" UPDATED RE: POPPY SACKING "

Used the poppy to justify a strop, is surely as bad as his original claim against the restaurant.

Used the poppy to justify a strop, is surely as bad as his original claim against the restaurant.

Justify a strop?? What are you on about? Where do you get that idea from?

Two sides completely contradicting one another. Only those involved will know what really happened, but maybe a football forum was'nt the best place to post this story in the first place. If the restaurant is at fault, they deserve all the bad publicity they get. If they have'nt done anything wrong, this employee should own up and apologise. Don't suppose we will ever find out the whole truth. Perhaps they are both at fault, who knows.

Used the poppy to justify a strop, is surely as bad as his original claim against the restaurant.

Justify a strop?? What are you on about? Where do you get that idea from?

He was told how to go about authorising the wearing the apron, but wore it anyway, so when he was pulled up on it, by someone who was wearing a poppy, he walked out.

is that not a strop?

Can I just say to you lot out there, the only reason the restaurant has put out a statement saying that my nephew was not sacked was because they are afraid of reprocusions, for those of you that believe what the restaurant has said then more fool you. If not in the habit of making stories up as I have nothing to gain from it. My nephew WAS told to leave because he was wearing an apron with Poppy's on it that was offensive to the owner who is Iranian. He never walked out, he was told to leave. Make of that what you will. They have asked my nephew to go back only because of the amount of bad publicity they are getting from social media networks, media and radio.
The investigation is still on going so please don't call me or my nephew a liar or to the sad few of you saying that we are attention seeking until you know all the facts. I will not discuss this with anyone on here anymore as its in full swing behind the scenes. I hope I have answered some of the questions that have been put on here but if you want to ask anymore then pm me by all means. I've been in work yesterday and up to now so haven't had the opportunity to answer you.
Thank you for reading.

That's why I said they will say what they have can to please the public steve as its not good for business, I believe you 100%

Me too I stand by what I said yesterday, I did ask the question was the ownwer a Muslim, maybe he is

Me too I stand by what I said yesterday, I did ask the question was the ownwer a Muslim, maybe he is

It's their poppy too. I have sold poppies alongside Muslims. Many Muslims died during various wars

What about going back to work modelling this apron..

What about going back to work modelling this apron..

You'd be all over that like a shot

What about going back to work modelling this apron..

You'd be all over that like a shot

Well, this is awkward

Well, this is awkward

Question: What does the baker have under his apron? Answer: Dough nuts.

True hero's come first .RESPECT .

True hero's come first .RESPECT .

It's spelt heroes and no one is denying that.

The guy was told no to bring in his own apron (Which I think is stupid by the way) however he chose to bring his own in anyway. If he turned up in any apron be it one with pretty kittens on it or a CCFC badge he would have been told to take it off.

He's used the poppy as a means to get a reaction as he knows it's an issue close to the heart.

Tenerife Blue

Does your nephew have a past history of attention seeking such as the desire to appear on Jeremy Kyle?

Also has he had previous experience of falling out with employers?

Yes we need a lie detector test,and an attention seeking test as soon as.
Ask military junta maybe he was there doing some lurking, he could fill us in.

We seem to have a contradiction here.

It's been said he's been on Jeremy Kyle, but apparently he also has a job!! the two don't ever go together!

Steve its Dan Mason

In order ot have any employment claim you need to be employed or at least 1 year continuous service (it might have even gone up to 2 since I last practiced employment law)

Basically if you are employed for less than a year you can be sacked without recourse for ANY reason (other than race disability religion pregnant) this is too see if your face fits as it were.

The only argument in this case is on religious reasons but it would be a bit of a stretch to say you were sacked for your religion over not wearing an apron. (which is nothing to do with your religion)

The only recourse he would have is contractually a weeks pay in liue of notice or whatever is on the contract.

All the people saying unfair dismissal constructive dismissal are wrong. Its just a sh*t company by the sounds of it.

Also if it is in the employee handbook and he refused to comply with an order then you could be sacked for gross misconduct.

Right or wrong this is the legal standpoint

There is no legal aid for employment claims anymore so some law firms will take on a Conditional fee agreement (No win no fee) but the case would need to be Nailed on for them to touch it. IE a preganat mum sacked with emails proving it was because she was pregnant.

As firms wont touch cases through fear of losing and then they would recover nothing.

If you tried to pursue this it would cost a fair few grand.. plus.. unless you could prove that wearing a poppy apron was paramount in following the religion of chistianity it would be a loser.

