Advice required

[jonnyboyentire]

Mate of mine is in similar game to me. Times very hard, work coming in but he has big debts and needs £ quickly. Has a few vans out, and seems like a newly-promoted (8/9 months ago) contract maintenance van foreman is taking the ****. Nothing proven but suspicions about lateness, early finishing etc. Whispers from clients too which is the most worrying thing.Mate far too soft and trusting, gives his foremen a reasonably trouble free life, pays well, company phone etc. Foreman and his labourer best mates, live close and the likes. No option to move people around between the vans due to skills shortages. He put the lad through college but has recently found out he failed exams due to attendance.

He aint been well so hasn't been around much. Has been going on trust. On the mend now and needs to save cash very quickly. Best way imho is to bullet the guy and run the business from the guys position ie take over that van. Will be difficult but would work medium term. So i've set the scene.

Mate has evidence the lad has been texting constantly whilst at customers houses, so far the record is 60 outbound texts in one day but its fairly consistent. Lad was previously warned verbally (not officially as he doesnt do paper !) about getting ar*e into gear. Van diary checked and concurs that said texts (not to others in the company) happened outside of break/lunchtime. Also evidence that lad is up all night texting (irrelevant but scene-setting) from the bills. Mate also think there is messenger being used but impossible to prove.

What do you guys think? Is it gross misconduct? All texts fall within "bundle" so no direct costs to company, but there is the lack of productivity + client viewing it.

[Pablo]

It's only gross misconduct if the fella's contract states that it is otherwise your mate is going to have to go down the verbal and written warning route. If he doesn't do paperwork he needs to start sharpish or one day he'll need to remortgage the house to pay compensation all because he fired someone incorrectly or didn't fill in the accident records etc. The fella sounds like he's taking liberties alright but nothing is serious enough on it's own unless the client complaints are 100% provable in court. If the complaints are done officially and are rock solid then I'd drop him.

[Mikey_C]

^^ i concur with pablo 100%. although if times are hard there is always redundancy, gets the bloke off site at least risk == minimal cost?

[lutonlagerlout]

complaints from clients end in the sack from me
only had it once and finished the man the same day
he can make him redundant as long as he doesn't re advertise the same position.
people come and people go,I never get attached to anyone any more because the back of one is the front of another
i find the best way to get shot of someone quickly is to bag them and give them a fortnights wages without predjudice
expensive short term but cheaper in the long run
LLL

[jonnyboyentire]

Thats my way too Tony, although its a weeks wages!! I f*****g hate people who take the p***.

[seanandruby]

take the phone off him and demote him. There must be others just as capable working for him.

[henpecked]

God, wish I had breaks like that when I was a lad

(breaks as in opportunities ,not a cuppa tea- textathon)

[rab1]

normally we tell you to leave on the Monday morning and we`ll pay you for the week etc. :;): .
basically the same deal as tony (LLL).

[jonnyboyentire]

Had a chat with him today. He'd rang ACAS who said he was on a sticky wicket, so I suspect its a redundancy situation. His problem is that the work for that van is steady but he needs to cut costs therefore needs to get rid of one guy and take his work on himself whilst the "position" remains. Again, ACAS reckons it's a sticky. He's now unsure whether just to pay off the foreman, or pay off the labourer and then demote the foreman.
Poor fella - it's tough for him, a no-win.

[jonnyboyentire]

Thanks so far guys.

Spoke again tonight. The situation has escalated somewhat - he checked where the guy and his (friend) sidekick had been later in the week and was appalled at the apparent lack of work done, so much so that he was considering serious disciplinary action against the foreman (who ultimately carries the can for what happens). He then received a documented written complaint from a very good (and apparently "straight") client with allegations of falsification of work times (several times and by hours at a time, not just a few minutes). Mate now in a precarious position where he could potentially lose two contracts and more may follow. So bearing in mind the "falsification" - one documented case and two verbal complaints he has grounds for gross misconduct and the foreman is to get the bullet.

Well, that was the plan. Now the foreman is on the sick and will be for weeks which puts mate in an impossible position. I dare not post too many more details as the circumstances are fairly unique and could be traced back to me, let's just say that even the long-term story reason given 2nd hand to my mate is a totally different one to that given to his workmates.......

I really feel for him, he's been well shafted. Partly through his own good nature too.

[mickg]

sack them both NOW

I would stick pins in my eyes before I would let one person take the piss put of me regarding not doing their work as instructed to do let alone two employee's

[London Stone Paving]

It can be really tricky getting rid of staff but at the same time it can also be simple if you follow the correct procedures.

1. How long has the guy been working for your friend?
2. Sounds stupid but has he got a contract of employment?

There is something called the three step procedure details of which can be found on the ACAS website, if not on ACAS is definately on the business link site. As long as the guy has a contract of employment then your friend should be able to use the 3 step procedure to lawfully get rid of the guy for gross misconduct.

Like Pablo says the paperwork needs to be 100% watertight and he needs to follow procedure to the letter.

[jonnyboyentire]

Both less than two years, i think one possibly short of a full year.

Contracts? I doubt it knowing my mate.

[rab1]

less than a year is bye bye from my understanding.

[London Stone Paving]

Thats my feeling as well rab. It gets a lot harder to dismiss somebody after 12 months of employment

The only problem is that if they havent got contracts of employment then its very difficult to get rid without any comeback.

I know for certain that if somebody has been employed for less than six months then that person would have to fund their own tribunal if they wanted to go down that road. But not sure how it stands between six months and a year