Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
Suspended for theft at work
24 Answers
I have recently been suspended due to suspected theft at work. 4 years ago I purchased some items as 'scrap' and have subsequently sold them. During the investigation the company cannot find any evidence that these items were purchased as they have a strict cash purchase policy which is supposed to be waterproof.
I don't have a receipt which I would have been supplied with so cannot prove my innocence, the best evidence I have, is from the manager in charge of the scrap sales who has since retired who remembers the items in question and has given me a written statement saying he signed off these items and remembers me purchasing some of them along with other employees.
As the company cannot find a record of this, they are accusing me of theft (it would have been a nominal fee and most of the items were thrown away) but it looks like I could be facing dismissal over this.
My question is, how likely is the company able to proceed with disciplinary proceedings when they have evidence of no records, yet evidence from a manager to say these items were deemed as scrap and as far as he remembers, sold as such?
Many thanks
I don't have a receipt which I would have been supplied with so cannot prove my innocence, the best evidence I have, is from the manager in charge of the scrap sales who has since retired who remembers the items in question and has given me a written statement saying he signed off these items and remembers me purchasing some of them along with other employees.
As the company cannot find a record of this, they are accusing me of theft (it would have been a nominal fee and most of the items were thrown away) but it looks like I could be facing dismissal over this.
My question is, how likely is the company able to proceed with disciplinary proceedings when they have evidence of no records, yet evidence from a manager to say these items were deemed as scrap and as far as he remembers, sold as such?
Many thanks
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by pasonsnose. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Many thanks for your replies. The items were purchased for a nominal sum - a few pounds, but I sold them for several hundred - the company did try to sell them at the time but nobody was interested and infact I'm still trying to sell a few remaining parts 4 years later (hence it's come to light now) The problem is that the company state their cash sales policy is watertight and audited and nothing could be purchased without a record. It can be seen that I purchased many other items around the same time, but nothing which seems to relate to these in question. Can the company argue that if there's no evidence in their files, I must be guilty? It was 4 years ago but they are adament that nothing could have been lost.
Many thanks
Many thanks
If you bought them fair and square and there is no record, wouldn't it be an argument that the suspicion of theft should be directed at the person who has prehaps taken your money and pocketed it and binned the receipt. Who actually sold you the parts? The retired manager? Maybe that't why he wants to help you he feels responsible. You say other employees bought items too can they help?
I volunteer in a charity shop and we are forbidden from purchasing donated goods and selling the stuff on in any way, shape or form.
I know that many people are suspicious about volunteers getting all the best goods but if I buy anything it is an item that has been on sale in the store (or on-line) for some time and always pay the full price (and sometimes more).
Is there such a rule in your organisation?
I know that many people are suspicious about volunteers getting all the best goods but if I buy anything it is an item that has been on sale in the store (or on-line) for some time and always pay the full price (and sometimes more).
Is there such a rule in your organisation?
An interesting case.
Dealing with the process that they should follow first, you should have been suspended on full pay pending investigation by the employer, who should then invite you to an investigatory meeting to enable you to put your side of the story. What normally happens then is that that your suspension will continue whilst the employer follows up anything it feels it should be after the interview with you, then they will reach a decision, which will be communicated to you. You should be offered the right of appeal (if the decision is one of disciplinary action) and the appeal should be heard by someone independent of those reaching involved in the process that far. Basically the appeal person (who is normally a more senior manager) looks at the process followed, the evidence and the decision. You can't put more evidence in at that stage.
The decision is not merely one of dismiss or not - it could be anything in-between to include final written warning or written warning (or no further action).
What your task should be in this process is to ensure any decision is no graver than a FWW.
Employment Tribunals follow a dismissal (and you don't 'sue' at an ET) and what they look at is to check for a fair PROCESS and a fair DECISION. Far more ET decisions go in favour of the employee at ET because the employer failed to follow a fair process (even though the dismissal reached was ultimately probably correct).
