See what happens!

[Lounge Lizard]

hadn't thought of this before. so why has the postie lost his job cos of this?

if a rm van with was parked with half a walks mail and some joyrider or whoever nips in and drives off, what is the crime? technically, it's taking a vehicle without consent to start with. a charge of taking mail would be added, even if the mail has not been tampered with, removed, touched in any way (other charges of having no insurance or anything else is supplementary).

why is it the vehicle removal firm has not been charged with taking mail. the purpose of using the original vehicle was acting as an rm delivery vehicle

Johny,
If the mail was out of sight locked in the car boot the removal firm would not have known it was there.
If the mail was on display on the back seat that gives Royal Mail more reason to sack him.
If it had been a Royal Mail there wouldn't have been "some joyrider" unless the driver had negligantly left it unlocked, and furthermore I understand that Police etc. have less power to stop, search, interfere with etc. Royal Mail vans than other vehicles on the road.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

hadn't thought of this before. so why has the postie lost his job cos of this?

if a rm van with was parked with half a walks mail and some joyrider or whoever nips in and drives off, what is the crime? technically, it's taking a vehicle without consent to start with. a charge of taking mail would be added, even if the mail has not been tampered with, removed, touched in any way (other charges of having no insurance or anything else is supplementary).

why is it the vehicle removal firm has not been charged with taking mail. the purpose of using the original vehicle was acting as an rm delivery vehicle

Johny,
If the mail was out of sight locked in the car boot the removal firm would not have known it was there.
If the mail was on display on the back seat that gives Royal Mail more reason to sack him.
If it had been a Royal Mail there wouldn't have been "some joyrider" unless the driver had negligantly left it unlocked, and furthermore I understand that Police etc. have less power to stop, search, interfere with etc. Royal Mail vans than other vehicles on the road.

and Posties - we are instructed if approached by a Police Officer who ask to search your pouch, we must first refuse politely and then explain that you have no objection but they must contact the DOM and follow his guidance. This would normally mean being taken back to the DO and the search done in his presence. Also if police block access to delivery points because of an operation we should take the badge number of the officer you speak to.

[Lounge Lizard]

hadn't thought of this before. so why has the postie lost his job cos of this?

if a rm van with was parked with half a walks mail and some joyrider or whoever nips in and drives off, what is the crime? technically, it's taking a vehicle without consent to start with. a charge of taking mail would be added, even if the mail has not been tampered with, removed, touched in any way (other charges of having no insurance or anything else is supplementary).

why is it the vehicle removal firm has not been charged with taking mail. the purpose of using the original vehicle was acting as an rm delivery vehicle

Johny,
If the mail was out of sight locked in the car boot the removal firm would not have known it was there.
If the mail was on display on the back seat that gives Royal Mail more reason to sack him.
If it had been a Royal Mail there wouldn't have been "some joyrider" unless the driver had negligantly left it unlocked, and furthermore I understand that Police etc. have less power to stop, search, interfere with etc. Royal Mail vans than other vehicles on the road.

and Posties - we are instructed if approached by a Police Officer who ask to search your pouch, we must first refuse politely and then explain that you have no objection but they must contact the DOM and follow his guidance. This would normally mean being taken back to the DO and the search done in his presence. Also if police block access to delivery points because of an operation we should take the badge number of the officer you speak to.

And is it not the case that the Police can not search our vans or delay the mail by suggesting that speed limits and other such traffic regulations apply to us ?

[johnsouthwales]

A yes or a no would have been suffice.. Thought i was seeing things for a minute.. Taking a vehicle is limited when a vehicle is properly secured. Is a locked vehicle exempt from break in attempts?
I think there are some other threads floating around regarding taking of vehicle. Maybe i was using the wording joyrider as an example to illustrate the differences which lead to mail taking.

[johnsouthwales]

if correct procedures were taken issuing the dismissal with consultation through cwu, even though the circumstances are unusual. Maybe the driver was unaware of being in pay area? Poorly signed. finding the vehicle gone was bad enough cos probably felt the mail inside was more important than the car itself. Being punished through dismissal is repugnant

[andy2007]

You're right there! If he'd been in a liveried RM vehicle, it wouldn't have been towed. But the fact of the matter is: That it's common for people to use their own vehicles on deliveries. And Managers, often put people under pressure to do so. So I wholeheartedly agree with you John: Sacking him was repugnant. And hopefully, he will get his job back on Appeal.

