verylittlehelps

Very Little Helps => Stores => Topic started by: barafear on 29-07-20, 02:36PM

Title: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 29-07-20, 02:36PM
Hi,

I have read several posts on here about investigation meetings - but still need some guidance about my particular example.

After working for Tesco for more than 10 years, I've barely had any disciplinary issues - until this year - where I've been racking up "Let's Talks" like they're going out of fashion.

And all for relatively "minor issues" - "refusing" to book 75% of my holidays by the end of March because I raised the query about "aren't we allowed to carry forward any unused leave into next holiday year as per Govt guidance on workers affected by Covid19 - i.e. we all had to work

Anyway - completely out of the blue, I received a letter "inviting" me to an investigation meeting - not sure I have a choice.

Two "counts" against me:

Not adhering to the company uniform policy
Leaving my till without informing Team Support.


I had a let's talk about my continued "refusal" to wear a name badge - in that let's talk, I commented that I had recently wore a name badge and when scanning an oversized item that the store sells, it hit into my name badge causing it to come open and the pin pierced my skin on my chest. Therefore, I took it off.
I mentioned this in the let's talk. I suggested a name badge without a sharp pin - and the Team support (doing the let's talk) stated that this would be passed onto management and they would get back to me.

I hadn't heard anything (that was around six weeks ago). I did ask the Team support and they stated they had heard nothing.

"Leaving my till"......consists of going to toilet to wash my hands/go to toilet. If the Team Support member is available and close to hand, I will alert them that I am going - but often the team support are no-where to be seen - and pushing the headset button tends not to produce much of a response - certainly not immediate. Obviously, I wait for a lull in customer numbers before going (other tills being empty/free).

I do not leave my till signed on - or unlocked - there are other cashiers nearby, and if I don't get the opportunity to tell Team support, I always tell the nearest cashier to me.

I know this is all a bit petty - and it seems if the 3rd Aug announcement is all about cutting hours, maybe this is the cheap way for them to do it.

To me, this just seems a complete waste of everyone's time.

I'm not in union - but intend bringing a trusted colleague (albeit this colleague is a bit too Tescofied.....they believe in black and white and believe I am "in the wrong" - so might need to choose someone else!) - and also intend not saying anything to incrimiate myself or provide their evidence.

What evidence will they have? CCTV? Witness statements from Team Support or managers?

So, if they say "Tom, Dick and Harry all saw you on 5th June not wearing a name badge" will that be enough?
If they say "you clearly weren't on your till for two minutes (here's CCTV to prove it)"

Is it a case of just going to Investigation and listening and not saying much and then waiting for disciplinary? Surely, it's such a minor offence I can only get a warning?

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 29-07-20, 02:59PM
For the 2 issues they're looking at disciplining you on, both don't have any merit, I will explain why.

For the uniform issue, by what you have explained, this revolves around you not wearing your name badge after an incident of the metal pin stabbing into your chest while carrying out your duties, this would mean that you had an accident that requires medical attention, even if it is a minor injury, it must be recorded in the first aid book (not sure if this is now part of the Safe and Legal log book), you say you received a lets talk by team support, was this just as the incident happened? You would then have grounds to say, if I suffered a workplace injury, why wasn't process followed? You would have a pretty strong case to appeal on grounds of failure to provide duty of care, especially if this was documented in the lets talk.

As for leaving the till to go to the toilet, if what you say is accurate, that the other tills were manned and you locked your screen or signed off, they would also have no grounds for a lets talk as you've done nothing wrong, you can also state that you haven't received the training on the process of having to ask team support to leave the till to relieve yourself, if your colleagues have had no problems doing the same thing, then the same must apply to you.

If it does go further, appeal and grievance the colleague/manager for harrassment, Tescos bottom line is that they will avoid unfair dismissal/constructive dismissal claims at any cost.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 29-07-20, 03:32PM
Leaving your till to go to loo is something that could have been picked up by the hub which is why it could have been flagged up . If till signed off or on secure mode it may have affected the idq or whatever it's called now . It is something being flagged a lot in our store atm which is ridiculous we're not kids in school and shouldn't have to ask to go to the toilet, .
Re  name badge , you'd be hard pushed to find a member of staff who hasn't been pricked by their name badge so I think you're clutching at straws there . It happens to me a few times a week , I hate the name badges , hate customers calling me by name but it is part of my uniform which I have known for over 15yrs I have to wear . I just suck it up .

@nightandday , I think calling a pin pr**k a work place injury that requires medical attention and needs recorded in s&L is a stretch 😂😂😂
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 29-07-20, 03:44PM
Issue 1

Bend the pin, then state it's not securely fastening, and you don't wish it to unknowingly fall off and risk a customer injury, should it fall opened into their shopping.

Issue 2

You've tried to get a response on several occasions for a request to use the toilet, which have gone unanswered. It adds to your stress incontinence problem, and to not immediately answer your call of nature, could result in an embarrassing accident, which would then be grievanced under 'dignity at work' by you.

Regarding CCTV monitoring...if your till was signed off it would be registered as such, showing you have left your checkout in a secure mode, therefore the use of CCTV evidence would be in breach, as it is not being used to survey a security risk, but to monitor staff productivity.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 29-07-20, 04:09PM
Thanks for the replies.

Yes, I share the same views of the name badge as Welshie - but so far I haven't succumbed (much) to "suck it up" - I do wear my badge on occasions;
Obviously the pin pr**k was not recorded as an accident, nor did I report it at the time - although I did let a nearby colleague know it happened as I "yelped" in pain.

Yes, I've tried bending the pin/breaking the pin etc. But they keep ordering me new badges or given me temporary ones!

So far I have yet to respond to the letter - I was a bit shocked to find that they only needed to give me 24 hours notice of investigation meeting!!

Is it a case of just "accept the invitation" and sit and hear what evidence there is?

I think it's more a case of what Welshie said - the "hub" is cracking down on very minor things - and it's really not making Tesco a nice place to work anymore.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 29-07-20, 05:36PM
Temporary badge ?? Does this have your name on it ? No name on it ? Or someone else's  name on it , if someone elses as I have seen in our store then surely that in itself is your argument against a name badge , as it does not identify you .

A few months back I served a colleague,   I didnt know them and looked at their name badge . I was very surprised to see that they had the same very unusual name as my husband,  I asked about it and he'd lost his name badge and been given it as it was lying in the office . I was furious as my husband is off sick .
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 29-07-20, 07:33PM
It will either be one of those "I'm new to the team" badges or someone else's name. I've been
Josh and Thomas...not my name. In reality there is no need for identification at all. They claim it's for customer wow comments or possibly complaints. But as a checkout person I'm easily identifiable by till number or login number printed on receipt.  But clearly, it is policy and this is what mgt will stick to.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Morris999 on 29-07-20, 07:45PM
I won’t comment on the uniform issue or the holiday booking ones.
Now the investigation for leaving the till without authorisation/permission.

Now like Welshie has said its most likely a Hub investigation, whereby you have probably done the same thing a few times over a certain amount of time, most likely after taking cash payments or not long after doing a till pick up.
Whether it was after a cash payment/till pick up or not it will flag up in the Hub system.
Yes it might seem trivia to yourself or others on here, but this is a well known tactic for when cashiers/reliefs decide to steal money out the till.
Also the Hub will not have access to the cash management system to see if the Till is short.
Things like this and other things like taking the customers word for how many items they have and not checking, not scanning tagged items etc, are Red flags for the Hub system.
From an operation point of view leaving your till without telling the Team support could have an impact on IDQ resulting in relief calls going out etc.
Remember it’s the Team supports role to deliver this not the cashiers, so if the store is failing and the frontend team are being challenged/managed on this then cashiers disappearing will be highlighted to the checkout manager.
Now it shouldn’t be this because IDQ is not being managed in stores currently.
So unless your manager has it out for you personally it will be because of the Hub.
Now obviously colleagues can go to the toilet but it’s not unreasonable to expect them to let the Team support know first, unless they have a medical condition that prevents them from waiting.

Just so people on here know some other things the Hub picks up.
It will inform the Store Manager for things like:
Managers not locking the waste cage after chucking waste
Colleagues/managers chucking waste without booking it
Managers not closing/locking the Makeup shutters after a certain time in the evening.
Colleagues leaving the backdoor/gate unlocked.
Colleagues authorising age restricted products without looking at the customer on self-serve or clearing weight discrepancies again without checking first.

All the above are the most common ones that I’ve either come across or been told about.
Some will trigger a Hub investigation after 1 occurrence others will need to be repeated by the same person over a certain time period, normally a couple of weeks.
And yes I’m aware of managers being investigated for some of the above.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Nomad on 29-07-20, 09:05PM
Or ate something the night before that is having an adverse affect, means that one can not hang around waiting for team support to turn up or answer the call.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 30-07-20, 06:04AM
The CCTV evidence will depend on your store. Even if poor quality it will be able to show you leaving your till. It may not be able to show if you left your till signed on or not when you popped off but that won't matter as the cash office journal will show this. Not asking or informing team support before you pop off is an issue too. They need to know what tills are open for customers. If store was quiet it would not be an issue but if store was busy they may need to arrange for someone to cover for you. It's about keeping the customer flow going.
As for refusing to book holidays, your manager can allocate them if you don't book. The whole point in the 75% before end of October and rest after that is so that Depts, and stores are not suddenly hit with so many holidays in a short space of time. Time off during COVID is not the same, same for everybody but it's time out from work. I have had this time during COVID, so have others. It's not great but we have all agreed after that we felt better for it. It does not really matter if you don't book, your holidays will just be allocated.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Tinkerbell1234 on 30-07-20, 10:16AM
Regarding cctv i am confused we dont have hub what is the new policy my manager has told me we are not allowed to view cctv at anytime not even tge security guard we have alot of theft so what do we do hes only mentioned it to me not other shift leaders i spoke to other colleagues from other store and they know nothing about it I know they are doing a trail in some stores with the hub I guess we will all get them if we are not allowed to touch cctv why can a manager view it all day watching staff
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Nomad on 30-07-20, 10:26AM
Team support not being around to ask or inform is more of an issue.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 30-07-20, 10:46AM
Quote from: Bubbles1234 on 30-07-20, 10:16AM
Regarding cctv i am confused we dont have hub what is the new policy my manager has told me we are not allowed to view cctv at anytime not even tge security guard we have alot of theft so what do we do hes only mentioned it to me not other shift leaders i spoke to other colleagues from other store and they know nothing about it I know they are doing a trail in some stores with the hub I guess we will all get them if we are not allowed to touch cctv why can a manager view it all day watching staff

Part of the security guards job is to copy cctv footage to disk and give to the police as evidence whenever an incident happens, your manager sounds inexperienced.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: miriam on 30-07-20, 10:54AM
Is any manager experienced in anything ?
Ather than no people skills Gossip and go around in clicks
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Tinkerbell1234 on 30-07-20, 11:33AM
So nothing has changed shift leaders can still view cctv when something happens I know we have to sign a book to say been viewed and why but my manager said if anything happens to inform him and he will view it when in
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: taliahad on 30-07-20, 05:01PM
Tell them that they must put everything in writing so that you can show it to your friend/uncle/whoever who is a solicitor.  If they think you've got legal back up, they are less likely to harass you. 
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 30-07-20, 05:33PM
thanks for all the responses.
I am a bit confused. The letter has come from my manager (Checkouts manager).
This manager will be chairing the investigation meeting - and the meeting is to discuss allegations made against me on the two grounds.
My view is that this manager is the only one that's all that bothered about me not wearing my badge (not sure if it's linked to their bonus or they are just being overly officious).

So this begs the question as to who raised the allegations?

Would I be wrong in thinking that this manager told one of the team support to make the allegation and then the manager could investigate me?

Surely if the checkout manager wanted to investigate me they could just raise the allegation and the investigation would just be carried out by another manager (there's enough of them floating about!)

I take on board what someone said about leaving the till/the Hub/possibility of stealing money etc.

To be honest, this Hub is a whole new Big Brother thing isn't it? I have my suspicions about its existence, but it seems people on here have had experience of it.

And if the "allegation" came from the Hub then fair enough - although the name badge wouldn't have been picked up by the Hub would it?

