Had a stand up arguement @ work with the brother of one (of 2) Directors, and ended up grabbing each other,

As the brother (director, who saw it all) wouldn't give me a verble warning, The one i had the arguement with rang the police to press charges.

He's saying he has lost some movement of 1 of his arms.

We have both been suspended from work for 2 days, whilst they decide the out come.

But there's talk of me being sacked now.


I've been there 15 months, with no problems or warnings of any sort. and upto that point got on fine with the Directors and Workshop manager.


The brother in hand, is a little Hitler, and in the past has been threatened with iron bars and all sorts off previous employee's.
And has had a grudge on me for 3 months since he took a joke i sed to heart.


Since i've been there, thier has been a couple arguements like this with other people, but nothing ever been done or sed.


I work in a Metal Fabrication workshop, with 10 blokes on the shop floor,


Any advice would be great thankyou.

Danny

 

Cue all the threats of violence .

Try talking to the brother that saw it over a pint after he finishes work and just explain the situation in full how you see it. Don't leave anything out (including the joke that was taken badly).

You are then in the hands of the Gods as to what he honestly thinks of his brother, but that fact he witnessed it all, and wasn't prepared to give you any sort of warning, speaks volumes to me....

 

i'd second mikes onions

if he hasn't said anything then it's your word against his brothers, although you shouldn't be reliying on that as your sole bit of defence

who grabbed who first is the qustion dibble will be asking everyone

 

I know wot you mean about violance, and i dont believe in it. and i very rarly do such a thing, but this bloke has been pushing and pushing me. to the point of rage a few times, and i just walk away.




Thats wot i thought,

But i went into work yesterday, to speak to the 2nd director

And he sed he wouldn't sack me, but some sort of warning is needed to both of us. which is fare and justly

But sed the Brother (other director) is at the solicitors as we were speaking, about wot legal rights he has if he wants to sack me


Which is the last thing i want to happen.

 

i think i was the 1st,

But he was the course of the original arguement, (which again the brother saw.)

i've just texted the Brother (director) to see if he will speak to me before they make a disission.

 

was it one of those "face to face shouty and then you gripped him up" sort of arguements or did it ort of go on for a while before you grabbed him?

without telling porkies you could always claim self defence, you gripped him up and pinned his arms to his side ebcause he was waving his fists in your general direction

i've had similar instances at work where i've gone face to face with someone who's been slobbering like cujo and everyone staring to see what was going to happen, as long as you rememebr that the calmer you have been the better it is to the witnesses, even though this guy seems like a right royal cock, plod could still see this as you wanting to take your anger out on the management

you have rights if he fires you because it's only his word against yours, but if you go to court and the judge pulls down your pants and shafts you, there really isn't aleg you've got to stand on unles the appeal courts overturn the desicion

my advice, based on that scenario, is to go to the police station and make a counter claim against him to put yourslef in a position to tell your side of the story. that way, if the cps decide there is enough eveidence at least you've got your statemnt to take to court with you, and if you were to make a complaint they might even turn around and say there isn't enough evidence to take it to court in the first palce

 

it went one for a minute,

Then i welked away,

Then he sed something, and laughed at me,so i went over there.

We talked to each other, and i grabbed his overalls, just before he took mine.

But i let go after i told him to stop getting in my face, and stirring sh-t.

I didn't threaten him at all. But i was wound up.


Most of the blokes who worked there told me to go to the police and make a counter charge,

Which i didn't want to do, as it makes it more complexed, but now i looking at doing this as 1. i dont want to lose my job, 2. because i dont want to get a criminal record.

Both of which wont do me any favours on my CV etc etc.

Nor will they pay my ,morgate

 

well technically to sack you, i suppose they could, BUT you could take legal action against them and put all your points across, which you would probably win but maybe would be trial basis, of course after doing that, you probably wouldn't want to work there since you would get more problems from this guy.

i would definately try talking to the other guy as said above, but if hes not willing to talk theres not much you can do. hopefully you won't get the sack seeing as you are meant to have a verbal warning and 2 writen warnings first. but you never know i guess.

this guy cannot just claim he has lost some movement in one of his arms, he would need a full examination by maybe 2 or 3 doctors before its taken into account (of course the legal system in this country never seems to work like that).

so if i was you i wouldn't stress too much, just do what you can without causing anymore conflict and see how things go, but if you really don't agree with the outcome, then there is legal action that you yourself can take

 

Hi, thanks for the advice.


