Skip over navigation

Services

Forum

Employee ordered to pay £100,000 costs

Related content: Employee ordered to pay £100,000 costs

This thread has been locked so no more comments can be added.


28.
Susan Walker
Member - 36 posts
31 Aug 2011 10:03AM

Wise guys? That shut us up! But true of course, all this goes nowhere and a nano bit of quantum never hurt anyone .........................yet!


27.
Susan Walker
Member - 36 posts
30 Aug 2011 3:35PM

Well done Peter! Peace be with you too! Holidays? Working hours? Breaks? Never heard of them!!!!


26.
James Vizard
Member - 43 posts
30 Aug 2011 7:52AM

I know Simon I had Eric Pickles trying to confiscate my golden pig the other day I had to put my foot down...


25.
simon hardwicke
Member - 30 posts
26 Aug 2011 9:12AM

James
the Cleggeron Hybrid can increase my contributions, but it can think again if it wants to take my Butler away.......


24.
Peter Browning
Member - 115 posts
26 Aug 2011 8:51AM

Prove it ? I cannot, but it is a very reasonable assumption to state that the majority of private employers were, at one time in their lives, an employee. It is equally true to state that I cannot prove, as claimed by Lorraine, that "there are far more cowboy employers out there than vexatious claimants".

It is however, comfortably easy to agree with Lorraine when she writes "There are good & bad on both sides- neither employees nor employers should be all tarred with the same brush".

In an attempt to restore some peace to this debate, may I suggest that all those who believe that employers are oppressive "cowboys" who batten onto the backs of their workers should, please, go and start a business, anything that will require you to become an employer. Then please write to us all here, and let us know how you get on. It will surely make very interesting reading. Thanks and regards, Peter.


23.
Lorraine Kerr
Member - 256 posts
25 Aug 2011 12:44PM

Trust me, Susan, in my current and previous jobs, I can't afford to wear rose-coloured specs- the thought amuses me greatly, given my reputation as a cynic.
And inexperienced from all sides of employment I am not.

Perhaps you would be better suited to the American employers' market? Apparently, employees there only get a maximum of 10 paid holidays a year (including publics).
I wouldn't recommend France, though ;-)


22.
John Maltby
Member - 73 posts
25 Aug 2011 11:03AM

Thats right Mark, and when the machine is bought and handed over to the hospital they declare that they need finance for 5 more staff and training to operate it. Finding they cannot get yet more money because the chief executive is getting yet another pay rise and bonus
the machine is taken into government stock which is then sent out to another country as government aid and listed as an export and we are back to the start asking the people for donations!!


21.
Susan Walker
Member - 36 posts
25 Aug 2011 10:49AM

Nurses and teachers are essential it's all the hangers on! Yes and we all know about the people who have never done a proper days work in their lives, we have plenty of those in this country. No one disputes the importance of nurses and teachers, I have been one myself. I never agreed to striking though and never will. Those jobs are sacred to us all and the people they care for. I certainly gave my monies worth with all the extra time I gave to my students, no overtime then! Unfortunately it is the thousands of unnecessary ones who work in quangos and collections and make light of closing businesses down for no reason rather than settle disputes, employed for political reasons no doubt. It would be OK if there wasn't so much bestowed on the management of these vast tax payer funded machines! How many earn more than our Prime Minister? I'm surrounded by early retired civil servants who are having a wonderful time relaxing,holidaying, double dipping and holding bar-b-ques with other retired civil servants who have no financial worries at all and live twice as long. It doesn't work, we can't afford all this as a country; where does the money come from? There isn't any, we don't produce enough! The balance is wrong! Sorry to go on - it just frustrates me that so much time is spent on claims, law suits and schemes to remove more from the public purse, who's paying for that? I no longer have any pride in this country, There are too many who take what they don't deserve and will cause us all to suffer in the end! I'll bow out disgracefully and leave comments to the folks who have the time!


20.
Mark
Member - 63 posts
25 Aug 2011 10:38AM

so, that's why, inspite of the fact that the NHS consumes an estimated £90bn per annum, when my local hospital needs a new bit of kit they organise a fun run...


19.
Kevin Ward
Member - 28 posts
25 Aug 2011 9:56AM

well said james, and lorraine.


18.
James Vizard
Member - 43 posts
25 Aug 2011 8:35AM

Goddamn those pesky teachers and nurses taking there fantastical 10 million pounds a year salaries and pensions that include a butler, a golden pig and a fountain of eternal youth. Always suspicious of people who use CAPITALS in an attempt to mak a point.


17.
Susan Walker
Member - 36 posts
24 Aug 2011 5:59PM

Definitely rose coloured specs Lorraine. Perhaps it is your experience that is lacking. And it isn't one or two employees, even when you look after them as family. With regards to the profit you don't realise how right you are! Yes, after the running costs, paying employees (who are the most important of course) then paying extortionate taxes on everything, there is no profit!! Look around you, do you realise how many businesses are going down and that's who pays civil service wages! OUR TAXES, the people trying to create jobs and not stealing from the state!


16.
BOB MILNE
Member - 27 posts
24 Aug 2011 2:08PM

Stop it, Lorraine !! You're far too sensible - any more of your thoughts and you'll be giving this forum a good name !!


