Incident on Leeming Street

[Jamie]

Give up Chris. He doesn't want to accept there are laws and rules. Your spot on with what your saying.

I want justice to be done and it will be. Sadly there are those on here who share a brain cell and just want to see heads on spikes because they know best.

[Tippy Tappy Football]

 The statutory test for the fairness of the dismissal is set out in s 98(4) ERA 1996

(4) Where the employer has fulfilled the requirements of subsection (1) (reason for dismissal), the determination of the question whether the dismissal is fair or unfair (having regard to the reason shown by the employer)—

(a)depends on whether in the circumstances (including the size and administrative resources of the employer’s undertaking) the employer acted reasonably or unreasonably in treating it as a sufficient reason for dismissing the employee, and

(b)shall be determined in accordance with equity and the substantial merits of the case.

If the employer fails to follow the proper procedures then it is more likely to be an unfair dismissal as the employer has not acted reasonably. However the tribunal does have a discretion to reduce any compensation (even to zero or a nominal £1) if they believe the conduct of the employee contributed to the dismissal.

[Sandy Pate Best Stag]

Contrary to popular belief there hasn't been instant dismissal in employment law for decades.

However guilty anyone may be to all and sundry together with an admission of " I done it Guv" you still have to suspend (on full pay) pending any disciplinary process which you must follow.

The act of suspension doesn't infer guilt but gives breathing space for all appropriate evidence to be gathered and a hearing convened at which, as others have said, any party is entitled to due representation.

Then the verdict is again as others have inferred based on what a reasonable person may have been expected to have done beyond reasonable doubt in a similar situation giving full weight to all terms and conditions of employment.

Hardly any of us are privy to footballers professional contracts so it depends what's in them.

Failure to follow due process by an employer who is expected to do so and behave appropriately would ultimately lose any tribunal however guilty any individual was.

That sounds very good but unfortunately is incorrect. An employer may still summarily dismiss a worker for gross misconduct without prior warning. A tribunal MAY not must award compensation if the process used to dismiss was not a fair one.

So yes, a process should take place but does not necessarily need to be a prolonged one with formal hearings. It is up to an employee to demonstrate to a tribunal that process was unfair and the standard of proof is on the balance of probability not beyond reasonable doubt..

There is no requirement to suspend an employee on full pay but an employer cannot suspend unpaid unless there is a clause in the employees contract allowing the employer to do so.

So in summary, if an employee demonstrates gross misconduct, they can still be summarily dismissed without notice or payment in lieu of wages. Gross misconduct isn't defined in the legislation but includes things like theft, physical violence and serious insubordination. It is advised that an employee be given the opportunity to respond to allegations before a decision to summarily dismiss is made.

If anyone wants to look at the legislation it's the available on http://www.gov.uk

So maybe the barrack room lawyers may wish to look at what the law actually says before insisting that good practice guidance is actually the law. That's all it is -guidance. Ultimately only a tribunal can decide if a dismissal was lawful or not and decisions can vary.

I also suggest that they read and understand what a poster is saying before jumping to assumptions.[/quote

Yes they can be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct but not on the spot...without an investigation. ...without representation....without the right to see evidence....without the right to appeal...otherwise the dismissal is automatically unfair.

Suspending someone unpaid without the contractual right to do so is automatically unfair and breaches the wages act and is an unlawful deduction of wages.

Why don't you just read what I've written and you will see that I've included and agreed with your points or are you in so much of a hurry to be controversial that you didn't notice? Maybe my language was too plain and the phrase 'a clause in the employees contract' doesn't sound as important as contractual rights although it is the same thing. Knowing what something says and understanding it aren't necessarily the same thing as is clearly demonstrated.

[Tippy Tappy Football]

There is a 2 year qualifying period for employees claiming unfair dismissal so Donohue would not be eligible to claim.

There are also statutory limits on the amounts that employees can receive for compensation for unfair dismissal based on length of service, age and the maximum week's pay that can be claimed. There are no limits in discrimination cases.

A highly paid employee working under a fixed term contract may prefer a claim for damages for breach of contract (wrongful termination of the contract by the employer) as there is no qualifying period and it may mean they can claim more money. Most sacked managers would bring a claim for damages for breach of contract.

[NorthLondonStag]

There’s a lot of half true/half wrong statements on here about employment law. Given, I suspect, over 95 per cent of people on here aren’t lawyers I suggest we just leave it to the club’s lawyers, who (a) will have all the facts and (b) will, I presume, be employment law specialists.

[cassellswasmagic]

Apparently Mellis wasn’t involved and will probably be cleared after police view CCTV footage. Have the club said anything about this alleged attack involving our player/s.

[MTFCMusings]

The question is will John Lomas or Jake Garner have the balls to ask any questions?

[bellwhiff]

Apparently Mellis wasn’t involved and will probably be cleared after police view CCTV footage. Have the club said anything about this alleged attack involving our player/s.

Well. I posted something similar further up the thread. If he is cleared then there are a lot on here that should apologise to him. They won’t though. They’re spineless.

[cassellswasmagic]

Apparently Mellis wasn’t involved and will probably be cleared after police view CCTV footage. Have the club said anything about this alleged attack involving our player/s.

Well. I posted something similar further up the thread. If he is cleared then there are a lot on here that should apologise to him. They won’t though. They’re spineless.

