt. The employer is being very quiet about all this and we think are stalling. We think this may all go back to one single case which was submitted to the pay office many years ago. At that time the criteria was a little ambiguous. It would appear that some correspondence took place between the pay office and a senior line manager, and it was agreed that the allowance should be paid. We suspect other subsequent cases relied upon that precedent. In my own case, many years ago I was told by my Line manager some good news and bad news. The good news was that I was going to receive the allowance; the bad news was that it was not going to be backdated! My view is that these alleged overpayments cannot be recovered on the basis of a review of the criteria and then applied retrospectively. These payments were not mistakes of fact but, a mistake of judgement or interpretation of the criteria. It seems unfair that such alleged overpayments can be recovered. But is the recovery unfair in legal terms? What can we do now if the employer is dragging his heels over all this? Some of us cannot take the stress of all this as much as the others with the threat of having to pay back many thousands of pounds. Hopefully, I have included only the most relevant of facts and tried to be as objective as possible. I have omitted much of the emotional details of the responses made, and the whole questioning of the interpretation of the criteria and seeking evidence of criteria being the same over the years. All of this sort of thing was just knee-jerk defensive posturing at the time of the refuted statements; understandable at the time but not necessary to dwell on here. Does anyone agree that these overpayments have to be repaid in accordance with the law? If so, what is a reasonable amount and over what period? Suffice to say we don't think we should pay any back. All interest, advice and comments warmly thanked for in advance.