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

manwithnovan · Post by **manwithnovan** » 13 Sep 2007, 14:12

All i can say its too late for us, we started later over a year ago (4am to 6am) were now screwed

, dont let it happen to you.
FIGHT IT

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 13 Sep 2007, 14:20

I like this bit "Where an imposed change involves a significant change to the contract,eg:a reduction of pay or alteration of working hours, an employer may well be acting in fundamental breach of contract"

vigilante · Post by **vigilante** » 13 Sep 2007, 15:00

WOULD WE GET AWAY WITH A PETITION HANDED INTO DUM DUM OR HAS IT GOT TO BE INDIVIDUALS WRITING TO HIM??
BECUASE YOU KNOW AS WELL AS I DO HALF THE W*****S ARE EITHER TOO AFRAID OR IGNORANT TO DO IT.
ANYBODY KNOW FOR SURE BEFORE I GO IN GUNS BLAZING??

robd · Post by **robd** » 13 Sep 2007, 15:40

i think someone needs to get in touch with the union and ask them this question,
"Was there a previous collective agreement that allowed for a provision regarding the alteration of duty times,that the
employer can now enforce."
judging by the silence from the cwu i think i already know the answer.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 13 Sep 2007, 16:01

frankie wrote:Hey Norbet, that's some heavy-duty sh*t you quoting there. I was feelin quite brave when I saw what Postman wrote, now I must confess that my bravado is fast approaching the exit door after reading your reply! Having said that, you did make some good points in 12) but, I'm already on tablets, I don't drink.....(much) due to unsociable hours and the ole man would love a break from me ..ha,ha,ha!!!

If this helps anyone quote Life without a Lawyer-Fenton Bessler -Century 2000 " The 1966 Act states you can GIVE written notice that you are opting to leave anyway but the procedure is complicated and your boss can serve a written counter notice that you work out your time . However this is NOT to say you CANNOT be constructively dismissed .If your position has REALLY been made impossible and you are made forcibly aware that the company is forcing you out , you do not have to wait until you feel your ribs are cracking beneath the pressure BEFORE you write {keeping a copy of the letter } to your immediate superior setting out the behaviour of which you complain and saying it's been made impossible for you to continue with your duties . You should use some phrase as I consider , in the circumstances , that the firm has constructively dismissed me . On no account should you write I therefore resign .That may only confuse matters . You are then free to persue a claim for breach of contract , redundancy or unfair dismissal depending on the circumstances . These cases are often difficult to argue on behalf of a cilent but it can be done"
Royal Mail have always made things difficult , if you did your back in and a customer sent the bag , they may get your money out of the firm's insurance , but usually they've always been unecessarily obstructive to put people off. They think they are bigger than you and noone dare take them on , they've always regarded themselves above the law . RM does what it likes , they've always been autocratic and they've had some very vicious solictors to do thier dirty work. Latest tactic is to get managers to swear blind that you handled the bag wrong if you contested that ,they'll just find more "witnesses", the "contributed" scenario. Simpson & Miller were getting too much money for compo so RM wanted that culture stopped .
Everything is dictated to by Senior Management and to impress them ,but you've to PROSECUTE them or forcibly ram points home otherwise a case can be struck out for lack of prosecution . You have to work on ADVERSE INFERENCES i.e. So-called "coincidences "-failure to answer properly, but wooly questions get wooly answers , CIRCUMSTANTIAL stuff on the balance of probabilties . The other mistake RM make is thier Senior Managers sounding like Solictors and the tendency to oversimplify or put a oversimplified structure on things as that's how they like things . Hence thier arrogance can be thier achillies heel .
In a nutshell you are working on what is considered "reasonable" and some other substantial reason which is deliberately left vague and favour RM instead of you . It's like the Highway Code , it's not illegal to fail to observe it but you can get into trouble for misdeamnours. Look at that case in Blackburn , RM did a witch hunt over 5 1-2 months but if they've posties from one half of Blackburn swearing blind that the poor guy was Nick Griffin's long lost cousin, it at least looks "straight" on paper for the ET's legal panel. ETs are not some old-fashioned jury dispensing common sense justice . RM don't do Common sense either , it's planet Alain or Adam .There is no easy definition of unfair dismissal and yes it's a mindfield.Also in worst case scenarios RM have been known to make things difficult with the DHSS as they don't want people slinging s**t about them , however thier linos and the likes of Shift Mgrs or equivalent are not very bright and botch things , it's all they know since being cadets and deal with a narrow box only . It's like The Shawbank Redemption , Prison is the world that makes sense , but higher up they CAN be less silly. The DHSS has a bad reputation with thier own staff , it's as equally as regimented for thier staff as RM , they just have idiotic New Labour Ministers meddling and interfering passing laws and so people cock up like Royal Mail with Reg Holdsworth and his sidekick. i know all about how DHSS staff think intimately!, it's infuriating but it was all she knew since University.
:lfo :lfo :lfo :lfo

