Some companies can be totally ruthless in how they treat employees. This can have a devastating effect on the mental health of an employee. There needs to be more compassion in society.
They only just became aware of his disability, they have not been ruthless. As long as the reasonable adjustments request is raised formally and is backed with evidence then the company will be legally obliged to do everything a court would consider reasonable to keep this man in his job.
@@TheChodax Yeah I wouldn't say giving him 7 months to improve is ruthless when they were thinking him to be fully abled. Though if he has short term memory loss you'd think someone might have picked up that something was wrong and sympathetically broached the subject especially if they've only noticed performance problems after a change in the workload. It may be he's witheld the information even when asked directly if there's any problems, given they've clearly been going through a proper process with him. Though at the same time the way they dragged him in while on annual leave is sketchy, I feel there's missing parts to the story.
@@stuartmorgan3654 to be honest the company sounds like they must have been incredibly patient with him for 20 years to let him carry on with short term memory loss. They were probably aware that something was wrong and thought he had some kind of developmental disorder or something. It's only when the demands of the work changed that they lost patience with him.
Not gonna lie at 60 I expect it will be difficult for him to find work again in the nicest respect so I would let them sack him and try sue for unfair dismissal
Unfair dismissal wouldn't work. The company had followed their processes. The key thing was effectively asking HR for an occupational health assessment once they became aware of the disability.
@@simonharris4873 he can still be sacked within this period and also, they can accept his resignation but only give him his contracted period. He can't just say how long he wants the period to be.
the reason we pay our taxes is so people like your partner have a safety a safety net to fall back on. i hope you sort things out i also know he has paid his fair share so he deserves all the help he can get xxx
HR are just protecting the employers interest and never impartial, gone are the days when there was some middle ground. NEVER TRUST HR. Awful people, and a bunch of liars, who cover up.
@@am4793 Proof of political bias in the workplace? I didn't think so. You just mean horrible or tight employers, of which I've had many, but never once did I know how they voted. I wonder what your political views are...
@@fluxington oh yes, those socially conscious lefty employers are well known for their union smashing and sweatshops, not! Stop being obuse we all know that the rightwing is about exploitation.
How inconsiderate, she's is clearly stressed, her husband has the potential of losing his job which will inevitably affect their livelihood and regardless of who is in the right or wrong. The company should have shown some decency and spoken with over time about their concerns and definitely given him more than one day to decide about his future, given his 20 years of working for the company.
This is how people react when they are upset, feel wronged and are highly stressed. I thought the presenter handled a clearly very stressed person in an excellent manner.
@@wackypeace1135 no she needed to shut and listen to the advice of the person who knows what he is talking about instead of moaning about how awful it is.
A friend was working in a shop for quite a few weeks. The boss only popping in once in a while. On one visit her saw for the first time she was working using only one arm. He asked her why and said she wasn’t suitable and terminated her employment. A few days later he came round to her home and asked for her help in filling out forms as he could get a grant towards her salary and for reasonable adjustments to the workplace. She turned to her mother and said “show him out”.
Sounds like someone sleazy is in the company trying to cut this employee off before they can qualify for a pension. I mean, he's a long term employee, he's nearing retirement age, and he has a very good record. If he was on a probationary period to monitor his performance, he should have been duly informed and signed a statement to agree to that. This sounds very suspect to me, especially given that the call was made whilst he was on paid leave at the same time that HR and other bodies that might vouch for him or defend his position were also out of the office. It doesn't sound on the level to me.
Most, if not all pensions are dealt with by a pensions company, so all the money he paid in over the years he worked there will be safe. I was forced to resign from a job that had private pension and I have about 1k in private pension as it was dealt with by a pensions company
Whilst I do agree with you, it can be easier said than done, personally I'm an epileptic, officially I need to tell an employer that for everyone safety, but when your in a job interview, or just accepted an offer, you are in a precarious position and it's very easy to tell yourself it's fine and it will better to wait abit before telling them, it can be very hard to have the confidence to just out right say it.
I agree and have done so my self. Thankfully for me, it's in todays climate of greater tolerance. In this gents case, it hasn't been an issue for 21 years. 21 years ago, the landscape was very different towards disabilities
The employee in my opinion should have made his employers aware as soon as question marks were raised with regards to his working standards. Why leave it so long to mention you have a condition that is affecting your ability to work?
If one has had a brain hemorrhage, I can see why you might decline to mention it. He has coped adequately for a long period and as such. I suspect he's a proud man who has tried to do his level best regardless and is morally prevented from using his condition as a "Uno reverse card"
You could argue that when someone says I have been a loyal employee that the company have also been loyal in paying you for your service. It’s not as if you work there for free.