I can see why people take firms to court for wrongly dismissle,

But i see it in my case as a waste of time, and money, as you sed, it wouldn't be a option to go back there after being sacked.

 

like i said just wait and see what the outcome is, maybe you could mention to them that they havent gave you the correct amount and type of warnings and that you could take them to court. maybe then they will get slightly weary ad maybe come to a compromise?!

i dont know but it is worth mentioning to them about the warnings, if they think you know ya stuff, and know what your dealing with, they aren't likely to try and just sack you.

 

 

As others have said, if the other Director has chosen not to sack you due to the offense then I wouldn't really worry.

If there were 2 parties using threatening behaviour then in most cases you will both get a warning (fairly stern) and a cool off period. If I was you I'd stay well away from the other party as it could lead to more serious offenses. If he uses threatening behaviour towards you then just ignore it and report it.

IMO I'd have a word with the other Director and tell him exactly what has happened. If he presses charges then counter-act them saying he used the same behaviour yo you and threatening verbal abuse (if he has done?) before which pushed you into the unnapropriate behaviour.

 

Thanks

But the main problem is the brother (has 75% shares in the firm) and the one only has 25%.

 

Who owns the company? If they are partners in the company, they both have to agree on a decision before they can carry out actions. Doesn't matter who has the biggest share.

 

Sorry to read this Danny, and i cant add anything better than has already been suggested. Hope it works out ok.

 

The brother owns the land and building himself.




Cheers Stu.

 

Not always true it depends on the circumstances and the conditions of your contract. If he maintains and claims you assaulted him then he can probably get away with instant dismissal as alot of companys view that as an instant dismissal but you'd have a good case to fight it due to the history between u etc and you can bring up the fact he's been treating u unfairly etc.
But as said for him to make any claim of injury he'd have to get doctors report and specialist reports and if u didnt twist his arm or anything like that i cant see many solicitors wasting there time but then u never know these days!
and i cant see the police bothering with it so i wouldnt worry bout any criminal convictions etc............

The problem u will have thou is if you just get a warning chances are he's gonna be even more of a wanker towards u than before and make u hate going to work!! So you'll prob end up leaving anyway

 

Yeah i know the feelings between us wont get better.

But at least if i dont get sacked,

i can leave on my choice, when i found a similar paying job locally.

 

Not the brothers that used to own Cobra Motorcycles as well is it?

 

i know there is instant dismissal but there is at this moment in time going to be a crack down on how easy it is to fire an employee, so i'm guessing that as it has been made clear to the country that it is far to easy to do this that maybe its the wrong time for anyone to be fired very easily.

i am afraid that the law interestd me lol and thats why i know the above about what the government have found

but hopefully if the point is gotten across that maybe the person provoked him and that it was basically set up then instant dismissal at this point will not be an option.

of course even so we won't know the outcome until hes gone back to work.

sorry if im rambling on

 

From a legal perspective.

Assault: When one person intentionally or recklessly applies force to the person of another, without the others consent ..

So based upon that YES you did assault him (In theory)..

BUT as above an exception to that would be self defence (for example if you felt you had to restrain him before he hit or grabbed you) but that will only stand up if you actualy feared this , should you be 6'6" and he be 5'0" it wont stand up in court...

What you have theoretically commited could be termed as Common Assualt (assuming there is no bruising to his body)

If you get a visit from plod and keep your cool, Common Assault is not an arrestable offence and carries a maximum sentence of six Months inside you COULD simply be issued a summons, provided you can confirm to the police you are who you say you are etc etc..

Then it would be up to the magistrate to decide whether you are guilty or not, that would depend on how plausable the victims arguement is obviously.

If it did get to court (I doubt the CPS would take it that far) having the "other" bro as a witness on your defence would help you no end, so yes follow Mikes advise...

HTH

 

cheers again.

As yet not heard back from the director (the brother) about having a chat.

Just had a phone call from one of the directors (not the brother)

He has spoke to the directors of a larger firm (who are next door)
and they sed they get a written statement off the people involved, and witnesses.

then have a interview with me, and then him, before that make a decission.

But he did say it wont be sorted before next monday, so time will tell.

 

If you do get a warning and i think thats all it may come to here,If the guy starts giving you grief again,keep a little diary of whats said and who did what and so on and NO PORKIES.

When it get to the point of grabing him again,put a letter in of complaint,ask for all of the directors to be there and have a witness with you.

Then tell all whats going on and hand over the,now nicely written out diary with all the complaints in, over to the directors,remembering to keep a copy of the letter and "diary" and give your witness a copy aswell.
When you do tell all to the directors keep it nice,do not lower to an angry voice and use the word "victimisation" this is as bad as bullying.

