[Closed] Firing staff

Five pages and no mention of shoes, bombers, slats or pudding? Standards are slipping.

My two-penn'orth is what most others have said. I'd file pinching unguarded chocolate under 'annoying but everyone does it' (I wouldn't, because I'm not a dick, but I imagine it's pretty common). But breaking into a locker I'd consider more serious, and stealing from the petty cash is firmly in the P45 category to my mind.

But. You have no proof. Moreover, [i]you don't even know for sure yourself.[/i] Maybe one of his co-workers got sick of his petty larceny and decided to set him up by stealing the cash, knowing full well he'd get blamed for it?

Are they in a union?

We had a load of cash stolen from the tuck shop at work. As there was no proof of who took it, we just wrote it off as bad luck. No one was fired.

If he has only worked there for 11 months the OP could simply let him go as "not being suitable", he has no real employment rights. Internal processes not withstanding.

If he is certain that he went into somebodies locker by stealing the key, then that's a sackable offence in IMO. Don't think it's from the information WTF is actually going on? Very possible that if he's sacked then the rest of the team will be pissed off.

Dont forget STM brews beer, therefore he IS a god!

Hmm, I went to the trouble of bringing cake and biscuits in for everyone on this thread, but some thieving git has only gone and stolen them 😯

No, whoever it was, can they own up. They were next to the bog rolls, dishwasher tablets, petty cash tin and a big can of acid

If I were you, I'd ignore most of the 'advice' on this thread, and get some from someone who is actually knowledgeable in such matters, and legally qualified to give such advice. A barrister friend of ours, who specialises in employment law, would rip you to pieces if you even tried to sack this lad, based on the 'evidence' you have. One case she dealt with involved a lad who probably was a bit 'dodgy', but whose employers sacked him on the grounds he was 'stealing' (he put something through his staff account which had a nominal price assigned rather than an actual staff price, and he claimed he'd forgotten to chase it up. He had however informed his line manager of this, and they'd also forgotten. The 'theft' only came to light when the director went over the staff accounts and discovered the discrepancy. Of course, line manager etc denied any knowledge). 2 years ago and still ongoing. Almost definitely going to conclude in favour of the sacked lad. Company likely to pay all costs, plus compensation (and then I think a fine). Will result in company either going under or having to make drastic cuts, so several other jobs lost. All because they didn't do their homework. It wasn't theft. As for the 2-year rule; he'd worked for less than that. Employers have to give a reason for dismissal in al cases.

Another case involves a dismissal for gross misconduct which has now turned into a case against that company for discrimination and/or constructive dismissal. Looks like that company is going to be hit massively too.

TL;DR: Do your homework before you even think of sacking someone.

This chap has been given 5 pages, can't imagine that isn't sufficient back up.

A barrister friend of ours, who specialises in employment law, would rip you to pieces if you even tried to sack this lad, based on the 'evidence' you have.

Your barrister friend wouldn't get very far in this case.

He can just sack him if he wants he only has 11 months service.

[url= https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/what-to-do-if-youre-dismissed ]https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/what-to-do-if-youre-dismissed[/url]

Qualifying period to claim unfair dismissal

You must have worked for your employer for a minimum period before you qualify for the right to claim unfair dismissal at a tribunal. If you’re classed as an employee and started your job:

on or after 6 April 2012 - the qualifying period is normally 2 years
before 6 April 2012 - the qualifying period is normally 1 year

"He can just sack him if he wants he only has 11 months service."

Not without giving a valid reason:

https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/overview

"If you’re dismissed, your employer must show they’ve:

a valid reason that they can justify
acted reasonably in the circumstances
They must also:

be consistent - eg not dismiss you for doing something that they let other employees do
have investigated the situation fully before dismissing you - eg if a complaint was made about you"

If you're going to dismiss someone for theft, you really, really need to be able to prove that they did commit that offence. Which doesn't seem to be the case here. The two year thing is only about bringing the case before an employment tribunal. You can bring a private case against an employer without any time constraint.

"This chap has been given 5 pages, can't imagine that isn't sufficient back up."

😆

There is another important element to this story that STM hasn't divulged.. not sure whether I should... 8)

There is another important element to this story that STM hasn't divulged

That its a metaphor for Israeli land grabs in Palestine?

