Postman found with drugs stash wins unfair dismissal

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/192749-post ... dismissal/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Royal Mail sacked Scott Curdie after police found drugs at his home claiming it 'damaged the reputation of the company'.

A postman sacked after a drugs stash was discovered at his home has won his case for unfair dismissal.

Scott Curdie lost his job with Royal Mail after he was charged with possessing cocaine and cannabis following a police raid in June last year.

Bosses felt his use of "illegal substances" could "damage the reputation of the company".

The 26 year-old took Royal Mail to an employment tribunal and now been awarded more than £3,000 after a hearing in Glasgow.

Mr Curdie had been based at the delivery office in Kilwinning, Ayrshire. The postman missed work last June after being arrested on the drugs charges.

The postman was initially suspended by Royal Mail. He told his manager that he had the stash having attended a festival.

He later met with another boss and claimed there were mistakes in the notes from the previous meeting and denied that he had claimed he had planned to share the drugs with friends.

Mr Curdie, of Killermont Place, Kilwinning, was then told by letter last August that he was being fired.

It stated: "Your use of illegal substances could damage the reputation of the company and is unacceptable."

Mr Curdie was fined £300 in October last year after he appeared at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court to admit to two possession charges. His not guilty plea to the allegation of intent to supply was accepted.

Mr Curdie lost an appeal against Royal Mail's decision which he claimed was "unjustified and without basis".

Drug dealing

The tribunal was told Brian Cassidy, appeal casework manager, did not believe Mr Curdie had no intention to share with his friends and suspected he was a drug dealer.

Thomas Curdie, representing his son, said the reasons given by Mr Cassidy were flawed. He said the ex-postman had co-operated fully with the company throughout the disciplinary process.

The panel, lead by employment judge Frances Eccles, awarded Mr Curdie a total of £3572.

In a written judgement, he said: "The tribunal was not satisfied that there was sufficient evidence before Mr Cassidy to reach such a conclusion."

[clashcityrocker]

Bosses felt his use of "illegal substances" could "damage the reputation of the company".

But they didn't see having the names/addresses of panellists and allegedly falsifying the quality of service figures in the same way.

[POSTMAN]

Hmmmmm can of worms on the site?

Should he of been sacked for using drugs for 'personal' use.Overzealous manager too big for his boots?
I know of people in the job who smoke and sniff some s**t,should they be sacked?
If that's the case there's a lot of sackings to be done,drug tests anyone?

[smokerjim]

Hmmmmm can of worms on the site?

Should he of been sacked for using drugs for 'personal' use.Overzealous manager too big for his boots?
I know of people in the job who smoke and sniff some s**t,should they be sacked?
If that's the case there's a lot of sackings to be done,drug tests anyone?

Personally, I rarely indulge in any intoxicating substances ( alcohol included ), however, while in theroy, random drugs tests could be brought in for drivers / shunters or those expected to work with heavy machinery, it should not be applied to walking postmen, indoor workers, hand sorters, etc - and fair, firm rules for their use such as unit rep and / or H&S rep to choose the testees with the manager on the day, and for the testee to be given the right to appeal against being chosen before the test takes place.

In practice, knowing RM's track record for royally screwing things up, and the CWU's inabillity ( or worse, intransigence ) to stand up to RM bullying at anything beyond a local level, if drug testing WAS brought in, it would be a licence for DOMs to sack people left & right.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

TBH sacking someone for personal use of an illegal substance as a matter of course would be a step in the wrong direction. For it to be fairly applied the following "crimes" would also have to be sack-able as well.

1. Littering - dropping 1 Rubber band.

2. Speeding or any other related vehicle crime such as overloading, illegal parking, No MOT etc.

3. Drunk and disorderly.

4. Breach of the peace.

[La Poste]

What the postman does in his own time is up to him as long as it doen't affect his job.
This is just an excuse to sack someone and nothing more.
The amount he was awarded is ridiculously small, if he had to employ a solicitor the fee would have been around £10,000.
Just goes to show that justice does not exist for the small guy.
Good job though, I sincerely congratulate him for taking the time and effort to go through the substantially long process of an employment tribunal.
I wonder what his reference from Royal mail will say now.