A copy of your complaint must be kept on his record for future reference and by law cant be removed.

If you get a warning it must be a written warning by law now and you must have 3 before they can sack you,they stay on your record for 6 months , i think.

 

Cheers again.


i've just spent a hour and a half writing the full story.

i'm going to work now to drop it off, then i'll try and scan it up on here for you's to read.

I'm also gonna give a copy to the police,

 

I wouldnt do that as you will be incriminating yourself if it hasnt already been reported.

IF he has reported it, its as good as an admission of guilt, so again could go against you

MY opinion only...

 

Can't give out any better information than on this thread.

Good luck mate.

 

Cheers,

Wot i will do is scan it up onto here, and let you see if it incriminates me in any way,

But i feel wen they come to get my statement, i'm gona verbly tell them the same as i've written, As i dont see apoint in lieing, as there is at least 1 wittness.

 

true, best way if you have nothing to hide

at the top of your statement, write Without prejudice that way it cant be disclosed in court as evidence

 

 

Basically there has been a common assault (which is now arrestable since the end of last year) but if he has lost movement in his arm then there could be ABH or even a GBH if he has a permanent injury. HOWEVER, no self-respecting Detective is going to take this matter as anything other than a squabble unless you and he fit one of the following:

1. He is a minority person and alleges racial/homophobic etc.
2. He is an asylum seeker.
3. You are a police officer.
4. He is a pupil and you are his school teacher!

Definately do not give anything to the Police. If however, you are contacted by the police regarding an allegation then make your counter allegation of assault. The reason you didn't report it sooner being that you took it for what it was - a minor scuffle and you didn't want to waste the time of the police.

Your local nick will deal with loads of these petty allegations every day from time-wasting tossers that just want to use the Police as a way of getting back at someone. These usually get dealt with by means of a telephone call to BOTH parties telling both to grow up. I wouldn't worry too much.

 

I would check your facts, thats incorrect.

Common Assault is an offence under Sec 39 of Criminal Justice Act 1988 and DOES NOT have its own powers of arrest and is a "Summary offence" only.

Powers of arrest are only applicable under Sec 24 of The Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

 

I would check your facts! There is no longer an arrestable offence under sec 24 of PACE.

As of December last year ALL offences are arrestable if certain criteria apply (what was the old Sec 25 PACE requirements plus a few others).

 

Here you are mate, read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4564600.stm

You were right up until the end of the last new but its all changed now.

 

FPMSL Do a little research on Powers of arrest under Sec 24 of PACE (General power of arrest), then come back to me YOU ARE wrong my friend

 

I am a DC on the SCD7 Specialist Crime Directorate - Serious and Oragised. I suspect you are not.

I know my facts.

Read my link above.

 

Read it yet?

 

Powers as a constable under Section 24

Section 24 provides:

“(1) a constable may arrest without warrant –

(a) anyone who is about to commit an offence;
(b) anyone who is in the act of committing an offence;
(c) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be about to commit an offence;
(d) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be committing an offence.

(2) If a constable has reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence has been committed he may arrest without a warrant anyone whom he has reasonable grounds to suspect of being guilty of it.

(3) If an offence has been committed, a constable may arrest without a warrant –

(a) anyone who is guilty of this offence;
(b) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be guilty of it.

(4) But the power of summary arrest conferred by subsection (1), (2) or (3) is exercisable only if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that for any of the reasons mentioned in subsection (5) it is necessary to arrest the person in question

(5) The reasons are-
(a) to enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained (in the case where the constable does not know, and cannot readily ascertain, the person's name, or has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name given by the person as his name is his real name);


(b) Correspondingly as regards the person's address;

(c) to prevent the person in question-

(i) causing physical injury to himself or any other person;
(ii) suffering physical injury;
(iii) causing loss of or damage to property;
(iv) committing an offence against public decency (subject to subsection (6)); or
(v) causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway;

(d) to protect a child or other vulnerable person from the person in question;

(e) to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question;

(f) to prevent any prosecution for the offence from being hindered by the disappearance of the person in question

(6) Subsection (5)(c)(iv) applies only where members of the public going about their normal business cannot reasonably be expected to avoid the person in question.

 

 

That is the OLD legislation. Its all changed now. READ THE LINK ABOVE!

 

I bow to your higher knowledge my friend (seriously), you obviously know more than me...

Maybe we have a cross purposes here, but as I understand it the above is currently correct