Just to add, we have to ensure segregation of duty so I have no choice but to rely on him to check - even though I had little faith in him doing it properly. If he had, I wouldn't have this problem now. But I seem to be the scapegoat for this now.
The issue in this situation is whether there was a specific policy you had failed to follow, whether there were specific instructions issued to you to address this, which you had also failed to follow, or if any reasonable person in your position should have been aware of what was going on and acted differently. The first two are easy to identify, the last can be rather subjective and will depend on what usual practices are in such situations and if your actions can be perceived as amounting to something like gross negligence.
The issue though, as highlighted in my previous advice to you, is that you are not protected against unfair dismissal due to your length of service. It does unfortunately mean the employer can dismiss, even on the reasons mentioned, without being able to challenge this by arguing the reason they relied on was unfair.
Well as for the first 2 - the answer is no, nothing. The third, my counterpart on a different contract is exactly the same and can't cope with the work load. She wouldn't have been able to pick up on this either given the ridiculous work load and the fact that requests for support have been ignored. How can they not acknowledge that??
I agree, but the issue is still what you can and can't do about this - you simply cannot challenge the dismissal, the law does not allow you to do so at this stage because you do not meet the minimum requirements to do so. All you can challenge is any future reference by arguing it is misleading
Sorry, what do you mean, I don't understand the last bit about challenging
well if you are dismissed because of this then you cannot challenge the dismissal and must accept the employer's decision to terminate your employment. However, if they provide you with a reference in the future and the talk about the reasons for your dismissal, then you can argue that the contents of the reference are misleading and that they should just stick to a factual reference, stating your periods of work and job title, nothing more
Oh right I understand. ok, thank you for your advice. That's very helpful
You are welcome