What a storm the report proposing change the rules regarding unfair dismissal has had. This is despite the fact that any changes, in the current climate, are unlikely.

Unproductive workers should lose rights
As reported by the BBC The report, commissioned by the prime minister, argues that unproductive workers should lose their right to claim unfair dismissal”. The Daily Telegraph
quotes the report as saying that under the current rules workers are
allowed to “coast along” with some proving impossible to sack.

Sarah Veale head of the equality and employment rights department at the TUC said that there were less than a million unfair dismissal claims last
year which was “absolutely nothing” out of a large workforce. TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: “The clue is in
the name. Employers already have plenty of powers to make fair
dismissals”. I find myself agreeing with Mr Barber! The only problem is that almost 40% of applicants withdraw their cases, but employers still have to pay legal fees in preparing a defence.

Informal discussions
I believe that employers should have the right to informally discuss with their staff issues surrounding employment, such as retirement plans, production and productivity without the fear of having to face an industrial tribunal. To do so would allows the employer to plan staffing needs, recruitment and other issues that make a business profitable.

In fact, if done properly, can’t an employer have these discussions already?

Maria had a meeting with the CEO this morning and has been told that due to unsatisfactory performance she is being moved from HR to leading an administration team.
 
As she is within the twelve month probationary period the decision is within this time-scale, however, the CEO is reluctant to dismiss her as she is a “senior member of staff” and he wants to be seen to be as supportive as possible to his senior team.

John will take over as head of HR and Maria will start in her new role on Monday.

Maria asked what alternatives she had and was told that either she accepted the situation or was dismissed as per her contract of engagement. Maria has left to go home early.

At a meeting this afternoon with the MD Maria was told that her performance was not what had been anticipated.The MD told her that:

1. She has alienated her team
2. Provided poor advice to him and other Directors.

He has offered to help where he can but has suggested that the efficiency and reputation of HR must improve quickly or further action (unspecified) will have to follow.

Maria has replied that her existing team is “weak on change” but that her new assistant manager starts next week and that improvements will be expected soon after.

Maria has been informed that a member of staff has complained that a disciplinary meeting conducted by Maria did not follow the ACAS code of conduct set out in April 2009 relatinmg to the calling of witnesses.

Maria has been told that the employee, who has now left the company, is making a claim for wrongful dismissal and the solicitor is wanting to move to tribunal. The CEO feels that compensation will have to be made to the employee and is placing the blame entirely at Maria’s feet for not being aware of disciplinary changes in procedure. Maria claims that the new procedure was only guidance.

As the employee was a direct report to the Sales Director it seems that she is unlikely to get any support from that direction.