+100000000 Laxative justice.

I would have bought OP chocolates to share at work.

To go through a drawer, then somebody's locker for anything? Fire him, plenty of people will take that 18K and be productive and honest.

To clarify a bit, because I got a bit confused myself ( 😳 ) !

If you're alleging a criminal offence, and you give that as a reason, then the employee has a case against you under some other section of employment law. In the case I mentioned earlier, there was an accusation of theft which was unsubstantiated, which was expressed as the reason for dismissal. I think it had something to do with the fact that the employer did not report this to police, as they are legally obliged to do (if you aware a crime has happened, you are legally obliged to inform the police, or risk being guilty of joint enterprise of whatever it's called), meaning that the reason for dismissal expressed put them in a very bad position.

There needs to be verbal warnings (with a representative of the person accused), written warnings and final warnings before you can bin someone.

what is gross misconduct?

LG: "It's a serious breach of contract and includes misconduct which in your opinion causes serious damage to your business, or irreparably breaks down trust and relationships - for example, if someone hits another employee or is stealing.

Not without giving a valid reason:

OK. "Not suitable for the job". You think that it's unfair?

As you are NOT entitled to claim unfair dismissal after 11 months, what could he do?

Qualifying period to claim unfair dismissal
You must have worked for your employer for a minimum period before you qualify for the right to claim unfair dismissal at a tribunal. If you’re classed as an employee and started your job:

on or after 6 April 2012 - the qualifying period is normally 2 years
before 6 April 2012 - the qualifying period is normally 1 year

"There is another important element to this story that STM hasn't divulged.. not sure whether I should.."

After five pages we deserve more....please.
We had chocolate cake today at work.
I snuck in a took a second piece when no one was there.fact.

If I were you, I'd ignore most of the 'advice' on this thread, and get some from someone who is actually knowledgeable in such matters

Most of the advice on here is the same as yours.

Gobuchul you want to copy and paste the rest of that law or just the part that makes you look right?

You know what
I wouldnt want any of you and your liberal , wrap it up in cotton wool , give me a hug , lets do some role play, benderisms working for me.
The irony of a prison guard advocating thats its perfectly OK to steal a locker key , enter a locker , remove posessions is somehow Ok morally as its all banter innit?. is lost on me .
Sorry , no . It fricken well isnt. Your parents should have taught you lot some respect for other peoples property.
Its not Ok to steal printer cartridges etc from your employer . When did theft from someone who tells you what to do at work become legit?
As for Emo management ..get lost.

I could fill the position really easily at very low cost if I had to.

However , As i am not manager of the month i forgot to check that he would be in work today , and it transpired he had a day booked off as holiday .

Brooes post was , in effect, the only one with any substance, and he will be given a bollocking and verbal warning and expalined to that it all stops right now. Last chance son . It also surfaced today that he somehow escaped a custodial sentance for theft, just got a suspended sentance.

Classic.

You need to separate the genuine issues with this guy from the stuff that just personally annoys you.

It's not ok to describe someone as a thief because they eat more than their fair share of celebrations.

I wouldnt want any of you and your liberal , wrap it up in cotton wool , give me a hug , lets do some role play, benderisms working for me.

U OK HUN?

Brooes post was , in effect, the only one with any substance, and he will be given a bollocking and verbal warning and expalined to that it all stops right now. Last chance son . It also surfaced today that he somehow escaped a custodial sentance for theft, just got a suspended sentance.

So just like pretty much everyone else told you.

Have you got some evidence now?

I think it had something to do with the fact that the employer did not report this to police, as they are legally obliged to do (if you aware a crime has happened, you are legally obliged to inform the police, or risk being guilty of joint enterprise of whatever it's called),

What's a "benderism"?

[i]What's a "benderism"?[/i]

It's a singletrackmindism 😆

A benderism is a term that a wet behind the ears kid would use, perhaps the sort of casual insult a clueless person out of their depth might use.

Just my opinion. What the **** do I know.

What's a "benderism"?

"Bite my Shiny Metal Ass" is the only one that springs to mind.

This is "badgeresque" comedy gold!