[smokerjim]

TBH sacking someone for personal use of an illegal substance as a matter of course would be a step in the wrong direction. For it to be fairly applied the following "crimes" would also have to be sack-able as well.

1. Littering - dropping 1 Rubber band.

2. Speeding or any other related vehicle crime such as overloading, illegal parking, No MOT etc.

3. Drunk and disorderly.

4. Breach of the peace.

1. What, like the amount of crap you can find around a manager's office

2. What like using an uninsured vehicle....such as using your private car to drop subordinates to their delivery points, maybe even using it to take out their drop bags

4. What, like completely losing all self control and shouting at people when things do not go the way you want them to....especially after the umpteenth person has come up and said said "Sorry boss, won't be able to complete or do OT today....you might have to finish it for me."

Oh hang on, I forgot that none of those apply, because they only happen due to "exceptional operational needs"

[DGP1]

If they ever did a drugs test in my office then most of us would fail.............not for illegals but for all the perscription painkillers we're on (Kapake contains codeine which is an opiate and would provide a positive test ).

[jockstrapp]

What about the useless PR1CKS running this company are they not ruining the reputation of the company.

[baldrick]

If the Court (and presumably therefore the Prosecutor) accepted his plea of not guilty to supplying drugs,
how was it that RM's case appeal manager could 'believe' that he intended to supply drugs to others.
Do RM managers believe that they are know better than the Courts and can ignore them?
If an RM employee was charged with a serious crime and was acquitted, could an RM manager decide they
were really guilty and dismiss them?

[Martin Walsh]

What the postman does in his own time is up to him as long as it doen't affect his job.
This is just an excuse to sack someone and nothing more.
The amount he was awarded is ridiculously small, if he had to employ a solicitor the fee would have been around £10,000.
Just goes to show that justice does not exist for the small guy.
Good job though, I sincerely congratulate him for taking the time and effort to go through the substantially long process of an employment tribunal.
I wonder what his reference from Royal mail will say now.

What the news report does not inform us of what contributions the postman recieved in terms of being to blame for his dismissal. Someone who is successful at a tribunal will also be viewed on the basis of whether they contributed to their own dismissal , so if an indivdual is found to have contributed to their dismissal by 40% then any financial reward is reduced by 40%.

It would seem that the reason for the decision was that the appeals manager did not conduct a fiar and reasonable investigation in coming to the view that the postman would share the drugs with others.

However in my view and experience I believe that they would still find the postman part reponsible for having drugs which would partially bring the post office into a bad light as the idivdual would be going to court and be the subject of coverage by the newspapers.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

1. What, like the amount of crap you can find around a manager's office

What PCOD drivers, early birds and flyers, not a very polite word for a grouping, like Flock for Birds and swarm for bees.

[fishtank]

If the Court (and presumably therefore the Prosecutor) accepted his plea of not guilty to supplying drugs,
how was it that RM's case appeal manager could 'believe' that he intended to supply drugs to others.
Do RM managers believe that they are know better than the Courts and can ignore them?
If an RM employee was charged with a serious crime and was acquitted, could an RM manager decide they
were really guilty and dismiss them?

Managers do not have burden of "beyond reasonable doubt" that a court of law has.
It is enough for a manager to make a "reasonable assumption of guilt" for dismissal.
I have seen people walk into meetings smiling and saying "They can't prove anything"...just to see them walk out without a job.

[Lounge Lizard]

Inconsistent when considered against instances of personal use of illegal drugs and alcohol while at work on the night shift and as for the reputation of Royal Mail, is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diCeubq_WXg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; our Bolton colleague still with us ?

[fishtank]

Inconsistent when considered against instances of personal use of illegal drugs and alcohol while at work on the night shift and as for the reputation of Royal Mail, is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diCeubq_WXg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; our Bolton colleague still with us ?

Inconsistency is about the only thing this business does well LL.
As for our Bolton colleague...he looks like management material to me.