At the moment, those are my only concerns.

I have yet to respond to the letter - telephone to confirm my acceptance of the invitation.

Part of the reason for that is that I need to be at work to ask someone if they'd be my companion - my meeting is set for Saturday and this particular person doesn't work on Saturdays - I have no way of contacting them out of work - reading the "policy" it doesn't seem I can delay the investigation meeting just to allow me time to choose and ask for a companion?

thanks.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Mutti on 30-07-20, 06:04PM
Just out of interest, what induced you to take a job where wearing a name badge is a requirement if you are so opposed to wearing one?
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 30-07-20, 10:54PM
If you have the hub in your store, you should have been made aware, by now, where the cameras are situated.

You can ask for an adjournment, if your chosen companion is unavailable, ( assuming this person is willing ) to arrange for when they will be available. Remember this person is YOUR CHOSEN REPRESENTATIVE, and therefore has the same rights as a Union rep, should be recognised and treated in the same way as a union rep. Not informed that they are not at liberty to speak or ask questions...they cannot answer questions on your behalf, unless you have stated they are to speak for, and instead of you.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 31-07-20, 07:20AM
As part of a till investigation CCTV can be looked at regardless of if you have the HUB or not. It makes it easier to understand what has happened, mostly.
Older CCTV systems don't need individual sign in's, as far as I'm aware but there are so many different CCTV systems with the stores I can only say this about the ones I have seen.
You can't just stand over CCTV and watch for performance related issues. You need a reason and can use to verify a till loss for example.
The HUB has people watching CCTV from a remote area. They email stores when they find issues. When a store gets an email they have to investigate, starting with looking at the CCTV for the issue themselves. The HUB will also suggest questions to be asked during an investigation. If a store has the HUB fitted there are individual sign ins. Everything that is looked at can be seen by them. If a manager misuses the system this will flag up too.
The cash office system can show issues, when it comes to money it's the heaviest tracked thing in the company, and at very low levels. How many stock control colleagues get a PDAs investigation for counting out 10.00 of stock for example. How many grocery colleagues get an investigation over poor rotation that causes 10.00 waste.
Checkouts get investigations for 10.00 gain or loss. It is taken seriously. The tills should balance. Mistakes happen, scams at the front end happen but colleague theft happens too. The investigation is to establish which one it is. The focus is on theft, if you have not stolen anything it is not a worry but if you have the tools are in place to prove it. If you have made a mistake the first thing should be to look at training.
Leaving a till signed on Anne walking away does leave it vulnerable. So does leaving the de-tagged open. You just need to get into right routine of never doing these things. You need to protect your back.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Morris999 on 31-07-20, 11:35AM
Quote from: barafear on 29-07-20, 02:36PM

And all for relatively "minor issues" - "refusing" to book 75% of my holidays by the end of March because I raised the query about "aren't we allowed to carry forward any unused leave into next holiday year as per Govt guidance on workers affected by Covid19 - i.e. we all had to work


As a FYI for yourself or anyone else for that matter, yes the government has stated you can carry over holidays into next year, however be very mindful this is only the legally entitled holidays/bank holidays that the Law states you must have, Not the extra Tesco gives for long service.
Tesco will only be carrying over the legally entitled Holidays etc not used which will always come out of your holiday entertainment first, so if you use 4 weeks worth and your pro-rota Bank holidays then you will lose your personal day and any extra long service holidays not used.

It is all on the Covid updates on help centre and has been out since around March/April.
It’s worth bearing in mind if people were planning on not using any of their holidays to carryover.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 31-07-20, 12:11PM
Ok, thanks again for the responses.

To try to answer some of the queries in order:

Why did I take a job that involved wearing a badge? Well, a slightly churlish question - but to be honest, when I started, the badge we wore was aound 1/3rd of the size of the current badges - and that doesn't take into account the additional badges they expect to wear - including the "plastic border" (making the badge around 50% larger still), Think 25 badges etc.etc. Slight exaggeration but I feel like a Formula One driver (in terms of wearing uniform festooned with labels/badges) without the salary!! Clearly, the whole thing about the badge is "minor" although Tesco/my manager is taking it seriously.

Theft from till/till shortages:

If I was being investigated for this, would this not have been specified in the letter, rather than "leaving my till". I haven't been informed of any till shortages recently (not for more than 5 years).

I understand if these are the issues, then fair play.

This makes me mindful of staff searches. I remember one once where I had a half eaten pack of chewing gum in my pocket - I was asked for a receipt for it - I stated that I didn't even buy it from Tesco and I stated that I'd hardly "steal a pack of chewing gum" when I sit on till with hundreds of pounds in it - but manager at the time stated "that's the way things start - small and then build up confidence"

I understand that, but sometimes they really seem to stretch the point!!

I understand about the "statutory holiday only" - but my manager called the deputy SM when I was having the holiday meeting and he stated that "it's not Tesco policy to allow any c/f of holidays and will not be implementing the govt guidance/guidelines" 
Hey ho.

As it is, I've found another colleague - although it might be a bit tricky - the colleague is actually the store's union rep - as I say I'm not in the union - but she has agreed to come with me but has told me "if you're in the union or not, i'm always willing to help but I just can't talk to management for you" - does this imply she won't be able to talk on my behalf in the investigation meeting simply because she is the union rep - or that she believes that regardless anyone who represents me/accompanies me would not be able to talk?

All of which is contrary to the advice on here from Lucego and others.
thanks
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 31-07-20, 12:45PM
@Morris 999 , is the carrying over of holidays just for those that have been shielding or off long term sick with covid and so unable to take holidays ? Why would it change for those unaffected by it .  I'm just curious
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 31-07-20, 02:57PM
Welshie

This is what the Govt stated:

Workers who have not taken all of their statutory annual leave entitlement due to COVID-19 will now be able to carry it over into the next 2 leave years, under measures introduced by Business Secretary Alok Sharma today (Friday 27 March).

Currently, almost all workers are entitled to 28 days holiday including bank holidays each year. However, most of this entitlement cannot be carried between leave years, meaning workers lose their holiday if they do not take it.

There is also an obligation on employers to ensure their workers take their statutory entitlement in any one year â€" failure to do so could result in a financial penalty.

The regulations will allow up to 4 weeks of unused leave to be carried into the next 2 leave years, easing the requirements on business to ensure that workers take statutory amount of annual leave in any one year.

This will mean staff can continue working in the national effort against the coronavirus without losing out on annual leave entitlement.

The changes will also ensure all employers affected by COVID-19 have the flexibility to allow workers to carry over leave at a time when granting annual leave could leave them short-staffed in some of Britain’s key industries, such as food and healthcare.


This is where the "argument" starts:

So, from an individual's point of view, during late March/April/May, Tesco were open and we were all working - other places were shut, people were on furlough. I don't know the exact terms of furlough and how other employers implemented it - but for the sake of my argument if you were on furlough, you didn't have to use/choose to use AL - but in theory, you were still earning/entitled to it.

I know it wasn't, but for a lot of people on furlough, it was effectively like "being on leave" (and getting paid 80% or in a lot of cases topped up to 100% by employer) whereas for Tesco staff we worked. My manager is stating that Tesco did not prevent me from taking any leave in this timeframe - I wasn't "needed" to work and prevent staff shortages in Britain's key industries. If I wanted to take leave, I could!
But this is where personal preference comes in (and some might see it as being greedy or selfish but I'm simply applying the Govt guidance). So let's say I had leave booked for mid-April - indeed I might have had an actual holiday booked and paid for - obviously I was not able to go on that holiday - but Tesco say "don't worry, you can be on leave and just sit at home and abide by the lockdown guidelines".

Personal preference would be "I'd rather work in Tesco and "help out" - and use my leave at another time when I am likely to be able to book a holiday/go away/whatever. Now I understand that if everyone did this and let's say Lockdown was completely lifted and holidays and anything else were bookable from Sept then I understand everyone would want to be off in Sept and that wouldn't work for Tesco as a business.
What I'm saying is that by applying the Govt guidance, I'm happy to delay my holiday to April next year - but I'd like to use this year's allowance (i.e. carry forward). I'm not expecting to carry forward 20+ days - but Tesco are stating "no" - no carry forward at all - we didn't prevent you from taking leave.

Going back to the furloughed employee example - I know, there's a risk they haven't got a job to come back to - but let's stick with the assumption that they come back in August - and they have their full AL entitlement available. They will "probably" also have that option to carry forward in next year or the year after - because how is everyone going to take a year's worth of AL entitlement in 7 months (this assumes an April-Mar holiday year) - but some companies would have Jan-Dec year - anyway - that's the "logic" behind it.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 31-07-20, 03:09PM
In our store if you'd holidays booked you had to take them , you were not allowed to cancel because you couldn't go away and didn't want to sit at home . Also the company who my son works for has all staff working from home and who are very flexible with holidays usually, told all staff that they had to take the BH off , noone was allowed to work them . So I was just interested. 
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Morris999 on 31-07-20, 03:27PM
@Welshie it’s for everyone
Realistically unless you are on maternity or long term sick then there is no reason why people shouldn’t be able to take their legally statutory holidays in retail or their full entitlement for that matter.
If your are in the self-isolating or shielding group you would have used at least 2 weeks of that already so only 2 weeks plus bank holidays to take in 8/9 months, some of which will be used for Xmas most likely anyway.

I know this next comment will probably upset some people’s egos but no-one in stores is that important that the store cannot survive without them for 28 days throughout the year, pandemic or not.
I get the reasons why people are saying they don’t want to take it, but what’s going to happen next year if everyone carries it all over?
People will be complaining they have a right to take it, but because of manning situations they won’t be able to take it.
Yes I know you will all say that’s Tesco’s problem not yours, until you are left working under even more pressure because everyone’s off taking 2 years worth of holidays.

The deferred holidays was more for industry’s that because they were having to close or have leave cancelled(eg, police, military and some NHS workers)due to the pandemic there employees were unable to take them(I get people will say the entire furloughed scheme is one big holiday)
Tesco put no restrictions on people taking holidays other than the usual, so again other than people not wanting to take them, Tesco’s has made it quite clear holidays are to carry on as normal and once the colleague has hit their  statutory amount taken none will then be carried over.

I’m just putting it out there again so people don’t get to Feb/March and are suddenly surprised/shocked or angry when they are told they cannot carry over X amount of long service holidays they were planning on doing and lose them.
We all know it will happen, and the usual colleagues will be doing there hardest to s**g Tesco off for it.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 31-07-20, 03:43PM
@barafear

The fact that she is a union rep, does throw up problems, as union members could rightly complain that as a rep, she should not be representing  a non paying colleague. So mum's the word  :-X

With regard her not speaking on your behalf...she can ask questions, she can state your case, she can give an opinion...what she can't do is answer any questions posed directly to you, unless you have stated that she is to do this...but then you can't reply.

Is she a newly appointed rep? Perhaps she is unaware that entering the meeting with her colleague hat on, does not differ in terms of representation rights...Tesco managers will state at the beginning of the meeting, that a colleague can only take notes, and are prohibited from speaking...untrue  :-X

It's all there on ACAS, if the managers care to check, under chosen representatives.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 31-07-20, 04:16PM
Lucego>

I think she's been a rep for at least a year.
To be honest, I'm not looking to say too much in the investigation meeting at all.
As I have previously stated, I'd like to hear the "allegations" against me - and who has made them. And then what evidence they have to back them up.
I do think this is all very trivial and I would be surprised if it was considered to be anything more serious than a warning - but I also take on board the other "ramifications" - i.e the risk of me leaving my till without telling team support.

Of course, the flipside is that on the occasions (there have been several) where I have informed team support, at most they have closed my gate, they've advised me not to bother locking my till (knowing I'll only be a few mins) and I hardly think they stand guard over my till - so what I'm trying to spell out is that the difference in risk between "informing and not informing" is very minimal.

