Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh
There is no proposal to remove the standard disciplinary procedure just the unfair dismissal claim that would go to a tribunal .
|
I didn't say there was a proposal for that - and I actually said "Dismissal via standard disciplinary procedures could still be used".
However there is more to this than simply removing the unfair dismissal claim - the point is to make it quicker and easier to sack people, not just prevent them from going to a tribunal afterwards. Removing unfair dismissal doesn't just prevent people from going to a tribunal after a disciplinary procedure, it also enables the company to sack someone without needing that procedure in the first place, as no dismissal would be "unfair" (unless discriminatory of course).
The proposal actually talks about something the author calls "Compensated No Fault Dismissal" - which would enable companies to sack people with "basic redundancy pay and notice", without having to go through the standard disciplinary procedure of different stages of warning (which would have no notice or pay at the very end, but obviously take a lot longer due to the stages).
A company could follow the disciplinary procedure, and give someone a verbal warning, written warning, final warning, and finally dismiss them... With no "threat" of being taken to a tribunal.
Or... A company could dismiss someone via "Compensated No Fault Dismissal", where the employee does actually get notice and a form of redundancy pay, but is removed far faster than via the disciplinary route.
If all the proposal involved was removing unfair dismissal so that those removed via disciplinary proceedings could not take action against their former employer, the author would not have also mentioned "Compensated No Fault Dismissal" and also would not have admitted that his proposal could lead to employers sacking people simply because they "did not like them".