Men - have you ever been sexually harrassed at work?

[Red Cat]

He's been sacked. There is no evidence of sexual harassment but he was offered 6 weeks rather than 2 weeks pay having failed his probation.

There is no case here, people are letting their wish to be helpful and to show their expertise cloud the matter. He'd have been better taking the 6 weeks pay and getting on with finding a new job, for reasons both financial and emotional.

 

[Silas Loom]

He's been sacked. There is no evidence of sexual harassment but he was offered 6 weeks rather than 2 weeks pay having failed his probation.

There is no case here, people are letting their wish to be helpful and to show their expertise cloud the matter. He'd have been better taking the 6 weeks pay and getting on with finding a new job, for reasons both financial and emotional.

If he honestly believes that he has been victimised by a senior employee who developed an inappropriate interest in him and then sabotaged his career, and he is able to convince the employer that he might devote all his time and resources to acting on that belief, he might be able to get more than the extra six weeks. We don’t know enough about the circumstances to say whether there is a case or how frit the employer actually is.

Your advice that there is no case should be taken with as much of a pinch of salt as advice to the contrary, which at least is coming from former union reps and people who have sat on both sides of the desk in commercial environments. There’s no substitute here for paid professional advice of course.

 

[Petcha]

He's been sacked. There is no evidence of sexual harassment but he was offered 6 weeks rather than 2 weeks pay having failed his probation.

There is no case here, people are letting their wish to be helpful and to show their expertise cloud the matter. He'd have been better taking the 6 weeks pay and getting on with finding a new job, for reasons both financial and emotional.

They've confirmed they're going to give me the full ex-gratia payment plus my two weeks notice. Which amounts to 6 weeks. They've also said they'll 'contribute' £500 to a settlement agreement. I'm unfamiliar with this. What's the £500 for exactly?

Hi xxxxxx,

Further to our conversation yesterday I am writing to confirm that xxxxxx will offer you an ex-gratia sum of £x,xxxx. Given the turn of the conversation yesterday and the allegations made, this ex-gratia sum will now be subject to you signing a settlement agreement. xxxxxx will contribute a maximum of £500 towards the review of the settlement agreement.

 

[Silas Loom]

The £500 enables you to get an independent lawyer to review it, I would have thought. Pretty standard.

They’ll also be better qualified than anyone here to advise you on whether it’s worth playing hardball over the number of extra weeks pay. That conversation is covered by employer’s funding but any further support obviously wouldn’t be.

 

[Sweet FA]

No, I didn't. I told them to talk to the CEO. As my allegations hadn't been passed on beyond my line manager. And said I wanted 13 weeks, not 6. I've been sent a holding email.

Would you have taken the money?

No I wouldn't. Have you got records of the times you reported?

eta - ignore me, just caught up with the last page

 

[Winot]

The £500 enables you to get an independent lawyer to review it, I would have thought. Pretty standard.

They’ll also be better qualified than anyone here to advise you on whether it’s worth playing hardball over the number of extra weeks pay. That conversation is covered by employer’s funding but any further support obviously wouldn’t be.

Exactly this. See a lawyer Petcha (as I said up thread).

 

[cesare]

Just to add that the lawyer advice is mandatory for a settlement agreement.

 

[Red Cat]

If he honestly believes that he has been victimised by a senior employee who developed an inappropriate interest in him and then sabotaged his career, and he is able to convince the employer that he might devote all his time and resources to acting on that belief, he might be able to get more than the extra six weeks. We don’t know enough about the circumstances to say whether there is a case or how frit the employer actually is.

Your advice that there is no case should be taken with as much of a pinch of salt as advice to the contrary, which at least is coming from former union reps and people who have sat on both sides of the desk in commercial environments. There’s no substitute here for paid professional advice of course.

I don't have to be a legal expert to know that allegations require evidence of some kind if they are to go anywhere. And from what has been said here, there isn't any. If there's unshared information that provides stronger evidence, or that the complaint came after the allegation and not the opposite as was initially claimed, and this has been documented by the employer, then of course you take legal advice from appropriate professionals, that goes without saying.