Anyway - thanks for the help guys/gals
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 01-08-20, 06:29AM
There is no reason not to take holiday. The time out was needed. Holiday from work is not so you can go away, it's time out from the business.
Union reps can talk in meeting but they can't answer a question directed to you. You pay union fees for the union support, knowledge and experience. If a rep goes in with you but you are not in the union they are with you just as moral support. You don't get the full service without paying the fees. It's like an insurance. It's there if you need it but you have to pay. If you opt not to pay you don't get it.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 01-08-20, 09:09AM
If a colleague goes in, that colleague has the same recognition, has the same freedom to ask and prose questions as a chosen representative, and should be afforded the same respect and courtesy shown to official reps.

If a union rep, choses to attend and support a colleague who is a non Union member, they are still there in the capacity of a chosen representative, and should be giving their all. They can't just switch off, knowingly allow themselves to be muffled from speaking, or question the wrong judgement passed, if procedures or policies haven't been followed. It can't be a case of the difference between the copper and gold package. Hence the reason I think this rep has made an error of judgement, by agreeing to attend the meeting, if they intend to stay silent.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 03-08-20, 11:40AM
Update on meeting which took place on Saturday.

In terms of my "rep" (chosen companion) - to be honest, she seemed unclear on the rules of whether she could talk (or even if I had taken someone completely different whether they could talk - had a quick chat for about 3 mins before we went into investigation meeting - she seemed to summarise it by saying she/any other companion could talk - but could not answer questions put to me directly.

All I was hoping/expecting was clarification of certain points of policy etc. (not necessarily with indepth Usdaw knowledge).

As it turned out, she didn't say too much - and neither was she really required to.

My manager started the meeting explaining what it was all about (basically reading the letter I had been sent) and asked me to  "answer the allegations"

I stopped her in her tracks and stated how shocked I was to receive the letter - and asked point blank - who has made these allegations against me.
In a roundabout way, my manager kept saying "Team Support raised these allegations" - so not citing any of the Team support individuals.
My manager then gave a bit of backstory which involved the manager themselves "noticing" I was not wearing my badge a few weeks ago - and instructed Team Support to monitor me - and over that period of time I had not adhered - therefore the investigation - so I stated "so basically the allegation has come from you, and you are leading the investigation into your own allegation?

The manager then referred to the Let's Talk I had on 17th May. This was with a member of team support, who told me at the time that the reason for the Let's Talk had been as a result of the manager telling the member of Team support to give me the Let's Talk.

This was the Let's talk that concluded with the incident of me piercing my sensitive area on my chest with the pin, and requesting an alternative non-lethal (!!) type of badge - to which I was told my comments/request/concerns would be passed to management and I would hear back.

Clearly, I didn't hear back - until this letter turned up.

Clearly, during the investigation meeting, my manager tried to "laugh off my concerns" - and I loosely quote her saying "in over 20 years at Tesco, the manager was unaware of any concerns/complaints/injuries caused by the pin of the badge" - implying that I was in the wrong!


Moving onto the "leaving my till without informing" - the manager referred to me leaving my till without informing Team Support - I asked for clarification of which incident or incidents the manager was referring to? The manager stated it was me walking off the till with a full belt of shopping on it and the customer standing there - and implied it was "last week" - I stated that an incident like that had happened about 4 weeks ago and the details were as follows:

There was a leak/spillage in my previous customer's shopping - my hands were covered in some sort of goo - I was on a till that was very close to the public toilets (15 yards maybe) - and I agreed with the customer that I had to wash my hands and the customer agreed and said he did not want me scanning his shopping with all this goo over me - I was back serving within 60-75 seconds and the customer did not have an issue - in fact he was quite pleased.

Clearly, Team support just "spotted" this incident and did not speak to customer or even attempt to jump on my till in my absence and serve the customer (if they were that concerned) - the manager looked ashen faced and clearly was unaware of this version of events - so we quickly moved on.

The manager gave the normal company spiel of IDQ, customer service etc.etc. to which I replied I was aware of all that - and I also used the very real example of it taking more than 3 mins for Team support to answer my red light call (on that very morning). I requested that maybe I should have a headset on the till and then I'd be happy to "inform" Team support whenever I needed to leave the till. The manager actually stated that this was an idea for Tesco a few years ago but it was not pursued. Don't Aldi staff all wear headsets? The reason I mention Aldi is that a new Aldi has recently opened and this is partly the reason for our management running around chucking investigations/disciplinaries/dismissals around like confetti.

Cut a long story a bit shorter - we were sent out of meeting while manager and company notetaker discussed - and then called back in to be told I had some "Next Steps"

Basically wear my badge and don't leave my till!!!

Not sure if it was a victory or a score draw!!

Thanks for your help and support guys.

My companion actually stated that I articulated myself very well (albeit whilst I was "shaking" - a combination of rage/frustration).
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 03-08-20, 02:46PM
 :thumbup:  well done you   :thumbup:

You have a right to a copy of the notes, and I hope those notes contained the reference you made, that the manager was leading an investigation into her own allegations?
This should have been picked up on right away by your rep, and the meeting adjourned, stating the above as the reason, being against Tesco policies.
Should there be any attempt to escalate at a later date, these notes will prove that this meeting cannot be used or referred to, due to non compliance of correct policies and procedures.
Instead of monitoring the non wearing of a badge, you should have been expressly informed to wear one, each time you didn't. Pathetic waste of time and resources to monitor such a trivial misdemeanour.

Moving forward, wear your badge, and if you need to use the toilet, make a note of the time, any problems encountered trying to bring it to the attention of the TS, or any unreasonable delay in your request being granted.

Jeez...I'm glad I worked shopfloor and not checkouts. It really wouldn't have gone down well with my team, if we had to ask permission to go for a p**s  :-X :-X
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 03-08-20, 03:00PM
Well done !
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: BUY TESLA STOCK on 03-08-20, 03:18PM
The badges are a liability anyway. I’ve been pricked myself before as a box fell from the top shelf hitting my badge. Then you have colleagues wearing anyone’s badge just to satisfy the management that they have one.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 03-08-20, 03:18PM
I forgot to mention one further point (in my desire to cut a long story short).

When the meeting resumed (after the adjournment for my manager to consider the "evidence"), my manager referred to an "informal discussion" that was still in my personnel file from 2012 (!!!) about not wearing my name badge - the manager indicated it showed an ongoing issue - I responded with "the ongoing issue of failing to provide me with a velcro badge?" I did express a level of shock that this was still "on file" - questioning that "warnings" (not that I've had any) only stay on file for a year - so how can an informal discussion be still there after eight years?
The "company notetaker" who also happens to be the "office manager" (I don't know exactly what their job title/role is) - she stated that it would stay on my file until seven years after I leave - stating that "informal discussions" were not the same as a warning that "dropped off after a year or whatever" - clearly they're not - but clearly they are not as serious as a warning and therefore should not be referred to at all!! By this stage of the meeting, I was doing well to hold it together - clearly this just proved my manager has it in for me- and is clutching at any straw possible to make this happen.


One further point - which actually made my rep "giggle" in the meeting - as we were sat around the table, my manager removed her waistcoat - and as she sat there in her blouse, I noticed she had no name badge!!
So I actually mentioned it - I said "isn't it ironic that as the four of us are sat around this table that you (the manager) are the only one not wearing a name badge" - to which the response was "it's on my waistcoat which I've just taken off" followed by "I'm not on the shopfloor so I don't need to wear one" (at which point clearly I should have emphasised the point by removing the badge that I had reluctantly put on - but I didn't ) - I did mentioned "well clearly, when I've been spotted not wearing a badge on my shirt, it's probably because it's on my fleece and as the temperature in the store has been roasting for the last two months, I've always needed to remove my fleece " - obviously, the response to that was "I can order as many name badges as I want" - the rep then stepped in and said "the store has been having problems receiving any name badges at all - loads of people ordered - but no deliveries" - to which the manager stated "they would look into it" - blah blah blah

I was tempted to use the shopfloor analogy - but I guess I can see the "difference" in a way (i.e. if someone disappears from filling up the bananas, no one is likely to come along and nick a box of bananas - but the till is a different beast (despite the numerous CCTV cameras trained on every till, not to mention other colleagues being on tills opposite and behind) - I also wanted to know whether my manager had to ask for the SM's permission to go to the toilet either - but I didn't think that would have helped much. I had read one of the posts on here stating I should be polite and professional during the investigation meeting.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: BUY TESLA STOCK on 03-08-20, 03:25PM
Barafear :)
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lackofinterest on 03-08-20, 03:50PM
nice one barafear :thumbup:. another f****ng numpty who should get a disciplinary for wasting company time >:D >:D >:D :D :D :D
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 03-08-20, 03:51PM
Informal discussions, should only be referred to if escalating to a formal warning, of the disciplinary process, so should be treated the same...also the note taker should not be making any comments or passing any opinions...she is there to take notes and stay silent!

Hmm...if you have got the nowse to stand up for yourself, and run rings around the management, you'd make an ideal rep :thumbup:
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lackofinterest on 03-08-20, 03:54PM
"informal discussion" that was still in my personnel file from 2012. so "informal" that it stays on file for 100 years ??? :D :D :D :D :D
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 03-08-20, 04:31PM
Next Steps are basically mickey mouse disciplinaries, when the upper echelons of Tesco don't like you, they will use next steps, their lips salivating at the prospect of giving you at least a first written warning, but to be downhearted to find that you're a consultant in CA clothing, but if you're a ca with at least a 100 iq, and haven't done anything wrong, you're untouchable. You won't progress at Tesco, but you'll at least be a thorn in your managers side with your superior intellect.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: BUY TESLA STOCK on 03-08-20, 04:35PM
NightandDay  :)
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: miriam on 03-08-20, 06:22PM
Jackanory
I agree with what u you say
If your face don't fit you will have lots of meetings cause u you r are just a thorn in clicks side

Also the click r are unintelligent idiots

[admin]From the VLH registration agreement. You are required to post only in the English language. 'Text speak' is not acceptable.[/admin]
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Mutti on 05-08-20, 12:38PM
CLICK
A short, sharp sound as of a switch being operated or of two hard objects coming smartly into contact.


CLIQUE
A small close-knit group of people who do not readily allow others to join them.

[admin]Well spotted Mutti, want a job ? :) [/admin]
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Robert Onedin. on 05-08-20, 09:16PM
Barafear they both sound like very trivial things to warrant meetings.I sometimes wonder how management keep a straight face during these so called investigations.As they often sound so trivial I wonder how people don't laugh at the waste of time they are sometimes.And paper wasted sending out these let's talk rubbish. :)
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Mutti on 06-08-20, 10:31PM
Quote from: Mutti on 05-08-20, 12:38PM
CLICK
A short, sharp sound as of a switch being operated or of two hard objects coming smartly into contact.


CLIQUE
A small close-knit group of people who do not readily allow others to join them.

Well spotted Mutti, want a job ?  :)


I may work on a checkout, but underneath lurks the kind of teacher that leaves your essay with so many red marks it looks like there's been a massacre!
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 10-08-20, 11:36AM
Mutti

Just the man (or woman) to help then.
I've just read Dave's August update - and within the first sentence or so, he states :


The contribution of colleagues has been immense, and the positive feedback we’ve seen from our customers speaks for itself.


Now without resorting to Google, I was curious whether it should be "contribution from colleagues" rather than "of" - I might be being slightly pedantic!!

Interesting comment on Ourtesco in relation to the August update - not sure whether the member of staff is on here at all - but clearly she (probably a she....name of Kim) doesn't sound like a happy bunny - but I'm not sure how positive posting comments like that (whether they are true or not) can be helpful to her career/job in Tesco - definitely sounds like she's reached the end of her tether.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Hammer10 on 10-08-20, 11:40AM
She always comments negatively since they cut our double time and premiums.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 14-08-20, 09:46AM
psmith>

Is your response above on the correct thread? Makes no sense!!

[admin]The post you refer to has been deleted as it appears nonsensical and off topic.[/admin]
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 01-09-20, 12:20PM
I didn't think I would be updating or adding to this thread - well at least not so soon nor on a "negative" basis.

Just a little background. I wrote on here about my "clean record" up to very recently when I have been collecting "lets talks" like they're going out of fashion and then I had this investigation meeting a few weeks ago - where it was seemingly "resolved" in my favour and I hoped that would be an end to it.

