Request of reason for dismissal in writing - Time Limit?

[minion1]

Hi everyone,

 

A while back I posted regarding compensation calculations for a forthcoming employment tribunal. Many thanks for all the help with that. Just a few more days before the time limit for response is up, though I'm sure they won't miss it.

 

This time my query is regarding asking for the reason(s) for dismissal in writing and applying a reasonable response time period. I read on a legal site (pls don't ask I can't remember which one, I've been all over the place!) that if I ask for the reasons for dismissal, and the respondent, even if they did this already at the time of the dismissal, has to comply with my request. If they do not, then they are liable to pay extra compensation. I think the site mentioned two weeks' pay as a basis for the additional calculation.

 

Could someone please clarify that for me? I might be way off, but it would be good to know these things. Additionally, if they do fall foul of the code/law/regulations in place, do I then adjust the Schedule of Loss and/or notify the respondent in writing?

 

Many thanks,

 

 

Minion1

[SarEl]

I think you have been reading some out of date stuff - there is a qualifying period for disclosure (14 days) but this is not a matter which attracts a financial penalty at tribunal. In the old days Up to 2009) failure to provide a written reason if requested was part of the statutory procedure, and an employer could be penalised for failing to comply with the procedure, but that was repeated. However, if you have already been given a written reason the employer has complied with the legal requirement.

[minion1]

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

I thought it sounded too easy! Time to see what ACAS can do, I won't hold my breath but you never know.

[elche]

I think you have been reading some out of date stuff - there is a qualifying period for disclosure (14 days)

 

I'm terribly sorry but I just think this may confuse the OP.

 

I'm not sure what could be 'out of date' here?

 

S.92 of the ERA gives an employee with one years the service the right to request written reasons for dismissal. The ER should respond to such a request within 14 days. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/92

 

To the best of my knowledge s.92 was not affected by the April 09 changes / repeal of statutory dismissal procedures. If this is wrong I openly eat humble pie.

 

I'm sure as your are currently practicing you will be able to point to when this amendment to s.92 occurred?

 

I painfully miss access to reliable 'Is in in force database(s)' on sites like Westlaw, Lexis Nexis. Surely your chambers subscribes to one or t'other?

 

Could we check this? So we can be sure we can all help future CAGGERS with legally correct advice.

 

I think that it is ever more important where that advice could get potentially them 2 weeks pay for writing a letter.

 

but this is not a matter which attracts a financial penalty at tribunal.

 

If the ER unreasonably fails to provide the written statement the ET can order 2 weeks pay as compensation. But of course the dismissed EE must have specifically requested it the written reasons.

 

More often a tactic used at the beginning of your claim as (one hopes) the ER rattles it off without legal advice. The ER is not bound to it at any eventual ET but any inconsistency between the defence at ET and prior reasons for dismissal will not assist their defence.

 

Still couldn't see your length of service on this thread or your original one re compensation minion. You would need one years service (normally) to be eligible for this right, and would have had to submit this request within 3 months of your EDT (i think) - so may well now be out of time.

 

But nonetheless I think the boards should strife for legal accuracy where possible especially where a claimant is prejudiced if a rule is not properly understood.

 

Hope this clarifies this

 

Che

 

NB - When I have personally included this in a claim PRE APRIL 09 (see my comments on this point above) it looked this this:

 

By letter dated the 10th November 2008, the Claimant, with the assistance of the Citizen's Advice Bureaux requested 'Written Reasons for Dismissal'.

 

The Claimant contends that the Respondent did not reply to this request within 14 days as the Respondent gave no reasons for dismissal until the Respondent's letter dated the 12th December 2008.

 

Therefore, the Claimant requests that should the Tribunal find this complaint well founded, that compensation in the sum of 2 weeks pay is awarded.

 

367.85 (1 weeks net pay) x 2 = 792.92

 

2 weeks net pay £792.92

[minion1]

Che

 

Thanks for the useful info. Not confusing at all. Just glad to be asking useful questions, rather than obvious ones!

 

Just to clarify, I have had one year's service; the ET accepted my case 6mths after unfair dismissal, due to new information coming to light: I found out my job was never redundant, no redendancy pool etc. I feel more like I was singled out, which is unfair because I didn't have any disciplinary procedures or warnings to my name whatsoever.