I'm personally loving the anger induced typos. Bash dem keys baby 😛

What's a "benderism"?

[img] [/img]

There is another important element to this story that STM hasn't divulged.. not sure whether I should...

What's a "benderism"?

Benderism is what has now been divulged. Although the divulge was really more of an outburst.

Bite my shiny metal ass.

singletrackmind - Member
You know what
I wouldnt want any of you and your liberal , wrap it up in cotton wool , give me a hug , lets do some role play, benderisms working for me.

^^I think this excerpt and the post says rather a lot about your attitude, which regardless of the guilt of your employee is a disgrace. If people don't agree with you they are inferior and you insult them. Many of the people offering reasonable advice (Including me) gave you the benefit of the doubt based on your lack of management experience. It seems from your last words that you didn't deserve it.

Oh and while I wouldn't tolerate petty theft, I wouldn't tolerate a team manager who wanted to terminate someone with poor evidence either.

Your welcome OP, anything else you'd like our help with? 😆

You're confusing an attitude to internet forum posters with an attitude to working the real world there jamj1974. Easily done, I know.

I wouldnt want any of you and your liberal , wrap it up in cotton wool , give me a hug , lets do some role play, benderisms working for me.

Erm...did you read any of the last few pages? Quite a few of us are trying to save your arse from the inevitable reaming because you can't constructively contain an issue that started out as pilfered biscuits, but it reads more and more as though you're unable to command any respect in your workplace. Not only that, you've freely acknowledged a reasonably serious health and safety breach has taken place with regard to the diluted acids. You've also guilelessly admitted you're ultimately responsible for it...

However , As i am not manager of the month i forgot to check that he would be in work today , and it transpired he had a day booked off as holiday .

You arranged a disciplinary for someone, but "forgot" to check whether they were actually in that day? Seriously, this has to be some sort of a wind up, surely?

Christ.

I could fill the position really easily at very low cost if I had to.

Of course, why wouldn't anyone wish to simply work for you for free?

And once again, because I couldn't believe what I had just read:

...benderisms

1975 called, it wants it's playground insults back. If this is the level of guile you have to fall back on when you're being given free advice that you don't like, then I would urge you to strongly reconsider whether you're cut out for any supervisory role.

Apologies for the lack of humour, but I'm out.

I think we finally know where Gareth Kennan ended up after leaving Wernham Hogg.

Stm I doubt many would even consider working for you after this.

I could fill the position really easily at very low cost if I had to.

Buy cheap, buy twice. 🙂

Oh.

Dear.

Imagine working in the hospitality industry and over the course of your 15 year career having to sack several people who were friends at that point in time.

Whatever else happens, never forget that its real people's lives your messing with. Sometimes they cant help but give you no choice, but most of the time, its down to you as the boss to find a way of making them better rather than finding someone better.

Gobuchul you want to copy and paste the rest of that law or just the part that makes you look right?

Which part don't you understand?

[url= https://www.gov.uk/dismiss-staff/eligibility-to-claim-unfair-dismissal ]https://www.gov.uk/dismiss-staff/eligibility-to-claim-unfair-dismissal[/url]

[url= https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/work-comes-to-an-end/dismissal/#Step_five_is_the_reason_for_the_dismissa ]Citizens Advice[/url]

Reasons for claiming unfair dismissal where you will have to have worked for long enough to be able to claim are:-

your employer says you are not capable of doing the job (see below)
your employer says you do not have the necessary qualifications to do the job (see below)
your employer says your conduct has been poor (see below)
your employer says you have done something illegal (see below)
your employer says you are redundant (see below)
some other reason your employer has given for dismissing you.

Without 24 months employment you can't claim for the above reasons unless it is "automatically unfair", those reasons relate to discrimination. trade union activity etc. Not for stealing sweets and pissing the boss of.

Stealing comes under criminal activity, that needs to be followed to show that it was investigated correctly.

Can the OP prove who reported the offence? No. The staff member could claim it was them and the OP response was to fire him without investigation and refused to record the report.

OP - if you do decide that sacking him is the best you can do for him, do him a favour and point him in the direction of Timpsons - c 10% of their workforce are ex-offenders. It is possible to take someone with a record of criminal behaviour and give them the opportunity to turn their life around and if you don't want to do that, let someone else - for this lad's sake...