One of the several "Lets Talks" concerned my "refusal" to book 75% of my holiday by 1st April 2020. To summarise - in the end I did meet my manager halfway - and ended up booking a few more days which more or less met the 75% threshold - at no stage have I been chased up or encouraged to book the remaining 25% (and outstanding BH days and Personal Day owing to me). If they were to be allocated to me then so be it - I'd deal with that when I heard - but I had heard nothing.

Whilst browsing on Ourtesco recently, I happened to be in the "sign in" bit (which I rarely am) and by chance clicked on the "Myshifts" screen - as my shifts are fairly standard week to week (I'm not flexi and sign up to very little overtime) it's not something I look at on a regular basis.

Anyway - as I checked, I noticed I was showing as being "off" on Sunday just gone (Sunday being a contracted day) - I had no record of having booked this - and as I knew I had booked the following weekend off (i.e. this Sat/Sun), I very rarely book two weekends on the trot off - preferring to spread my leave throughout the year - so I thought that this day off showing was a mistake.

Anyway - I managed to contact my team support member and she confirmed that in the "holiday book" there was a signed copy of holiday sheet showing that Sun 30 Aug had been allocated as my personal day!!! I know the shops have got Christmas stuff in early - but Aug 30th for a personal day!!!

In addition to this, my outstanding BH days had also been allocated - all of these were unbeknown to me - and not communicated to me.
I actually managed to find my version of the holiday form and none of these days were on there - so they had been added to the Tesco copy but not communicated to me or signed by me - clearly when signing forms in future, I will make sure I score out any "blank spaces".

So privately I have been fuming about this - I was going to take it up with my manager (the one who brought about this investigation in the first place) - but given my relationship with them is fairly non-existant and in my mind I was thinking "what will I gain?" I decided to leave it.

Fast forward to yesterday - I worked the BH - and 3 mins before end of my shift, Team support closed my till and said my manager wanted to see me in office out the back - I was actually thinking that maybe the news about the holiday non-communication had got back to them and I was about to be apologised to - silly me!!
Knocked on door, come in - here's a letter - goodbye.

Opened the letter and "you are invited to an inveestigation meeting for "failure to adhere to company uniform standards" !!!!

To say I was not best pleased would be the understatement of the century. I was "F-ing and Blinding" (in the back area of shop so not in front of customers) - my heart rate increased significantly - basically I did not handle it very well - To top it all, they handed me the letter to save on postage - but expect me to phone them to confirm my attendance!!!

To top it all, the meeting was scheduled for next saturday when I have AL booked!!

The next bit probably shouldn't have happened - and did lack professionalism on my part - but I was extremely angry/frustrated - I had to go back to tills to retrieve something personal - and my team support (who is a "friend") asked what had happened - and my anger/frustration were still very high - so in describing what had happened I was still using inappropriate language - customers unlikely to have overheard - I then proceeded to rip up the letter in front of her and chucked it in the bin!!

I then marched back out the back and knocked on manager's door and told them I would not be attending the meeting next Saturday (didn't say why - that's for them to find out!!) - when I don't turn up for work next week, they can add two and two together.

In summation, the outcome of the previous investigation seemed to be "fairly positive" for me - with my manager "promising to look into the possibility of obtaining alternative badges for me that did not contain a sharp pin" - obviously I have not been provided with any replacements of this kind (in fact, two new badges appeared for me - just the standard pin badges) - over the last six weeks or so, I have tried to "follow the rules" and wear the badge in a way in which to minimise the possibility of injury (wearing it on my collar) - on a couple of occasions I have "been reminded to wear the badge" (I have questioned whether my velcro badge had arrived yet?! ) - and I have worn the badge on being reminded - even though this whole situation had not yet been resolved (i.e. the velcro) -

So to get this letter is just a kick in the teeth - and I am strongly considering a grievance for harassment and bullying by my manager - although my lifeline experience of these things is not positive.

>:D >:D
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Jasper5 on 01-09-20, 01:36PM
Perhaps you could wear the badge on a lanyard and tape over the pin on the back to avoid it stabbing you? Finding a way to wear a badge that suits you would be my priority if I was you - to avoid all this stress of let’s talk, investigations etc. I think it’s highly unlikely Tesco will provide you with any other type of badge (whatever has been said to you previously), so this would be the quickest way to resolve the situation.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: penguin on 01-09-20, 03:41PM
Your manager is simply following the process as your not wearing full uniform, a badge is part of your uniform when all said and done, you would struggle to get a grievance upheld under the circumstances.  I agree with Jaspers suggestion of wearing the badge on a lanyard, this could be something you might like to bring up at your investigation meeting, doing it then at least looks like your trying to find a way forward and can only help your case.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 01-09-20, 05:37PM
If your manager was asking something unreasonable or singling you out to do something then I would understand you wanting to put a grievance in but everyone in our store has to book all there holidays not just 75% , it's really annoying but it how it is and uniform policy states you must wear a badge . I dont understand how your relationship with your manager has broken down to such a degree  over these issues .
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 02-09-20, 10:00AM
I have noticed other staff in the store not wearing a name badge.
I have noticed staff with long hair not tieing it back as per the policy - and laughably although they are wearing a name badge, their long hair covers it up!!
I have noticed staff wearing coloured nail varnish - and not only not getting "admonished" for it but being admired for it by "management/supervisors" ("oh isn't that lovely, where did you get it done?")
Do I spend all my time raising these transgressions?
That's without even going down the line of what do managers actually do?

Laughably, we all had a special meeting because a rival was opening a new shop nearby.

As part of this one of the messages which was reinforced was : If a customer approaches you on shopfloor and asks for help finding a product, rather than just pointing or saying look down aisle 12, you were actively encouraged to take the customer to the product.

Within a couple of weeks of that meeting, I was on the till and my manager was standing at the "desk" and was approached by three customers within about 3 mins - all asking for help finding products - and all of them she just pointed away and stated an aisle number.

I feel victimised because I am being singled out - and all for a relatively petty misdemeanour - and not only that but it has already been part of an investigation - the "next steps of which" were that my manager would be looking to meet my needs for a badge without a pin - as this still has not been produced (and I agree probably never will) then how can I be still doing "wrong" when I raised my dispute in the meeting and no resolution has been made - so basically if I "just wear my badge like nothing happened" then it just makes it look like the reasons/concerns I raised in the investigation meeting were of no merit!!!!

I understand people's views on here - it does seem a minor point - I should just "wear a badge and get on with it" - but I just feel it's a point of principle now given the "history"

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 02-09-20, 10:56AM
So as you say , they do seem minor points SO  is there an underlying reason that it has got so bad . I get how annoying the holiday thing is , I get round that by booking mine for as late in year as possible and telling them I may need to move them for if something comes up . The badge thing I really dont get , we have all injured ourselves with the badge pins at times I'm sure . I've frequently drawn blood as the pins are rubbish but I'm not going to let that destroy my relationship with my manager to the point I'm miserable in work because of it . I suppose you need to ask yourself is it worth feeling isolated over .  Good luck if you do go to new meeting  .
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 02-09-20, 01:55PM
Quote from: barafear on 02-09-20, 10:00AM
I have noticed other staff in the store not wearing a name badge.
I have noticed staff with long hair not tieing it back as per the policy - and laughably although they are wearing a name badge, their long hair covers it up!!
I have noticed staff wearing coloured nail varnish - and not only not getting "admonished" for it but being admired for it by "management/supervisors" ("oh isn't that lovely, where did you get it done?")
Do I spend all my time raising these transgressions?
That's without even going down the line of what do managers actually do?

Laughably, we all had a special meeting because a rival was opening a new shop nearby.

As part of this one of the messages which was reinforced was : If a customer approaches you on shopfloor and asks for help finding a product, rather than just pointing or saying look down aisle 12, you were actively encouraged to take the customer to the product.

Within a couple of weeks of that meeting, I was on the till and my manager was standing at the "desk" and was approached by three customers within about 3 mins - all asking for help finding products - and all of them she just pointed away and stated an aisle number.

I feel victimised because I am being singled out - and all for a relatively petty misdemeanour - and not only that but it has already been part of an investigation - the "next steps of which" were that my manager would be looking to meet my needs for a badge without a pin - as this still has not been produced (and I agree probably never will) then how can I be still doing "wrong" when I raised my dispute in the meeting and no resolution has been made - so basically if I "just wear my badge like nothing happened" then it just makes it look like the reasons/concerns I raised in the investigation meeting were of no merit!!!!

I understand people's views on here - it does seem a minor point - I should just "wear a badge and get on with it" - but I just feel it's a point of principle now given the "history"

If you can prove that the team support or manager communicated, observed or had any interaction with someone who wasn't wearing a name badge, you can raise a grievance for being singled out, if you're being disciplined for something many others are doing, then the managers have a semi-legal responsibility to ensure that investigations and disciplinaries are applied in a fair and consistent manner.

For more info https://www.acas.org.uk/disciplinary-procedure-step-by-step/step-2-following-a-fair-procedure


Semi legal being:
"Although the Acas Code is not the law, if a disciplinary case reaches an employment tribunal, judges will take into consideration whether the employer has followed the Acas Code in a fair way"

And

"The employer must make sure they follow a full and fair procedure throughout."

And


"The Acas Code mainly applies to those with employee employment status. But to keep good working relationships, it's a good idea if employers follow the same fair procedure for all workers."
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 03-09-20, 03:43AM
With nearly 30 years of wearing the badge I have never had an injury. As it would seem that you work on checkouts the likelihood of injury is much less than those working on the shop floor.
As for the holidays. The 75% before end of October applies to everyone. As a company we are moving towards work and pay. at some point we are going to move towards online holiday booking and allocation.
I'm not one who says policy is law but as we work in a big company we do have rules. If we don't like he rules we need to be constructive in trying to change things. It has worked for some things. What we can't do is have rules that we choose to ignore as we don't like them or think it's ok for others but not for me.
Thinking we can get round things and thinking we are being clever about it will at best only win you the battle, it will never win you the war. I bet you had a good laugh about wearing your badge on your shirt collar. You must have thought you had found a way round things and you had won. You are clearly doing battle over standards of dress and holidays. Having a meeting booked during annual leave will not happen and you have found a mistake made by your manager. They may have made a mistake in this but they are correct in standards of dress and holiday booking.
Do you also argue about what till you are on and when you are sent on breaks.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 03-09-20, 07:08AM
"Do you also argue about what till you are on, and when you are sent on breaks?"

NUMBER 6 !!!!
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 03-09-20, 08:13AM
Quote from: barafear on 01-09-20, 12:20PM
I didn't think I would be updating or adding to this thread - well at least not so soon nor on a "negative" basis.

Just a little background. I wrote on here about my "clean record" up to very recently when I have been collecting "lets talks" like they're going out of fashion and then I had this investigation meeting a few weeks ago - where it was seemingly "resolved" in my favour and I hoped that would be an end to it.

One of the several "Lets Talks" concerned my "refusal" to book 75% of my holiday by 1st April 2020. To summarise - in the end I did meet my manager halfway - and ended up booking a few more days which more or less met the 75% threshold - at no stage have I been chased up or encouraged to book the remaining 25% (and outstanding BH days and Personal Day owing to me). If they were to be allocated to me then so be it - I'd deal with that when I heard - but I had heard nothing.

Whilst browsing on Ourtesco recently, I happened to be in the "sign in" bit (which I rarely am) and by chance clicked on the "Myshifts" screen - as my shifts are fairly standard week to week (I'm not flexi and sign up to very little overtime) it's not something I look at on a regular basis.

Anyway - as I checked, I noticed I was showing as being "off" on Sunday just gone (Sunday being a contracted day) - I had no record of having booked this - and as I knew I had booked the following weekend off (i.e. this Sat/Sun), I very rarely book two weekends on the trot off - preferring to spread my leave throughout the year - so I thought that this day off showing was a mistake.

Anyway - I managed to contact my team support member and she confirmed that in the "holiday book" there was a signed copy of holiday sheet showing that Sun 30 Aug had been allocated as my personal day!!! I know the shops have got Christmas stuff in early - but Aug 30th for a personal day!!!

In addition to this, my outstanding BH days had also been allocated - all of these were unbeknown to me - and not communicated to me.
I actually managed to find my version of the holiday form and none of these days were on there - so they had been added to the Tesco copy but not communicated to me or signed by me - clearly when signing forms in future, I will make sure I score out any "blank spaces".

