IMPORTANT:LATE STARTS:HOW YOU CAN HELP YOURSELVES!!!

Post by **POSTMAN** » 12 Sep 2007, 20:45

A.C.A.S.

1 - If RM want to change your start times they need to give "statury written notice" (Letters due tomorrow.)

2 - If you agree to the changes, they have to give you 4 weeks notice.

3 - If you dissagree with the changes being imposed upon you RM have to give you "1 weeks notice for EACH year that you have been employed - UP TO A MAX OF 12 WEEKS "

4 - After the relevant notice has been served you can leave your job - and sue for "constructive dismissal" OR you can coninue to work "UNDER PROTEST" and retain the right to sue for "constructive dismissal" ( BUT if you work for too long under the new arangements you lose the right to sue because you have been deemed to have accepted the new arangements" )

If EVERYONE puts in a LETTER to their DOM, we could at least delay the starts for 12 weeks !
And you as a group/Branch could do the second part of 4

If you feel strongly enough about later starts,you will take notice of all this.

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 12 Sep 2007, 20:53

s**t hot ,YOU eager beaver. Masses of topnotch respect. I knew Iwas'nt going doollalypip ,constructive dismissal, we' re in the money we're in the money!

The Inspector · Post by **The Inspector** » 12 Sep 2007, 21:08

Sorry Postman - SIR! Can you just explain where this comes from? I see that ACAS is written at top - does this come from the arbitration lot - or does ACAS mean something else - in this context? Any idea of any actual document - that this is from. I'm not doubting it for one moment but as it's 'dynamite' can you explain further.

Wild Rover · Post by **Wild Rover** » 12 Sep 2007, 22:40

So the letter due soon is either telling us or informing us of change? Oct 8th is what i heard/read for the introduction of later start times - that doesn't tally if a vote has to take place..

Post by **POSTMAN** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:01

The Inspector wrote:Sorry Postman - SIR! Can you just explain where this comes from? I see that ACAS is written at top - does this come from the arbitration lot - or does ACAS mean something else - in this context? Any idea of any actual document - that this is from. I'm not doubting it for one moment but as it's 'dynamite' can you explain further.

One of the girls on here contacted Acas.

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:22

I read it! I said it! I read it I did!
Legaly contract of employment = task you USUALLY perform at the time you USUALLY perform it whatever gobshite is written down
Any change to such contract of employment can only be effected with YOUR or your WORKPLACE REPRESENTATIVES AGREEMENT
Forget notice periods ,If you are sacked for failing to comply with unagreed changes to your contract of employment thats tribunal time and hands down, bang to rights ,very expensive for RM constructive dismissal compensation time.

It,s employment law ,we are all covered by it, costs + compensation adds up.

Dark thought, the CWU has a legal dept., presumably well versed in employment law... yet.......silence???? mulder,scully.

Post by **ade@cambs** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:33

Can you please clear one thing for me, that is how you can leave your job and sue for constructive dismissal!

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:39

ade@cambs wrote:Can you please clear one thing for me, that is how you can leave your job and sue for constructive dismissal!

You dont leave. They ,without agreement ,change your contract, you can not fulfill this new unagreed contract, which is legally null and void ,they sack you, you win big compensation for constructive dismissal.

Post by **POSTMAN** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:41

What is Constructive Dismissal?

When an employee's position becomes redundant or disappears and where his newly assigned position involves a substantial reduction in his salary, bonus, benefits, status, responsibilities, authority or any combination of these factors, he may have a right to sue for constructive dismissal. He cannot, however, remain on the premises, asserting that his contract has been breached by the company, and at the same time initiate a lawsuit for damages for constructive dismissal. If the employee alleges constructive dismissal, then he must leave the premises and either work out a settlement or commence proceedings.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 13 Sep 2007, 10:47

POSTMAN wrote: What is Constructive Dismissal?

When an employee's position becomes redundant or disappears and where his newly assigned position involves a substantial reduction in his salary, bonus, benefits, status, responsibilities, authority or any combination of these factors, he may have a right to sue for constructive dismissal. He cannot, however, remain on the premises, asserting that his contract has been breached by the company, and at the same time initiate a lawsuit for damages for constructive dismissal. If the employee alleges constructive dismissal, then he must leave the premises and either work out a settlement or commence proceedings.