[url= https://www.timpson.co.uk/about/careers-at-timpson ]Timpson[/url]

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL

Timpson really are an equal opportunities employer. We consider anyone for our vacancies as long as they are able to do the job. This includes ex-offenders and other marginalised groups. We recruit exclusively on personality and expect all of colleagues to be happy, confident and chatty individuals.

I had no idea managers were so influential and awesome. Thanks thread!

Hard to see how anything could be made to stick as there is nothing in the way of actual proof about any of the offences.

With so many possibilities and the likelyhood of mr manager being walked all over in court (should it go that far), I'd be getting everybody together that works in the area and letting them all know as a collective what has been going on.

Then say if it continues, the company will be forced to install CCTV cameras for security and insurance reasons.

That way you are not pointing fingers directly but let everybody know you know what is going on.

Not entirely sure of the law about cameras tbh (will likely need a new contract with the employees), but a place I worked at did it 15 yrs ago and caught somebody stealing beer from the office.

too late to edit...

I was once seen removing a toilet roll from the building where i worked. The person who saw me was a bit of a ****. A few weeks later the MD pulled me into his office and accused me of stealing eggs from the fridge. I wasn't particularly happy at being called a thief and when asked why he thought it was me, he told me about the 4 star ^^ who had caught me stealing a toilet roll a few weeks earlier and this made me the prime suspect. Once i told him what really happened - that i had borrowed the toilet roll to dry the seat of my motorbike before getting on, and had left it back when i'd finished, he looked a bit sheepish and apologised. There may or not be a moral in there but i think we can all agree, it's a cool story bro...

Sounds like there's more to this than meets the eye..
Some dominance issues perhaps?

It's not been made clear in your posts what your communications with the lad have been like during the escalations..
You talk about cotton wool liberal management advice, but I'm sure this could have been nipped in the bud early if you could have asserted your authority in a very basic bloke fashion..

It does sound like it's gotten well out of hand now though, and that you are being bullied at work.. It must be pretty bad for your self esteem

I'd be giving him a proper fiery roasting.. Laying out some clear boundaries with a first and final warning

"Most of the advice on here is the same as yours."

The only 'advice' I'm giving is to think things through very carefully, and seek proper legal advice. A situation like this can be a potential legal minefield, and the OP/company runs the risk of suffering significant damage if they don't prepare their case properly.

The OP's subsequent post reveals that they are inexperienced and possibly unsuited to management. If I were the owner of that company, that would give me far greater cause for alarm than someone stealing some chocolate eggs.

Mostly what I get reading this again is the OP coming in to "brag" he is going to fire someone then have a go at anyone trying to suggest he might have it wrong.

If I were the owner of that company, that would give me far greater cause for alarm than someone stealing some chocolate eggs.

Very true

I am in the process of considering the future of one of our apprentices. He is not up to the job, has been messing about during college lessons (evidence from lecturer), has an appalling sickness record and has failed to respond to the many chats we have had. It's coming to the break point and sadly I think that I'm going to have to let him go. I'm not only disappointed in them but also in me as I haven't been able turn the situation around. IMO sacking is a last resort.

Timpson's sounds like it's run by some righteous dudes.

All Timpson colleagues get their Birthday off. We believe that nobody should have to work on their Birthday!

We offer our colleagues free use of our holiday homes throughout the UK.

We also offer you use of the company limousine if you get married, as well getting an extra £100 in your wages and a week off work!

I don't know what I like better, Timpson's or this thread.

"This is completely wrong."

You're right, it is. Just as well I'm not a lawyer. 😆

I don't have all the details of that case so am just (wrongly) speculating. All I know is that the employee was accused by the company of theft, without proof (and in fact without it actually being 'theft', technically), which fell foul of some aspect of employment law, I [i]think[/i]. It would be interesting to have more details, as without them it's a bit difficult to work out why the company are now in a very bad situation. I used it as an example to try to deter the OP/company they work for from making a rash decision that could have potentially very serious consequences.

I used it as an example to try to deter the OP/company they work for from making a rash decision that could have potentially very serious consequences.

Why is everyone over complicating things?