Being paid is the bare minimum one can expect from the company for employment, that in itself doesn't constitute loyalty. On the other hand, an employee who works diligently for many years, rarely if ever taking sick days and potentially going the extra mile for the company is a demonstration of loyalty.
As a GMB Union Rep, and speaking from regular experience, the manager of this gentleman would not have got anywhere near behaving in this manner if this gentleman had been in a Union. There is so much wrong with this. As part of the process of taking someone through a 'capability' at work problem the managers should have requested the involvement with Occupational Health to determine the possibility of a health issue contributing to this matter. That's just one part of it. Usual incompetence from managers. This why people SHOULD join a Union.
Whilst I feel sorry for him, but he had made a decision not to tell his employer about his condition so he is not treated differently. And so his employer did exactly that. But now he wants special treatment. Best to be clear from the beginning and not try to change your defence based on the benefits you can get from it.
There's circumstances in which I might agree with you but this has come to a head after 21 years of employment. He's coped adequately until a few months prior to this video and the job has changed beyond his capability to adapt(rather than his capability to do the job in the first place). The climate regarding disabilities in the late 90s/early 2000s was very different to what it is now and as such, in these particular circumstances, it is right to bring it up now when it has become very relevant
My parents both worked in a hotel for around 30 years each. During the pandemic, they were furloughed and upon returning to work, were told that staff were no longer allowed to use the lift due to Covid and because of staff restructuring, again, because of Covid, they would both have to access multiple floors as part of their jobs. Both of them struggled with stairs and after a few weeks, they were called in to see their boss who gave similar terms to the callers husband. Resign or be sacked. I knew nothing of this, typical parents not wanting to make a fuss, and by the time I found out, they had already signed the paperwork and left the business. I was congratulating them on their retirement, they were both in their 70s at the time, and they dropped that bombshell. Once you resign, that's it, in a situation like this, always "let" your employer sack you, otherwise you don't have a leg to stand on.
He’s perfectly entitled not to tell them about his brain haemorrhage and subsequent short term memory loss so as to be treated like every other employee but if then further down the line…….
Having a disability should not have been seen as embarrassing. He would have likely not have gotten in this situation had he accepted that he NEEDED to be treated differently to help him cope a lot earlier. And thus HR wouldn't have been able to do this to him in the first place, or at least as easily. Yes, he coped for ages due to somehow the work not changing much, but imagine how much more effective he could have been in that time with extra support.
From what I gather, the company knew nothing of his disability until the last minute. I would hope the newfound knowledge of that makes them sit back and take stock of the situation. People aren't mind readers but some are heartless wankers. I'm not sure the company has had enough info to prove otherwise
Employment law is so weak in favour of rich employers. Blatant unfair practices supported by employment law and no legal aid anywhere in site...what society are we after in the UK??
it sounds like a good company giving him 7 months so they would only sack him if they didn't know, now they do know they will just pay his charity wage for awhile until they can legally get rid.
As stated in the video, the fact that they didn't know absolved them of responsibility because how are they meant to make reasonable adjustments without knowing they're needed? Now that they know it puts a pause on things allowing them to assess if they can make reasonable adjustments to the role and enable him to continue working. Letting them sack him then taking them to tribunal is stupid, they're just going to shrug and say what were we supposed to do? He didn't tell us and waited until he was already sacked to make it known.
Tbf working In HR I get the impression they probably went for a formal process with them, at the stage of they can fire him. But rather than fire him they full. I'm going to give him a chance so that it doesn't affect his future employers. 7 months is a very long time. I've seen people leave within like 3 months. Maybe they don't want. They don't want him to appeal the decision because if he fries I'm his own to call. Then he loses right to appeal that outcome. I think there's a possibility that they may have tried to being helpful so it doesn't lose any future job prospects but also like he should have told them.
We are taught at school that the whole goal in life is to find a 'good' job. They don't teach you instead how to start your own company and be your own boss.
So he didn't make them aware of his condition because he didn't want to be treated any differently. And the employer has done exactly that. Anyone who underperforms at work will be disciplined, unless, of course, there is a reasonable excuse as to why this is - but the employee hid this from their employer. The employee has entirely done this to themselves, sorry, but think about it from the perspective of the manager.
