Twitter | Search | |
Search Refresh
Public Interest 11h
At the stated he knew certain staff were trained because...he had trained them!! Yet, at , he completely forgot he trained them and instead stated had trained them!! overlooked this inconsistency!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest 23h
deemed that Claimant's 3 months experience as a manager meant he ought to have known specific staff werent suitable to be left in charge despite withholding the relevant information from !!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest 24h
failed to give sufficient information to carry out the job role they had put him in. made decision based on information he had. Respondent disagreed with decision and dismissed him. deemed fair dismissal!!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest 22h
never investigated or reviewed training, no one told respondent that claimant was trained, Claimant directly told respondent he wasnt trained; still deemed it for respondent to 'believe' claimant was trained!!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 4
The removal of fees now gives everyone access to an but, that doesnt mean you have # especially with people like hearing cases who seem to ignore and do their own thing!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Dec 29
Despite no staff being absent, deemed there was a staff shortage caused by staff absence!!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 8
In order to dismiss the , the breached the employee handbook, breached the employment contract, and breached employment law. saw nothing wrong with all these breaches!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest 21h
It was established the staff left on site by were not managers. It was never established they werent trained, it was never established they werent responsible people, yet deemed them not trained and not responsible people!!
Reply Retweet Like
Philippa Newis 14h
A massive thank you to for speaking to about . An issue with huge personal and professional impact.
Reply Retweet Like
Kathleen Philipson Dec 28
Is there a rule or law abt the stopping us going 2work can your employer complain abt not turning up to work?
Reply Retweet Like
Complaints About ... Jan 17
awful insensitive social media posts from saying everything fiiiinne in sunny Originville. Tell that to the staff you sacked, especially the one you called the Police on yesterday as he waited outside the office for his wageslip
Reply Retweet Like
Nicki Mawby (HR) Jan 22
Did you know?? Employers should always consult with employees before making any redundancies giving them information on: why the redundancies are necessary and if there are any alternatives to making people redundant.
Reply Retweet Like
sonja 14h
found there was more than anecdotal evidence that [inc ] people were being mis-performance managed because of a lack of awareness and clear information.
Reply Retweet Like
Ⓔ Boriqua Ⓐ 15h
10 out of 9 comrades agree, flossing while singing is better for your dental health than flossing alone.
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 21
had never once stated he had done nothing wrong; he simply maintained had not shown any evidence of him doing anything wrong. falsely stated 'the claimant was insistent he had done nothing wrong'!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 20
This wasnt just versus ; it was claimant versus the respondent and !!! Claimant would have had better odds of winning if you put names in a hat and pulled one out!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 20
If just one person gains useful knowledge of 's actions from these posts and the linked site, and then applies that knowledge if ever faced with Judge Horne at , then my work here was worth the time and effort!
Reply Retweet Like
Helen Moira Kay Jan 20
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 20
If does not support the allegations, how can the then have a the Claimant was guilty? Easy...they simply say they know the is guilty from their own knowledge!!!
Reply Retweet Like
Public Interest Jan 20
Speculation, groundless assumptions and anything else stated by that wasnt investigated or established as FACT was deemed a by despite no !!!
Reply Retweet Like