So privately I have been fuming about this - I was going to take it up with my manager (the one who brought about this investigation in the first place) - but given my relationship with them is fairly non-existant and in my mind I was thinking "what will I gain?" I decided to leave it.

Fast forward to yesterday - I worked the BH - and 3 mins before end of my shift, Team support closed my till and said my manager wanted to see me in office out the back - I was actually thinking that maybe the news about the holiday non-communication had got back to them and I was about to be apologised to - silly me!!
Knocked on door, come in - here's a letter - goodbye.

Opened the letter and "you are invited to an inveestigation meeting for "failure to adhere to company uniform standards" !!!!

To say I was not best pleased would be the understatement of the century. I was "F-ing and Blinding" (in the back area of shop so not in front of customers) - my heart rate increased significantly - basically I did not handle it very well - To top it all, they handed me the letter to save on postage - but expect me to phone them to confirm my attendance!!!

To top it all, the meeting was scheduled for next saturday when I have AL booked!!

The next bit probably shouldn't have happened - and did lack professionalism on my part - but I was extremely angry/frustrated - I had to go back to tills to retrieve something personal - and my team support (who is a "friend") asked what had happened - and my anger/frustration were still very high - so in describing what had happened I was still using inappropriate language - customers unlikely to have overheard - I then proceeded to rip up the letter in front of her and chucked it in the bin!!

I then marched back out the back and knocked on manager's door and told them I would not be attending the meeting next Saturday (didn't say why - that's for them to find out!!) - when I don't turn up for work next week, they can add two and two together.

In summation, the outcome of the previous investigation seemed to be "fairly positive" for me - with my manager "promising to look into the possibility of obtaining alternative badges for me that did not contain a sharp pin" - obviously I have not been provided with any replacements of this kind (in fact, two new badges appeared for me - just the standard pin badges) - over the last six weeks or so, I have tried to "follow the rules" and wear the badge in a way in which to minimise the possibility of injury (wearing it on my collar) - on a couple of occasions I have "been reminded to wear the badge" (I have questioned whether my velcro badge had arrived yet?! ) - and I have worn the badge on being reminded - even though this whole situation had not yet been resolved (i.e. the velcro) -

So to get this letter is just a kick in the teeth - and I am strongly considering a grievance for harassment and bullying by my manager - although my lifeline experience of these things is not positive.

>:D >:D

Do you still have your copy of the original booking form, which these added days are not on it?? If so, then you can grievance that the manager has falsified a Tesco document, by adding these dates, without your knowledge, and prior agreement. The dates of your original and their copy should be the same, and the holiday booking meeting date that you had with the manager, which has your signature on, should match on both forms. If the booking meeting is the same date, then they have added after you have signed, without your knowledge, which is gross misconduct ( this is why you sign it, to show agreement ). If the holiday booking date differs, with the added dates, then you obviously haven't signed it, which would show that they have failed to notify you that they have allocated you holiday dates.

With regard your Personal Day...if you go onto the colleague website, the holiday section should cover the PD. Now it used to state that the PD could be booked anytime during December, but can be used at any time throughout the year by MUTUAL agreement with your manager.

With regard BH, I'm unsure if that can be allocated to take as holiday, as it is not technically part of your annual entitlement, as you could work a future BH, as overtime, but you can't work your annual leave entitlement. Perhaps someone on here, or your rep could advise the policy on that?

With regard this future meeting...is it to be conducted by the same manager?? If so, you can refuse to have this manager conduct it, on the grounds you feel that there is an air of conflict between you, which leaves you feeling extremely anxious and uncomfortable.
Do you still have a copy of the next steps...have any of the agreed steps taken place in the agreed timescale?? Was there a future date agreed, for a follow up meeting, which hasn't been met? Has that future date passed?
If no to any of the above, then they shouldn't be bringing you in on the same issue, which they have failed to either resolve, or follow up with. That would appear to border on harassment.

With regard to any future holiday dates to book...ask for Christmas week and Christmas Eve as your PD...they cannot say no holiday bookings in December...bank holidays or five star weekends, as there are no freeze weeks, and if your dept diary has these dates blocked out, then they are acting against policy, and therefore can't deny you booking them by saying overbooked, as they haven't let anyone book them!

Now I feel that you've dug your heels in with the badge issue, as has your manager, and reached a stand off. Your manager is correct, in that wearing a badge is part of the uniform, however...it doesn't state where that badge should be worn, only that it should be visible. ;)
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 03-09-20, 09:28AM
Thanks Lucgeo.

Just a quick one on the badge issue. the uniform policy does state it should be worn on the "left hand side". Therefore, all the ideas about wearing a lanyard - whilst good - would be breaching the policy as the badge would clearly be "central" if worn on a lanyard.

Thanks for agreeing with my sentiment about the feelings of being harrassed and bullied - simply based on the fact I had an investigation about this - the next steps were "try to wear my badge, but the manager would "seek out alternatives - as in "non pin""

I've since had a letter rearranging the meeting for the following week when I am not on AL - so clearly the message has got back to them.

Yes meeting is with the same manager. As I've torn up the letter I'm not sure of the exact wording - but as my manager is conducting the investigation meeting I suspect the semantics of the wording are the same - i.e. someone other than my manager has made a complaint about me not adhering to uniform policy.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Morris999 on 03-09-20, 11:12AM
@barafear
I’m guessing you have worked for Tesco for a long time and remember and have witnessed old school PM’s enforcing standards of dress etc in store, in regards to hair being tied up, hair colourings, face piercings, tattoos on display and numerous other so called violations of dress.
Too the point people were sent home until they rectified the issue on first occasion and disciplined on second depending on how your PM saw the issue.

Unfortunately/fortunately depending on your view of said matters the company updated its policy regarding these issues some time in the last decade.

It is now ok to have tattoos on display as long as they are not offensive
It’s ok to dye your hair any colour you want
It’s ok to have your hair as long as you want and not tied up, obviously food prep and some other areas are different.
And the same with nail coverings/colours.
Plus many others things too.

So please for your own sake and wellbeing do not bring those up in your investigation or any other conversations you might have as it will not only end up in embarrassment for you but also be seen as a unsuccessful attempt at tit for tat to deflect the name badge issue.
Which will only impact your mental well-being and make you feel even more that you are being singled out.

In regards to the name badge, have you thought about ordering a male shirt, and wearing the badge on the left side pocket, with your clocking in/food card in there behind it to act as a barrier from future pin pr**k*?
As Tesco welcomes diversity and is in the process of giving every colleague diversity training, your manager cannot say no without falling foul of diversity laws and company polices/training themselves.
It’s a potential solution to your concerns and issues regarding the name badge.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 03-09-20, 11:41AM
Thanks for the update - but according to the latest (Feb2020) policy on dress code and appearance the following seems to be the standard expected:

5. Does my hair have to be a specific
style/colour?

No, regardless of style or colour, your hair needs to be
clean and tidy. If it’s below your shoulder (including if it’s
in dreadlocks or braids), it should be tied back.
6. Can I wear makeup and nail varnish in
stores?

Yes, just make sure that your makeup is natural and not
excessive. Keep your nails neat and tidy with no chipped
polish.

"Natural" - not sure if this wording has changed from neutral to natural - and what the subtle difference is?

Long hair - covering a badge - what is the point of therefore wearing a badge?



And the specifics about a badge:

Badges Name badges should show your first name
Worn on the left
Can be worn in all fresh food handling depts. with the exception of scratch
bakeries and raw hot Deli Counter colleagues.
On raw counters badges should be worn under white jackets
Bake-off bakery, counters, food to go and colleague room colleagues
should wear them on apron


Ok - regardless of how "lightweight" the badges are I do find that they are "there" and affecting my movement - ok this sounds like a gross overreaction -

Some people are quite happy to shove things in their pockets - be it pens, mobile phones, clock in card, note pad etc. etc.

And clearly, someone like a nurse wears uniform and has all these things in her breast pocket - if you're used to working with all this added apendage then the addition of a lightweight badge isn't anything to worry about - but if you're used to being "bare" - then a single item like a lightweight badge just feels annoying.

I do know that this sounds ridiculous -

However, the bigger "issue" at the moment is that fact that this "minor" issue is being dealt with so heavy handedly.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Morris999 on 03-09-20, 12:05PM
With what you’ve just posted its sounding more like a psychological issue than a physical one, that no amount of alternatives that your manager offers is going to resolve.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 03-09-20, 01:47PM
More that intelligence is frowned upon by management, authority vs intelligence has been at odds with each other since the dawn of man.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: miriam on 03-09-20, 10:47PM
Nightandday
Exactly
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 12-09-20, 02:29PM
Well I had the second investigation meeting. I didn't have a representative with me this time. The details of the complaint this time related to an incident which happened since the previous meeting. I was wearing a name badge but I had placed a very small piece of white sticky tape on the badge covering the last two letters, basically changing the name. I only thought of this idea as I had seen a colleague called Leslie doing the same because she preferred the name Les. When I day small piece of tape I'm talking about 8mm by 8mm....literally just covering the last two letters of the name on badge. This was the entirety of the complaint. This had been picked up by a different manager at the time who questioned me at the time. I replied I didn't want customers knowing my name. The manager just said you can use tape on the badge. Within a week or so I was given two new badges with the shortened name. I didn't order them so I assumed it was a result of this incident. Anyway during today's investigation meeting I was told it was against Tesco policy because it looked unprofessional. As usual, I was sent out whilst manager deliberated. Called back in to be told that on reflection of the facts the manager was putting it forward to a disciplinary.
To say I was astonished would be an understatement. I was told I could take my break. I replied that I wasn't in a fit state to return to work today and I left for the day. I told my team support. But I have since been told I should have informed duty manager. I have since phoned the absence line and explained I wasn't in the right frame of mind to carry on working.

Suffice to say, I am still seething. Is this seriously the way the company treats us now?
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 12-09-20, 04:30PM
Which policy is that then ??? That specifically covers the placing of a small piece of tape on a name badge is deemed unprofessional and against policy :D

I'm taking it the notes were thorough and included that another manager had previously questioned you, stated that the tape was ok, and arranged for new badges to be ordered, with your PREFERRED name title, which I believe IS policy.

The fact that you informed a team support, rather than duty, of your intention to leave for the day should be deemed as acceptable, given your agitated mental state, caused as a direct result from the constant harassment and victimisation levied at you by this manager!

Get a copy of all the notes, and place a grievance against this manager for constant bullying and harassment, affecting your mental wellbeing. You do not have to present it on the grievance form, you can put it in writing on a piece of paper, dated and signed. The same timescales apply and should be adhered to.
In your welcome back meeting, state your absence as severe stress, being a direct result of this managers constant harassment and bullying toward you. They have to write it down in the notes.
Refuse to have this manager conduct any more meetings with you, which should not be the case due to the fact that you have a grievance placed against them.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 13-09-20, 07:12AM
It is now clearly just a battle of wills. Colleague trying to find numerous ways round policy and manager trying to find the breaches. Whole situation will just get worse as normal relationship between manager and colleague has broken down. Altering the name on the badge to change the name and then being pulled up on it is just one of the many battles. The battles can go on and on but at the end of the day the war will be won.
I just don't think that this is the right time to be spending time on things like a name badge. I am saying this from the point of view of both sides. The name badge is part of the uniform and should be worn but time spent in meetings and doing investigations is a waste too. It will end in tears, as the story goes. They are looking for that chink and as soon as they find it you will be out. This won't be fun for the the people you work with. Fellow colleague and team support are having to endure the situation whilst trying to put smiles on faces and deliver great service at the front end. It's hard working with an atmosphere and people will be working with sinking hearts when seeing yet another ploy being introduced to try and get round wearing a badge. The managers will be trying hard to resolve things but not in favour of you. This is a pointless waste of time, it's not fun, it's not clever. It's just pointless.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 13-09-20, 12:02PM
I totally agree with you red shoes.  This issue could be simply resolved by either colleague or manager going to a craft shop and buying stick on velcro ., attaching it to badge and fleece and job done !
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 13-09-20, 12:42PM
whilst I agree in part with Red Shoes, and Welshie, and indeed Lucgeo - it's not really helping me move forward much.

