Dismissed for calling someone a "fat arse"

[dvbuk55]

years ago you could say more or less what you wanted to except threaten anybody now if you as much as sneeze in someone's direction you are in the sh-t,the p.c. brigade have gone mad

I wouldn't want to return to the early 80s when a PEC in our office stuck his head out of the door and shouted "Where's that n*****!" or when a PEB told a meeting "I don't like blacks" and allowed a poem to be printed in an area magazine which included racial abuse of Asians. The so-called PC 'Brigade' (whoever they are) are an over-reaction to a problem which should have died out once mass education became law.

You are quite right IWW we shouldn't want the 60s, 70s, style of blandishment which WAS common but I'm sure that having worked through those eras most of the remarks were not meant to be derogatory or demeaning - much of it was taken from TV programmes, like Love thy Neighbour and Til Death Us Do Part with Warren Mitchell and was meant genuinely in fun.

I'm afraid that the modern take on B & H and racism is reminiscent of the Spanish Inquisition and the McCarthy era and bears no resemblance to a genuine attempt to solve the issues, which have been around from time immemorial. Like the Irish other nationalities also had their "joke group" but there was never a hue and cry over it.

I am not a racist, but I do feel that there are justified racism issues which are NOT helped by the statement made by the Archbishop of Canterbury in advocating some acceptance of Sharia Law.

[scottyb]

was the person a fat ass...if so whats the problem. im a useless no brained so and so truth never hurt me..

[Carnoustie]

I am not a racist, but I do feel that there are justified racism issues which are NOT helped by the statement made by the Archbishop of Canterbury in advocating some acceptance of Sharia Law.

He's been opening his almighty gob again ...

Archbishop of Canterbury claims introduction of Sod's Law is 'inevitable'

The Archbishop of Canterbury caused further controversy today by claiming that the adoption of elements of Sod’s Law into UK law ‘seems inevitable.’ He claimed that Sod’s Law had a strong hold over many marginalised groups within the country and that it would create sense of unity.

Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4 that the law could apply to many areas, such as toast landing butter-side down or three buses arriving together after a half hour wait. He stressed that ‘nobody in their right mind would want to see the more extreme application of Sod’s Law such as the unemployed man who threw himself under a train with the next weekend’s winning lottery ticket in his pocket.’

Politicians were quick to oppose the Archbishop’s ideas. Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, told journalists that to fragment British Law set a dangerous precedent, unaware of the pigeon dropping on the shoulder of her brand new suit. Leader of the Opposition David Cameron condemned Dr Williams’ views to the House of Commons, but Sod’s Law dictated that the Members’ Bar had just opened so no MPs were in the house to hear it.

Sod’s Law has already been introduced in some parts of the UK. New Welsh secretary, Paul Murphy, introduced his own version of the law in Wales this month. From 1 February ‘Murphy’s Law’ dictates that anyone who applies for a public sector post will be interviewed by panel that includes the driver you crashed into on the way to the interview or an ex-girlfriend who found you in bed with her sister.

Ironically the Archbishop’s comments caused grave offence to one Muslim cleric who immediately issued a fatwa calling for ‘the infidel leader’s wicked tongue to be struck from his mouth for suggesting that there could ever be any other law other than the one true code of ‘Sharia Law.’ But as luck would have it, the microphone had just broken so nobody heard him.

( taken from http://newsbiscuit.com/article/archbish ... itable-300 )

[Lounge Lizard]

We've all done things in the past that we regret, and most of us will have done something worse than calling someone a "fat arse", and will have got away with it.
Over the years I've had many worse things happen to me than the equivalent of being called a 'fat arse', not least, in a previous employment, being suspended from work on a totally unfounded charge of "gross misconduct".
There must be proper systems in place to protect against harrasment and discrimination but what is sadly often missing in the workplace is proper judgement and comon sense.
My previous career was ruined by the 'gross misconduct' charge brought against me, and eighteen months later on being cleared of the allegation because no proper evidence could be brought agianst me, I was left to try to put my life back together, rebuild my health from a breakdown, try to get my family life back together, eventually seek another job ( this one, thankfully ) and all this while the 'colleagues' who caused it all just carried on their employment as if nothng had happened.
Very often the accused suffers far, far more that the accuser.
Does the "fat arse", in making an allegation, realise that she could be wrecking someomes life ? Probably not. And does she care ? Who knows ?

[Night Tonic]

My sister, now in her late 40s, was recently approached by a woman who upon recognising my sister, pleaded forgiveness for bullying her at school. She said it had laid on her mind all her life and wished she'd never done it. My sister had dealt with it at the time and just got on with life but for the Bully, it had left her very scarred by it. I know this isn't a bullying case but sometimes the victim isn't always obvious so, yup - I echo your comment.

[brothermagrew]

It looks as though our colleague will have to go all the way to an Employment Tribunal to get any kind of justice if this similar incident is anything to go by. All the best to him.



Troubled train operator, First Great Western, already short of drivers, has taken the bizarre step of sacking a driver for swearing at a colleague during an argument, claiming that the swearing was "threatening."