For about the sixth time, rightly or wrongly, the OP's employee does not have the right to claim unfair dismissal, unless it could be seen as race/sex discrimination etc. as they only have worked there 11 months.

All the company has to do is say that they are "unsuitable for the job" or similar guff.

In 21st Century UK, unless you have been in a job for 24 months, then you basically have no employment rights. It's pretty shit but that's the law.

It's not clear cut as that but you're ignoring that.

In 21st Century UK, unless you have been in a job for 24 months, then you basically have no employment rights. It's pretty shit but that's the law.

"Why is everyone over complicating things?"

Because things have a habit of suddenly becoming very complicated once they get into a court room. What's important here is to save the OP and their company from that. Now we don't have anything but the OP's account of things here, from which to base an informed analysis. I'd hazard a guess it's not as clear-cut as may seem. And if so, then there may be myriad other factors which could affect the situation. None of us have any idea what the real situation is, beyond the OP's account. Ergo, it might be an idea for those involved to ensure they are in a watertight position.

"In 21st Century UK, unless you have been in a job for 24 months, then you basically have no employment rights. It's pretty shit but that's the law."

It's a really good thing [i]neither[/i] of us are lawyers. 😆

"All the company has to do is say that they are "unsuitable for the job" or similar guff."

Yes, but they still need to be able to cover their arses. As Drac says; it's not as clear cut as that.

If you want to sack someone for theft you do not need to prove beyond reasonable doubt, you just need to have reasonable belief.

It's not clear cut as that but you're ignoring that.

Explain please?

If the OP sacks this employee and the employee thinks it's unfair, then his only option is to claim unfair dismissal. However, he is not legally entitled to do so as he has not worked their long enough. So what happens? Nothing.

Because things have a habit of suddenly becoming very complicated once they get into a court room.

It Will Never Go To Court. He Has No Right To Claim Unfair Dismissal.

Yes, but they still need to be able to cover their arses. As Drac says; it's not as clear cut as that.

They Do Not Need To Cover Their Arses. He Has No Right To Claim Unfair Dismissal.

[url= http://employmentlawclinic.com/articles/employment-rights-in-first-12-months/ ]http://employmentlawclinic.com/articles/employment-rights-in-first-12-months/[/url]

While the right not to be unfairly dismissed can be available from the moment an employment contract is agreed, employees often cannot pursue a complaint against an employer for an unfair dismissal unless they have been employed for at least 12 months if the employment started on or before 5 April 2012, or 24 months otherwise – for employments that commenced on or after 6 April 2012. There are exceptions, where dismissal is said to be ‘automatically’ unfair; in these cases, an employee can bring a claim to an Employment Tribunal regardless of length of service.

Reasons that qualify for automatic unfair dismissal include dismissals associated with the transfer of a business (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE)), health & safety, discrimination, trade union membership or activities, as well as many others.

Gobuchul; I think you are seeing this in far too simplistic terms. Yes; on the surface, it may appear a cut and dry dismissal case. But none of us bar the OP are party to any other information about this particular case, such as what is laid out in the employment contract (for example things like disciplinary procedures etc), the relationship between the workers, or anything else that we haven't been told about, that may eventually come up in a court of law. It may well be that the OP sacks the employee, and nothing more comes of it. But as I've tried to point out, if the OP and their company do not do everything to make sure they have acted 100% within the bounds of the law, they may end up in a very difficult and potentially damaging situation. I'm sorry If I didn't make things clearer, maybe I didn't quite express it the way I should have.

And in the quote you posted yourself:

"employees [b]often[/b] cannot pursue a complaint against an employer"

Note the word 'often'. It is very important.

In law, it is never a good idea to assume you have your arse covered. Always make sure it actually is.

that may eventually come up in a court of law.

It never will.

The only way is if he claim some kind of "automatically unfair" reason.

[url= http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/employment-law/dismissals-and-redundancies/circumstances-when-a-dismissal-is-automatically-unfair ]http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/employment-law/dismissals-and-redundancies/circumstances-when-a-dismissal-is-automatically-unfair[/url]

If he the OP feels that this bloke is unsuitable, for what ever reason, then he can let him go.

