Exploited by an employer then refused a good reference...revenge is sweet.

You know, for the sake of your son, if he wins his case i hope he gets a confidentiality clause in any agreement. If word gets around that your son took an employer to a tribunal and won (regardless of who was right or wrong) he might lose more job opportunities in the future because of it.
Employers are kinda funny that way.

A lot of companies (illegally) keep a little black list they share amongst themselves.

And anyway, bragging of your revenge on the internet is really petty and encourging revenge is not good parenting.

I am not saying it's wrong to stand up, but, just do it and move on. Why feel the need to brag about it and encourage it in a revengful way.

As an employer, it wouldn't be the act of standing up about something that riles me up (employers have to be careful of doing the right thing more than employees in a lot of cases), it would be the act of bragging and using it in a revengful way that would get up my goat.

a reply to: Soloprotocol
True, and it is highly likely that the confidentiality clause will be a two way street in the offer the employer will be soon to present.
To be honest though, my lad is aiming at 5-6 more years of full-time education (including university) so concerns about that are a long way off.
That fear of employer blacklists may well be true in some sectors, but bending over and taking it because of such a fear is not a mindset I would want my son to have.
I do however support the rights of any employee to bend over as much as they wish for an employer, as I support the rights of an employee to use legislation where appropriate. A business breaks the law at it's own risk, as an employee breaks company rules at their own risk.

You cannot use confidentiality clauses to silence Tribunerals.

You cannot prevent people from earning a living either (an EU Human Rights issue, i say EUHR issue as the UK doesn't give a toss about those ).



It really all comes down to how much do you wish to be VISIBLE about this issue.

Seems you want everybody to hear about it shouting from the rooftops, since you brag on the internet about it, well, that has a down side too

a reply to: jajaja
I intended to inspire interesting discussion and it appears to have been successful in this thread.
You can inaccurately attempt to spin any emotion into the discussion if you wish, but if reading this thread causes you personal distress of any kind you are always free to ignore it.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: jajaja
I intended to inspire interesting discussion and it appears to have been successful in this thread.
You can inaccurately attempt to spin any emotion into the discussion if you wish, but if reading this thread causes you personal distress of any kind you are always free to ignore it.

I am not the emotional one bragging on the internet about revenge

That's your choice, I respect the entertainment, it doesn't affect me

a reply to: jajaja
That's cool then, please do stay a while and enjoy the entertainment, it gets better when the US posters are involved and the blood is really flowing in some members there.
I find that very entertaining.

a reply to: grainofsand

Oh, not no But Hell No. If employers cross a line, it's up to the employee to stand up for themselves and not be taken advantage of. I am simply pointing out that just because your son has deleted that employer from his resume', it doesn't mean future employers won't find out. If they see him as a "boat rocker" ready to sue at the drop of a hat, [ which they may, any company will be leery of someone who has sued past employers ] it will cost him. Sorry if you got the impression I was on the company side.

a reply to: DAVID64
Ah no worries, I apologise for making the assumption incorrectly.
You are of course correct that winning any action against an employer may well have repercussions in the future for any employee.
As I've mentioned though, college and university (5/6 years of more education) for my lad to get through first so it is not a present concern. A company may of course exact it's own revenge as a result of losing litigation, but that is always the risk of taking anyone on in any dispute, corporate or otherwise. It's life, and I've never bent over for anyone, never will.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: jude11
...doesn't matter. The employer is responsible for complying with child employment law. My son is not legally able to agree to work longer hours.
The director tried to screw him over 'rules' but failed to follow the law himself.

got to have documented proof, and you would have to file with the state labor board, if there is one in your state. or, it turns into one of those life lessons.

a reply to: jimmyx
Overwhelming evidence in this case and the government agency is advising the employer that they can settle informally or be prosecuted. It will be up to my son if he wishes to accept their offer or not.
Oh, and this is the UK, and UK legislation. The result of the case is not in question due to the documented evidence.
The employer broke the law, now they will be punished. My son broke company rules and was punished. A win win situation with two parties being able to exercise their rights, the employers right to dismiss an employee, the employees right to report an employer for breaking employment law.

a reply to: grainofsand


You could just say that you and your son were ignorant of the law/were unaware of the law regarding working hours.
Your son agreed to the hours because of the economic climate and through fear of losing his job.... especially with Mr Meanie as his boss, picking on him.
These guys are screwed and I'm sure they know it.

Good luck mate

a reply to: blupblup
Cheers mate.
The law doesn't take into account anything other than the question did the employer break child labour law or not. It is irrelevant legally if the employee agreed to it or understood the law. A child worker cannot legally agree to working excess hours, and any business employing young people must comply.
Ignorance of the law is not a defence, and even if the child worker completely loved doing the hours, it is the employers responsibility to ensure they do not work them.

I am grateful for the employer showing us how strongly they support all rules being followed by sacking my son. It was their right to sack him, as it is also the right of my son to report the employer for breaking the law.
I support the rights of both parties, it is just unfortunate for the employer that their failure to comply will result in a penalty far more severe than my son suffered...but that is always the risk when breaking the law.

originally posted by: jajaja
A lot of companies (illegally) keep a little black list they share amongst themselves.

And anyway, bragging of your revenge on the internet is really petty and encourging revenge is not good parenting.

I am not saying it's wrong to stand up, but, just do it and move on. Why feel the need to brag about it and encourage it in a revengful way.

