I wonder about the legality of this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EddieM
  • Start date Start date
Tigercubrider said:
No, because their employer has the right.
Click to expand...

His employer only has the right to act within employment law. No company can enforce or indeed create a contract that is outside of that. Notwithstanding other factors that we are unaware of I still maintain on the face of it they are on shaky ground.
 
100% agree. This does not fit gross misconduct and any reputational damages clause cannot be enforced on the personal opinions of his employer. There are decided cases that would guide a tribunal to examine the foreseeable risk of the damage. I'd be assessing his salary vs the unfair dismissal cap and would probably sack him as his employer has done and then consider a compromise agreement of 20-50k (depending on his earnings and length of service). I'd be minded that my business may benefit from a tribunal win/lose. Max exposure here is £88,519 + some expenses and that is assuming the chap has at least 2 years service

I'd probably sack him too, not because I had a right, but because it would be a calculated risk.
 
Last edited:
motorbiking said:
100% agree. This does not fit gross misconduct and any repetitional damages clause cannot be enforced on the personal opinions of his employer. There are decided cases that would guid a tribunal to examine the foreseeable risk of the damage. I'd be assessing his salary vs the unfair dismissal cap and would probably sack him as his employer has done and then consider a compromise agreement of 20-50k (depending on his earnings and length of service). I'd be minded that my business may benefit from a tribunal win/lose. Max exposure here is £88,519 + some expenses and that is assuming the chap has at least 2 years service

I'd probably sack him too, not because I had a right, but because it would be a calculated risk.
Click to expand...

I'd probably do the same, but likewise I'd be expecting to make it a mutually acceptable pay off.
 
motorbiking said:
... and any repetitional damages clause cannot be enforced on the personal opinions of his employer. ...
Click to expand...
If the employer provided some evidence to demonstrate that he was potentially losing some business, it wouldn't be his personal opinion.

motorbiking said:
I'd probably sack him too, not because I had a right, but because it would be a calculated risk.
Click to expand...
Agreed, the potential damage to such a company could run into many £100,000's, especially such a company with international sales, a company with obvious equal opportunities polices, perhaps also their share value could be affected by such organisations that invest in ethical investments, etc.
 
Bobby Dazzler said:
If the employer provided some evidence to demonstrate that he was potentially losing some business, it wouldn't be his personal opinion.
Click to expand...

No it can't be after the fact. He has to know/be informed in advance what conduct might come in to play. Example in the company handbook, social/media policies etc.
 
motorbiking said:
No it can't be after the fact. He has to know/be informed in advance what conduct might come in to play. Example in the company handbook, social/media policies etc.
Click to expand...
Hmm, debatable point, I think.
If the employer knew he would lose some business, if he didn't dismiss the employee, due to the company being brought into disrepute, perhaps because its policies were based on ethical products, practices, etc, and it provided evidence, from its handbooks, websites, etc, or perhaps from business partners to that effect, surely it could demonstrate that its reputation would have been damaged if it didn't dismiss that employee?

I don't suppose it actually happened, but if such business partners had been aware of the association of Hepple, with the company, and made its opinion known to the company, they would have been left with no alternative but to dismiss him, and any known associates of him and his attitudes.

Any past arrangements, contracts, etc based on ethical practices, or with some form of ethical comment embedded in it, would surely be sufficient to prove that its business would be affected.
Isn't it normal practice now for companies to include some form of ethical consideration in their business and contracts?
 
Ifs, buts and maybes aside.. No is the short answer. They have other sanctions to address the issue. Dismissal is a last resort. We do not know his general employment conduct or even his length of service. He may not even have a right with regard to unfair dismissal.
 
Last edited:
Sacked is the headline, but he doesn't have the power to sack her. She'd need to be recalled to be properly sacked.

I thought he sacked her because she had links to the Pawn industry :D :D
 
Bobby Dazzler said:
So ifs, buts and maybes could be important?
Click to expand...
Yes - if the situation was completely different, it would obviously be... completely different. ;)

If you are interested in the limits of reputation damages clauses google pay vs united kingdom
 
Last edited:
JohnD said:
carrot is a vegetable.

Saying that does not imply that cabbages are not vegetables.

It does not imply that you hate turnips

It does not imply that you think peas have less value.

It is simply a statement of fact.
Click to expand...
"""Most ridiculous analogy of the day""prize to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top