ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!

SFO must investigate RM

Postal workers discussion forum. Discuss the day to day life in a Blue Shirt.
MinisterofCucumber
Posts: 806
Joined: 15 Dec 2009, 22:18
Gender: Male

SFO must investigate RM

Post by MinisterofCucumber »

"Fraud is a type of criminal activity, defined as:

'abuse of position, or false representation, or prejudicing someone's rights for personal gain'.

Put simply, fraud is an act of deception intended for personal gain or to cause a loss to another party. The general criminal offence of fraud can include deception whereby someone knowingly makes false representation, or they fail to disclose information, or they abuse a position."

This quote is taken from the website of the Serious Fraud Office.

If a senior manager responsible for a group of employees pays some of those employees an allowance, for example pay protection, and fails to pay another group of employees the same allowance eventhough they are entitled to it, then I can't see how that senior manager can reasonably claim to be unaware of the policy governing that allowance. Any reasonable person would conclude that the employees not paid this allowance had been deceived. Has the deception led to any personal gain for the senior manager? Yes, if the money saved by not paying these allowances resulted in a bigger bonus payment.

We need to know how much bonus has been paid to each manager and how this bonus was worked out.
"You wanna f**k with me? Okay. You wanna play rough? Okay. Say hello to my little friend!" - Tony Montana
Tman
Posts: 4143
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 09:57

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by Tman »

Any reasonable person would conclude that the employees not paid this allowance had been deceived.
Possibly denied an entitlement, but hardly "deceived". If there's a problem, why not contact HR direct, and allow them to sort it out?
It's not within any manager's remit to withhold or deny nationally agreed contractual payments.
hazzeem025
Posts: 280
Joined: 11 Oct 2009, 18:09
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by hazzeem025 »

i was thinking that royal mail is currently committing fraud with the way it calculates traffic figures?
wacko74
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 1572
Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 20:35
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by wacko74 »

hazzeem025 wrote:i was thinking that royal mail is currently committing fraud with the way it calculates traffic figures?
I agree... this is a more obvious case of fraud and it should be relatively straight forward for someone to come in and give an independant assessment of how accurate RM's method of traffic counting is.

whilst i'm on it did i hear right on that despatches that RM claim that 80% of all letters are now walked sequenced!?... its never more than 30-40% in our d.o.
noggin1969
Posts: 1321
Joined: 13 Oct 2009, 17:28
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by noggin1969 »

The general criminal offence of fraud can include deception whereby someone knowingly makes false representation, or they fail to disclose information, or they abuse a position."
Last edited by noggin1969 on 06 Feb 2024, 16:29, edited 1 time in total.
belle smith
Posts: 1557
Joined: 26 Aug 2008, 17:41
Gender: Male
Location: scotland

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by belle smith »

hazzeem025 wrote:i was thinking that royal mail is currently committing fraud with the way it calculates traffic figures?
They seem like a work of fiction to me.
don't know about the serious fraud office but i would certainly like to see the national audit office investigate this, amougst other things
MinisterofCucumber
Posts: 806
Joined: 15 Dec 2009, 22:18
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by MinisterofCucumber »

Tman wrote:
Possibly denied an entitlement, but hardly "deceived".
The employees denied this entitlement deserve an explanation.

As I see it, the senior manager has two options, either to deny all knowledge of the policy governing the entitlement or to claim misinterpretation of the policy.

In view of the fact that the entitlement was given to some employees, claiming ignorance is hard to believe and any attempt to do so would reasonably be seen as deception.

If misinterpretation is claimed, this is also hard to believe bearing in mind that some staff received the entitlement prior to any grievances being raised.

If there is a record of the senior manager receiving training on the policy that was broken, then if deception can't be proved, incompetence certainly can.
The senior manager responsible has to be held to account.
"You wanna f**k with me? Okay. You wanna play rough? Okay. Say hello to my little friend!" - Tony Montana
TADLEYMUSH
Posts: 15
Joined: 11 Oct 2009, 08:04
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by TADLEYMUSH »

Minister of Cucumber wrote: If a senior manager responsible for a group of employees pays some of those employees an allowance, pay protection for example, and fails to pay another group of employees the same allowance eventhough they are entitled to it, then I can't see how that senior manager can reasonably claim to be unaware of the policy governing that allowance. Any reasonable person would conclude that the employees not paid this allowance had been deceived. Has the deception led to any personal gain for the senior manager? Yes, if the money saved by not paying these allowances resulted in a bigger bonus payment.

We need to know how much bonus has been paid to each manager and how this bonus was worked out.
Can somebody tell me what 'pay protection' is please?
baldrick
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 5038
Joined: 13 Sep 2007, 23:37
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by baldrick »

TADLEYMUSH wrote:Can somebody tell me what 'pay protection' is please?
It's where someone used to get an extra payment/allowance, eg night duty allowance, but loses
their night duty because their duty is ceased, they would still receive the allowance for a defined
period depending on how long they had held the duty (I think the maximum is 3 years).
This is in the MTSF agreement.
BELIAL
Posts: 6758
Joined: 15 Jun 2007, 17:33
Gender: Female
Location: Nowhere

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by BELIAL »

It could also apply to DSA firms selling customers a "tracked" service then simply dumping packets into the RM pipeline where they are no longer tracked.
Scotts of Stow need to check out their suppliers :chuckle
Bye
TADLEYMUSH
Posts: 15
Joined: 11 Oct 2009, 08:04
Gender: Male

Re: SFO must investigate RM

Post by TADLEYMUSH »

baldrick wrote:
TADLEYMUSH wrote:Can somebody tell me what 'pay protection' is please?
It's where someone used to get an extra payment/allowance, eg night duty allowance, but loses
their night duty because their duty is ceased, they would still receive the allowance for a defined
period depending on how long they had held the duty (I think the maximum is 3 years).
This is in the MTSF agreement.
Thx for that.