The problem the employer has got is finding enough evidence 4 years later. Personally (and this is only my personal opinion) I don't think it is good enough to merely say the money-tracking system is bullet-proof so you are guilty QED. They have to talk to staff, and that certainly should mean the retired manager. The fact that you have something in writing from him, I would keep very quiet until the investigatory interview. At interview, then seek to find out what steps they have taken to check out the circumstances. This should have involved both speaking and the retired manager and other employees who have bought stuff.
I'll stop at this point, but do keep in touch with us if you want further info prior to any investigatory meeting (to which you should bring a friend who should write notes of the meeting on your behalf) - it is too early to be talking about ET and compensation yet - you haven't been dismissed yet.
Dealing with the process that they should follow first, you should have been suspended on full pay pending investigation by the employer, who should then invite you to an investigatory meeting to enable you to put your side of the story. What normally happens then is that that your suspension will continue whilst the employer follows up anything it feels it should be after the interview with you, then they will reach a decision, which will be communicated to you. You should be offered the right of appeal (if the decision is one of disciplinary action) and the appeal should be heard by someone independent of those reaching involved in the process that far. Basically the appeal person (who is normally a more senior manager) looks at the process followed, the evidence and the decision. You can't put more evidence in at that stage.
The decision is not merely one of dismiss or not - it could be anything in-between to include final written warning or written warning (or no further action).
What your task should be in this process is to ensure any decision is no graver than a FWW.
Employment Tribunals follow a dismissal (and you don't 'sue' at an ET) and what they look at is to check for a fair PROCESS and a fair DECISION. Far more ET decisions go in favour of the employee at ET because the employer failed to follow a fair process (even though the dismissal reached was ultimately probably correct).
The problem the employer has got is finding enough evidence 4 years later. Personally (and this is only my personal opinion) I don't think it is good enough to merely say the money-tracking system is bullet-proof so you are guilty QED. They have to talk to staff, and that certainly should mean the retired manager. The fact that you have something in writing from him, I would keep very quiet until the investigatory interview. At interview, then seek to find out what steps they have taken to check out the circumstances. This should have involved both speaking and the retired manager and other employees who have bought stuff.
I'll stop at this point, but do keep in touch with us if you want further info prior to any investigatory meeting (to which you should bring a friend who should write notes of the meeting on your behalf) - it is too early to be talking about ET and compensation yet - you haven't been dismissed yet.
If your employers do dismiss you for theft as you have 18 years service you will be able to claim unfair dismissal at an employment tribunal and will probably have the opportunity to be reemployed if that is what you wish, or given financial compensation for the loss of your job if you are successful.
If you are now suspended it should be on full pay and your employer should follow the correct procedure, which will give you the opportunity to explain, and appeal, you should be able to call the retired member of staff as a witness and if you are a member of a trade union get them involved now. I would be very surprised if you were dismissed for this alleged offence, which your employers would probably see as gross misconduct if there were no evidence that you did not purchase the scrap.
If you are now suspended it should be on full pay and your employer should follow the correct procedure, which will give you the opportunity to explain, and appeal, you should be able to call the retired member of staff as a witness and if you are a member of a trade union get them involved now. I would be very surprised if you were dismissed for this alleged offence, which your employers would probably see as gross misconduct if there were no evidence that you did not purchase the scrap.
Many thanks for all your advice. This is my first posting here.
The scrap purchase scheme is designed to be 'watertight' The manager signs off the scrap - you pay security in cash - they give you a receipt and keep a copy themselves. It's these paper copies that the company have been looking at to find evidence. It seems the electronic records were lost when the manager retired, but they claim that the paper records are irrefutable.
The manager in theory could have signed the items off for scrap and I didn't pay security for them - I think that's what the company will argue and as it's so long ago nobody can remember for sure who bought other items, only that 'people' did.
I don't think there's a policy on re-selling items bought, but that's not the issue at the moment, it's a large company and the trade union is involved and the people are following procedure to the letter. I have submitted the retired manager's statement in my defence as advised by the union, but it didn't seem to make much difference.