Yes, it's become a "battle of wills" - or it feels like a "war" with each of these "battles" taking place but ultimately most people on here know there is very likely going to be only one winner of the war.

In terms of raising a grievance - whilst in principle I agree it's the right thing to do - in reality, the manager will be able to show they are following procedure - it's just whether there's a level of pettiness being displayed by my manager - is that a genuine reason to put in a grievance.

Furthermore if I put in a grievance, who do I go to - the SM? If so, it might be the "behaviour" of my manager is being driven from the top - so there's no chance of a fair hearing if I put in a grievance.


In hindsight, and I did mention at the end of my investigation meeting yesterday, that this separate incident (putting tape over two letters of my name) should have been dealt with as a Lets Talk with the manager who raised it - but my manager responded stating that as it was directly related to the name badge issue (i.e. the issue of me not wearing one - due to the H&S issue) and therefore required another investigation meeting and now an upcoming disciplinary meeting.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Nomad on 13-09-20, 01:02PM
"This is a pointless waste of time, it's not fun, it's not clever. It's just pointless."

Agreed, it is never a surprise to me how petty MM can be.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 13-09-20, 02:35PM
It's just petty...or is it ???
Who gets to decide what's petty, so therefore irrelevant ???

It's not even about the wearing of the badge now, as barafear is obviously wearing it. It's now about a little bit of tape, which is not related, as it is not a H&S issue, or even a lets talk, as a more sensible manager has addressed the issue by TALKING to barafear, assessed and acted accordingly by ordering two replacement badges with the preferred name, which I assume is now being worn? All without the need for taking time off the shopfloor for four people ( manager, note taker, colleague and barafear) to attend a meeting to discuss something which is no longer an issue  :-X

This is all about the manager saving face...but looking bloody silly in my opinion, wasting all those man hours on nonsense, just to prove a point! I doubt the SM is even aware of the conflict, as feet on floor always takes precedence, especially when they learn that it's already been sorted, within a few minutes, by another manager.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 13-09-20, 03:10PM
Quote from: barafear on 13-09-20, 12:42PM
whilst I agree in part with Red Shoes, and Welshie, and indeed Lucgeo - it's not really helping me move forward much.

Yes, it's become a "battle of wills" - or it feels like a "war" with each of these "battles" taking place but ultimately most people on here know there is very likely going to be only one winner of the war.

In terms of raising a grievance - whilst in principle I agree it's the right thing to do - in reality, the manager will be able to show they are following procedure - it's just whether there's a level of pettiness being displayed by my manager - is that a genuine reason to put in a grievance.

Furthermore if I put in a grievance, who do I go to - the SM? If so, it might be the "behaviour" of my manager is being driven from the top - so there's no chance of a fair hearing if I put in a grievance.


In hindsight, and I did mention at the end of my investigation meeting yesterday, that this separate incident (putting tape over two letters of my name) should have been dealt with as a Lets Talk with the manager who raised it - but my manager responded stating that as it was directly related to the name badge issue (i.e. the issue of me not wearing one - due to the H&S issue) and therefore required another investigation meeting and now an upcoming disciplinary meeting.

If it's common knowledge that your colleague Leslie is doing the same, and you can prove the managers know about it and haven't subjected them to the same treatment, you should then contact ACAS on advise with regards to Tesco not following the minimum standards as set out by them, namely;

4. That said, whenever a disciplinary or grievance process is being followed it is important to deal with issues fairly. There are a number of elements to this:

Employers and employees should raise and deal with issues promptly and should not unreasonably delay meetings, decisions or confirmation of those decisions.

Employers and employees should act consistently.

Employers should carry out any necessary investigations, to establish the facts of the case.

Employers should inform employees of the basis of the problem and give them an opportunity to put their case in response before any decisions are made.

Employers should allow employees to be accompanied at any formal disciplinary or grievance meeting.Employers should allow an employee to appeal against any formal decision made.

(Ref https://www.acas.org.uk/acas-code-of-practice-for-disciplinary-and-grievance-procedures/html)

If they then decide to subject Leslie in light of your analysis of unfair treatment, a note taker should be present during the investigation and should highlight the fact that this has taken place only after you raising it as unfair treatment.


Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 13-09-20, 07:04PM
I'm not a manager BUT  if you have a name on your name badge for months/years of employment and you only feel the need to change it after the manager has spoken to you about not wearing a name badge then it looks to me like youre6trying to stick 2 fingers up to that manager.
The inconsistency of the manager over badges is a different issue and yes may be unfair . I suggest if you want to put in a grievance, first do something to try to resolve issue ie; sticky back velcro , at least that way it looks like you are trying otherwise I think whoever takes the grievance meeting will simply see you as a troublemaker who doesn't want to or thinks they're above wearing the company uniform .

Also in our store name badge must state full name , no shortened versions or nicknames .
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: penguin on 13-09-20, 07:49PM
Badges can use a nickname, shortened name or a totally different first name to someone's legal name, without going into to much detail as it could make those involved indefinable this was the outcome of a grievance taken out by someone a while ago who's manger demanded they have a badge with there actual name on despite being known by another first name for 20 odd years.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 14-09-20, 10:12AM
Once again thanks for the responses on this thread. Unfortunately (for me) things have moved on somewhat.
I'll try to answer some of the points made by people above -

When I day small piece of tape I'm talking about 8mm by 8mm....literally just covering the last two letters of the name on badge. This was the entirety of the complaint. This had been picked up by a different manager at the time who questioned me at the time. I replied I didn't want customers knowing my name. The manager just said you can use tape on the badge. Within a week or so I was given two new badges with the shortened name. I didn't order them so I assumed it was a result of this incident.

The above is  quote from my post (no 64 on this thread) - I had unwittingly made a couple of small typos - which may have led some (Lucgeo) to come to some incorrect conclusions:


First typo: When I day small piece of tape

"day" should have read "say"

Second typo:  This had been picked up by a different manager at the time who questioned me at the time. I replied I didn't want customers knowing my name. The manager just said you can use tape on the badge.

The last sentence should have read "the manager just said you can't use tape on the badge" - didn't give any reason and I didn't get a let's talk about it - it was "merely" a manager "telling me off" - to be honest, I cannot remember whether I removed the tape after this telling off or not - I probably did (i.e. having been alerted to the "wrongness" of it and because frankly it was such a minor point).


Next a quote from post 65 (Lucgeo):

The fact that you informed a team support, rather than duty, of your intention to leave for the day should be deemed as acceptable, given your agitated mental state, caused as a direct result from the constant harassment and victimisation levied at you by this manager!

Well, in all my years of working for Tesco (13+) I don't know if I've ever phoned in sick - if I have it's been a very small number of occasions. Therefore, my knowledge of the sickness policy is somewhat limited. In addition to that, despite working several shifts where I probably haven't felt anywhere close to 100% for my whole shift, I have never asked or been told to go home early from my shift. So from that point of view, I have no idea what the policy is - and I don't spend my whole life reading policies on Ourtesco (that's assuming you can find them after going through various different screens with different passwords etc.)

Anyway - as a result of the above (i.e. my very low level of absence) I decided I would work yesterday (also partly helped by the expectation that my manager would not be in - they work very few Sundays). Well, during my shift, I got called into a meeting room and was given a Let's Talk about "leaving the building without informing Duty" - to be honest, the manager was quite pleasant and amiable and accepted (in part) my ignorance of the policy (she did try to make her point of asking me "so when you phone in sick/absence line, do you speak to "Team Support"?" - obviously my answer to that was "I don't phone in sick" - anyway - overall, it wasn't the  type of Lets Talks I've been having with my manager - in my eyes, it was a Lets Talk in the manner for which they've been designed. On explaining my ignorance of the policy, the manager asked me "so is there any other policies you're unsure of that you'd like help with" - to which I answered "how about the bullying and harrassment policy?" - clearly this was difficult. I was saying it with the full knowledge in my mind that my current situation with the investigation meetings with my manager are known by all the managers/mgt team in the store - I have no faith that anything is being kept confidential - certainly not at the management level. I simply clarified who I need to approach with a possible grievance if that was against my line manager - I was trying to keep things as hypothetical as possible. Once again, I felt this manager dealt with things in a professional manner - and although I may have had some suspicions (i.e. she might see me as a "troublemaker" simply because I don't bend over backwards to go above and beyond - e.g. go and collect trolleys in the rain when they cannot cover the trolley function (despite having three trolley personnel - but two of them seem to "opt out of working Sundays/BHs" - so when the other is off for any reason, they need to cover, but very rarely provide appropriate cover) - so although I may have been slightly suspicious, I had no immediate cause for concern that this hypothetical discussion was going to cause any friction - i.e. that she might tip off my manager or the store manager that a bullying/harrassment claim might be forthcoming.

Sorry - lots more to add - but I need to get something done - will come back and add more.



Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Welshie on 14-09-20, 11:46AM
@barafear , just a thought but when you told team support that you were going home as you were unfit for work , did they not tell you to inform duty manager  ?  I think they really should have as they know it is beyond their job role to fill in absence book .
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 14-09-20, 11:55AM
Appreciate the amendments...not really affected by the outcome, as the manager who spoke to you, took on board your comments, and sorted it...job done :thumbup:

Just picking up on a point made by you regarding collecting trolleys...any person offering or being asked to support, by going to collect trollies should be wearing the correct PPE...a Hi Vis jacket and be issued with Tesco safety shoes, solely for your own personal use.  That is H&S and Tesco policy. Any injury sustained from not being protected by wearing both, Tesco will not accept liability, and could result in you losing your job, for non compliance.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 14-09-20, 01:01PM
Quote from: Welshie on 14-09-20, 11:46AM
@barafear , just a thought but when you told team support that you were going home as you were unfit for work , did they not tell you to inform duty manager  ?  I think they really should have as they know it is beyond their job role to fill in absence book .

Team support did not tell me to speak to Duty.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 14-09-20, 06:35PM
So continuing on from my earlier post today - I signed that off with my belief that my "informal" chat with another manager asking about the bullying and harrassment policy would cause any issues.

Anyway - two hours after that meeting, my shift finished and it was time to go home. Having collected my stuff from upstairs and heading down to exit the shop (which had closed for the day) I was "intercepted" by another manager and handed a letter (words being "I've been asked to give you this letter") - my name was handwritten on the envelope - and laughably they spelt my name incorrectly (surname.....not my "badge" name!)

I assumed it was the date of the disciplinary - although I did think it was quick - although given my belief there's a definite agenda to get rid of me, any haste is setting up a disciplinary meeting would not surprise me!!

I didn't open the letter until I got home ......and again, another completely "knock me to the floor" shock. (that was after the investigation meeting which concluded that "there was evidence to send it to a disciplinary")

The gist of the letter........Dear Barafear....you are invited to attend an investigation meeting .......hardly an invite is it?

The reason for this meeting is to investigate:

allegations of inappropriate and aggressive behaviour towards my line manager in which you acted very dismissive towards your manager.


Given recent events, it would be churlish of me to even imagine which "incident" this refers to - but it does seem obvious that it is what happened at the end of my investigation meeting the previous day.

I probably didn't go into the details in my post (#64) ........so I will expand now.

As I said, I was called back into the meeting room and told that after careful consideration of the "evidence" the manager had decided to proceed to disciplinary. As stated previously, I was exasperated, shocked (well sort of, although in a perverse way I kind of expected it) and disappointed.
And clearly, as I then left for the day without completing my shift, I was somewhat "all over the place".

I also asked my manager (I believe this was after the official end of the meeting - so none of this is likely to be in the notes) "why are you doing this to me? What have I ever done to upset you?" (or words to that effect) - The manager replied "nothing, I am just following company procedure"

That's when I was told I could go on my break and I responded with "I'm going home" - and I got up to leave the room - but I was called back to "sign the notes" - I was sat on the other side of the table from the note taker - so the notes were passed over to me - I scribbled on each of the pages (well, it could be a signature - but it was literally a scribble) - and then I pushed the pages back in the general direction of the note take - and told them to send me a copy of the notes with my letter detailing date of disciplinary. I then left the room - and within 10 mins or so, left the shop and finished my shift early.

