Law or anything legal

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 27 Apr 2012, 18:12

Ive decided to start this thread this cause my staff has a small legal issue with the state as a government employee. So instead of making a specific thread I decided to make a law thread.

Anyways... Here is what I need advice on. My staff is being accused of misconduct for swearing security at the gate of the hospital. First they charged this person for being at the gate at 15 30 now 2 months later when the official document has come the time has been conveinently changed to 16 15. Now I know this staff and they will not have done this because there is motive for the security guards to target my subordinate. They caught the security changing their doctors prescription on their own to suit their needs this carries the penalty of fraud before we as the pharmacy could report it properly this charge of abusive language at the gate came forward. In other words I suspect that this security guard opened a claim of abusive language in order to discredit my subordinate from reporting his fraud case or perhaps to get back at them for catching them.

Last week they punctured their car tyre obviously we have no proof for this, however will this help the case of being targeted at my staff's hearing?
Also how is it legal for the hospital (government facility) to open investigation on staff on behalf of a private contracted company isn't that an illegal investigation as they are using government employment time for private use?
Also as per government law as it is an internal hearing they are not allowed to bring in external legal council to their hearing.

Any legal advice and knowledge you guys might have will be appreciated so that I can advise my subordinate. I have already told them to seek legal council so that they know how to approach this matter, but one can never have too much information

This matter is simply stupid, this hospital let 14 patients die in a bus because they refused to admit them to trauma wards so they didn't stabilize the patients just sent them back and 14 died as a result, the has not warranted an investigation but the swearing as 3 investigators and official charge sheet and scheduled hearing with a date to be confirmed ... I give up with the government systems really.

Tribble · Post by **Tribble** » 27 Apr 2012, 18:22

Wow - seems a lot of bad things go unnoticed. I have no legal knowledge but will ask around.

StarBound · Post by **StarBound** » 27 Apr 2012, 18:37

I'm trying to figure out whats going on a bit there.

So whats the end result? 14 people died because the guy at the security station 15:30 did not allow admission of patience?
Do you have proof of the persons clocking reports and shift scheduel?

Fact is he is acquesing your staff of verbal harasment. He needs to prove it meaning he needs a witness.

Even with that harasment charge you can still carry forth gross negligance if he can't give a valid reason for not allowing admission. If he had no reason to stop entry how could be accountable for 14 cases of murder.

You can still charge them with fraud, and you should for switching perscriptions. This can lead to someones death should the wrong perscription and dosage be given.

As long as you got proof your set.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 27 Apr 2012, 21:23

no no the 14 patients incidence isnt related, just stated that out of frustration that they investigating for verbal misconduct and not for malpractice.

Yes they claim to have 3 witnesses but all are security staff none are hospital personal, now at 16:15 that gate is choked with hospital staff cause 16:00 is home time and there only one gate to exit and this hospital has some 2000 staff. This is a pure setup, my staff has no reason to swear the security.

They are saying that he got out of his vehicle at 16:15 refused to open his boot for inspection and called them all "f***ing baboons" now this oke is a quiet guy and has complied will all of security's protocols for almost a year now, in other words he has no motive to swear security out of the blue. First they charged him at the gate for 15:30 but he made the mistake of telling them where he was before the hearing now the charge sheet has 16:15 they have changed their claim by 45 minutes to suit the clock in and clock out time of the pharmacy.

And its extremely conveinient that these charges came a day after the fraudulent prescription and that security guard was very upset that pharmacy sent him away back to the clinic, dont know what they did to him but its clear he harbours a grudge towards my staff

apologies for making seem the 14 patients were related to this case. What i would like to references to the law that I can print out and hand to my staff to present at his hearing, in other words we going to hit this disciplinary board as if we were labour lawyers since we arent allowed to bring in our own personal ones.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 27 Apr 2012, 21:26

btw the degree of fraud is not severe, he guard changed his prescription dates to violate the number of repeat issues and he missed his previous month and with this type of script if a patient misses a month of treatment their prescriptions become null and void and they are required to attend counselling sessions before they can get another prescription from the doctors, so i ASSUME that he was angry about this and did not wish to go for this council that is why he is angry with pharmacy and my staff

StarBound · Post by **StarBound** » 27 Apr 2012, 22:29

Is there any vid footage? Something showing he refused or struggled at the car? I guess not judging from the no tire slash incident.

Does the staff clock out before going home? If it shows he clocked out 15:30 and their reports shows 16:30 they are in trouble for fixing times.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 27 Apr 2012, 23:06

No no security feed unfortunately and clock time is 1600

StarBound · Post by **StarBound** » 27 Apr 2012, 23:15

Mmm. So it is possible? I don't think much will be made from it. If there is nothing for the judge to see then it will come down to a he said, she said. The first line is company procedures though. See if it can't be settled outside a court. But I take that this is the first time you heard of it?