Only if the bloke can show he has been discriminated against for some of the reasons highlighted above can he claim unfair dismissal.

This law was brought in by the Tories to encourage companies to take on new staff and reduce unemployment. At least that's what they claimed. Some twisted logic there.

Can you claim unfair dismissal if you believe you are being held responsible for a crime you didn't commit?

Ok Gobuchul; I don't see the point of continuing this 'argument' as you' seem to be convinced you're right. Personally, I'd seek the advice of a qualified professional. It's up to the OP what course of action to take. I know which one I'd be taking.

Also if the alleged offender can swing it in to a discrimination case (easy with to do if they have half a brain) and or a whistleblowing matter then the OP is on a sticky wicket.

To the op - any firm of any size will have procedures to follow. Only a slack operation will allow managers to make the decision without referring it. Do you even have authority to fire without referral to the HR function?

Take advice, do it properly. Let's play devils advocate for a moment. You fire the lad. It backfires spectacularly and the firm ends up being dragged into a tribunal (it can happen for the reasons I opened with). Your management then start asking questions of you. Have you covered your arse?

I have first hand experience of employment matters and what looks a nailed on dead cert can suddenly get very very messy with a competely unexpected outcome.

Aversion therapy is the way forward OP, you'll need a load more mini eggs but they're going [s]cheep[/s] cheap now.

You have the right to ask why you were dismissed, in this case it was over some mini eggs and possibly some petty cash. The victim can then claim it was then who reported that incident, as a whistle blower, where's the OP evidence it was investigated he didn't just sack a whistle blower. I mean after all only the OP had the key to the locker.

then fire him at a later date ( 11mths in work )

they have pretty much nothing to protect them then unless you pick gender o/religion or sexuality

IMHO just sack them because it has "Not worked out" to avoid any potential aggro

TBH why has no one challenged him or at least poisoned the bloody stiff he knicks with Picolax?

You have the right to ask why you were dismissed, in this case it was over some mini eggs and possibly some petty cash. The victim can then claim it was then who reported that incident, as a whistle blower, where's the OP evidence it was investigated he didn't just sack a whistle blower. I mean after all only the OP had the key to the locker.

Why complicate it. Just sack them with no mention of the mini eggs.

they have pretty much nothing to protect them then unless you pick gender o/religion or sexuality

IMHO just sack them because it has "Not worked out" to avoid any potential aggro

Bloody hell! Junkyard and I agree again.

I think that's twice now.

IMHO just sack them because it has "Not worked out" to avoid any potential aggro

The kid clearly has problems already, otherwise he'd not be thieving (based on his suspended sentence, not the OP's assumptions) - I wouldn't be surprised if there's some level of mental illness (which STW is usually very sympathetic about) or lousy parenting...

... and sacking him without evidence of his crime or even giving the time to defend himself helps in what way, exactly? Sounds like an excuse to victimise him...

Why complicate it. Just sack them with no mention of the mini eggs.

So sack him as you feel like it.

I think it might have been his birthday yesturday as well, hence the day off.

As I stated. I read and re-read this thread and took some advice . I decided on the Verbal warning all official and on record in front of a witness, then a car park chat of the reality of the situation. I will not tolerate petty theft in the workplace.

Fed up of having my ear chewed off because all the choclates are gone, or all of the cup cakes that were left for us. 2 for each of us, someone had 7 and some staff got none.
Imagine you worked in a big office with 12 people in it, and it was your 40th birthday. You bought 12 cakes , but only 4 people got one as the others had mysteriously disappeared between 0800 and 1230

Had to seperate a warehouse shouting match because the lad in question had nicked another employees lunch ,as hes a mate and therefor it would be ok.

Jeez , You lot will be suggesting we all link arms and let each other fall backwards and be caught as a trust and team building exercise, never, ever going to happen.
Go Karting ( Im paying ) followed by getting smashed in an all day drinkathon is the favourite thing they wanted to do.

Nice one, OP, for treating him like an adult. Everyone deserves to be treated like an adult in the first instance IMO.

It sounds like he's got some really challenging behaviour if nicking other people's stuff is his natural way of getting his needs met - and frankly I'd struggle with knowing how to deal with that - and to be fair that's your manager's failure, not yours.