What should have happened IMHO, is that he should have been given a serious disciplinary, and the Manager who allowed him (or more likley put him under pressure) to use his own vehicle. Should also, be on a serious disciplinary.

[johnsouthwales]

Yes andy,i agree with you. you all know about the merits. I wouldn't go down the route of if it wasn't for him,this wouldn't have happened. I am thinking of it but that is the job of cwu. If the case is going to be appealed, then surely it will be a test case that will once and for all close the car use issue on way or another.. Going back to when i mentioned joyrider, someone could take rm livery van by whatever means and has no intention of removing the mail. When or if that person is caught, he will be charged of taking the mail on top of taking the vehicle, whether he or she will like it or not. So why hasnt the vehicle firm been charged with removing the mail? Thats what the question was,is it possible?had they commited an offence even if they didn't know it was there? As far as i can see is they had. It is an offence to withold and interfere with mail.. So if someone takes rm van even as a prank, the driver wouldn't have a clue what's in the back yet interfering charge will be brought, and end up doing more time for taking the mail than taking the van.

[NWpostie]

That would leave a lot of Cars that may possibly be "Royal mail " use, I don't thinkany charges willeb brought as the Mail bag would have been out of sight, if it wasn't then the Postie will be done as the Tow away driver.
There was no distinctive sticker or any Royal Mail tag to indicate it is under RMs use as we do with hired vans, the Manager is just as culpable for allowing its use and permitting it to be used as a mobile storage.

That said , he should not be using it in the first place, Dissmissal is extreme, but then they are looking to reduce numbers by cheapest means possible, sacking for wrong doings is the cheapest, as long as it is an option in the conduct code, they will use it, as to a Test case, there have already been many "Test Cases" with car drivers being done for crashing, losing mail bags in cars, killing or injuring someone in the use of their cars, it still goes on even if RM was found culpable, there will be more Managers and driver to fill the gaps, it would have to take something more substantial to stop the car use culture, either making it illegal or allowing managers and line supervisors to be tried under Motor traffic offence for permitting use of car.

until then it will not go away.

[DGP1]

Just a question, was this a first offence or was the postie already under deferred dismissal (or another conduct issue)?

As for the law and RM drivers, we have NO extra rights on the road, every driver HAS to follow every law of the road, as for being stopped and searched by the police I would have thought it would be the same for any other person ie. the officer has to prove a suspicion to search http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[johnsouthwales]

That sounds too much of rm easy option, replacing staff as dispensable as a convenience. Yes,i've seen and read the other threads with the other cases. I dont think car drivers like to put up identification in fear of being broken into. The end of the day, what can be done to reinstate? Are the fellow members going to walk out in protest?

[Oh no its raining]

Are the fellow members going to walk out in protest?


Me personally I would, in the view that it would protect us more and make RM supply us with enough company vehicles to meet any demand for them. Its my opinion, nobody has to agree but I see people that use their own cars as the ones that maybe cant or dont want to cope with working under the terrible conditions that we are ALL faced with.
If I may use an example, take 2 people, 1 can cope and fight back when under extreme stress, the other hits the booze and inevitebally becomes an indinial alcoholic who avoids everything life throws at them.
I dont mean to start any arguments so dont, its just how I personally look at people using cars against the rules in RM.

[shadow]

If you want to take your car on your own head be it cause if you cross a dom or lackie they will screw you good. Know of a guy out on delivery using his own car. Got a visit from 3 managers who wanted a chat. All got in his car and guess what they found. A letter under his seat.SACKED.Funny how it took 3 managers and a visit out on delivery. Managers are

[johnsouthwales]

Not being funny last post. Could the letter have been planted? If there was any suspicions, security should have done the search and not management. Please note the word if. From my independent point of view, 3 managers requesting a chat in a car is suspect. Could have four of five, or even two. Still would have been suspect.

[Oh no its raining]

Wouldn't the managers have needed police presence to conduct a search in a private vehicle? I say this as if they found it under a seat, they were obviously searching, and ratther unusual that a single letter would have been found as we bundle our mail after prep?
We dont know the full details but it sounds like a management gang up to me if things weren't done properly?

[DGP1]

I did a link to earlier on (about police searches).