17 yr old dismissed despite not being at fault

A question about : 17 yr old dismissed despite not being at fault

I have a very distressed DSD. A friend at work played a practical joke on her (they are very close but he is quite immature) which has lead to her employers calling her in for a meeting where they informed her they had already written her dismissal letter.

Obviously I don't want to give too many details but in summary:
Employer is a charitable trust
DSD is 17 but has a higher professional qualification than most of her more senior colleagues - to the point that the employer regularly lauded her (and the other employee involved) for their ability and commitment.
She is on a zero hours contract but has been getting several shifts per week, fitting around her A level courses
The joke played on her involved an obscene graphic which she was unaware of until the manager brought it to her attention.
The employee responsible for the prank has not even been interviewed, let alone disciplined for his behaviour, even though he is adamant that he is solely responsible.

I have to admit to being very angry with them as it transpires that earlier this year she was actually doing more shifts per week than legally allowed (she was only 16). Which she went along with because she wanted to work.

I'm not going to claim she's perfect but it does appear to me that the employers have been at minimum very unprofessional in not investigating the incident fully as the nature of it quite obviously implies that she may well have been unaware of the prank played on her.

Any advice? She loves this job, she trained hard for it and she has put in hours over and above what she has been paid for and was recently reassured that she would get regular work for as long as she wanted it.

Best answers:

• I dont get how they dismissed her when she has not done anything as it seems but the colleague has? There has to be more to it
• Take it from me with over 20 years in the sector - charities are among the very worst employers. (Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence, though.....)
  How long has she worked there? Over a year? I don't actually know what sort of employment rights are attached to a zero hours contract, but hope one of the experts on here might tell us. It might be a start if she asks them for a copy of their disciplinary policy, which they obviously have not followed, if they called her into a meeting without prior notification and told her they had already reached a conclusion!!!!!
• What is a 'DSD' ??
• Dear Step Daughter.
  Give the local council Employment Permit dept a call to check out the situation with them because the charity may not have handled the situation correctly for someone who is not yet an adult.
  I don't think it is a simple as I pay you, therefore my contract is with you, when it relates to a youngster.
  Also ref her working extra when still 16 years old, double check that because if she is after the school leaving date there may not have been a breach (I can't remember off the top of my head and there are different bye laws for different councils).
• There is a little more to it, but really nothing that moves the baseline. Her employers were apparently quite up-front with her and the other 16 year old that they were breaking the law by not giving them sufficient time off, but according to her it 'wasn't their fault' - I don't accept that, the fact is that they didn't recruit enough staff to cover all the supervisory shifts, end of.
  And no he hasn't for one moment suggested that DSD was to blame, he has been absolutely clear from the start that she had no knowledge of what he was doing, and he attempted to attend the meeting with her, as requested by the employer, and they refused to speak with him -which we know for a fact because DSD's dad and another person were there to witness it. Fair do's, they would have been absolutely right to call them in separately but his mum took the call so, once again, they can be seen to be completely unprofessional.
  She started working there a bit before she took her last GCSE exams in the summer, so not long.
• I still think her dad needs to speak to the council about this whole situation.
• The meeting only happened this evening, not had a chance to speak with anyone yet LOL
• How long as she been employed?
  Assuming it is at least 51 weeks (plus one week's statutory notice) then she would be able to make an unfair dismissal claim.
  The problem with it being a zero hour contract is that they could simply have stopped offering her work at any time so any compensation is likely to be minimal even if she won.
  It has been suggested that some aspects of her employment were not legal? Not my area I'm afraid but, if this is the case, then handled with care it might encourage the employer to reach a settlement!
• Given that she has only worked there a few months (and a great deal less than the 2 years that are now required to gain full empoloyment rights) they can dismiss her for no reason at all unless there is a discriminatory aspect to the dismissal. The charity would probably have been better advised to simply state that she was no longer employed there, giving a reason makes a fight possible, but it's unlikely to be won on legal grounds, so you have to ask whether it's worth the bother, or whether your DSD should just look for another job. Perhaps asking the charity to provide a reference based on her work performance in return for going quietly might be a way out.
• Hi OP,
  It does sound as though there is more to this than has been described (although you may not have been told the full facts ?).
  I am not sure how a 17 year old has a higher professional qualification than most of her more senior colleagues, and the reality may be that her manager wanted to get rid of her for some reason and this gave them the perfect escuse.
  It still may be worth obtaining copies of the disciplinary procedure, copy of any letters / notes / minutes to meeting etc. etc.
  I understand that with a zero hours contract she could get her job back and then not be offered any hours, but she may still be able to get a decent reference.
• There really isn't anything else that's pertinent. The rest just gives an understanding of the atmosphere there. Suffice to say that the fact the both DSD and the lad responsible are more highly qualified has lead to resentment, especially on the part of staff (including relations of the people who decided to sack her) who have lost shifts because the manager, quite reasonably, wants to retain his most highly qualified staff. The manager is, however, not willing to risk his own job to defend them.
  Unfortunately it's a specialised job and there aren't many opportunities locally.
• Can't be that specialised if a 16 year old is qualified to do it.
• Yes, it can
• An immature 16 year old?
• it does sound like a bit of 'office politics' is happening here. Existing employees already resented the OP's step-daughter and her friend and the prank has given them the perfect excuse to get rid of one of them. However that wouldn't explain why they're singling the step-daughter out and not the lad who did it?
  If she's been employed illegally (ie they're giving her too many hours for her age) that might be something you could try and hold them for if you speak to the charity concerned. I think as others have said she has very few 'rights' as she's so young and on a zero hours contract and hasn't been there long, so it's more a question of how you can play the situation in order to persuade them that it might be in their interests to let her keep her job..