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!
One rule for one.......
-
Viewfindergeneral
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 12:05
- Gender: Male
One rule for one.......
...and one for another. I got into work today to discover that the mail I had been unable to deliver yesterday in my contracted hours was still sitting on my desk. The manager was fully aware of this fact because I informed him yesterday that I had not been able to finish my delivery. I also informed him, using the correct procedure before going out, that I wouldn't have time to deliver all my walk . Surely a manager has the responsibility for ensuring that that mail was delivered yesterday, even if he had to deliver it himself. I know for a fact that more than one colleague went home before their contracted finishing time and there were others who would have done it on O/T. In my opinion HE should be investigated concerning "Wilful delay". Maybe HIS manager would be interested to hear about this. 
-
fishtank
- Posts: 19732
- Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
He would have to report it as a failure.
He would only be in the brown sticky stuff if he didn't.
He would only be in the brown sticky stuff if he didn't.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share
-
bag69
- Posts: 297
- Joined: 18 Mar 2010, 19:52
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
Yes mgmt should of done all to get it delivered. Hope you started today where you left off yesterday and brought back what you could not complete again. Do the same again tomorrow if needs be. Its the only way that RF will learn that we cant cope with what they expect us to do each day. Not that they will ever change anything. In this case the computer says YES!!!!
-
Viewfindergeneral
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 12:05
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
And how would I be able to find that out?fishtank wrote:He would have to report it as a failure.
He would only be in the brown sticky stuff if he didn't.
-
fishtank
- Posts: 19732
- Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
You won't and to be honest....i wouldn't go there.Viewfindergeneral wrote:And how would I be able to find that out?fishtank wrote:He would have to report it as a failure.
He would only be in the brown sticky stuff if he didn't.
You can be 90% sure he will have because in management circles failing mail will get your arse kicked whereas hiding mail will get you the sack...or at least 6 months in the garden.
He would have to be pretty dumb...even by management standards.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share
-
motherhubbard
- Posts: 1001
- Joined: 08 Feb 2010, 17:13
- Gender: Female
- Location: in the cupboard
Re: One rule for one.......
Maybe there has been a culture change among managers.fishtank wrote: He would have to be pretty dumb...even by management standards.
It used to be common practice to hide undeclared failed mail in case of an audit.
Never let the hand you hold, hold you down.
-
Cheetah
- Posts: 428
- Joined: 13 Oct 2009, 13:17
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
And don't forget they are ruled by completely different rules to us "do as i say, Not as i do"

-
fishtank
- Posts: 19732
- Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
That's very true.motherhubbard wrote:Maybe there has been a culture change among managers.fishtank wrote: He would have to be pretty dumb...even by management standards.
It used to be common practice to hide undeclared failed mail in case of an audit.
I know of a cupboard that could hold 4 yorks...and frequently did...but since the EMC incident with the artic it hasn't been used for anything other than mops and snow shovels.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share
-
Viewfindergeneral
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 12:05
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
But of course he WAS wilfully delaying the mail because there were staff who could have delivered the backlog within their contracted hours but he chose to ignore that fact. At the very least it should be investigated surely?fishtank wrote:You won't and to be honest....i wouldn't go there.Viewfindergeneral wrote:And how would I be able to find that out?fishtank wrote:He would have to report it as a failure.
He would only be in the brown sticky stuff if he didn't.
You can be 90% sure he will have because in management circles failing mail will get your arse kicked whereas hiding mail will get you the sack...or at least 6 months in the garden.
He would have to be pretty dumb...even by management standards.
-
fishtank
- Posts: 19732
- Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
That's not wilful delay.....it's just piss poor management.Viewfindergeneral wrote: But of course he WAS wilfully delaying the mail because there were staff who could have delivered the backlog within their contracted hours but he chose to ignore that fact. At the very least it should be investigated surely?
No need for an investigation...he's an arse...case closed.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share
-
coxie
- EX ROYAL MAIL
- Posts: 1336
- Joined: 09 Oct 2009, 14:57
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
since park & loop at my office its been constant mail left for sometimes 2 or 3 days, don't worry about it they obviously dont
-
Cheetah
- Posts: 428
- Joined: 13 Oct 2009, 13:17
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
The point seems to be being missed here.
It seems obvious to me that viewfinder is being investigated for some form of willfull delay. But this rule ONLY applies to employees who 1. speak up for themselves or 2. the management doesn't like for some reason or another (he may have a nicer car than the manager or something equally stupid
) 3. does the job properly and won't come in early or do the job in his car and books overtime in the process.
Now it seems on the day in question there were people available to cover the part of the round which was undelivered either as lapsing or on the dreaded overtime, but the manager chose to leave it as he didn't want to make himself unpopular with his seniors by allowing too much overtime booked in his office. Or upset the people who were back early because like in our office they are the ones who come in early and do the job in their car.
The fact remains that mail was left in and evidently no effort had been made to get it took by the manager when this should be ALL OF OUR PRIORITY not just us indians.
So in my opinion the manager should also be charged for "Willfull Delay". His first and proper response should be to cover the round with those back early (hence no extra cost to RM) but seems like in our office that doesn't happen
But we all know that won't happen as like viewfinder said "RULE FOR ONE BUT NOT ANOTHER"

It seems obvious to me that viewfinder is being investigated for some form of willfull delay. But this rule ONLY applies to employees who 1. speak up for themselves or 2. the management doesn't like for some reason or another (he may have a nicer car than the manager or something equally stupid
Now it seems on the day in question there were people available to cover the part of the round which was undelivered either as lapsing or on the dreaded overtime, but the manager chose to leave it as he didn't want to make himself unpopular with his seniors by allowing too much overtime booked in his office. Or upset the people who were back early because like in our office they are the ones who come in early and do the job in their car.
The fact remains that mail was left in and evidently no effort had been made to get it took by the manager when this should be ALL OF OUR PRIORITY not just us indians.
So in my opinion the manager should also be charged for "Willfull Delay". His first and proper response should be to cover the round with those back early (hence no extra cost to RM) but seems like in our office that doesn't happen
But we all know that won't happen as like viewfinder said "RULE FOR ONE BUT NOT ANOTHER"
-
fishtank
- Posts: 19732
- Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
- Gender: Male
Re: One rule for one.......
All of that may be true,some of it may be true or none of it may be true.Cheetah wrote:but the manager chose to leave it as he didn't want to make himself unpopular with his seniors by allowing too much overtime booked in his office. Or upset the people who were back early because like in our office they are the ones who come in early and do the job in their car.
The fact is if he reported it as a failure it isn't wilful delay,he has done what we do when faced with workload we cannot cover...pass it up the chain to a higher authority.
It's up to his bosses to then decide if his attempts to have it delivered were adequate...so as you see the rules are exactly the same.
All failures are questioned,whether those questions are robust enough is another matter...i wouldn't know,i'm not a manager....but i do know that managers,certainly in our area do not fail deliveries for a laugh,i've seen their faces when they come out of conference calls after a good kicking...it' almost makes my day.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share