Due a disciplinary for gross misconduct

[Glenno]

I am due a disciplinary for gross misconduct for wilful delay of mail. The alleged charge was an observation made on a postbox on my collection route.

First of all in all cases where consideration of dismissal is involved you need to get in touch with your branch and area rep, if necessary cancel the interview until he/she is available.

Also they are supposed to provide you with all the information that they will rely upon to make the accusation
You and the Area Rep must only concentrate on the alleged charge first and formost and get this dismissed/reduced
Q: Where there any more Test letters on your collection?
Q: Did any of your colleagues recieve Test letters on this day, or has that route been singled out due to repeated complaints
If the latter all this info should have been made avialiable to you
There are lots of Questions, but not a lot of detail in this post
As always there is some good info on this site, read all the posts and follow the info provided, hope this helps you

[rinky]

A one minute difference could actually equate to 1 minute and 59 seconds, If the first scan is done at the beginning of the minute and the last scan is done at the end of the second minute. Just an idea?

[chrisj]

Sorry, you did say Hybrid previously...

I think you should be provided with all the evidence and your Rep should ensure that is the case.

You cannot even apologise for missing a 'test letter' unless they have given you the actual evidence and how they deduced that you missed the letter during a collection.

The one about 3 scans within a mile in a minute; also needs to be made clear to you; is it exactly a minute or in quick succession (record time).

You said it is not possible to scan those boxes in the record time they stated - so are you saying that you collected all the letters from all the boxes that you scanned? If so, then you are in the clear - even with the test letter issue.

[Lounge Lizard]

Alleging ONE test letter shouldn't mean dismissal but might they have evidence that "three boxes were scanned in a minute space with a mile distance between all boxes" to suggest "remote scanning"?

[chrisj]

What do you mean by 'remote scanning'?

You have to open the box to scan... oops, I think I might have got what you are suggesting...

[chrisj]

Even if there is remote scanning...

Why can't they just put this postie out of his misery by showing him the evidence: these days we all have camera phones and bosses/investigators should certainly have something even more sophisticated to record/capture evidence before making allegations.

If, lets say, someone opens the Post Box and finds this and that or not find this and that then they should have recorded the event as video and image captures - open and shut case...

[Fatyud88]

The box where the observation took place, I opened and scanned and with my eyes there was nothing in there. Nothing adds up and no further answers have been provided to the woman's statement which we asked in the fact finding interviews. If they have three times why have they not been shown when I have asked for them. In the conduct code book it says any evidence should be presented two working days prior to the hearing.

[rehabron]

The box where the observation took place, I opened and scanned and with my eyes there was nothing in there. Nothing adds up and no further answers have been provided to the woman's statement which we asked in the fact finding interviews. If they have three times why have they not been shown when I have asked for them. In the conduct code book it says any evidence should be presented two working days prior to the hearing.

What WOMAN'S STATEMENT ? this was not mentioned in your original posting and second FF. If you wish to be given support and good advice it I best to give all current and be specific with the details when possible rather than revealing additional information in further postings.
This is where it becomes difficult to provide answers to your dilemma if evidence held by employer is given In staggered postings.

[janitor]

The charge is failing to collect a letter by observation, I assume the person who observed him not collecting the letter, is the woman who made the statement. He does not say whether this is a member of the public or a manager of some sort.

[fishtank]

I would put money on it being a customer arriving at a box just before the collection was due only to find the postman driving off into the sunset, how close to the time and how accurate her testimony is would be the question.

[Fatyud88]

Sorry but stressful time, the observation was carried out by a manager from another DO.

[rehabron]

The observation needed to be clarified by the manager who performed it. -this was not clarified
The above is an excerpt from the original posting so I am confused to who exactly is the observer is it a RM manager or this woman who has provided a statement?
Apparently this was questioned at the first FF and as stated has not been clarified.
If was a woman who was the observer and was to become a poster into the offending pillar box and saw the postman driver leaving before the final clearance time on the box then I am assuming that she has contacted the office to lodge a complaint that this box was cleared early and RM has asked her to provide a statement as evidence in the possibility of a disciplinary.
The barcode scanner would have shown the exact time this pillar box was cleared yet RM have not provided this information to the postman/driver despite repeated requests and this would have cleared up the matter without a customer statement being asked.
A " test" letter has also been mentioned is this still forming part of the investigation or is the letter that the woman attempted to post is the letter?
If it continues to a disciplinary hearing then copies of all documents that the interviewing manager will be referring to will be copied to the postman/driver in advance of the meeting so that they may be challenged that would also include a print out of the running times on that route for that particular day.
The PDA can also be your friend in certain circumstances.

[chrisj]

Sorry but stressful time, the observation was carried out by a manager from another DO.

I can imagine how stressful it must be... Not knowing is probably the worst part of it. I now feel for you even if there are still some nagging questions and obvious omissions; but you simply cannot afford to tell us everything as it will probably lead to you being identified or self incriminating, perhaps?

The abiding principle here is that you should be provided with all the evidence and information so that you can fight your case as quickly as possible - not what appears to be a cloak and dagger situation.

Though having a manager from another DO observe you sound a bit ominous... You have been set in my opinion. I do like your forthright comment about saying that you opened the post box and emptied the one with the test letter... Good LUCK!

[Jomum]

Could he send a subject access request asking for all documents including electronic readings from the PDAs which are directly related to him on a certain day?