The scrap purchase scheme is designed to be 'watertight' The manager signs off the scrap - you pay security in cash - they give you a receipt and keep a copy themselves. It's these paper copies that the company have been looking at to find evidence. It seems the electronic records were lost when the manager retired, but they claim that the paper records are irrefutable.
The manager in theory could have signed the items off for scrap and I didn't pay security for them - I think that's what the company will argue and as it's so long ago nobody can remember for sure who bought other items, only that 'people' did.
I don't think there's a policy on re-selling items bought, but that's not the issue at the moment, it's a large company and the trade union is involved and the people are following procedure to the letter. I have submitted the retired manager's statement in my defence as advised by the union, but it didn't seem to make much difference.
A couple of questions:
1. Although it was 4 years ago, do you remember if you were given a receipt, even though you may have disposed of it since then?
2. Are the receipts given from a sequentially numbered book, or just pieces of paper with the copies kept in a file? If the latter I would not call this watertight!
3. If the receipts are sequentially numbered, has the company retained copies covering the period in question?
4. Could 'security' have pocketed the cash and not given a receipt?
1. Although it was 4 years ago, do you remember if you were given a receipt, even though you may have disposed of it since then?
2. Are the receipts given from a sequentially numbered book, or just pieces of paper with the copies kept in a file? If the latter I would not call this watertight!
3. If the receipts are sequentially numbered, has the company retained copies covering the period in question?
4. Could 'security' have pocketed the cash and not given a receipt?
No I can't remember if I had a receipt or not, I would think I did because of any future repercussions such as this, but the chances are it has been thrown away since. I can't find receipts for anything I have purchased. The company will claim that a receipt would have been given if cash was received and I think the cash receipts are from a numbered pad
The company don't even know what period these items were bought - they have looked through their receipts for two years for items bought in my name and can find nothing listing these items specifically.
In theory yes, security could have kept the cash and maybe issued a receipt from the back of the book, and not made a copy for the records, but I would doubt that happened. However, to an outsider it's possible, but then equally possible I took these items without paying for them!
The question remains - am I probably or probably not guilty of theft?
If to look at the records the company has found - I bought several items at the time including 'plastic boxes' All the items were bought at a nominal cost and a fraction of their retail value, as they were classed as scrap - it could be argued why would I purchase certain items at the time, and not others when we're only talking a few pounds.
The company don't even know what period these items were bought - they have looked through their receipts for two years for items bought in my name and can find nothing listing these items specifically.
In theory yes, security could have kept the cash and maybe issued a receipt from the back of the book, and not made a copy for the records, but I would doubt that happened. However, to an outsider it's possible, but then equally possible I took these items without paying for them!
The question remains - am I probably or probably not guilty of theft?
If to look at the records the company has found - I bought several items at the time including 'plastic boxes' All the items were bought at a nominal cost and a fraction of their retail value, as they were classed as scrap - it could be argued why would I purchase certain items at the time, and not others when we're only talking a few pounds.
It doesn't sound like they have "evidence" as such. If they are going to go a legal route then they have to follow legal rules i.e. innocent till proven guilty and proof acceptable in law which these folk don't seem to have or even be looking for. The employment disciplinary process, while governed by strict rules isn't quite so tight as the legal process but from what you are saying they don't even seem to be complying with a "fair" disciplinary process.
I wouldn't get into whether they have proof beyond reasonable doubt that you are guilty of theft or not - you aren't being tried for theft.
I don't see how it is reasonable that you kept a receipt for a purchased item of scrap more than 4 years after the event - that is one of things the employer has to consider. Also you are not being secretive about disposing of them - which you clearly might be if you knew they were stolen and a 'rare' item not obtaonable from other sources.
I don't see how it is reasonable that you kept a receipt for a purchased item of scrap more than 4 years after the event - that is one of things the employer has to consider. Also you are not being secretive about disposing of them - which you clearly might be if you knew they were stolen and a 'rare' item not obtaonable from other sources.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles34 mins ago
Crosswords141 mins ago
News160 mins ago
'Abuse' What Does It Mean To You?
Society & Culture171 mins ago