[SarEl]

Ah sorry Che - you are correct - I had misunderstood the OP. As I read the post they were making a claim about the falure to provide a written reason, and as such this cannot be claimed for on its own. Prior to 2009 it formed part of the "failure to comply with the statutory procedure" - which could of course be claimed on it's own. That was why I understood that they had been reading out of date material. However, this does not change that fact that as the OP has already said, the employer has already provided written reasons for the termination of contract.

[minion1]

Ok, so if the employer has said in the termination letter:

 

"Due to the reduction of coverage of So-and-so, we regret that it has become necessary to give you one month's notice from 01 August 2010."

 

Does that constitute enough of a reason? It just seems a bit vague to me. On 5th Feb I asked for the 'precise reason(s)' for dismissal. I also stated I required their response within 14 days of the date of the letter. So far I have heard nothing. 1st March is the deadline for submitting their position as Respondent to the ET.

 

Can I still claim they have not responded within the given time frame?

[SarEl]

I can't say whether it is enough of a reason - I don't know whether it explains the termination or not. But it may well do so, if what they are saying is that they did not have enough work. You can certainly make the claim, but whether the tribunal will agree with you is a different matter, since you have had a written explanation already, and if that is what they say the reason is, that is the reason they will stick with. What is it that you are trying to accomplish here? Without knowing the context it's hard to work that out. Are you expecting it to say anything other than what you have been told?

[elche]

On 5th Feb I asked for the 'precise reason(s)' for dismissal. I also stated I required their response within 14 days of the date of the letter. So far I have heard nothing. 1st March is the deadline for submitting their position as Respondent to the ET.

 

Can I still claim they have not responded within the given time frame?

 

My advice would be to put the claim in your schedule as I outlined in an earlier post. I believe that technically even if they gave you a written reason when they dismissed you and then you put the request in - which they fail to reply to - then there is the technical breach of s.92.

 

As a colleague of mine used to say, 'Forget the book, what does the LAW say?'

 

Well s.92 says - that, ".... an employee is entitled to a written statement under this section only if he makes a request for one; and a statement shall be provided within fourteen days of such a request."

 

Thus if you put in the request and did not get the reply then you have the technical breach - BUT - the law goes on to say, that if the ET finds the complaint well founded they SHALL make an award of 2 weeks pay - BUT - only if, "...the employer unreasonably failed to provide a written statement ... (or) ...the particulars of reasons given in purported compliance with that section are inadequate or untrue" http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/93

 

Thus in my personal experience where there was a previous written reason although the tribunal has found the breach of s.92 when the ER failed to reply they never made the award of 2 weeks pay because they always said - 'Well it is not unreasonable as the Claimant already knew from the letter of DATE, the reasons why he/she was dismissed, and thus it would not be equitable to order the payment of the 2 weeks pay'.

 

In your case the written letter alludes to a potential redundancy situation but doesn't use the words 'for reason of redundancy' - so why not have a go? What do you you have to lose?

 

You have the technical breach of s.92, no ET will criticize you for putting it in your schedule - put it in - worst case scenario the ET says 'No'.

 

Che

[minion1]

@ SarE1:

"Are you expecting it to say anything other than what you have been told"

 

I simply don't feel it adequately explains the precise reason(s) for dismissal. That was the only contact I had from this company. No warnings, no redundancy procedure. I watched my wife get made redundant just before Christmas, and only then did I see how it is supposed to be done. So I guess I wanted further clarification of their statement, since I feel their statement was inadequate AND untrue: the evidence I have proves that it is untrue.

 

@ Che:

 

Thanks for the info, I will be putting it into my Schedule. It's great to know there are laws that I can also use to my advantage! Should I quote those sections of law in a letter attached to the Schedule of Loss?

 

And thanks to both you guys for supporting me during this. I'm trying to remain calm and hopefully regain some financial stability.

 

 

Minion1

[SarEl]

I would just point out that the entitlement is to a written statement - at no point does it say "precise". Whatever that means - because what you think is precise and what anyone else may think is precise are not necessarily the same.

[minion1]

Ok, precise is the wrong word.But they have not complied with my request, so I think I should still include it in the Schedule.

 

Also if I want to request information that forms part of their defence, how do I go about it? Do I again state 'within 14 days'? And if no response, ask the ET to order them to comply?

[SarEl]

Information that forms their defence will be exchanged at a time set by the tribunal. You aren't entitled to it any earlier. You can ask for information which you need to make your case, but not theirs. The tribunal will (if they have not already) set a date for the exchange of documents.