An employer will pay out to make someone go away, it doesn't tell us anything about their perception of the situation at all.

 

[xenon]

We had this really lovely "culture lead" at work and she said she was leaving cos she wanted to try HR. We told her she was way too nice for it and would hate it but she did it anyway. I think she lasted two months. To be fair to her we were trying to treat people really well and were small enough to do it, it was probably good experience for her to realise not everywhere is the same.

WTF is a culture lead?

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

WTF is a culture lead?

@elonmusk

 

[tommers]

WTF is a culture lead?

Somebody who leads the culture.

It's basically a person who looks at ways of working within the company and tries to ensure that processes match what we think / want the culture of the company to be. So for example if one of our values is "autonomy" then our remote working policy might give everybody the choice over where they work. There's lots of theory around new ways for companies to work and organise themselves, and that's easier to implement when you're 50 people, rather than 5000 but it's an interesting thing to think about and try to put into practice. They also try to capture what people want the culture to be, look into ways to improve it etc.

Of course when you get bought it all gets torn down and replaced by the new companies processes. But whatever.

 

[Petcha]

If he honestly believes that he has been victimised by a senior employee who developed an inappropriate interest in him and then sabotaged his career, and he is able to convince the employer that he might devote all his time and resources to acting on that belief, he might be able to get more than the extra six weeks. We don’t know enough about the circumstances to say whether there is a case or how frit the employer actually is.

Your advice that there is no case should be taken with as much of a pinch of salt as advice to the contrary, which at least is coming from former union reps and people who have sat on both sides of the desk in commercial environments. There’s no substitute here for paid professional advice of course.

Yeh good advice. I'll sort out a lawyer tomorrow. I've emailed the head of HR tonight to mention the fact that I had been assured by my boss that she had been properly briefed about all the allegations before my final meeting yesterday. The head of HR looked absolutely astonished when I brought it up and I'm inclined to believe her more than my boss. I don't think it was mentioned to her at all. Earlier in the day we had a team meeting and one of the subjects was about the team Xmas party where my boss actually mentioned she was inviting the woman involved. She's not in our team so I guess they might be mates.

So anyway, I told them to check my Teams records where said boss said she had passed on 'everything' to the head of HR. Which patently she didn't.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

just a thought - are there any communications that might be important that were committed to e-mail?

some organisations' e-mail systems can lose important e-mails when the shit hits the fan.

if there is anything important, may be worth printing a paper copy / e-mailing it to a personal e-mail address / saving a copy somewhere you have some control (don't know how many of these are technically possible, and which would be greater breaches of policy where you are.)

 

[Petcha]

just a thought - are there any communications that might be important that were committed to e-mail?

some organisations' e-mail systems can lose important e-mails when the shit hits the fan.

if there is anything important, may be worth printing a paper copy / e-mailing it to a personal e-mail address / saving a copy somewhere you have some control (don't know how many of these are technically possible, and which would be greater breaches of policy where you are.)

Oh, they shut down my accounts the moment I left that meeting room yesterday. Like literally... got back to my desk and it was all shut down.

But there will be some Teams chats surely on archive proving that I did report it and that my boss had passed it up the chain. Which she clearly didn't.

Anyway. I'm happy enough with the outcome I guess. Basically a full month's salary for doing nothing. They're still discussing my request to increase the ex-gratia. They are going to get a shock to their system when they find out I've spent the best part of 6 months saving a load of my work on my desktop rather than Sharepoint, with my own unique naming conventions. I did offer to clean it all up for them before I left but they weren't listening and just ushered me out the door. So fuck em!

I've also said that before I sign anything I want an assurance this woman has been spoken to.

 

[redsquirrel]

Can they revoke their offer of a month if they're fucked off that I tried to up the ante? Coz that was certainly the implication... 'off the record' was mentioned a lot

They aren't bound by any without prejudice offer they've made previously.

I'm not quite clear on what happened at this meeting. Did they dismiss you on the basis that you did not pass probation? Or do you think it was some other reason (and if so can you prove that)?
TBH your probation and the complaint should be dealt with separately.