Sacked Bristol driver Patrick Spackman said: "I regret swearing at him. And I regret referring to his weight. But for management to call this 'gross misconduct' is just ludicrous. I'm afraid that this kind of language is used all day and every day on the railways and if the company is going to start sacking people for it they won't have many drivers left."

First Great Western boss Alison Forster is already under pressure over the company's poor services. Last year Early Day Motions were tabled in Parliament condemning reductions in services and now David Drew, MP for Stroud, has tabled an EDM calling for First Great Western services to be run in the public sector.

Mr Spackman is being represented by the Industrial Workers of the World, the trade union universally known as "the Wobblies."

A union spokesperson said: "First Great Western have mishandled this case from the beginning. It could easily have been resolved months ago but now it will have to be dealt with by an Employment Tribunal. Yet more unnecessary stress for our member and a total waste of time and money for everyone."

Has anyone ever looked at the Industrial Tribunal case of Holden v ConnexSE - full report and much more at the following website (a must for CWU safety reps).
http://www.csenews.net

[norbert]

It looks as though our colleague will have to go all the way to an Employment Tribunal to get any kind of justice if this similar incident is anything to go by. All the best to him.



Troubled train operator, First Great Western, already short of drivers, has taken the bizarre step of sacking a driver for swearing at a colleague during an argument, claiming that the swearing was "threatening."

Sacked Bristol driver Patrick Spackman said: "I regret swearing at him. And I regret referring to his weight. But for management to call this 'gross misconduct' is just ludicrous. I'm afraid that this kind of language is used all day and every day on the railways and if the company is going to start sacking people for it they won't have many drivers left."

First Great Western boss Alison Forster is already under pressure over the company's poor services. Last year Early Day Motions were tabled in Parliament condemning reductions in services and now David Drew, MP for Stroud, has tabled an EDM calling for First Great Western services to be run in the public sector.

Mr Spackman is being represented by the Industrial Workers of the World, the trade union universally known as "the Wobblies."

A union spokesperson said: "First Great Western have mishandled this case from the beginning. It could easily have been resolved months ago but now it will have to be dealt with by an Employment Tribunal. Yet more unnecessary stress for our member and a total waste of time and money for everyone."

Has anyone ever looked at the Industrial Tribunal case of Holden v ConnexSE - full report and much more at the following website (a must for CWU safety reps).
http://www.csenews.net

Thanks for that link , I do know that Industry very well and I know a lot of railway lads as others on here might do too. South Central was effectively renationalised when Connex lost the franchise , the subsidy went down to between a fifth to a third , but B-Liar didn't like it as it was too Old Labour , so the old pals act came into play and he got a consortium
to run that Section .

Branson trousers 24 million to run Virgin+Profits , Brian Soatar pays himself 1 million to run Stagecoach /South West Trains , it'd have been cheaper to pay Beardie Branson off. Could have renationalised everything up North and brought everything back in House and saved the tax payer a fortune , instead of Joe Public being taken for a ride with PPP/PFI etc . Service is NOT provided , just personal enrichment for some .

The hyperlinks on that web page links are good , and it's very interesting that management have targeted RMT reps NOT ASLEF as RMT Drivers are rarer .As much as people rightly complain about Billy Bunter & Frank Butcher at 150 , The Broadway , SW19 , there's bad blood between the unions RMT/ASLEF which goes back years . I can't comment on TSSA , or I'd get banned for profanities . The problem is that you've got all these Bus managers in to run the railways .

Some of these cases have been mentioned on the railway staff site www.railchat.co.uk

I'll be filing some of these pages and emailing them around -Cheers . You'll get plenty more of this sort of thing , I can assure you of that from Bitter Memory .

[andy2007]

I think that RM have been missing the point with their Dignity and Respect rules from day one! Of course people need protection from bullying and harrassment. But the rules in place, make the situation worse, not better in my experience.

We are all Human Beings, and therefore have Emotions. If we are forced to try to "bottle it up" for too long, then it is much worse when we are pushed too far. I would never condone bullying or harrassment of any kind. But it is normal for people who are angry, to say things that they wouldn't otherwise say. It is merely a way of getting your anger out of your system.

This is where the circumstances MUST be taken into account. If there are repeated incidents against a particular individual, or group, then action must be taken. It is ESSENTIAL that procedures are in place to take EFFECTIVE action against such people, as B&H must NEVER be allowed to persist. But we have ALL at some point in our lives lost our temper and said things that we later regret. Does that mean that we should ALL risk loosing our jobs for normal Human behaviour?

I'm lucky, in that in the RDC where I work, some common sense is brought into these cases. There have been a few cases since the current Dignity and Respect rules were brought in. The system wasn't perfect, but the outcomes were far less severe than the ones I have just been reading about. However, I would be crazy to assume that the rot won't reach us eventually.

In my opinion, RM should take 3 things into consideration when applying these rules:-
1) We are all Human, and therefore need an outlet for our emotions, or a bad situation could get out of hand unneccesarily.
2) Dignity is a RIGHT, Respect is EARNED. You can't impose respect. It can be faked, but real respect can only be earned.
3) A rare incident shouldn't be considered bullying or harrassment. If the situation persists, then that indicates malace, and therefore SHOULD be considered for B&H proceedings.