Companies don’t give a crap about you let’s be honest, if you choose to work for a company don’t be surprised when they put the company’s needs before your tenure & loyalty
Power of attorney maybe an option for this lady. Union representative to. Keep a diary of everyday routines. Surely there be paperwork for his extra support performance reviews etc. Sounds a dirty company.
![Employer withdraws job offer the day before the new job starts [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Fe8Lwsw8-50/mqdefault.jpg)
![Employer withdraws job offer the day before the new job starts [LBC Legal Hour]](/img/tr.png)
![I've been shamed and humiliated on social media. What can I do? [LBC Legal Hour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tARiikDmotA/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Some companies can be totally ruthless in how they treat employees. This can have a devastating effect on the mental health of an employee. There needs to be more compassion in society.
They only just became aware of his disability, they have not been ruthless. As long as the reasonable adjustments request is raised formally and is backed with evidence then the company will be legally obliged to do everything a court would consider reasonable to keep this man in his job.
@@TheChodax Yeah I wouldn't say giving him 7 months to improve is ruthless when they were thinking him to be fully abled. Though if he has short term memory loss you'd think someone might have picked up that something was wrong and sympathetically broached the subject especially if they've only noticed performance problems after a change in the workload. It may be he's witheld the information even when asked directly if there's any problems, given they've clearly been going through a proper process with him. Though at the same time the way they dragged him in while on annual leave is sketchy, I feel there's missing parts to the story.
@@stuartmorgan3654 to be honest the company sounds like they must have been incredibly patient with him for 20 years to let him carry on with short term memory loss. They were probably aware that something was wrong and thought he had some kind of developmental disorder or something. It's only when the demands of the work changed that they lost patience with him.
Daniel is such a valuable dude. everyone could do with a caring intelligent person like this in their social circle.
Not gonna lie at 60 I expect it will be difficult for him to find work again in the nicest respect so I would let them sack him and try sue for unfair dismissal
Unfair dismissal wouldn't work. The company had followed their processes. The key thing was effectively asking HR for an occupational health assessment once they became aware of the disability.
I would resign and give them 7 years notice.
You could find work in your 60s but low paid work that most don't want to do.
@@simonharris4873 he can still be sacked within this period and also, they can accept his resignation but only give him his contracted period. He can't just say how long he wants the period to be.
the reason we pay our taxes is so people like your partner have a safety a safety net to fall back on. i hope you sort things out i also know he has paid his fair share so he deserves all the help he can get xxx
From a HR person - some HR professionals need to grow some balls and say no to owners or managers for this exact reason.
@Don´tbehasty depends what your values are.
Every HR person I have ever dealt with was borderline sociopathic.
HR are just protecting the employers interest and never impartial, gone are the days when there was some middle ground. NEVER TRUST HR.
Awful people, and a bunch of liars, who cover up.
@@powerboon2k Yes, I tend to equate them with doctors receptionists.
Hr are manager’s employees 😂😂 they will always be Yes-Sir no matter what … Worst job ever …
Dodgy employer wanting to avoid redundancy money.
No, statutory redundancy pay is nothing. 20 yrs at the cap is only 10k which is only 3-4 months pay for average wage?
@@coderider3022 it sucks that rightwing employers don't even want to pay the minimum amount offered with statutory redundancy.
@@am4793 Proof of political bias in the workplace? I didn't think so. You just mean horrible or tight employers, of which I've had many, but never once did I know how they voted. I wonder what your political views are...
@@fluxington oh yes, those socially conscious lefty employers are well known for their union smashing and sweatshops, not! Stop being obuse we all know that the rightwing is about exploitation.
@@coderider3022I thought they only needed to pay 2 weeks worth of pay
If Daniel didn't interrupt she would still be talking to this day
news update. she has just came up for air.
How inconsiderate, she's is clearly stressed, her husband has the potential of losing his job which will inevitably affect their livelihood and regardless of who is in the right or wrong. The company should have shown some decency and spoken with over time about their concerns and definitely given him more than one day to decide about his future, given his 20 years of working for the company.
This is how people react when they are upset, feel wronged and are highly stressed. I thought the presenter handled a clearly very stressed person in an excellent manner.
@@wackypeace1135 no she needed to shut and listen to the advice of the person who knows what he is talking about instead of moaning about how awful it is.
A friend was working in a shop for quite a few weeks. The boss only popping in once in a while. On one visit her saw for the first time she was working using only one arm. He asked her why and said she wasn’t suitable and terminated her employment.
A few days later he came round to her home and asked for her help in filling out forms as he could get a grant towards her salary and for reasonable adjustments to the workplace.
She turned to her mother and said “show him out”.
