emplyment law

[aardvaark]

Good afternnoon.
I am writing this on behalf of a friend. The circumstances are that we was head hunted by an insurance company from a secure job. He signed a contract of employment with his new company and then left the previous company to commence his period of notice at home. Once released from his period of notice he joined the new company and commenced work. On his arrival at the new company he was asked to fill in some forms one of which asked details of his education. Not reading it properley he declared 3 'A' levels of grades A to C. but in fact he has two C grades and on D grade.(all passes). The HR department checked his details obviously and he was called in (after being employed for a month) and said he had provided false information and sacked him on the spot. His immediate bosses tried to intervene on his behalf unsuccessfully. he has performed well in his first month exceeding his targets fourfold and in a few days the company was due to pay him a substantial amount as a signing on bonus. I am not familiar with employment law. But the fact that it was a genuine error and he had already been employed and therefore was not trying to gain an advantage by deceit this seems unnecessarily harsh. Doesnt the law allow for Humans being imperfect and acknowledges mistakes can be made also the penalty seems very harsh under the circumstances. This is a young man and he is crushed by this. Is there any remedy he can pursue in law? Any help appreciated with thanks.

[HowardKennitby]

Did the form give any indication of the penalty for providing false information?

[rockyracoon]

Whether intentional or not the fact remains the wrong info was put on the application. Insurance companies use every trick in the book to get out of paying anything.

[aardvaark]

On the penalty question I will get back to you. As regards the application form. He had been head hunted on basis of his reputation and had commenced employment so the application form was retrospective. Also he had overperformed in his first month and his immediate boses were horrified at the situation but HR rule.

[mccfluff]

"HR rule" -- no they don't, they advise the managment and they make the decision. somethign else is goign on here, if they went to the trouble of headhunting him and offering a signing on bonus then they could of over looked it

[tonywiltshire]

There is something strange about this. If he was head hunted the new company would require his services and would probably have asked him to complete an application form which would normally ask for educational qualifications at that stage, not after the employee has started employment. Was it a requirement of the job that the applicant must have three A levels grade A to C?
It is not unknown, I do not say it happened in this case, that a successful person in a rival organisation is offered a job and then dismissed to remove them from the market. But I would not expect any responsible organisation to act in this way. There is little remedy as the person involved does not have the qualifying period of service to make a claim to an employment tribunal and the no qualifying period gives very restricted reasons. The new employer would probably claim the dismissal under capability or qualification, which is one of the five potentially, fair reasons for dismissal even with the correct qualifying period.

[factor-fiction]

In law an employer may dismiss an employee for almost any reason (main exclusions being on grounds of race/sex) within the first 12 months, so I'm afraid his position here is very weak.

[tonywiltshire]

Agreed f 30 the no qualifying period grounds are very limited.
Membership of a trade union.
Maternity, adoption, paternity related reason.
Health & safety reason or asserting statutory rights.
And a few others

I like your answer to selmecat; I wished I had thought of that.

[aardvaark]

Thanks everyone.