Originally posted by Talion
Any lawyers in the house?
In my current company they have a 100% accuracy policy. In other words we have to get every part of our job 100% correct of they aren\'t happy. Which isn\'t possible.
I was wondering what are my legal rights, is there anything that says they have to give you a certain error percentage. I have a clear employment record, and would like to prepare myself if they decide to start issuing official warnings, I can then wave something in their face and threaten them with an employment tribunal.
I am not a lawyer at all and don\'t have any legal qualifications however I have been a low level trade union rep, and did a year of employment law as part of my degree (which admittedly was a long time ago!).
If I remember right and from my old notes and books dismissal on grounds of performance is mostly governed by common law (cases that have gone on previously) more than Statutes (Acts of Parliament and laws passed by government).
Dismissal can be normally be fair if it is due to your capability in a job. (a bit about capability is
here. Generally if you do not do your job to the \"required standard\" then this could be a fair reason for dismissal.
However with all things it\'s never this simple. An Employment Tribunal would have to in this case be satisfied that this was the reason for the dismissal AND that the employer
\"acted reasonably in the circumstances (including the size and administrative resources of the undertaking) in treating that reason as sufficient to justify dismissing the employee.\" See here.
The following cases give an idea of how the legal system decides on that last point that is in bold.
- If an employee\'s work is criticized generally s/he must usually be given the chance to improve it with training and supervision [/i]Davison v. Kent 1975[/i].
- Length of service and previous work record must be taken into account. In Tiptool v. Curtis 1973 a workers 20 years satisfactory service apart from one or two complaints was taken into account by the Tribunal when he was sacked for doing one job badly (the Tribunal found in the employee\'s favour - they considered firing him straight away was not reasonable).
- The employer must be prepared to specify and prove reasonable grounds for making the decision and the employee is able to produce evidence in his/her favour. In Raynor v. Remploy 1973 an employee produced figures that challenged his employers view of his ability. He also produced evidence of problems that he got landed with when he started the job. His dismissal was found to be unfair.
- \"It is broadly true to say that an employee should not lose his job because he makes an \'honest mistake\'. But the question is one of degree, and we cannot say that all employees are entitled to make mistakes regardless of their consequences or of the basic lack of ability which the mistake may indicate.\" Michael Whincup Ll.B, Ll.M, Barrister at Law.
What I think he is basically saying is that if the mistake is minor, the consequences small (for example you are not a doctor, airline pilot, health and safety consultant etc..) and there is no big lack of ability, then a Tribunal may well find a dismissal for a minor honest mistake unfair.
Wow I have waffled on... by the way www.acas.gov.uk provides free employment law advice and they have a helpline too. Bear in mind what I learnt may now be a bit out of date and that I have no legal qualifications, but I think at least you now have an idea of evidence to keep about your performance in case the worst should happen and things like that....