Sounds like someone sleazy is in the company trying to cut this employee off before they can qualify for a pension. I mean, he's a long term employee, he's nearing retirement age, and he has a very good record. If he was on a probationary period to monitor his performance, he should have been duly informed and signed a statement to agree to that. This sounds very suspect to me, especially given that the call was made whilst he was on paid leave at the same time that HR and other bodies that might vouch for him or defend his position were also out of the office.
It doesn't sound on the level to me.
Most, if not all pensions are dealt with by a pensions company, so all the money he paid in over the years he worked there will be safe. I was forced to resign from a job that had private pension and I have about 1k in private pension as it was dealt with by a pensions company
You have to always be honest from the start. It’s the right action to take and any non disclosure bites you later, no question.
Whilst I do agree with you, it can be easier said than done, personally I'm an epileptic, officially I need to tell an employer that for everyone safety, but when your in a job interview, or just accepted an offer, you are in a precarious position and it's very easy to tell yourself it's fine and it will better to wait abit before telling them, it can be very hard to have the confidence to just out right say it.
I agree and have done so my self. Thankfully for me, it's in todays climate of greater tolerance. In this gents case, it hasn't been an issue for 21 years. 21 years ago, the landscape was very different towards disabilities
The employee in my opinion should have made his employers aware as soon as question marks were raised with regards to his working standards. Why leave it so long to mention you have a condition that is affecting your ability to work?
@@jackoh991 I would hope they know their rights now
If one has had a brain hemorrhage, I can see why you might decline to mention it. He has coped adequately for a long period and as such.
I suspect he's a proud man who has tried to do his level best regardless and is morally prevented from using his condition as a "Uno reverse card"
You could argue that when someone says I have been a loyal employee that the company have also been loyal in paying you for your service. It’s not as if you work there for free.
Being paid is the bare minimum one can expect from the company for employment, that in itself doesn't constitute loyalty. On the other hand, an employee who works diligently for many years, rarely if ever taking sick days and potentially going the extra mile for the company is a demonstration of loyalty.
You've got serf-brain
As a GMB Union Rep, and speaking from regular experience, the manager of this gentleman would not have got anywhere near behaving in this manner if this gentleman had been in a Union. There is so much wrong with this. As part of the process of taking someone through a 'capability' at work problem the managers should have requested the involvement with Occupational Health to determine the possibility of a health issue contributing to this matter. That's just one part of it. Usual incompetence from managers. This why people SHOULD join a Union.
People won't join unions "coz unions is comyunism innit"
Always do the bare minimum. You don’t owe these corporations anything.
Brain half off im lol im not paid what im worth so fk it.
@@NineSeptims you're definitely paid what you are worth...
Whilst I feel sorry for him, but he had made a decision not to tell his employer about his condition so he is not treated differently.
And so his employer did exactly that. But now he wants special treatment.
Best to be clear from the beginning and not try to change your defence based on the benefits you can get from it.
absolutely
There's circumstances in which I might agree with you but this has come to a head after 21 years of employment. He's coped adequately until a few months prior to this video and the job has changed beyond his capability to adapt(rather than his capability to do the job in the first place).
The climate regarding disabilities in the late 90s/early 2000s was very different to what it is now and as such, in these particular circumstances, it is right to bring it up now when it has become very relevant
@@andrewmcnamara3959 Would you not agree that he had the opportunity to voice his condition when the job started to change?
My parents both worked in a hotel for around 30 years each. During the pandemic, they were furloughed and upon returning to work, were told that staff were no longer allowed to use the lift due to Covid and because of staff restructuring, again, because of Covid, they would both have to access multiple floors as part of their jobs. Both of them struggled with stairs and after a few weeks, they were called in to see their boss who gave similar terms to the callers husband. Resign or be sacked. I knew nothing of this, typical parents not wanting to make a fuss, and by the time I found out, they had already signed the paperwork and left the business. I was congratulating them on their retirement, they were both in their 70s at the time, and they dropped that bombshell. Once you resign, that's it, in a situation like this, always "let" your employer sack you, otherwise you don't have a leg to stand on.
Great explanation, Daniel.
He’s perfectly entitled not to tell them about his brain haemorrhage and subsequent short term memory loss so as to be treated like every other employee but if then further down the line…….
An assessment with occupational health would help in this situation.
Having a disability should not have been seen as embarrassing.
He would have likely not have gotten in this situation had he accepted that he NEEDED to be treated differently to help him cope a lot earlier. And thus HR wouldn't have been able to do this to him in the first place, or at least as easily.