Clearly, I've broken one cardinal rule - I did not take a representative with me - so it's my word against my manager's word (plus the note taker as a possible witness) -

And clearly, the words "aggressive, inappropriate and dismissive" are open to interpretation.

And yes, this does rather confirm the views of Redshoes (#66) reply about it being a battle of wills.

This investigation meeting will be held by a different manager.

I am now at a point where I will be going sick with the stress this is causing - I will try to find a doctor or get an online consultation and see if I get a sick note to extend my sick leave beyond what I can self certify. I will lose money by going sick obviously.

I'm also strongly considering putting in the bullying grievance against my manager - do I send this to the store manager? Or can I or should I send it only to HR (people manager) - or should I copy in both?

And yes, if any of you can help, I would need some guidance.

Clearly, after the above, answering some of the other queries/responses from people on here seems somewhat "minor" - but I do want to try to provide as much info/truth as possible.

"This is a pointless waste of time, it's not fun, it's not clever. It's just pointless."

Agreed, it is never a surprise to me how petty MM can be.
  (Nomad, #69)

Just to clarify, does MM = middle management? Or have I got that wrong?

Lucgeo (#70):

This is all about the manager saving face...but looking bloody silly in my opinion, wasting all those man hours on nonsense, just to prove a point! I doubt the SM is even aware of the conflict, as feet on floor always takes precedence, especially when they learn that it's already been sorted, within a few minutes, by another manager.

To be honest, I don't have that many dealings with the SM - but he/she (anonymity!) can be a bit "petty" about things - I think my lack of badge wearing was picked up by the SM one day and SM told team support to tell me to put it on. On another occasion (very recently) I was taken off tills whilst it was quiet to rumble - I trotted off and started rumbling - only for the team support to come to me and say "the SM has asked/told me to tell you to wear a mask whilst rumbling". Other than that, the SM tends to keep out of the way but does seem to be a "instructor" (telling people to do things) rather than hands-on.

#71:

If it's common knowledge that your colleague Leslie is doing the same, and you can prove the managers know about it and haven't subjected them to the same treatment, you should then contact ACAS on advise with regards to Tesco not following the minimum standards as set out by them, namely;


This is the crux of the matter - who knows if it is common knowledge - I only noticed it once - but then I might not work on the till near her or even do the same shifts as her - and the other thing is I have no idea whether she has been admonished about it. And this is a problem with bringing any bullying claim - how do I prove I am being "singled" out when I cannot possibly know whether other staff members are collecting Lets Talks and Investigations/Disciplinaries like they're going out of fashion.

#72:

I'm not a manager BUT  if you have a name on your name badge for months/years of employment and you only feel the need to change it after the manager has spoken to you about not wearing a name badge then it looks to me like you're trying to stick 2 fingers up to that manager.
The inconsistency of the manager over badges is a different issue and yes may be unfair . I suggest if you want to put in a grievance, first do something to try to resolve issue ie; sticky back velcro , at least that way it looks like you are trying otherwise I think whoever takes the grievance meeting will simply see you as a troublemaker who doesn't want to or thinks they're above wearing the company uniform .


Ok this is the crux of the argument - which may well make me look like a constant rule breaker/trouble maker. Over my many years of working for Tesco, I have probably only worn a badge on 40% of my shifts (and that's a generous estimate) - whether that's because it shows my name, or whether it is a potential H&S issue or whether I think "what's the point?" it doesn't really matter does it. I'm sure all of the people on this forum know people like me - rarely wear a badge - I think where I came from right at the beginning is that whilst strictly speaking it's "wrong", in the greater scheme of things it's not preventing me from doing my job to the required standard. Team support used to (don't know whether they still do) do "health checks" where they would stand nearby and make sure you were doing things right - wearing right uniform (incl badge), greeting customer, offering help, saying goodbye , smiling and all that. Most times I was ok - on some occasions, everything was good but the badge - but no big deal was made of it - just a gentle reminder to wear one next time. So, I have in the past objected to wearing my name on a badge - and I have been given badges with other names (we had this discussion on another thread Welshie) - as far as management (Team support maybe) care, any old badge will do - most managers don't get close enough to read the name on a badge - I got really "unlucky" with the manager and the white tape - it was only because I was on the till right next to the "computer" (where they do all their labels and things), In terms of a "amicable" conclusion, I do think that boat has sailed!!

One other "side issue" - it appears my manager may have lost the notes to my first investigation meeting!!! They asked my rep whether they had a copy!?

Anyway - I am obviously in a bit of a state over all this - and any advice would be much appreciated.


Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Nomad on 14-09-20, 08:06PM
MM, Management of any level.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 14-09-20, 10:07PM
Quote from: barafear on 14-09-20, 06:35PM

#71:

If it's common knowledge that your colleague Leslie is doing the same, and you can prove the managers know about it and haven't subjected them to the same treatment, you should then contact ACAS on advise with regards to Tesco not following the minimum standards as set out by them, namely;


This is the crux of the matter - who knows if it is common knowledge - I only noticed it once - but then I might not work on the till near her or even do the same shifts as her - and the other thing is I have no idea whether she has been admonished about it. And this is a problem with bringing any bullying claim - how do I prove I am being "singled" out when I cannot possibly know whether other staff members are collecting Lets Talks and Investigations/Disciplinaries like they're going out of fashion.
...........

One other "side issue" - it appears my manager may have lost the notes to my first investigation meeting!!! They asked my rep whether they had a copy!?

Anyway - I am obviously in a bit of a state over all this - and any advice would be much appreciated.

Wouldn't CCTV footage of a manager interacting with this colleague while he/she is wearing her taped name badge be evidence enough of ACAS's required minimum disciplinary standards being broken, if you can talk to this colleague about whether he/she had any interactions with a manager in view of a CCTV camera while wearing the taped badge, then you can ask the union to force the manager to provide the relevant footage as proof in a grievance and appeal.

[admin]Please do not quote large posts just to reply and make a point related to a small part of it. Apart from it not being necessary it really is a complete waste of the website space that VLH supporters pay for through their donations. Thank you.[/admin]
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 15-09-20, 03:11AM
If you continue not to follow policy and your manager continues to pull you up on this until it becomes a battle of wills I'm not sure this can be classed as bullying. Your manager can't sit back and ignore someone who doing battle with them over this. You have tried to find a way round complying but it has not worked. I think a compromise should be found. I have known many people who wear a badge and are known by a different name. Someone who is called Steven wears a badge with George on it for example. If you have a middle name why not offer to use that. I use my full name on my badge but everyone calls me by the shortened one, even customers.
Many years ago we had Mr, Mrs, Miss on badge followed by last name. A few were very upset with the change to first name but we got used to it. At the same time we had to call our managers by their first names and not the Mr, Mrs, Miss we were used to. It was awkward to start with but again we got used to it very quickly.
Your badge being ordered with shortened name sounds to me like your manager attempting to solve the situation but that it was then revoked has come from above.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 15-09-20, 09:28AM
Sometimes I think I've missed a post  8-) a compromise has been reached, another manager has resolved the issue and ordered badges with the preferred name. Have I missed the part that stated it was revoked ???
It is policy that you can have a badge with your preferred known name on it...as long as it cannot be misconstrued as offensive or derogatory to others. That is why they changed the badges at one time, to choose a picture image that related to your interests or hobbies, making it more personal to your individuality. My badge had my nickname, ( of one letter ) which is what I was known by, the name used by all colleagues, and used when called over the tanoid system. Then when they decided to drop the department on the badge, I was told numerous times I could not wear the old badge and to re order the new ones....yep...three times I put in my request but never received...twice the PP put in the request...never received. No manager insisted I order and use my Christian name, because that's not who I was!!
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 15-09-20, 09:56AM
Quote from: Redshoes on 15-09-20, 03:11AM
If you continue not to follow policy and your manager continues to pull you up on this until it becomes a battle of wills I'm not sure this can be classed as bullying................

There's battle of wills and then there's Tesco complying with government regulatory standards as a minimum, while there seems to be progress around the name badge issue, the greater issue is Tescos compliance with actioning fair disciplinary processes, ACAS's minimum standards does state that there can't be a state of exception (one rule for one another rule for the others).
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Nomad on 15-09-20, 10:56AM
Well known fact some MM have 'pets', trouble always arises when those pets are in work and not at home.

MM which act in such a way are in truth NOT MM material.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 15-09-20, 11:39AM
Pets or no, rules are rules, a judges job is to spank managers (well employers who entrusted these managers to represent the company in such a capacity) when they don't follow the rules.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 15-09-20, 11:49AM
thanks for all the responses so far - but I do still need some guidance on the latest investigation meeting re: Inappropriate/Aggressive/Dismissive behaviour towards my manager.

Also, if I call in sick (workplace stress), will this simply add to the possible reasons to get rid of me? (Absence)

And, in terms of putting in a bullying grievance, I understand what some have said (i.e. there are not substantial grounds) - but I do feel it's become "tit for tat" and if I don't put in a grievance, I've rather missed out.

If I just sit back and accept all their investigations/disciplinaries/Let's Talks and general "micro management" of me, things are just not worth carrying on with.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 15-09-20, 11:57AM
They can't get rid of you on different grounds of misconduct, eg you can't be sacked for not stock rotating if you have a final written warning for attendance (that's what a people partner said anyway).

As for the grievance for bullying, documentation is your friend, keep a notepad and pen handy and record all these incidents as they happen, the more proof you have the more seriously they'll take it, keep notes of times, locations and witnesses and what happened.

Also keep in mind that you can't be subject to an attendance review meeting if the absence is related to a medically signed off incident such as stress, they can give you a return to work meeting and add the percentage to your current, but even if it's above 3% an ARM can't be given on those instances.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 15-09-20, 12:35PM
I would now strongly suggest you become a union member, usually a rep cannot take up a case mid term, but as your rep has notes from the previous meeting that they sat in, and the fact that there is to be a meeting under a new heading, this should be treated as different.

So, the manager has lost your notes  :-X Do not provide them with a copy, until the new meeting has commenced, and note taking started, then it is to be noted that they are requesting a copy as the original has been misplaced (lost) from your personnel file, where it should have been placed for privacy. The fact that it hasn't is subject to investigation, as it contains personal information about you, covered under the data protection act.

The notes of your last meeting, that you were called back to sign...again questionable, as you should have signed the notes before leaving the room. Have you had a copy of these? Does it mention you left the room, and was called back to sign...are your comments recorded on the notes when you returned to sign. Were snake like lines drawn in any gaps below the end of meeting and your signature? This should always be the case to stop any adding on after a meeting. Check your copy and theirs matches.
Any mental health issues, believed to be directly caused from constant criticism of an individual(s) is not unsubstantial. If you had this noted in your welcome back, then that is also relevant and should be included in any grievance investigation against an individual.

A manager stating inappropriate/aggressive/dismissive behaviour against them is laughable. They are a manager, and expected to manage a situation...should they have felt that you were being any of the above in a meeting, they should have immediately adjourned that meeting, stating that as the reason.
It's more likely, the other manager has mentioned your " hypothetical " conversation, and this manager is trying to cover their backs by counterclaims of unacceptable conduct.
Many T/L's and managers will state "the SM told me to tell you" but it usually isn't the case, it's just a ploy often used to get something done, whilst appearing to be neutral and your mate.
It's easy to see if Leslie has been spoken to, by walking past and looking at her badge...if still taped then no, if full name on show, a simple friendly comment, " oh you to?" they will more than likely fill you in on what was said.
If you call in sick, get a fit note stating workplace stress, or similar, it can not be used to get rid of you. Absence is seperate, and there's a lot of procedures to go down before dismissing anyone, especially mental health.
Regarding a grievance, this goes to the PP/HR department, under the heading harassment and bullying in the workplace. It does not go to the SM as they should not be involved at this stage, as it would be in contravention of the process.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 15-09-20, 01:57PM
I would like to request a copy of what is held in my personnel file - is this a request to store or head office?

It's quite "laughable" that "Lets Talk" forms are not routinely given to the person - i.e. there is only one copy, held by the store.

