Firing employee

[Border Reiver]

The law allows you to dismiss any employee without cause in the first two years of employment (so long as you do not dismiss for gender, race, pregnancy etc.) After that you must have a legal cause for dismissal and follow a set disciplinary procedure.

 

[maomao]

Are you the real Mike De Scala of Ultrabeat?

If it is, he's spelt his own name wrong.

 

[A380]

I think you should reward him. Whenever I buy a new car, and I regularly buy brand new quality German manufactured cars, or Audis, I always question the sales person about both dialectical materialism and anarcho syndicalism and if they fail to accord to my line I take my business elsewhere.

 

[klang]

no way this is making 5 pages

 

[Pickman's model]

littleseb never ever ever take a horse racing tip from killer b as it will invariably go awry

 

[killer b]

I was hoping no-one would notice.

 

[hitmouse]

The law allows you to dismiss any employee without cause in the first two years of employment (so long as you do not dismiss for gender, race, pregnancy etc.) After that you must have a legal cause for dismissal and follow a set disciplinary procedure.

You're thinking of Scottish law there. The OP's shop is on a boat in international waters, so maritime law applies.

 

[nogojones]

The law allows you to dismiss any employee without cause in the first two years of employment (so long as you do not dismiss for gender, race, pregnancy etc.) After that you must have a legal cause for dismissal and follow a set disciplinary procedure.

 

[teuchter]

I was hoping no-one would notice.

I've come here specially to mention it and say it's what I predicted last night and am slightly disappointed someone else got in first.

 

[killer b]

at least you're disappointed.

 

[klang]

I was hoping no-one would notice.

I was hoping you'd be right.

 

[hitmouse]

I was hoping you were right.

Decent first two lines of a song there, what's the chorus?

 

[klang]

Decent first two lines of a song there, what's the chorus?

You used to nail it all the time
For once you got it wrong
You used to guess the page count right
But it's still dragging on

 

[Border Reiver]

You're thinking of Scottish law there. The OP's shop is on a boat in international waters, so maritime law applies.

Employment law is not devolved.

 

[keybored]

Now that neotobyjug is here I'm upping my prediction to 50 pages.

 

[JimW]

Employment law is not devolved.

The quality of mercy is not strained, shrdlu.

 

[MickiQ]

Assuming this isn't a troll (yes, yes, I know but lets just assume) I wouldn't think much of an employer who rather than bother learn the law upfront or consult an employment solicitor (or even just Google it) seeks advice on the subject from random strangers on the internet.
As a general principle firing people because of social media seems definitely iffy and a bit "American" to me. If they're plastering confidential company secrets over the the internet or posting a video of them doing a ton in the company van on FB then yes firing is probably justified but what the hell has a person's personal opinions on subjects like politics, brexit, the middle east or anything else got to do with their employer?

Oh yeah, this thread reminds me, I have an employee who puts beans on before cheese, am I within my rights to fire him for that?

Hell Yes, somethings just make me rethink my stance on the death penalty

 

[kebabking]

Now that neotobyjug is here I'm upping my prediction to 50 pages.

I'll take that.

My wife's school - she's a deputy head - has let go a teacher on a fixed term contract at least in large part because of their behaviour on their personal social media, and their linking it to the Schools social media.

There's other stuff as well, he's lazy, he's unprofessional, petulant, but it's the SM stuff that broke the camel's back.

And so - let the Games begin!

 

[A380]

You're thinking of Scottish law there. The OP's shop is on a boat in international waters, so maritime law applies.

In that case not only is the OP allowed to sack the employee as Officer in Command under maritime law he is obliged to slap them, and if that doesn’t work shoot them. And that is, some kind of, fact...

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Business happy.

 

[StoneRoad]

I've just had one of my lot chuck in the towel.
Letter states no reason, the verbal response to "Why?" was interesting, he's always been a conspiracy nut.
What became clear, the walk was because he's an anti-vaxxer / mask avoider and if he's going to be working in a shared space very close to other staff* (instead of outside / in a compartment by himself) then we've needed to insist he has to take precautions against transmission of covid. And he won't be forced to do either [he's also worked as a porter in a care home / elderly persons facility]
We do this with all visitors (clients, reps etc)
Note * Everyone else will have had at least one jab by the end of this week.

 

[existentialist]

You're thinking of Scottish law there. The OP's shop is on a boat in international waters, so maritime law applies.

Ah, right, so you can actually just shoot him? That makes sense.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Ah, right, so you can actually just shoot him? That makes sense.

Only if he is losing you business.

Otherwise it's unfair discharge.

 

[existentialist]

Only if he is losing you business.

Otherwise it's unfair discharge.

The trick is to get him to exhibit symptoms of mild hysteria, then he can be shot with impunity.

 

[bellaozzydog]

Audi or BMW

 

[mikedescala]

Just a follow up we had a chat this morning and I mentioned about social media posts and attending protests in a nice way and he said ye I do that and basically just for fun and something to do
I now have a line open and I mentioned that maybe that’s not good for his career and going forward if he was looking for a job that future employers could find this and take a dim view
All went down well

 

[muscovyduck]

yikes

 

[muscovyduck]

raise your hand if you've ever had someone in a position of authority give you advice that something you're doing won't look good to employers because they think it's a clever way to threaten you without getting into trouble

 

[StoneRoad]

+ puts up both hands +

(as it has happened more than once).

 

[existentialist]

raise your hand if you've ever had someone in a position of authority give you advice that something you're doing won't look good to employers because they think it's a clever way to threaten you without getting into trouble

It generally doesn't end well, IME. There are times when I find it impossible not to take the piss, and that would be one of those times.