15.
Lorraine Kerr
Member - 256 posts
24 Aug 2011 11:03AM

Surely the profit of any business is what is left after the running costs of the business (including taxes & other liabilities) have been deducted? In other words, businesses are not paying taxes from profit- profit is what is left after paying taxes etc.
Businesses need to factor in these costs and the REAL costs of having employees. Too many owners of small businesses carry a chip on their shoulder that they should be exempt from employment laws because of their size. There are services out there for small to medium enterprises that can provide employment policies, advise you day to day when issues arise, and, if a claim is made against you, can provide reps- insurance, if you like, against claims being made.
Alternatively, of course, they could ensure that they are reasonably well-informed about employment law, treat their employees well & within the law and, if any claims are made against them, use lay reps instead of solicitors (as many employees are forced to do).

I'm not unsympathetic to the small business but it strikes me, Susan (and others), that your view of the employee-claimant is as jaundiced as Michelle's view of HR in the public sector (perhaps like her, also based on a nasty experience). Like many opposing opinions, perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between? Prejudice & bigotry often begins with one negative experience which is then used to justify opinions about entire nations, races, genders, disabilities...


14.
Susan Walker
Member - 36 posts
24 Aug 2011 10:44AM

You only have to look at statistics to understand the differences between the Public sector and the Private sector (that doesn't include the banks, who are a law unto themselves). These factors spring to mind - sick days, stress related absences, holidays, perks, pensions, credit cards, employment claims and so it goes on. But of course the reason behind all this is it's very easy to make all these claims when the tax payer is paying. Unfortunately businesses have to pay directly from their profits which is very difficult these days when most of the profits are taken up by various taxes direct or indirectly emptied into the HM Purse! Do these people ever stop to think where the money comes from? Very brave Michelle, but these people think they have such a difficult life and have no concept what it is like to earn proper money!


13.
marcus sheibi
Member - 4 posts
23 Aug 2011 10:20AM

Well done Lorraine for an excellent commentary.


12.
Michelle Wild
Member - 108 posts
22 Aug 2011 11:35AM

Handbags at dawn....well let's hope that everyone you meet is as fantastic and fabulous as you and those wonderful people you have worked with your world sounds fantastic and wondrous and for 30 years' i thought so too. Sadly not everyone is nicey and sweet as you may or may not find out...............


11.
David Hubbard
Member - 8 posts
22 Aug 2011 9:48AM

Michelle - My reasons for leaving the civil service (and so, HR) have nothing to do with my regard for civil servants in general or civil service HR people. My view of my civil service colleagues is that most of us come to work determined to do a good day's work, operating in as professional a manner as we can. My expereiences of HR people in the civil service is, again generally, that we try to walk the tightrope between dealing with people in a caring and compassionate way whilst keeping in mind the needs of the business and taxpayer's money. Mostly we get it right - in my view. I'm sorry that your views, based I think, on experiences you have had, are so jaundiced but do not accept the generalisation of people like me that we are the scum of the earth.


10.
Michelle Wild
Member - 108 posts
19 Aug 2011 11:44AM

Working on it watch this space! Is truth in or out at the moment though?


9.
BOB MILNE
Member - 27 posts
19 Aug 2011 10:45AM

Michelle, perhaps you would find a more appropriate spiritual home amongst the forums of the tabloid press, to express your rather extreme views !!


8.
simon hardwicke
Member - 30 posts
19 Aug 2011 10:05AM

I am Home Office HR, and i can confirm that i am indeed the scum of the earth.


7.
Michelle Wild
Member - 108 posts
18 Aug 2011 5:22PM

Home Office HR but if the cap fits...........as you are leaving it appears you know exactly what I mean.


6.
David Hubbard
Member - 8 posts
18 Aug 2011 2:52PM

Michelle, as a current civil service HR person, I was dismayed to read your appraisal of me and my kind. Or does the title "scum of the earth" only come to me when I leave either the civil service or HR? I'm doing both in six months, so don't have to wait long!


5.
Michelle Wild
Member - 108 posts
16 Aug 2011 9:08PM

Ex Civil Service HR = scum of the earth. She deserves everything she got.

BUT the ET is a really necessary last resort for genuine cases and it is being eroded by this government. This last constitutional right will soon be gone and that is not what we need at all. Tribunal staff can deal with the chancers in this world as they have proven in this case don't throw the baby out with the dishwater and play into the governments hands.


4.
Lorraine Kerr
Member - 256 posts
16 Aug 2011 11:08AM

There are far more "cowboy" employers out there than vexatious claimants. Costs awards are still pretty rare (because vexatious claims are pretty rare) and this level of award is extremely rare.
The vast majority of claimants make claims in good faith. The employer may not agree with the basis for their claim, may even successfully defend it- all that means is that the claimant had a weak case or it was poorly argued- it does not mean the claimant was "at it". Only a tiny proportion of claims fit into this category.
Those who think making an ET claim about discrimination is easy for the employee ought to try giving it a go- it's a lengthy, tortuous & difficult process, especially for those who go unrepresented. And, if you read judgements regularly, you'll see that employers are also found to lie.
There are good & bad on both sides- neither employees nor employers should be all tarred with the same brush.

The law around whether someone is a worker or an employee is complex and based on a number of factors. An ET and the HMRC may come to different conclusions depending on the law being applied. Just as some contractors may take advantage of this, so do some employers who try to make what is (on the facts) an employment relationship look like a contract for service in order to avoid the liabilities of an employer.

Employment Tribunals actually do a pretty good job most of the time of looking at the individual facts and the evidence in any given case. Just as employees can attend unrepresented, so can an employer choose to do.


This thread has been locked so no more comments can be added.


Sign up for our weekly newsletter



Forum disclaimer