[Stormproof]

In my case the manager kept digging away daily(going on months) until I finally snapped, I so wanted to punch him but I ended up throwing everything I was carrying on the floor and walking out of the building. My thoughts at the time were that I should'nt be going through this shite and no job is worth taking that sort of crap for, thats why I walked. I came home and called the B&H line then went to my doctors and explained the situation, he signed me off sick with stress for a week(which put me on a Stage 2 when I returned to work). Won my B & H case, still waiting for an apology, won't hold my breath on that

[andy2007]

In my case the manager kept digging away daily(going on months) until I finally snapped, I so wanted to punch him but I ended up throwing everything I was carrying on the floor and walking out of the building. My thoughts at the time were that I should'nt be going through this shite and no job is worth taking that sort of crap for, thats why I walked. I came home and called the B&H line then went to my doctors and explained the situation, he signed me off sick with stress for a week(which put me on a Stage 2 when I returned to work). Won my B & H case, still waiting for an apology, won't hold my breath on that

That's the biggest problem (in my opinion) with the current rules. You haven't got the opportunity to "get it out of your system" early on, and the stress just builds up till something snaps! If we were allowed to react in a normal way, and have an argument, there and then, even if it includes bad language, things wouldn't have got so bad. But if you had done that, the manager would have got you on B&H early on (which seems to have been his intention).

Why can't they simply accept there is a difference between loosing our temper (a normal Human reaction) and bullying or harrassment?
Context is vital when considering People's reactions. It makes me sick, that there is such a "Jobsworth" attitude to such things. As I have said previously, we've been lucky so far, in the way that these things have been dealt with at our Site. But how long it will continue, remains to be seen.

That doesn't mean that we don't get disciplined for such reactions. But no-one has been unfairly dismissed or suspended so far.....

[Fluke]

I think that RM have been missing the point with their Dignity and Respect rules from day one! Of course people need protection from bullying and harrassment. But the rules in place, make the situation worse, not better in my experience.

We are all Human Beings, and therefore have Emotions. If we are forced to try to "bottle it up" for too long, then it is much worse when we are pushed too far. I would never condone bullying or harrassment of any kind. But it is normal for people who are angry, to say things that they wouldn't otherwise say. It is merely a way of getting your anger out of your system.

This is where the circumstances MUST be taken into account. If there are repeated incidents against a particular individual, or group, then action must be taken. It is ESSENTIAL that procedures are in place to take EFFECTIVE action against such people, as B&H must NEVER be allowed to persist. But we have ALL at some point in our lives lost our temper and said things that we later regret. Does that mean that we should ALL risk loosing our jobs for normal Human behaviour?

I'm lucky, in that in the RDC where I work, some common sense is brought into these cases. There have been a few cases since the current Dignity and Respect rules were brought in. The system wasn't perfect, but the outcomes were far less severe than the ones I have just been reading about. However, I would be crazy to assume that the rot won't reach us eventually.

In my opinion, RM should take 3 things into consideration when applying these rules:-
1) We are all Human, and therefore need an outlet for our emotions, or a bad situation could get out of hand unneccesarily.
2) Dignity is a RIGHT, Respect is EARNED. You can't impose respect. It can be faked, but real respect can only be earned.
3) A rare incident shouldn't be considered bullying or harrassment. If the situation persists, then that indicates malace, and therefore SHOULD be considered for B&H proceedings.

I like your attitude, I wish more people thought like you. I'm a great believer in having the row and getting it out of your system, and then thats it, no need to sit and let somthing fester and turn into a grudge.

[L Tommo]

I THINK THE FECKING LOT OF YA ARE FAT ARSES!! SO THERE!!


OUT :lfo :cfo

If ya dont like it...>? Blame these two!!! :lfo :cfo

[brothermagrew]

I THINK THE FECKING LOT OF YA ARE FAT ARSES!! SO THERE!!


OUT :lfo :cfo

If ya dont like it...>? Blame these two!!! :lfo :cfo

Brother Tommo you crack me up pal

[brothermagrew]

The best £14.95 I ever spent was on a book entitled BULLY IN SIGHT - How to predict, resist, challenge and combat workplace bullying. Overcoming the silence and denial by which abuse thrives. Author Tim Field ISBN 0-9529121-0-4.

Over the last two decades, precedents have been set, including discrimination (on grounds of disability, race etc) sexual harassment (this is not the same as bullying, but shares the underlying lack of behavioural maturity), and child abuse. In each case, there was initial resistance and reluctance to act, but now respect for others, especially those who differ from society's currently accepted 'norm', is incorporated into human knowledge and, where appropriate, enshrined in law.

IT IS TIME FOR BULLYING AT WORK TO JOIN THE LIST.

[k979aaa]

[quote="heather.davison"]My husband (a postie) was suspended from work last May following allegations from a female colleague of sexual harassment. He has worked for Royal Mail for 27 year with a completely clear conduct record apart from 1 complaint by the same woman 6 months ealier over a work related issue. Following investigation he was cleared of all the allegations apart from 2 which he owned up to when interviewed, these were calling her a “fat arseâ€