unforum

[Mos]

Contact - TERMINATED!

[rosie]

Mos:If I can help you I will

[jonathan]

I'm on it man

[rose]

Not my finest effort

[sauceykat]

Mos, you should have Jonathan represent you as your attorney, he's a law student isn't he?

D-

[Rasputin42x69]

[jonathan]

Hi.

Mos seemed like a very good player, and I hate to see good players sacked .

I have prepared a letter that I will e-mail to Ideltech, which should at least make them give a valid reason for your dismissal

Sorry I'm not emailing it from my real name, Last time I pulled a stunt like that I came close to getting the sack myself!




21 May, 2004
In regards to:
Ideltech
Attention:
Dear Marcus Thesburg,
Dismissal
It has come to the attention of AGJ Solicitors that you (being Ideltech Information) are dismissing employees without due cause.
In this particular case, our client L. Joyce, complains that he was dismissed without valid reason from Ideltech Information on May 21st 2004. I do adhere to the fact that an employee can be dismissed in the first twelve months of employment without reason. However, I am also aware that there are "exceptions" to this rule. I will now outline what exceptions Ideltech fall into.

Ideltech Information, are guilty of breaking the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, (subsection 12, point VI) which clearly states that any employee who provides information to a third party pertaining to the following information should not be sacked by his or her employer. If the employee is sacked, this would prove substantial grounds for an Employee to seek compensation under the act outlined above.


• a criminal offence;
• the breach of a legal obligation;
• a miscarriage of justice;
• a danger to the health or safety of any individual;
• damage to the environment; or
• deliberate covering up of information tending to show any of the above five matters.


Since no reason was stated for Mr Joyce's dismissal, except that he is "guilty" of "leaking information about Ideltech and it's employees to a company that has been trying to buy out Ideltech."
Due to this, AJG have to assume that, until proven otherwise, it may constitute one of the above points.

Under law, Ideltech Information must now
i) Give a valid and thorough account of the reasons behind Mr Joyces' dismissal.
ii) If this reason is deemed unsatisfactory by Mr Joyce, AGJ will seek compensation on his behalf.


However, up until this incident Mr Joyce did enjoy his position at Ideltech. He is willing to call off any further legal proceedings if Ideltech Information:
i) Re-instate his position at the company.
ii) Re-activate his Ideltech e-mail account.

Also, Please note that failure to respond within seven days (as of May 21, 2004) will be denoted as contempt on the issue from Ideltech, and will consequentially lead to the request from AJG for an employment tribunal on the grounds of wrongful dismissal.
Finally, I urge you to take note that there is no qualifying period of service or age limit for employees who wish to complain that they have been dismissed for a reason described in this section. Therefore, the "90 day-review period" argument is overwritten and thus declared void.

I await the response of Ideltech Information with earnest,



Cordially Yours,
Alan John Greenshaw
AGJ Solicitors

[Giskard]

Great letter Johnathan... I'd love to see them answer to that!

[StercusMaximus]

Not bad, Jon!! If nothing else, all that legalese should be somewhat intimidating!!


SM