Conflict of Interests ??

[TrueBlueTerrier]

same old faces, same old story, everything is wonderful and please keep paying my wages beloved master!!

Took this quote from A News Thread as it raises an interesting question.

Does the fact that from Area Reps and those above, who are on full time release, are still paid by Royal Mail, introduce a potential or factual "Conflict of Interests" - please discus.

[La Poste]

If you spoke to people in my office about this they would say most certainly yes.
We have had a case where an area rep has been given clear evidence of a manager lying in a conduct case and it was not pursued, the manager should have been taken down the conduct code himself but was not.
I would say their is a conflict of interest in that the reps do their best to get you off a case but don't seem to go after management when there is evidence of wrondoing.
Just my opinion.
I wonder if anyone can give me an example of the higher levels of the CWU bringing a manager to book and having them properly disciplined.

[fishtank]

Its human nature to have one eye on your own position.You only have to look at duty repicks to see that.
Does it affect the way they do the job? Only they will know.They may just be poor area reps.
What is undeniable is that full-time release removes you from the sharp-end of the job.
This makes it difficult to relate to the problems of the staff you are representing.
Maybe some kind of job-sharing system might help.

[La Poste]

Still wondering if anyone can give me a case where the CWU have brought a manager to book and had them disciplined.
Cheers.

[spilie]

i think it does as if they were still slogging around the streets they would fight harder for the cause, also you only have to look at this latest dispute to see that the further up the chain the more self preservation kicks in, but we on the shop floor always hang ourselves, the same faces sneak about making little secret agreements with DOM`s doing all the dirty work just to earn a lousy few pounds more, greed is the common denominator

[Big Daz]

I dont think it does.

[dvbuk55]

I don't think it is something you can generalise. In all walks there are good, bad and indifferent and these people will be no different. I have seen good representation and I have seen bad representation - there seems to be a level at which the representation switches from a true reflection of the shop floor wishes to a seperate agenda which often alienates the very people who have elected them.

[La Poste]

Maybe it's wrong to call it a conflict of interest at my level of shop floor understanding I would say there is definately a limit to how far the union will go IE they will try to bail you out of the sh1t but won't attack management. It's all done with a "I will keep that bit of information on this wrongdoing manager in case I need a favour in the future" . Maybe this is good quiet diplomacy.

[POSTMAN]

When i see an area rep rip into a manger who has shrugged his shoulders about the exec act he has just put in saying 'i'm just following orders',with the rep replying 'yeah,and so was the f***ing nazis just following f***ing orders',you just know their aint no conflict of interest

[La Poste]

It's one thing to shout and posture but another to have someones scalp.

[snoddy]

If a manager was to behave in an inappropiate manner or harrass or bully me, I wouldnt be such a wimp as to say "what is the area rep doing about it".
I mean what the hell has it to do with the CWU?.
Each and every individual has far more rights than any CWU rep there is a grievance procedure, B&H procedure and good old "bugger off" procedure.
Whats the next step? "Mr Area rep will you please have a word with my wife she wont listen to me".

[La Poste]

That's not what I'm saying what I'm saying is if during an investigation IE I am being investigated a union rep uncovers evidence of wrongdoing by a manager they usually keep this to themselves. If this wrongdoing is just another episode in a long list of wrongdoing by the same manager then taken together as a whole the union would probably have the ammunition to sack this manager but they never seem to.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

The Union cant "go after" mangers that is outside their remit. All they can do is present evidence in each case anything beyond that is outside the scope and I would think legalities of their tasks and responsibilities.

All that can be done is for each aggrieved member either individually or as a group to make the business aware of the situation through the various stages of the grievance procedure and in this the CWU will help. It is ultimately up to RM management to take any action on, or even recognise if there is a problem. I think we all realise what normally happens.

[mailsort6]

That's not what I'm saying what I'm saying is if during an investigation IE I am being investigated a union rep uncovers evidence of wrongdoing by a manager they usually keep this to themselves. If this wrongdoing is just another episode in a long list of wrongdoing by the same manager then taken together as a whole the union would probably have the ammunition to sack this manager but they never seem to.
I have experienced managers that have tried to sack postman by hook or by crook and have been caught out a number of times by the union but nothing seems to happen to them.
The only people with evidence of a catalogue of misdemeanors by a certain manager would be the union as they have dealt with each case this manager has put in against different postman and yet no manager ever seems to be brought to book, the union simply try to get the latest victim of this manager off the latest charge.
That's how it appears to me.
I would like to add that I am fully supportive of the union as they have helped me before.

If unions have previous grievances on a particular manager for bullying and harassing staff and the manager continues to bullying and harass other staff this information should be used as evidence in new bullying and harassment cases against this particular manager. Usually a employment lawyer would ask whether a manager has had any previous cases against them and is there any strong evidence of this. Usually it is up to the member to make the interveiwing manager aware of any previous cases involving a manager if it is relevant to their case because the union will not got down this route for some reason.

[La Poste]

Right so if as a result of an investigation a manager is found to have done something a bit dodgy it is up to the individual postman who was being investigated by this manager to put in a grievance. The grievance should state that the postman was not happy about the way the investigation was handled and give any evidence he has of this.