TBF I think they are pretty standard now if anybody leaves your organisation for any reason other than voluntarily. Just in case.

Yeah, offering a bit more money and getting a settlement agreement signed is just an easy way of tidying up any loose ends

 

[Petcha]

They aren't bound by any without prejudice offer they've made previously.

I'm not quite clear on what happened at this meeting. Did they dismiss you on the basis that you did not pass probation? Or do you think it was some other reason (and if so can you prove that)?
TBH your probation and the complaint should be dealt with separately.


Yeah, offering a bit more money and getting a settlement agreement signed is just an easy way of tidying up any loose ends

Well they've confirmed they'll be making my payment on 19 December - are you saying that because it's 'without prejudice' they can withdraw that payment? Should I stop stoking the fire here?

They've dismissed me because I didn't pass probation. My boss did a 360, and it wasn't pleasant reading although reading all the comments they were clearly overwhelmingly coming from one person, and you can guess who that was.

 

[redsquirrel]

Well they've confirmed they'll be making my payment on 19 December - are you saying that because it's 'without prejudice' they can withdraw that payment? Should I stop stoking the fire here?

Sorry confirmed that they are making what payment?
They will have to pay you any monies that you are owed so the two weeks as a minimum. They are not bound to keep the offer of 4 weeks pay regardless of circumstances, they can turn around and withdraw that if they wish.
The email you've quoted above is clear that the extra four weeks is subject to the signing of an agreement.

They've dismissed me because I didn't pass probation. My boss did a 360, and it wasn't pleasant reading although reading all the comments they were clearly overwhelmingly coming from one person, and you can guess who that was.

So there are two separate (if linked) matters here - (1) was your dismissal fair, (2) what do they intend to do about the behaviour of this individual.

 

[Petcha]

Sorry confirmed that they are making what payment?
They will have to pay you any monies that you are owed so the two weeks as a minimum. They are not bound to keep the offer of 4 weeks pay regardless of circumstances, they can turn around and withdraw that if they wish.
The email you've quoted above is clear that the extra four weeks is subject to the signing of an agreement.

So there are two separate (if linked) matters here - (1) was your dismissal fair, (2) what do they intend to do about the behaviour of this individual.

The ex-gratia payment. Which is basically a month's salary. They've confirmed it in writing but they did preface the email with 'Without Prejudice'. I know they don't need to pay me this but they implied they were doing it as it's Xmas and I have a child.

I honestly don't think they will withdraw it. I don't think they're bad people but I have been stoking the fire a bit.

 

[redsquirrel]

If it is without prejudice they can withdraw the offer.
Whether they will or not - well a months pay to have a settlement agreement signed and a line drawn underneath the matter seems pretty cheap - but you will know the place better than us

 

[Petcha]

If it is without prejudice they can withdraw the offer.
Whether they will or not - well a months pay to have a settlement agreement signed and a line drawn underneath the matter seems pretty cheap - but you will know the place better than us

They're one of the smaller companies I've ever washed up at tbh, lowest salary I've had for years but they're an asset mgmt firm nonetheless and have a few billion AUM.... I told them I want 13 weeks because someone further up thread there suggested that somewhat random number.... the head of HR looked a little confused by that too i have to say. I was literally scrolling through this thread in the meeting.

Anyway, I shall update you all on this soap opera tomorrow when their next gambit is played.

 

[cupid_stunt]

13 weeks = 3 months.

 

[Silas Loom]

“Without prejudice” means that any offer made doesn’t count as an admission of liability should the matter go to court. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the offer is time-limited or can be withdrawn at will: if either of those are intended they should be set out in the letter.

 

[Silas Loom]

They're one of the smaller companies I've ever washed up at tbh, lowest salary I've had for years but they're an asset mgmt firm nonetheless and have a few billion AUM.... I told them I want 13 weeks because someone further up thread there suggested that somewhat random number.... the head of HR looked a little confused by that too i have to say. I was literally scrolling through this thread in the meeting.

Anyway, I shall update you all on this soap opera tomorrow when their next gambit is played.