Yes, he coped for ages due to somehow the work not changing much, but imagine how much more effective he could have been in that time with extra support.
Im sorry but the employer didnt know until anfew days before her call. Give them a chance before calling up
Name and shame this company. Everyone must know who this company is so it can be avoided and boycotted out of existence.
From what I gather, the company knew nothing of his disability until the last minute.
I would hope the newfound knowledge of that makes them sit back and take stock of the situation.
People aren't mind readers but some are heartless wankers. I'm not sure the company has had enough info to prove otherwise
Employment law is so weak in favour of rich employers. Blatant unfair practices supported by employment law and no legal aid anywhere in site...what society are we after in the UK??
Employment law is ruled by the employer.ACAS has practice code for the employer to comply,but not a statement of law so all is back to square one.
Let them sack you and then you can sue them for unfair dismisal and take every penny they have.
Well you can do that and you would probably get a good payout but you’re not going to get every penny they have. Just nonsense
@@Nightstalker321 A good payout is not nonsense is it fool
@@destroycommies2427 that’s not what you said is it. “Take every penny they have” and “good payout” are completely different. Can’t you read?! Lizard
it sounds like a good company giving him 7 months so they would only sack him if they didn't know, now they do know they will just pay his charity wage for awhile until they can legally get rid.
As stated in the video, the fact that they didn't know absolved them of responsibility because how are they meant to make reasonable adjustments without knowing they're needed? Now that they know it puts a pause on things allowing them to assess if they can make reasonable adjustments to the role and enable him to continue working. Letting them sack him then taking them to tribunal is stupid, they're just going to shrug and say what were we supposed to do? He didn't tell us and waited until he was already sacked to make it known.
They have set it up to avoid redundancy!
Tbf working In HR I get the impression they probably went for a formal process with them, at the stage of they can fire him. But rather than fire him they full. I'm going to give him a chance so that it doesn't affect his future employers. 7 months is a very long time. I've seen people leave within like 3 months. Maybe they don't want. They don't want him to appeal the decision because if he fries I'm his own to call. Then he loses right to appeal that outcome. I think there's a possibility that they may have tried to being helpful so it doesn't lose any future job prospects but also like he should have told them.
Daniel says keep it consice as there are other callers then let people tell their life flipping story.. get to the bleeding question love
We are taught at school that the whole goal in life is to find a 'good' job.
They don't teach you instead how to start your own company and be your own boss.
what did he mouth at the end? @8.33
Loyalty, the most disposable of virtues. Only as good as your last win or loss is.
Its also so they can get out of paying the company pension or redundancy
Company pensions are long gone !!!
60 years old with a brain hemorage and he wants to keep working?
So he didn't make them aware of his condition because he didn't want to be treated any differently. And the employer has done exactly that. Anyone who underperforms at work will be disciplined, unless, of course, there is a reasonable excuse as to why this is - but the employee hid this from their employer. The employee has entirely done this to themselves, sorry, but think about it from the perspective of the manager.
For the most part you are correct. What would you do upon receipt of this info given these circumstances?
Companies don’t give a crap about you let’s be honest, if you choose to work for a company don’t be surprised when they put the company’s needs before your tenure & loyalty
A grievance will not (in most cases) halt any formal performance or sickness management.
Where do you “register as disabled”?
DWP, numb nuts.
Genuinely, your GP and the DWP.
@ Nope. No such thing as a disabled register. Why would there be?
The company might be good! But the individuals involved with his employment should be ashamed. They do not represent the best of any company.
I feel like we have an unreliable narrator here. The wife didnt even know he was being reviewed and seems to filling many gaps with her assumptions.
Looking for a claim up...
03:00 "I'm not an academic"
You don't say
Power of attorney maybe an option for this lady. Union representative to. Keep a diary of everyday routines. Surely there be paperwork for his extra support performance reviews etc. Sounds a dirty company.
The term partner grinds my gears.
The company love knifing people in the back, start your own business
Firstly, always join a union, second he should have informed them he had a brain haemorrhage so they could make reasonable adjustments.
👏👏👏
WTFF ?
He got caught ! End of .
so they didn't know hmmmmmmmmmm so they just treated him like a normal person, so she wants them to pay her husband for being rubbish at his job.
Is he claiming for disability? Ask the right questions, poor woman for expecting good advice from LBC.
Thats not necessary; just being disabled is enough for the Equality Act.
He asked if he is legally disabled - and she said he is and could either claim disability and chose work instead, but is disabled by law still