There is no legal aid for employment claims anymore so some law firms will take on a Conditional fee agreement (No win no fee) but the case would need to be Nailed on for them to touch it. IE a preganat mum sacked with emails proving it was because she was pregnant.

As firms wont touch cases through fear of losing and then they would recover nothing.

If you tried to pursue this it would cost a fair few grand.. plus.. unless you could prove that wearing a poppy apron was paramount in following the religion of chistianity it would be a loser.

Agree a zillion % Danny! A lot of people don't realize how little in the way of rights the individual has these days vis a vis organizations. Cannon fodder; we're being mullered!

Far from it.

The workers can throw employers under the bus for all sorts, getting advice from the state free of charge, while the company pays out thousands in legal fees.

And 9 times out 10 they will find some scummy loop hole to force the employer to pay out regardless of what actually happened.

But it does work visa versa.

It really isn't all against the worker though. They do come out of it for the better in a large, largeeeeeeee amount of cases

Tenerife Blue

Does your nephew have a past history of attention seeking such as the desire to appear on Jeremy Kyle?

Also has he had previous experience of falling out with employers?

I asked these questions for two main reasons , and would be interested in your nephew`s response

1) He seems to have a need to seek attention - he has appeared on the Jeremy Kyle show and wishes to post an employment dispute matter (with a number of relevant facts initially missed out)on a football message board

2) He seems to have a problem with employers/authority , which is why I asked if he has a record of disputes with other employers of his in the past.

I don`t think either were unreasonable questions.

I don't think my question is either unreasonable which is 'did you ask their reasoning in writing' surely that's the first thing anyone who ask if in a similar situation

To my mind this has got nothing to do with poppies at all but aprons. He was told not to bring in his own apron, be it poppy aprons or not. For those bringing the owners religion into this are pathetic, he sells pork ffs.

He's used the poppy here to gain a reaction from people and shit stir, it's utterly deplorable.

Ahhhhhh so the company aren't as disgraceful as first thought. They were simply following dress code policy. He didn't get the authorisation so he went against what was right. I work in an office and I'd have to get authorisation from my manager to even wear jeans
Job done. We can move on. Employee was in the wrong.

Ahhhhhh so the company aren't as disgraceful as first thought. They were simply following dress code policy. He didn't get the authorisation so he went against what was right. I work in an office and I'd have to get authorisation from my manager to even wear jeans
Job done. We can move on. Employee was in the wrong.

So the company was not in the wrong because they said so, oh well they must be rite.

Imagine them saying it did happen im sure puplic would be flooding to get in there for food

Ahhhhhh so the company aren't as disgraceful as first thought. They were simply following dress code policy. He didn't get the authorisation so he went against what was right. I work in an office and I'd have to get authorisation from my manager to even wear jeans
Job done. We can move on. Employee was in the wrong.

So the company was not in the wrong because they said so, oh well they must be rite.

Imagine them saying it did happen im sure puplic would be flooding to get in there for food

No , the company seems to be in the right because it has put up a plausible explanation for what happened. The opening poster`s nephew , on the other hand , seems far less believable and very much an attention seeker (why else put such things on a football message board or appear on Jeremy Kyle?) And he has also not answered the question as to whether or not he has had similar fallings out with previous employers.

As for customers , the restaurant doesn`t seem to be doing too badly , with a maximum 5 hygiene rating and a top Trip Advisor score. I doubt if many sensible current or potential customers would worry about a dispute with one of its chefs over those factors even if the chef`s claims were true (which I seriously doubt based on what he has claimed and the manner in which he has claimed it)

Not to go on and on about it as I'm sure it'll be resolved soon, but how much red tape would there be to speak to management about wearing a different apron.

The statements talks as if he would have to write a formal letter to management. As far as I can tell with restaurants, wouldn't management be there on the day???.

Not to go on and on about it as I'm sure it'll be resolved soon, but how much red tape would there be to speak to management about wearing a different apron.

The statements talks as if he would have to write a formal letter to management. As far as I can tell with restaurants, wouldn't management be there on the day???.

Well there's precious little else to discuss Mario, at this time #ApronGate is what's interesting the most minds on this forum and we must get to bottom of it.

The chef should have just told him no at the time, it was a cop out to suggest he asked the manager. Besides iv'e worked in kitchens in my youth and what went on in the kitchen was at the discretion of the chef, not management.