I will Belly. I’m not on Facebook or anything else so heard on here both were involved and said get rid of em both. Now if it’s true Mellis isn’t involved I apologise. Whoever is the culprit should be gone though. That still stands.

[EdwinstoweStag]

Which players are purportedly involved?

[bellwhiff]

Apparently Mellis wasn’t involved and will probably be cleared after police view CCTV footage. Have the club said anything about this alleged attack involving our player/s.

Well. I posted something similar further up the thread. If he is cleared then there are a lot on here that should apologise to him. They won’t though. They’re spineless.

I will Belly. I’m not on Facebook or anything else so heard on here both were involved and said get rid of em both. Now if it’s true Mellis isn’t involved I apologise. Whoever is the culprit should be gone though. That still stands.

Fair play. Mellis texted to a relation of the lad that was hit saying he didn’t do it and was waiting for the videos to clear him.

The point made by myself and others remains extant though. Let’s wait for evidence.

[cassellswasmagic]

Apparently Mellis wasn’t involved and will probably be cleared after police view CCTV footage. Have the club said anything about this alleged attack involving our player/s.

Well. I posted something similar further up the thread. If he is cleared then there are a lot on here that should apologise to him. They won’t though. They’re spineless.

I will Belly. I’m not on Facebook or anything else so heard on here both were involved and said get rid of em both. Now if it’s true Mellis isn’t involved I apologise. Whoever is the culprit should be gone though. That still stands.

Fair play. Mellis texted to a relation of the lad that was hit saying he didn’t do it and was waiting for the videos to clear him.

The point made by myself and others remains extant though. Let’s wait for evidence.

Yes.

[jpstags]

If Mellis is cleared of any wrongdoing, his drinking habits certainly need acting upon.

[bellwhiff]

If Mellis is cleared of any wrongdoing, his drinking habits certainly need acting upon.

That’s as maybe but it’s not really relevant compared to the lynch mob nature of this thread

[stagsfan6493]

No Mellis and no Dion? Win 2-0

Get both of them out of the club - we don’t need players who go on the piss every Thursday beating up kids.

[bellwhiff]

No Mellis and no Dion? Win 2-0

Get both of them out of the club - we don’t need players who go on the piss every Thursday beating up kids.

There you go again. Apparently Mellis may not have been involved in the violence. Yet you accuse him of beating up kids.

[Uncle]

The question is will John Lomas or Jake Garner have the balls to ask any questions?

Questions about what? Matters involving a Police investigation? I assume the only people asking any questions would be Detectives or Solicitors.

[88BenM]

https://www.mansfieldtown.net/news/2019 ... director2/

Bill Broughton is the legal director, I'm pretty sure he will be as clued up if not more, than the Stagsnet masses.

Innocent until proven guilty, being arrested does not indicate guilt.

[jpstags]

If Mellis is cleared of any wrongdoing, his drinking habits certainly need acting upon.

That’s as maybe but it’s not really relevant compared to the lynch mob nature of this thread

Of course it's bloody relevant !

[bellwhiff]

If Mellis is cleared of any wrongdoing, his drinking habits certainly need acting upon.

That’s as maybe but it’s not really relevant compared to the lynch mob nature of this thread

Of course it's bloody relevant !

Jesus. It’s like pulling teeth. It’s not relevant to arrests and assault. It’s relevant to club discipline. It’s not relevant to people hanging the lad before the facts are fully known.

PS. Do you know if Mellis got a pass to go out ? He’s suspended so knew he wasn’t playing. Do you know if he asked ?

[AlanStag]

I can't believe people are trying to blame JD, the agenda against him is just frankly ridiculous.

If you went out on a work night and got into a fight do you think your gaffer would get the blame? Of course not, these are fully grown men capable of making their own decisions and knowing better is he supposed to babysit them?

That being said there is no confirmation that the two players being stated were even involved and until anything is proven then it is all conjuncture. If there is some truth I don't think the relatives are wise to be posting everything on Social Media etc it will only go against them in court.

[MTFCMusings]

The question is will John Lomas or Jake Garner have the balls to ask any questions?

Questions about what? Matters involving a Police investigation? I assume the only people asking any questions would be Detectives or Solicitors.

Well for the club to acknowledge that something has happened is the first thing, whether investigations are ongoing or not it doesn't change the fact that they were allegedly arrested and have allegedly been suspended. It would seem the obvious thing to do given it's all over social media.

[Uncle]

The question is will John Lomas or Jake Garner have the balls to ask any questions?

Questions about what? Matters involving a Police investigation? I assume the only people asking any questions would be Detectives or Solicitors.

Well for the club to acknowledge that something has happened is the first thing, whether investigations are ongoing or not it doesn't change the fact that they were allegedly arrested and have allegedly been suspended. It would seem the obvious thing to do given it's all over social media.

Silly me. I thought John Lomas worked for the CHAD.

[MTFCMusings]

The question is will John Lomas or Jake Garner have the balls to ask any questions?

Questions about what? Matters involving a Police investigation? I assume the only people asking any questions would be Detectives or Solicitors.

Well for the club to acknowledge that something has happened is the first thing, whether investigations are ongoing or not it doesn't change the fact that they were allegedly arrested and have allegedly been suspended. It would seem the obvious thing to do given it's all over social media.

Silly me. I thought John Lomas worked for the CHAD.

What has that got to do with anything?

[yorkshire stag]

So was anything said either before or after the game ref the allegations ?

sorry just landed back in the UK