In terms of the notes - I hadn't actually "left the room" before signing them - I had gone to get up off my chair and leave the room before being called back - so I think in terms of procedure they were ok on that one. After I signed the forms and "pushed them back across the table" I stated (probably in my inappropriate/aggressive and dismissive manner) that they could send me a copy with the letter (detailing my disciplinary date).

Said letter arrived this morning - seemingly hand delivered - had a stamp but no franking - and arrived much before the normal postman delivery.
I didn't open the letter (I don't need any more stress!) - but it felt bulky enough to include the notes requested.

Union membership> Yep - I'm working on it. There's only two reps in our store - the one (rep 1) that accompanied me to my first meeting - they have stated it might be more appropriate to have the other rep represent me this time because "rep 1 knows my manager/visa versa" and the other rep (rep 2) works nights so doesn't really have any dealings with my manager - the next bit is purely conjecture because I don't work nights or even late evenings - so I haven't seen the other rep for years (I used to work evenings and remember seeing them) - but a colleague has stated that rep 2 is "quite friendly with management" - so I'm rather hoping that's not the case and I get a strong defence and independent defence to help my cause. Given the way things have gone I can see them pushing for gross misconduct.

The so called incident - I think!!! - occurred at the "end of the meeting" - probably after it was adjourned and seemingly not part of the notes (as the meeting had ended).

However, as stated previously, with all the other "trumped up charges" they've come up with, who knows which incident of aggression my manager might be referring to.

I did read the Tesco bullying policy and noted that it states:


An occasional raised voice or difference of opinion or using a strong management style is not bullying, provided everyone is treated fairly with respect and dignity. We do not condone bulling under the guise of ‘strong management’.


And yes, the spelling mistake is in the policy documents!!

I'm surprised you think that my hypothetical conversation with the other manager prompted this new investigation into me.
My colleague agrees with you, suggesting that this other manager is "a bit of a snake" - but really - in the space of two hours this would have been discussed with my manager or any other managers - and then someone's suggested "let's get in there first and investigate the aggressive behaviour displayed by me" - Maybe I am just too naive in thinking that surely not all managers can be that bad?

PP? People Partner?

So I email my bullying complaint direct to the People Partner and do not copy in SM at my store? Despite being told to do that by this "other manager"?  The actual policy is a bit open ended as to who to raise the complaint to - albeit it does state PP as a possible option.

Looking through that policy again, picked up on the next thing they'll be out to get me on:

Occasionally, once an investigation has taken place it may be decided that a malicious and/or false complaint has been made. Any individual found to have made such a complaint may be subject to disciplinary action.


Thanks for the comments.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 15-09-20, 02:46PM
Regarding false/malicious complaint, they can't pursue that course of action if there is no proof of it one way or the other, only if there is proof that the complaint is false, to pursue you on these grounds with just a "your word vs his word" situation would break the impartiality part of ACASs minimum standards of investigation and disciplinary procedures.

In other words, the alleged actions have to be proven as categorically false in order for them to be able to pursue that, not inconclusive.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 15-09-20, 03:02PM
To add, what is the difference between raised voice and shouting, the policy sounds at odds with the legal definition of victimisation or bullying at work, in fact I would probably think you could get a nice tidy sum if you were to show this to the liberal press.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 15-09-20, 06:47PM
I'm unsure if you can be given copies, or just allowed to look through it, with someone present to ensure nothing is removed?? Request to your HR or PP.

You can always make your own notes in a " let's talk" Also ask to read any notes written by manager, query if needed, then sign and date after filling in any gaps with snaking line.
If there is nothing in the notes pertaining to your manner...then the question is, why was it not broached at the time?

If you had not left the room, then your copy and their notes will match. Again if this aggressive manner was not mentioned in the meeting, then it should not be in the notes. If they are referring to the incident at the end of the meeting, then your following actions clearly showed that you were " emotionally flooded " ( Tesco speak ) and you were unable to continue your shift due to your emotional state. A manager is 'trained' to recognise emotions during disciplinary meetings and supposed to conduct/postpone the meeting accordingly.

Your day rep, I believe you stated, is inexperienced....however she can not honestly think that as the only day rep, she can chose not to rep a colleague as she knows the manager!! There is no conflict of interest, how many other times is she going to refuse to sit in with people because it's that manager?  She attends as a rep, is given and affords the same respect, and is considered to be of equal footing to the manager conducting the meeting, not a subservient. Managers and reps are not pals, or enemies, once they enter that room. They are both there to debate the rights, wrongs and grey areas....( oh there's always grey areas for reps to rely on). The night rep may, or may not, be willing to attend, but the meeting has to be conducted during YOUR shift, not theirs. You should 'phone the USDAW area office tomorow to sign up...Thursday you phone to request they organise a rep to attend the meeting, as your day rep is reluctant to attend as your chosen rep.

That "BULLIN" paragraph should be interpreted for you also, as being a strong colleague.
The paragraph regarding a malicious complaint...who would decide that?? You have had this ongoing situation of which another manager is aware, hardly could be deemed fake and malicious could it?
Managers are constantly on their phones, within the time it took you to walk down the corridor, they could have spoken and this manager has taken a knee jerk reaction to protect themselves...bullying or harassment on any managers file can prove very detrimental to their career prospects.

If your PP ( people partner ) is not instore on a regular basis, then you can email them in the first instance, to state your intention, and request clarification as to whom you address it to and who, if any, you need to CC it to.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 15-09-20, 07:31PM
I've never met my PP - then again I tend to work weekends!
I have emailed my PP on another unrelated matter - my PP was "averagely moderately helpful" - that's being polite.

There is something about requesting documents on OurTesco - it's like a "full subject access request" - so think it does go to Head Office first. I'll check up on it.

I'm just trying to create a timeline - I can show the dates of the various Lets Talks - and also the next steps "suggested" by these that "management" were supposed to have acted on - or could be perceived to be.

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 17-09-20, 07:05AM
At the time of the meeting you need to sign to say you want a copy of the notes or not. If you change your mind later and want a copy you can do so but there is normally a £10 charge for this.
There is a work place stress risk assessment form. You could ask for this. However, if your relationship has broken down to such a level that you can't work with your manager you could end up being moved. Unless your manager is under-performing they are unlikely to move them. This is not your opinion on your manager, it's what they think. You may think they are the worst thing ever but it's what the store manager thinks that matters. They may decide that even if the manager is in some part at fault that they will back the manager to protect the role. It sounds to me from what I have rad that your manager is acting on orders from above though. They may not even want to do all of this, they could even agree with you but they are being told what to do. They will have to be keeping those above in the loop, that is for sure. If it was my store manager they would have already been talking to the people partner so if you do ring them they will probably know all about it.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 17-09-20, 08:39AM
Have never heard of a £10 charge for a copy of the meeting notes....it should be asked at the end of the meeting do you require a copy? Where does that money go into?? Petty cash?? Is it declared and tax paid on all these £10 cash in hand payments  ??? Are you given a receipt for cash paid?
So, barafear, if they have misplaced their copy of the notes, it's £20 per page...that's what price you charge, and you'll want a cheque, for proof of income to the tax people. The loss of your notes should be grievanced as gross negligence, and investigated by the senior area PP.

If you can prove that the manager is acting on the SM instructions, then this is in contravention of the process, as the greivance is heard instore, and the SM has final decision.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: gomezz on 17-09-20, 09:47AM
I suspect Redshoes may be confusing things with the maximum £10 charge that can be made by an organisation for a Subject Access Request under the DPA.  That has nothing to do with requesting copies of meeting notes or indeed normal employer / employee relationships.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Rad on 17-09-20, 11:01AM
Redshoes is talking about requesting copies of notes months or years later.  I assume this would fall into the category of subject access request rather than saying you want a copy of the notes during the process. 

I've never heard of Tesco charging for the info. 
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 18-09-20, 06:56AM
I have known of the £10 being charged, twice. Both times was when copies of  notes were requested after a few days. I have been pondering this though and not sure we still do this but last time it was done was only about three years ago.
Your store manager is aware of ongoing investigations. They may even suggest it goes to investigation. They can't say outcome as that will depend on investigation. When an appeal is held they look at the questions and answers, the whole thing. They will only know a summery of the meeting before appeal. Part of what they look at if it goes to appeal is if process was followed, this is the reading of the notes. Then they will hold a meeting themselves. If policy not followed or by something that comes up in meeting they will decide if they stand by or override outcome. The big thing is policy being followed, by your manager during investigation and by yourself in why investigation was triggered.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: lucgeo on 18-09-20, 08:53AM
It's more than likely the SM is aware of any investigations...however when the investigation is on the direct instructions from the SM, which many are, then that contravenes the process.
As you stated..."from what I've read, it sounds like the manager is acting on orders from above"
This happens far to often...which makes it all a farce, and the process is blatantly ignored, by management...then they wonder why morale is so low and there is so much distrust from CA's. This is also the reason good reps are few and far between now, as each meeting becomes a running battle with managers knowing the SM's got their back.  :-X
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 18-09-20, 02:35PM
I wish I could just get back to basics:

1) I get invited to an investigation meeting to investigate complaints about xyz
2) The letter doesn't tell me who's made the complaint - so I go into investigation meeting with very limited info about what it's all about.
3) So, once I clarify who's made the complaint, I can then progress.
4) My concerns then become: Am I being investigated/possibly disciplined by the same manager who has "made the original complaint"
5) Clearly, my first investigation meeting felt that way.
6) My second investigation meeting - with exactly the same text (i.e. failure to comply with uniform regs) - is then "different"; this time the "complaint" is from a different manager and relates to "wearing a badge with a tiny piece of tape covering two letters on the name"
7) So, strictly speaking is this an example of "failure to adhere to the company uniform policy"? Is this a separate complaint? Is this "misdemeanour" so serious that it required an investigation rather than a lets talk?

Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 18-09-20, 02:51PM
forgot to say:

I received the date for my disciplinary meeting - I got two days notice!!
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Sunpie on 18-09-20, 06:07PM
Everything you need to know is on colleague help.
I do believe it’s 24hrs notice
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: NightAndDay on 18-09-20, 08:52PM
Quote from: barafear on 18-09-20, 02:35PM
I wish I could just get back to basics:

1) I get invited to an investigation meeting to investigate complaints about xyz
2) The letter doesn't tell me who's made the complaint - so I go into investigation meeting with very limited info about what it's all about.
3) So, once I clarify who's made the complaint, I can then progress.
4) My concerns then become: Am I being investigated/possibly disciplined by the same manager who has "made the original complaint"
5) Clearly, my first investigation meeting felt that way.
6) My second investigation meeting - with exactly the same text (i.e. failure to comply with uniform regs) - is then "different"; this time the "complaint" is from a different manager and relates to "wearing a badge with a tiny piece of tape covering two letters on the name"
7) So, strictly speaking is this an example of "failure to adhere to the company uniform policy"? Is this a separate complaint? Is this "misdemeanour" so serious that it required an investigation rather than a lets talk?

Keep in mind, depending on how you want to approach this issue, the disciplining manager isn't the final arbiter in the decision of what is an appropriate level of disciplinary for you to receive for the case of a subjective uniform conduct issue, the final arbiter is an employment tribunal judge, even the mickey mouse area manager and unqualified people partner have to adhere to the decisions made by the right honourable, duly qualified meritocratically appointed due dilligenced judge. They are after all the entity put in place to spank the corporations when they step out of line. What you're going through sounds like a textbook case of constructive dismissal, I'd even suggest that there are case studies strikingly similar to what you're going through for you to use as the basis for such a claim, I can assume safely that you're a long service colleague, and they're looking to *cough cough* "manage you out of the business" to save money on potential future redundancy payments.
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: barafear on 19-09-20, 12:31AM
Whilst I don't disagree with you, any tribunal case is very time consuming and expensive if I need legal help. In terms of constructive dismissal, very hard to prove. I'm sure I read sometime that success rate was 3% and average compensation  award around 6000. So as a long standing member of staff, probably much less than any possible redundancy
Title: Re: Investigation meeting: Front End
Post by: Redshoes on 19-09-20, 06:51AM
one thing for sure, no matter where the process was started from it has to stick to process. The SM may have said "sort that out" but he won't have guided them through every step of the way. If there is a mistake the process is broken and the appeal will be overturned.