HELP MY FRIEND BEEN SUSPENDED

[DEE4237]

MY FRIEND RECIEVED A TEXT MESSAGE FROM A FRIEND AT WORK TO SAY THAT THEIR BAGS WERE GOING TO BE SEARCHED.

[fishtank]

anyhow the letter states he has deliberately witheld mail which they believe warrants a dismissal, is that true?

Yes...ignoring any mitigating circumstances.


17 MAIL INTEGRITY - SAFEGUARDING CUSTOMERS’ MAIL

UNEXCUSED DELAY TO MAIL

The responsibility for safeguarding the mail and giving it prompt and accurate treatment is one of the most important duties of all employees.

Various actions can cause mail to be delayed, e.g. carelessness or negligence leading to damage or loss of customers mail, breach or disregard of a rule or guideline. Such instances are to be distinguished from wilful delay although they may also be treated as misconduct, and in more serious instances could also result in dismissal.

Furthermore, Royal Mail does recognise that genuine mistakes and misunderstandings do occur and it is not the intention of the Business that such cases should be dealt with under the Conduct Code beyond counselling for the isolated instance. The key is that employees should do their job to the best of their ability and, if in doubt, ask for their manager’s advice and guidance.

WILFUL DELAY

Wilful delay of mail is classed as gross misconduct, which if proven could lead to dismissal. The test to determine whether actions may be considered as wilful delay is as follows:

Deliberate action taken by an employee that causes mail to be delayed is called wilful delay. Where proven, such breaches of conduct can lead to dismissal, even for a first offence; indeed Wilful Delay is a criminal offence and can result in prosecution.

[DEE4237]

Thankyou for your quick reply, so does that mean it is a sackable offence? but they don't have to sack him as Royal Mail believe that sometimes people make mistakes?
it was a kinda yes and no reply, is it because it is all up to Royal Mail whether they sack him or not, but they don't have too? i'm very confused now.....

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Thankyou for your quick reply, so does that mean it is a sackable offence? but they don't have to sack him as Royal Mail believe that sometimes people make mistakes?
it was a kinda yes and no reply, is it because it is all up to Royal Mail whether they sack him or not, but they don't have too? i'm very confused now.....

The bit after "17 Mail Integrity" is an extract from an official document which is why it can e quite vague - they are trying to cover all the bases.

1. It is unfortunately a sack-able offence.

2. No they don't have to sack him, but in the present climate I would say it is a likely outcome.

3. If he is sacked then his only course would be to prove that the sacking was unreasonable - this would e extremely difficult to prove.


His best et is to contact the rep or Area Rep if he is in the CWU and get there advice. He will need to tell them EVERYTHING both the good bits and the bad bits, if the rep does not know the whole story then he cannot help.

It may be worth explaining to the rep the situation about the alleged action of the other person, however, unless it has a direct affect on his defence it is unlikely that it will have any effect. As far as I know even at an Employment Tribunal all cases are judged on their own merit and even if he was "dobbed" in that does not have an effect on his case as he either did what he was accused of , or he didn't. That's all they will be interested in, and of course any mitigation.

ETs do not look for fairness, or rightness of action - they only judge whether the actions of the employer were reasonable or not, and this is usually based on any procedural failings rather than if the employee was guilty or not.

[fishtank]

Thankyou for your quick reply, so does that mean it is a sackable offence? but they don't have to sack him as Royal Mail believe that sometimes people make mistakes?
it was a kinda yes and no reply, is it because it is all up to Royal Mail whether they sack him or not, but they don't have too? i'm very confused now.....

The biggest decision will be whether it is un-excused delay or wilful delay.
That will be made after a fact finding process.
Although both carry dismissal as a possible final scenario,a decision to proceed with wilful delay would almost certainly mean that dismissal was being not only being considered but actively pursued.
One of the most important facts would be whether the mail that was put into the postbox was endorsed correctly.
Another would be the level of experience and training your friend has had...and what,if any guidelines are in place at his delivery office.

A word of warning though....do not put too many facts on this forum,in fact it may be wise to ammend your first post

[AnotherLimey]

It's ironic that a postie can "delay" a few mailsorts and have the book thrown at him.

Where as a DOM can cut hours out of an office meaning hundreds of packets that people have ordered are delayed day in day out, week in week out!

[superteamu10]

This is just typical of the way RM is going. Yesterday a few people cut off and brought their mail back having informed management before they went out.
DOM just said to put all undelivered mail back on to your fitting to be done the next day. This she says will happen every time anybody cuts off.

So somebody gets sacked for forgetting they have a few letters in their bag, yet a mountain of mail is deliberately held back by management.

[DEE4237]

thanks fishtank, i have edited it.
well mostly gone, i guess that's it for him then- just ashame that a few people do it and get away with it on a more occurence than a one off, :(

[pokos27]

Hopefully, he will just get told off, but in this current climate it could be bad news.
and the ruling does vary as well.

[Grinder64]

It's ironic that a postie can "delay" a few mailsorts and have the book thrown at him.

Where as a DOM can cut hours out of an office meaning hundreds of packets that people have ordered are delayed day in day out, week in week out!

Those bonus incentives don't grow on trees you know...
'Ello DIM, got a new motor?

[DEE4237]

what will happen with the woman that informed him of the baggage check surely she will get disciplined for the security breach of informing him in the first place right?

[north london driver]

what someone has grassed up and named the person who text the warning to your mate.

what a s**t office you must work for.

[Stammerking]

Your up sh*tcreek without the union on board hope he is a member!

[DEE4237]

nope he isn#t in the union and the person who grassed him up was the same woman that texted his mate, to warn him about the baggage check,
she didn't realise that that person she texted would tell another person.
she just told one person and that one person told him.
Dont think she likes my mate, who found out second hand and grassed what he had done to the bosses...... just wondered what will happen to her?

[Stammerking]

She might be conducted under breach of security if it gets serious.You need to contact your office or area rep and get proper advice as they will have had to deal with similar incidents!
You could always say if you had not had the phone call you would not have panicked and do whatever you did and be open with them, that you were finished way past your time and had to go home urgently ,how many items are we talking about?