You're getting confused between reality and perception.
Everything the Government says about him could be true. It won't matter to his future roles.
>>something like that is likely to be the tack.
Not a chance.
He could be the most obstructive, difficult, obstinate man alive and that is still no defense against constructive dismissal.
What would they be saying? Ok we / Patel did it but he deserved it? You say anything like that in a tribunal and you better be able to provide written evidence that he has been spoken to formally and warned about his behavior, and asked to change it.
And even then you'd have to justify why you didn't fire him.
And even then that is still no defense.
The only defense is that the Tribunal is either convinced you didn't do it, or there isn't reasonable grounds to believe that you did.
|