As an employer, it wouldn't be the act of standing up about something that riles me up (employers have to be careful of doing the right thing more than employees in a lot of cases), it would be the act of bragging and using it in a revengful way that would get up my goat.

I dont know.

Cause a law has been clearly broken the company will likely cut there loses and run. As pushing the issue even in private could reap too much crap on them to be worth being vindictive.

Getting caught once in breach of a "minor" rule? Well, that can be written off as youthful indiscretion or mistake.

Getting caught twice, well he doesn't have that excuse to hide behind.

The fact that the employer felt confident enough to "spot check" him a third time is what got him fired. Not the fact that he was wearing the bracelet, but the fact that he chose to continue wearing the bracelet despite two previous warnings. That's nothing more than a big "f**k you" to the employer.

Your son got fired because he was untrustworthy, which makes him a liability to the business. Even if the Director was a bully or had a grudge, his decision was still absolutely correct. The Director did not bully him into wearing the bracelet, in fact he gave him multiple opportunities to correct the situation. This is not a mistake that can be rectified with better training or mentorship (my preferred approach), it's straightforward deliberate disobedience.

If you can't trust someone to follow a rule as simple and easy as "take the bracelet off before starting the shift" - and if that person willfully refuses to follow that rule despite multiple warnings - then how can you trust him not to ignore other rules that are more important? You can't. Someone who decides to pick and choose the rules he is prepared to follow, is not a trustworthy employee.

Maybe the "bullying" or "grudge" is because the Director had identified him as a potential problem early on? Did you ever think of that?

Yes, the company are still at fault for breaking the law relating to hours, and that should be dealt with accordingly. That does not absolve your son. I would have fired him as well in that situation.

Spoken as a Director of multiple firms, who does not want to trust his livelihood to employees that he cannot trust.

a reply to: crazyewok
I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did though, there will be real anger in the boardroom that an employee followed their shining example of strictly enforcing rules and the law. It was a very good lesson to the employee that 'rules is rules' just unfortunate for the employer that a strict adherence to the rules in this case is biting them back on their arse.
If the employer seeks revenge in return then we will deal with it as in any other conflict/dispute situation, but you won't see me or my son bleating about it, that's life, win some, lose some.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: crazyewok
I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did though, there will be real anger in the boardroom that an employee followed their shining example of strictly enforcing rules and the law. It was a very good lesson to the employee that 'rules is rules' just unfortunate for the employer that a strict adherence to the rules in this case is biting them back on their arse.
If the employer seeks revenge in return then we will deal with it as in any other conflict/dispute situation, but you won't see me or my son bleating about it, that's life, win some, lose some.

well in my instance the company disciplined the manager responsible for the illegal action and the HR department way laid off and put under head office as they bloody freaked that a crap storm would hit the shiny company image.

Haha, wow, paragraphs of opinion relating to how my son was untrustworthy, should have been sacked, blah, etc, then just one little line relating to the employer knowingly breaking child labour law:

originally posted by: EvillerBob
Yes, the company are still at fault for breaking the law relating to hours, and that should be dealt with accordingly. That does not absolve your son.

That says much about your good self, much.
Oh, and if you take the time to read all my posts here I have not once indicated that my son should be absolved, he accepted the sacking, regardless of the personal reasons of the director, as the employer must now accept that they are being punished for breaking the law.
Win win, two parties exercising their legal rights.

...it is interesting that you typed so much about an employee breaking company rules yet so little about a business breaking child employment law. That really is telling.

a reply to: crazyewok
I'll admit, I can't see them keeping that director on much longer, and I shall shed no tears if he finds it difficult to get work as a result of it. Live by the rules, die by the rules, perhaps he will be less of a prick bully to young staff in future, everyone has learned something, that is good.

I'm amazed by all the folk here breaking their hearts for the employer though. If an employer is passionate about enforcing 'rules is rules' in an oppressive and fear filled workplace, then they can blame nobody but themselves when they get stung by an employee for breaking the law.
...it will be interesting to see their initial offer, but I shall not be announcing it here for obvious confidentiality issues.

*Edit*
And if anyone is wondering, any cash my lad makes out of it is his, not mine, and it is up to him if he wants to sort me a bonus or not.
I've taken no money off him during his working summer, I don't need it, but he has filled the fridge and cupboards with the food he rinses out, and bought me some lovely random presents which far outweigh the few quid of gas and electricity it costs extra for him each week.
No, this is not about the cash for me, just the principle of a dominant enforcer of rules being made to comply with the laws which are applicable to them.
Both employer and employee learn a lesson. That is good.

a reply to: grainofsand

No, I'm sorry you didn't know that it is the sole responsibility of the employer. They broke the law.

Yes, with you knowing about for how long?

Yes take it to court, tell them you knew of law being broken for how long was it again?

Then tell the court how you are warranted in in your vengeful act and see where it gets you.

Man what a joker you are, yeah the employer broke the law, boo hoo.

The individual director screwed him over for personal reasons and picked him out over other staff for the minor offences

So why haven't you mentioned the discrimination charge that should be brought up as well, or were you blinded by your vengeance,

What you have described is your son was discriminated against by sacking him for things that other workers were allowed to do.

I would suggest going that route if legal proceedings are being thought of or implemented, as pointing out you knew of the child labor law being broken and only bringing it up when you son is fired will get you in hot water as well.