Unfotuneately thats as far as I can go. I don't know all the procedures. But I know without substancial evidance it usually doesn't see the light of day.

Did the police contact you on the matter?

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 28 Apr 2012, 00:42

No it's purely internal matter hence no on is allowed to use legal council however it will put a black mark n the person's background for future jobs. Being convicted of calling a black security guard a baboon in a BEE country is not a good mark to have hence why we taking it as a very serious offense

Now I want to know in terms of malicious abusive or hate speech in order to be found guilty of such a offense does the accusing party have to prove that the speech was directed at them ? And can you be found guilty as passing it as a side comment with real direction towards any individual for example:

I get out of my car and I decide to swear the security at the check point but I do it as I'm going into my car now can one be charged for that ? And would it be a good idea to admit this as an out if the case is simply too strong to win cause you are right starboard it's going to end up as he said this anD she said that however this guy has no one else in the car he goes home alone and they have 3 security guard witnesses to disprove all 3 shouldn't be a difficult task since they are probably lying and after this guy the slashing of the tyres prove they are after him for some reason. However at the end of the day it doesn't matter it's going to be three words against his one word at the hearing

Tribble · Post by **Tribble** » 28 Apr 2012, 08:41

I am not sure if you will win this the legal or moral way. Seems that the odds are stacked against the employees.

Surely the fact that the tyres were slashed while security were on duty - shows dereliction of duty. Isn't it their job to protect people and property? Perhaps an issue should be made of this as this is more serious than swearing - and more costly.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 28 Apr 2012, 16:12

problem is proof we cant prove its the security that damaged the tyres.

Post by **Stuart** » 28 Apr 2012, 16:28

Here is the simple breakdown: no proof, no case.

END

Tribble · Post by **Tribble** » 28 Apr 2012, 18:07

RiaX wrote:problem is proof we cant prove its the security that damaged the tyres.

I am not talking liability for the damage - I am talking dereliction of duty. The damage was done under their watch so to speak. What is the point of having security if they cannot even prevent damage to vehicles parked within the gates ?

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 28 Apr 2012, 18:38

Yeah but we can't prove that the cases are related so that would have to be a second change all together

Tribble · Post by **Tribble** » 28 Apr 2012, 19:31

Yes - it won't make the other go away - but it will perhaps lose them the contract and you would not have them around any more

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 29 Apr 2012, 04:03

Stuart wrote:Here is the simple breakdown: no proof, no case.

END

They claim to have three witnesses to have seen my staff swearing this dude of course they are all security guards as well, convenient

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 02 May 2012, 18:45

Lol what a developement that entire security company has lost their contract and no longer work at the hospital. Is it still possible for them to charge my staff now ?

StarBound · Post by **StarBound** » 02 May 2012, 18:50

It is but the grounds have suddenly deminished a lot since they will need to testify that they were incompitent so the staff would have had reason to swear at them.

"I did a crap job so the guy swore at me". See it kinda incentivises it.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 02 May 2012, 18:58

In reality I suppose so but in a legal hearing with the code of conduct in its full might I doubt that wold matter

StarBound · Post by **StarBound** » 02 May 2012, 20:45

Well has the charges been laid down? The thing is still come to court and you need your proof. So if your guy didn't swear and that's his story then unless you have footage of a aggressive word exchange or some external non-security personels word then there won't be a case.

RiaX · Post by **RiaX** » 02 May 2012, 23:36

Yeah I was there when his union reps came to advise him, doesn't look like there is going to be a case. It's not going to a legal court it's an internal hearing in front of a disciplinary board, thats the problem if it was a court then I would've just told the guy to hire a labour advocate and the case would've been over by now. In a court of law a judge would throw this case out the window.

Frustrating when under qualified people try and enforce the law when they have zero understanding of it

SykomantiS · Post by **SykomantiS** » 08 May 2012, 10:33

I have a question regarding traffic cameras.

More specifically, cameras in areas where temporary speed restrictions are in place. Can anyone point me to the relevant enforcement acts or such? There is a camera on the N1, I think it's somewhere near the Stormvoël on/offramps? That is, as far as I can tell, an 80 zone, albeit it's a temporary restriction- yellow and black signs?

Website · Post by **hamin_aus** » 08 May 2012, 11:10

I have a legal question:

If she says no, can it be opposites day

Hman · Post by **Hman** » 08 May 2012, 11:35

Every time

Website · Post by **hamin_aus** » 08 May 2012, 11:38

Thank you, kind legal eagle!

PCFormat Forum Archive