UPDATED PRESS RELEASE

Having become aware that several media outlets have published articles in relation to the recent dismissal of an employee of this firm, Biscoes responds to the specific allegations publicly made by or on behalf of a former employee of the firm by the GMB. 

An employee was dismissed from the firm for misconduct and continued substandard performance in his role. 

The firm has a documented disciplinary procedure and the firm complied with that procedure over the course of many months – a process in which the employee was fully involved – before the employee was dismissed.  The allegation, whether made by the employee, or the GMB, that the employee was dismissed “on the spot without warning” is therefore factually incorrect.  It is defamatory and is strenuously denied.  It is also denied that the dismissal was unfair. The employee was given several opportunities to improve before being dismissed and was fully advised that he had the right, and the opportunity, to appeal the dismissal in accordance with the firm’s disciplinary procedure. Despite the firm offering to pay for this appeal to be carried out by an independent HR professional, the GMB have confirmed the employee refuses to participate in that process. Therefore, the allegation that an appeal has taken place and was unsuccessful is also factually incorrect. 

The employee was not ‘days away from completing an apprenticeship’ and evidence has been provided to the GMB to confirm that he was, despite an extension having been granted, several months away from completion. This statement is therefore also factually incorrect.

The allegation that the employee was pressured into withdrawing his appeal by anyone from Biscoes or any third party encouraged by Biscoes is also denied and is again defamatory. 

The firm’s Managing Director is the former employee’s mother but was not involved in the employee’s disciplinary procedures.  The allegation that the employee was dismissed by his mother is therefore factually inaccurate and defamatory.

As to the alleged data breach referred to in these articles: the alleged data breach relates to providing the GMB representative with a copy of the employee’s personnel file at the GMB's own written request after it had been made clear to the firm by the employee and the GMB confirming that the GMB had been instructed by the employee to represent his interest in the dismissal appeal.

The firm has received nothing from, or on behalf of the employee, to suggest that he intends on issuing proceedings against the firm at an employment tribunal.  Should proceedings be issued, they will be strenuously defended and the circumstances leading to the employee’s dismissal is fully documented within his personnel file. 

ENDS