When you said it was an agency, and you designed ads, and an account director was in your reporting line, I assumed marketing services agency. The asset management bit throws me completely as I don’t see how designing ads as part of an in-house marketing function for a financial services firm brings you into contact with an account director. Anyway, this presumably means you are not customer-facing at all, and #90 should be disregarded.

 

[Petcha]

When you said it was an agency, and you designed ads, and an account director was in your reporting line, I assumed marketing services agency. The asset management bit throws me completely as I don’t see how designing ads as part of an in-house marketing function for a financial services firm brings you into contact with an account director. Anyway, this presumably means you are not customer-facing at all, and #90 should be disregarded.

It's a slightly bizarre arrangement they have where the lines are very blurred. I've never worked anywhere quite like it... so yes you do have the client coming and sitting with you at times.

 

[Petcha]

Further to our discussion on Monday, I am now able to confirm that XXXXX will not be revising the ex-gratia sum initially offered to you. The original offer was made to you in good faith and as a genuine goodwill payment.

We acknowledge the allegations you made in the meeting and accept that you had raised these with xxxxx previously, but that you had asked her not escalate these. I also now understand that xxxxxx from my team was present at a conversation that you had with xxxxxx, but again your wishes not to escalate these at the time were respected. In light of the information you shared with me directly, I understand that you would like us to look into this with you. I will of course try to speak to xxxxx, but as you know she is currently on a protected period of her maternity leave so we are unable to contact her for the time being. That said, we are fully committed to addressing this with you on either a formal or informal basis, if you would like to proceed with either option please let me know when you are free to speak and we can agree how to move forward. Until I have all the specific details on the issues raised and have had an opportunity to conduct an investigation, it would be improper to draw any assumptions or conclusions based solely on the information you shared in the meeting on Monday. This would be our approach to all grievances raised.

With that in mind, the offer of xxxxxxxx ex-gratia settlement is still available to you, on a full and final basis, and will remain so until COB Tuesday 3 December 2024. Should you wish to accept this payment you will need to return the attached signed settlement agreement (with your advisers certificate) no later than 5pm on 3 December 2024. If we have not received a response from you by this date, we will take this as non-acceptance of the offer. I do also need to make you aware that xxxxxxx offers no commitment to paying any ex-gratia sum after the 3 December 2024.

So I guess I'm just gonna have to take this. Anyway. Thank you for your help everyone. She's attached a fairly lengthy document for me to sign - is the next step to send that to the solicitor she's recommended?

At least the woman in question's card is now marked in the mind of HR.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ah well. You tried. Don't ask, don't get, and it didn't cost you anything.

"genuine goodwill payment"

One thing that occured to me. Will they be giving you a good reference? Worth securing that as well.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

She's attached a fairly lengthy document for me to sign - is the next step to send that to the solicitor she's recommended?

would have thought so, but i'm not expert in settlement agreements

One thing that occured to me. Will they be giving you a good reference? Worth securing that as well.

yes - settlement agreements can include agreeing what will / will not be put in any future reference - although increasing number of organisations don't do anything other than confirm dates of employment. (an urban myth has built up that 'it's illegal to give a bad reference' - that isn't strictly true, but an (ex) employer can get sued if a reference is untrue and / or malicious, so many organisations play safe and won't do more than confirm dates.)

 

[Glitter]

Ah well. You tried. Don't ask, don't get, and it didn't cost you anything.

"genuine goodwill payment"

One thing that occured to me. Will they be giving you a good reference? Worth securing that as well.

I’d imagine they’ll give a truthful reference if asked, ‘Worked for us between x and y dates, didn’t pass probation’

 

[Winot]

So I guess I'm just gonna have to take this. Anyway. Thank you for your help everyone. She's attached a fairly lengthy document for me to sign - is the next step to send that to the solicitor she's recommended?

At least the woman in question's card is now marked in the mind of HR.

YES SEND IT TO THE LAWYER AND TAKE THEIR ADVICE.

Christ this is infuriating. I've been an HR partner for 20+ years. I've been on the other side of this situation multiple times. So for the third time, do yourself a favour and take legal advice.

 

[Winot]

(and you don't need to use their recommended lawyer)