-Good luck to anyone who does it, more power to the elbow etc but 1 Constructive Dismissal cases are notoriously hard to prove , they are often deemed to be "vexed" cases ; you'll probably be on your own with NO support from the CWU . The CWU HAS to go on the chance of success and STRATEGIC value, they make make out your case is FRIVILOUS AND VEXED , TO BE FAIR RM are quite happy to play Trench Warfare which is expensive and RM know it !; at the end of the day it's David versus Goliath .2 Those two-bobs spivs will say you'll have to prove RM CONSTRUCTED your dismissal, B&H cases are downgraded to Greviances but as long as one's been put in and RM will try to APPEAR SUPERFICIALLY REASONABLE which is s*** but that has to be proved , it's all about the burden of proof. . 3 Also RM will move the goalposts and redefine everything , if you were pulled into the office for "a chat" , it'll take on a different meaning in a IT case .4 Make sure youv'e witnesses , primary evidence 5 RM will play the "victim" if they can't BULLY you out of it and make out YOUR motives are suspect if youv'e been "managed " out of the industry 6 If youv'e got it past Preliminary stage 1 RM will try and say you'll be liable to costs , that has to be reported then RM will throw thier dummy out and try to get a ANOTHER Preliminary hearing in thier favour so it's supposedly a weak case which could get struck out or you'll be liable for costs ,BASICALLY THEY WILL TRY ANYTHING TO STOP YOU AND PROTECT THIER SORRY A***S..7 You need clear concise PROSECUTION on RM on the BALANCE OF PROBALITIES but it's not like Criminal Law which is beyond all reasonable doubt , RM 's arrogance is to THINK THEY CAN PROVE it's too obtuse, use it!, any contradictions , flaws , inconsistencies must be attacked & challenged , RM will maintain that SUPERFICIALLY they followed procedure. 8 They will try every evasive , delaying tactic going , be vague , ambigious , everything has to be pulled to bits and challenged , contradicted . 9 If all the latter fails for RM , they'll set thier Employer's lawyers on you , the sort of people who could twist things and would have made out Mother Teresa was Myra Hindley, if RM have to hide behind thier skirts that has to be reported and used as Prosecution. 10 RM haven't got a new firm of "Solutions" Employment Lawyers and Solictors without good reason 11 RM's arrogance can be thier Achilles heel , use it and and , they do cock things up and botch things as we all know!. b, everything is purely to impress other managers and they are daft enough to put it on paper ,GO FOR THAT. 11 Know your enemy thier weaknesses and strengths don't go guns blazing as RM will play very dirty.12 The CWU won't like you dragging up s*** about RM and you'll have to be prepared to upset people and fall out with them. SORRY! to put a damper on things , it'll be very stressful , RM know this , but better this, than anyone ending up as a stress case and ending up on tablets or hitting the sauce big-time or even splitting up with the girlfriend / missus due to the strain , and ending up in another court!. Also my apologies if I've Laboured any points but they are important and can't be over emphasised.

L Tommo · Post by **L Tommo** » 13 Sep 2007, 11:44

Norbert... Can i take you in with me on my cases??? That advice comes from a person EITHER very close to a case or HAS been thru a case or two...?

Well thanks and i will look at all the points you raised and I have plenty of paperwork and evidence on RM And there cheerful little band on bullys that bring about just that case of being on Medication and stressed out to all lengths.. Lets see how RM try and chuck shite about now as they surely will... Never mind at least we know its coming.. Never think RM wont stoop to the depths you wouldnt coz they will and further if it keeps them from losing face and Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£ Nasty they may be but silly they aint when it comes to these type of cases....

OUT

Ta mate....

robd · Post by **robd** » 13 Sep 2007, 11:50

Please remember,asking one person to alter there shift time is different than asking everyone.
by this i mean no one would be seen to be at a disadvantage,also you would have to approach your employer
and ask for a good reason why you can't remain on your normal hours.
you would have to give the employer an opportunity to resolve the problem before seeking arbitration,(as the union seem
to be indifferent towards later starts,this may be a problem)
But here's the thing,and i can only speak of a delivery office,lets say the business agree to let you come in at 5.00am.
it wouldn't be a case of staying on your normal duty,you'd have to cut and tip mail,and throw in various walks for AG's,perhaps even sorting firms mail,there are options available,and ironically you could work in a delivery
office,yet not deliver any mail.
But it's decision time,there's a differenence between i won't do and i can't do later starts,so if you can't i think it's a
question of how flexible you prepared to be.(sorry for the RM speak)

Post by **dvbuk55** » 13 Sep 2007, 12:29

robd wrote:Please remember,asking one person to alter there shift time is different than asking everyone.
by this i mean no one would be seen to be at a disadvantage,also you would have to approach your employer
and ask for a good reason why you can't remain on your normal hours.
you would have to give the employer an opportunity to resolve the problem before seeking arbitration,(as the union seem
to be indifferent towards later starts,this may be a problem)
But here's the thing,and i can only speak of a delivery office,lets say the business agree to let you come in at 5.00am.
it wouldn't be a case of staying on your normal duty,you'd have to cut and tip mail,and throw in various walks for AG's,perhaps even sorting firms mail,there are options available,and ironically you could work in a delivery
office,yet not deliver any mail.
But it's decision time,there's a differenence between i won't do and i can't do later starts,so if you can't i think it's a
question of how flexible you prepared to be.(sorry for the RM speak)

Our el supremo of the later starts has organised the 2 x 5a.m. duties without the present incumbents names - when challenged about it he said "they had been left out in case anyone needed them because they couldn't start later" - that more or less is the attitude of the managers here - like it or lump it and quite frankly most of these chumps will lump it.

frankie · Post by **frankie** » 13 Sep 2007, 12:51

cruisey · Post by **cruisey** » 13 Sep 2007, 13:13

Well done postman. A member at my office emailed a copy of the document to me and i'm forwarding this to my branch sec. There are legal implications here. Everyone affected by later start times MUST do it under protest. Put it in writing, informing your manager that you'll be taking legal advice for ''unfair dismissal from your current contract''. Even though the contract you're currently employed under may not contain working hours, the 5am start time is currently a verbal agreement, which under contract of employment rules, is still legally binding.