Wild Rover · Post by **Wild Rover** » 13 Sep 2007, 17:49

Whislt i agree with everything written on here, the trouble is do we have a choice? The flaming letter we got today states, "by law, the regulations come into place by Jan 2008". If the laws the law, the best we can do is just keep stalling it and stalling it until jan 2008..? Please tell me i'm wrong and that these clowns at RM are actually playing the system?

manwithnovan · Post by **manwithnovan** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:01

Am i being stupid but why cant the whole system move back an hour?
Earlier collections
Earlier dispatch & so on

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:03

manwithnovan wrote:Am i being stupid but why cant the whole system move back an hour?
Earlier collections
Earlier dispatch & so on

I asked that a few months ago and never got a response just one of those looks.

robd · Post by **robd** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:22

Yes in terms of the law,royal mail do need to be compliant,however as regards the transport directive,surely they are
already doing this!
This point of law simply strengthens royal mails argument as an overriding business factor,as i said before when dealing
with a third party,we are not always privvy to all the information,if during a previous agreement royal mail said one condition was a variation of clause 4.2 regarding an alteration to duty times,how important would this appear?
i mean it would be of no interest to it's membership,so no point in mentioning it,and more to the point a mild concession
against announcing we've won you a 2% pay rise.
If the union,legally have nothing to fear,then as Royal mail are trying to impose this variation,the union should simply
tell them they are in breach of contract.
But clearly something is not right,so come on CWU be honest with your members,for they are prepared to lose money on
the picket line,yet still pay your subs for the privelige.

The Sarge · Post by **The Sarge** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:22

Wild Rover wrote:Whislt i agree with everything written on here, the trouble is do we have a choice? The flaming letter we got today states, "by law, the regulations come into place by Jan 2008". If the laws the law, the best we can do is just keep stalling it and stalling it until jan 2008..? Please tell me i'm wrong and that these clowns at RM are actually playing the system?

The law refers to the driving regs coming in to effect. RM are using this law as an excuse period. If that law came into effect tomorrow there would be no effect as the difference between 56mph & 70mph is only an hour on journeys of 300 miles +, and thatt's on a motorway.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:33

The Sarge wrote:
Wild Rover wrote:Whislt i agree with everything written on here, the trouble is do we have a choice? The flaming letter we got today states, "by law, the regulations come into place by Jan 2008". If the laws the law, the best we can do is just keep stalling it and stalling it until jan 2008..? Please tell me i'm wrong and that these clowns at RM are actually playing the system?
The law refers to the driving regs coming in to effect. RM are using this law as an excuse period. If that law came into effect tomorrow there would be no effect as the difference between 56mph & 70mph is only an hour on journeys of 300 miles +, and thatt's on a motorway.Just how fast are smaller OMVs allowed to do motorways anyway? legally ,the artics can't go that fast nor would they be allowed to. The reality is 1000hrs delivery only posties that are more "corporate" who don't deliever to his customers anyway nor joe public who aren't worth bothering about. Aparently they can wait just a smokescreen.

:lfo :lfo

madelin4 · Post by **madelin4** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:00

BELIAL wrote:
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.

But , do you have to have a big big reason for not being able to start later or just because you dont want to and it dont suit you due to other things or hobbies you do out of work?????????????

peedofpostie · Post by **peedofpostie** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:06

I RAISED THIS ISSUE TODAY AND WAS TOLD THAT WE ARE NOT GETTING OUR CONTRACTS CHANGE WE WILL STILL BE WORKING 40HRS IT IS JUST THE TIMES THAT ARE CHANGINIG WE WILL LOOSE NO MONEY AS WE ARE TO GET THAT PROTECTED ASWELL SO HOW DO WE GO ABOUT WORDING THE LETTERS TO THE DOM WHO HAVE NT GOT A CLUE THEY WILL PROBABLY JUST FLING IT IN THE BIN

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:21

Madeline wrote:
BELIAL wrote:
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.
But , do you have to have a big big reason for not being able to start later or just because you dont want to and it dont suit you due to other things or hobbies you do out of work?????????????

-Royal Mail's attitude is Did Royal Mail PURPOSEFULLY construct , can you prove that ? also if you didn't have something else lined up did you leave with good reason?and the DHSS have to try and trip you on it as they're under a lot of pressure from above too . You may be able to leave if you were threatened with dismissal by RM for poor-timekeeping and you resigned to avoid dismissal. You'd have to prove that RM would have sacked you.
Women might have more of a case with the EOC & RM's poor record but purposeful discrimination would have to be proved . Don't know if that helps anyone ? . I just think RM want you through the door quietly without giving them problems or sh*t slinging .

sol · Post by **sol** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:30

As Norbert says, constructive dismissal is notoriously difficult to win. More importantly the only way you can deal with these proposed changes to your contract is COLLECTIVELY. Isn't that what the strike action is about? Forget about dealing with it individually.

What advice is the CWU giving in relation to management's attempt to change your start times?

ROYALMAILCHAT

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

LETTER AGAINST LATE START/90 DAY RULE