A training day prank that failed to raise a giggle

What it appears was intended as joke certainly did not turn out to be a laughing matter for Serena.

The energy sales consultant faced the threat of dismissal when what is thought to have been a prank backfired.

Serena was with four colleagues – three females and one male – in a bar at a hotel following a training session, and it is fair to say the group had enjoyed much more than just a few drinks.

When the male member of the group went to the toilet, and left his mobile phone on the table, an inappropriate picture was taken on it and sent to his wife.

The group enjoyed the rest of the evening before heading to their rooms to sleep off their over indulgence.

Nothing was said about the picture until the group returned to the workplace.

Serena, who had worked for her employer for just over three years, was summoned to her manager’s office and asked about what happened on the evening in question.

She explained she had a bit to drink and could not remember much about it.

The manager said the male member of the group had since gone off sick and raised a grievance as a result of the inappropriate picture that was taken and sent to his wife.

Serena expressed her shock and said she knew nothing about it, and did not know her colleague’s passcode for his phone to be able to unlock it and take a picture. 

Her manager insisted she must know about the picture, and refused to accept that she did not.

He said if she did not do it, then she must know who did. Serena said she had a lot to drink and honestly could not remember a picture being taken.

Her boss did not accept the explanation and she was suspended from work. 

Serena later learned her three female colleagues had also been suspended.

Just over a week later, Serena attended a fact-finding meeting held as part of the disciplinary investigation.

She again insisted she knew nothing about the picture and did not see it being taken.

The HR advisor conducted the meeting in the style of an interrogation in pushing Serena and repeatedly insisting she must know.

The following week Serena was invited to attend a disciplinary hearing to face an allegation of inappropriate behaviour, which caused a colleague alarm and distress.

She was warned the allegation is considered extremely serious and if proven could result in dismissal.

Serena contacted our Employee Support Centre for help with the case.

When she discussed the case with our representative, Serena revealed that two of her colleagues, implicated in the case, had since resigned.

The evidence to support the allegation against Serena did not include witness statements from her workmates present at the time of the incident, so our representative requested them from the employer.

It emerged the two employees who resigned did not provide a statement before leaving, but the one still employed did. Similar to Serena, she said she knew nothing about the picture.

Our representative was strong in his assertion the allegation should be dismissed and the action being taken against Serena was extremely unfair based on the evidence.

He pointed out disciplinary action should be based on clear evidence of wrongdoing. He added that as there was no proof Serena took or sent the picture, sanctioning her in any way would be completely unreasonable.

Our representative raised concerns about the process. In particular, the concerning nature of the fact-finding meeting which based on the notes clearly showed it did not adhere to the good practice guidance in the ACAS Code of Practice for conducting such a process.

In addition the failure to at least seek to check  CCTV , which it was established was in the bar, and gather statements from all employees involved, was highlighted to argue the process was flawed and unfair.

Our representative concluded a robust response to the allegation by reiterating disciplinary action should be fair and based on evidence and, therefore, punishing Serena would be grossly unfair.

Relieved Serena was cleared of the allegation following the hearing.