sharonbar wrote:lled the union today an the interview notes are on the way i asked him if i should put a grivence in an he said it wont make any difference i feel that im not getting any support from him as i keep mentionion if im dismissed i will appeal straight away for unfair dismisall for being treated different to the other guy ive also spoke to the solicotor an she says i will have a case but union man said ive just to get on with it an see what the outcome is an me an my colleage are 2 different cases but how can we when we are both charged with gross misconduct for fraud claiming overtime
What's his rank within the union - is he a area rep ? - this all sounds a bit odd , if the Solicitor says you've a case - I'd take that as read . I'm told that Tribunals are very hot on consistency ..
I'm getting the impression that the Union man sees you too much as a loose canon , sh** stirrer / troublemaker - whatever ! . I'd get in touch with the Branch and voice your concerns . The other thing I think he wants you sacked as a sacrificial lamb as it were and / or a example to keep management happy . I don't buy into that because in my experience that turns into concentration camp management i.e . as long as it's not me in trouble / get's sacked & the backstabbing + morale gets even worse and it's exactly what RM want - divide and rule
FTR - I think you've bent or stretched the rules a bit but not necessarily the outright fraud that RM have accused you of . The Office doesn't sound very well run ( Quell Surprise ) and there has been a crackdown from on high .
sharonbar wrote:lled the union today an the interview notes are on the way i asked him if i should put a grivence in an he said it wont make any difference i feel that im not getting any support from him as i keep mentionion if im dismissed i will appeal straight away for unfair dismisall for being treated different to the other guy ive also spoke to the solicotor an she says i will have a case but union man said ive just to get on with it an see what the outcome is an me an my colleage are 2 different cases but how can we when we are both charged with gross misconduct for fraud claiming overtime
What's his rank within the union - is he a area rep ? - this all sounds a bit odd , if the Solicitor says you've a case - I'd take that as read . I'm told that Tribunals are very hot on consistency ..
I'm getting the impression that the Union man sees you too much as a loose canon , sh** stirrer / troublemaker - whatever ! . I'd get in touch with the Branch and voice your concerns . The other thing I think he wants you sacked as a sacrificial lamb as it were and / or a example to keep management happy . I don't buy into that because in my experience that turns into concentration camp management i.e . as long as it's not me in trouble / get's sacked & the backstabbing + morale gets even worse and it's exactly what RM want - divide and rule
FTR - I think you've bent or stretched the rules a bit but not necessarily the outright fraud that RM have accused you of . The Office doesn't sound very well run ( Quell Surprise ) and there has been a crackdown from on high .
I have tried to follow this thread but Sharon does not seem to give all the details, its hard to follow. I have an ET against RM as I post!
I know this is a "grey area" but what is the difference between what sharonbar is being accused of and the thousands of hours of ghost docket booked every day where people claim for hours worked that aren't? That is not to say the work isn't done but it isn't done for the period claimed.
dvbuk55 wrote:I know this is a "grey area" but what is the difference between what sharonbar is being accused of and the thousands of hours of ghost docket booked every day where people claim for hours worked that aren't? That is not to say the work isn't done but it isn't done for the period claimed.
Exactly ! - I think this is what frightens the union as it's too "controversial" - the can of worms
Last edited by norbert on 18 Nov 2009, 18:07, edited 1 time in total.
dvbuk55 wrote:I know this is a "grey area" but what is the difference between what sharonbar is being accused of and the thousands of hours of ghost docket booked every day where people claim for hours worked that aren't? That is not to say the work isn't done but it isn't done for the period claimed.
I think it has something to do with it being the managers decision, they agree to pay 2 hours for a specific task even if that task is finished within the normal hours.
I'm preparing myself for the zombie invasion, rule number 1 - Cardio
dvbuk55 wrote:I know this is a "grey area" but what is the difference between what sharonbar is being accused of and the thousands of hours of ghost docket booked every day where people claim for hours worked that aren't? That is not to say the work isn't done but it isn't done for the period claimed.
I think it has something to do with it being the managers decision, they agree to pay 2 hours for a specific task even if that task is finished within the normal hours.
So in effect they are turning a blind eye to what is a fraudulent practice oh and I don't for one minute believe a manager KNOWS half of what goes on
hi all recived my formal conduct notes today an even though there was a note taker there there is a few things wrong straight away one is he said i signed in on the 31st oct at 9am till 1pm for a start off it was my day off as it was my long wkend he then mentions that i was metical cant find that word in the dictonory so i dont know what means he also says on the 28th he was gonna clarify with another employee to ask if i was in early but the date he was suppose to mention was the 12th oct i know ive not to have any corrispondence with any one but he hasnt approached him i know that much so i will have to make ammendments as it is not a true =record of the interview held any advice please an please dont make any nasty comments as im not the best on a computer where as i dont know how to write things in paragraphs
Make sure you ammend your notes sharonbar so that you are happy with the version. Did you not say to the manager that it was your day off so you couldn't have signed in? The whole case seems a bit flimsy but again, dont know all the facts. Surely RM should know when you were in rather than asking a colleague!!! Unbelievable.
I posted a question earlier about knowingly claiming for OT that WAS NOT agreed with your line manager, is this true?
hi postie yes we never call the manager to let him know we are claiming overtime we never have the little sorting office is just a complete shambils there has never been a signing in book until they started following me an the other lad the office is that bad its got weeds growing inside its warmer out than in yes i will ajust an send it back hes just trying to catch me out any way he can
fmrPOSTIE wrote:Make sure you ammend your notes sharonbar so that you are happy with the version. Did you not say to the manager that it was your day off so you couldn't have signed in? The whole case seems a bit flimsy but again, dont know all the facts. Surely RM should know when you were in rather than asking a colleague!!! Unbelievable.
I posted a question earlier about knowingly claiming for OT that WAS NOT agreed with your line manager, is this true?
wouldn't look good in a Tribunal - failure to conduct a proper investigation therefore they have not followed their own procedures - use that as a weapon against RM
Anyway keep your chin up sharonbar, definately appeal, its your right to do this. (Assuming it comes to the worst). Notify your lino within 3 days of the decision.
What were the 'mitigating circumstances' put forward by your rep? - i mean what points did he say in defence?
Sounds like the manager has no balls and his boss is putting the pressure on him at one time custom and practice was being paid for what ever your manager agreed for the job to be done regardless of if you finnish within your time!.
if the manager agreed to give 2hrs OT and the postie finished early then that's fine, if the OP has put in a false claim for OT without notifying management and not even working said OT then that would be wrong!
fmrPOSTIE wrote:if the manager agreed to give 2hrs OT and the postie finished early then that's fine, if the OP has put in a false claim for OT without notifying management and not even working said OT then that would be wrong!
Actually it isn't OK - under the 2007 agreement you are to work for the hours paid NOT the work completed - therefore if 2 hrs is agreed then there should be enough work for 2 hours - if completed in less than 2 hours then that it was should be booked. A manager is wrong in authorising a time specific element in advance he should only authorise time for work completed.
oh and I don't for one minute believe a manager KNOWS half of what goes on 