They're clearly not giving you enough support to deal with this lad. You need to push higher up the chain and ask them for support and training... that's taking responsibility.

Where I'm going to disagree with you is that treating people with respect isn't some nancy-fancy nonsense - treating people badly screws up your business... I've seen at least 3 collapse and effectively go bankrupt because they failed to learn this lesson - had to sell themselves before they ran out of cash...

Timpsons has a revenue of £169m and their philosophy of "If you treat people well, it is blindingly obvious that they will do a good job" (from Wikipedia) might have something to do with that... certainly in my experience if you support people at times when they're struggling, they'll pay you back in spades

and sacking him without evidence of his crime or even giving the time to defend himself helps in what way, exactly? Sounds like an excuse to victimise him.

Yes it might be a mental health issue or he might just be an amoral scumbag - we cannot tell. Does he deserve sympathy- I dont know he seems pretty systematic in his disregard for other people's property.

My suggestion was to help the OP not the thief

OP he gains employment rights at 12 months - just checked its now 24 mths so you have time to offer him support if this is the route you prefer

TBH in some of the workplaces i worked the car park incident would not have been a polite chat but a shooing. I dont agree with this but folk dont like working with people who steal from them;this has been my universal experience.

EDIT: I agree with treating people well in the workplace and staff are your greatest asset. However very few employers will put up with that sort of behaviour and to get respect you also need to earn it. Stealing from your "mates" is a spectacularly ineffective method of achieving respect in the workplace or wider society,

You've made the right decision, good on you and hope it works out.

No one has suggested linking arms they're grown ups too so if they can't between themselves sort out cakes and chocs then tell them to grow up.

This was an April Fool's, yes?

The employment laws here protect the employee and work against the employer.

Since I started this job, I have removed 4 members of staff, all long term, all have taken us to the labour courts. All have lost, but it has taken a huge amount of my time. One we only lost because I spotted criminal activity and the threat of 6 separate charges each up to 9 years ago made him back down.

I have a particularly weak teacher on staff, who was warned three months into his first year that if he didn't sort out his teaching he was out, support was in place. Exam results came out it was clear he had to go, first day of the new school year I told him his contract wouldn't be renewed and to start looking for work for the next academic year.

It took half a dozen or so separate meetings for him to get the message. It has had a huge impact on his wife and kids who are also at the school.

Eventually I convinced him to resign so that I didn't have to say in any future reference he hadn't renewed his contract.

I can't give him a decent reference, he is shit at teaching, although I have put him in touch with some schools who will hire anybody.

Personally I can't stand the guy, or his wife. I have never, ever, worked with anybody as naive as the two of them. It is very hard to keep those feelings separate when having to yet again speak to them about some stupid thing they have done or said.

His nickname among the staff is manchild.

12 more weeks and they are gone, but there are feelings of guilt that I haven't supported him enough, or his wife.

. It also surfaced today that he somehow escaped a custodial sentance for theft, just got a suspended sentance.

Convicted thief stealing? Who'd have thought it? If you employ known thieves it's going to happen.

I'm not sure about "offering support" to someone who, not only isn't very good at a pretty easy job, but is also a thieving scumbag.
If I stole from my workplace (yeah, I've done the dishwasher tabs thing), I would expect to be immediately sacked if caught. No chances, no support, sacked. Thieving is wrong, no ifs or buts, and no tolerance would be expected from me. But then I wasn't stupid enough to be caught, I suppose if you're that thick, you don't quite understand the difference between right and wrong and therefore need regular hugs.

[i] If you employ known thieves it's going to happen.
[/i]
The OP didn't employ him.

So, not an April Fool, then...

But then I wasn't stupid enough to be caught,

This guy hasn't been caught just suspected.

@ Quirell your guilt shows you care and that you did the right thing/as much as you could for the manchild. TBH bad teachers, we have all seen them, should just be put on a list somewhere to stop them cycling through the system

It is horrible sacking folk - even folk you dont like as you wonder if you are just doing it due to the personal/petty reasons.

Its also making folk redundant.

I have seen folk of all ages and all genders cry at the decision point SOme were genuinely upset. SOme wanted everyone in the room to feel like shit.