Dismissed

[TrueBlueTerrier]

To clarify for the bright sparks that seem very slow at assimilating information as It clearly had nothing to do with your footware.

and to clarify for someone who believes a debate is better done with insults and innuendo, I will try and explain simply.

If a stage 1 was issued in error then the rest of the process through stage 2 and stage 3, if connected in the same timeline, is certainly open to question.

IE if the stage 1 he got, allegedly, because of conditions brought on by lack of replacement footwear was not issued, then he would not have been issued the stage 2 and stage 3 at those trigger points, even if he was swinging the lead, or if the absences were not connected.

However, if the stage 1 is discounted and they still would have trigged a stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3 then he has a fight on his hands.

But back to the original question he asked, its best not to assume anything, its better to take what they have posted at face value and answer his question. We will never know all the facts, or even if we have all the facts, therefore to assume he is swinging the lead does not really help. He asked for advice not judgement.

[bitchface]

THIS IS WHY I SAY YOU FAIL TO ASSIMILATE INFORMATION..

He had already arrived at a stage two for other unacceptable attendance reasons.It had nothing to do with this problem.his gripe is that he was 17 days away from going back to a stage one when this problem arose ,leading to dismissal.

"my question is are royal mail at fault for not providing me with correct footwear which led to me triggering stage 3 and dismissal".

so telling that if the stage one was a mistake then the rest doesnt count is rediculous,pointless and has nothing to do with the information initally provided

also the insults,again started with FISHSTANK..the RMC BULLYBOY..

I WILL GUESS IT WAS OVER LOOKED AGAIN

[hantsman]

Maybe Bitchface your an indoor worker , you need to wise up fella because it could be you tomorrow who's getting dismissed unfairly and I for one hope you do with your childish remarks . Rm are issuing stage warnings for any illnesses serious and not serious so wheres the fairness in that , you will one day be I'll and let's hope for yourself it's not serious , obviously you don't understand planta facilitiesand I'm not going to educate you , if rm knew I had a problem they should have offered me light duties and investigated my injury , it's no different to you my friend slipping over on some ice they would investigate that accident , my gp said it's wear and tear through my job and that's good enough for me over an I'll educated man

I know this may not be of comfort but RM have lost quite a few Employment tribunals regarding dismissal for sickness cases, because they dont even follow their own rules on sickness.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

1. You chose your moniker - are you now complaining because Fish reduced it.

2. Your right I got the stages wrong, my apologies. However it still does not affect the process. If the stage 3 should have taken into account mitigating factors and it hasn't then Royal Mail are not following their own procedures. If they failed to follow their own procedures he should not have been dismissed, and the previous stages as issued have no bearing on the matter.

3. My main point still stands though he came on here asking for advice not judgement. If we want to judge him we have to assume a hell of a lot, as he is only asking for advice then its best to advise him on the facts he presents. If he has not told us everything then the advice we give will be flawed and he should take that into account.

[bitchface]

To answer your questions Bitchface I've had 6 absences in the last 3and half years being off twice with planta f totalling 11 days .,so I've had another 4 absences totalling 23 which were transient illnesses , my point Is if rm investigated properly my foot injury and was offered light duties than those two absences wouldn't have incurred and I wouldn't have been dismissed if you cant see that's unfair than I think you must be a rm puppy dog , rm need to be proactive and not reactive in my experience they react to problems and are not proactive , like I said my boots were on order and I was wearing rm boots what had worn down on the heels , in WTl the staff was always told you must wear issued footwear which I did , its not my fault in the lateness of my new boots arriving and I abided by rm standards on footwear please tell me what you would have done differently

THANKYOU,VERY INFORMATIVE.

firstly i would like to assure you that i am a man,and that i am a walking /van/bike postie too,And i am only to aware that rm is run by shockingly inept managers at all levels,some of whom like nothing more that to get rid of the undesirables.
As you state you have had 34 days off in the last 3.5 years.My record in the same time is zero BTW so if i get sack for poor attendance then i really would have a greivance.

you have taken 23 days in 3.5 years for transident illnesses,i guess thats colds and flu.Thats nearly five weeks in 3.5 years thats not royal mails fault i assume?

You now say that you have been diagnosed with this problem before ,as you say twice totaling 11 days.

So its fair to assume you already knew of this condition before this stage 3 trigger.
Yet you are still wearing the same unsatificatory shoes.there are differant makes for a reason.not recieving your cats for months really is not an valid reason if they are the same type used the first time you went off with the problem.

so i guess the question is now

Did you order differant shoes?
did you inform the manager/atos of your problem/solutions the first time

if the answer is yes you may have a good chance of getting your job back..if you really want it back that is .

[andy2007]

I may have misunderstood, but surely if the 2 absences for his PF hadn't happened, he would be on a Stage 2, not 3, wouldn't he?
Surely that's grounds for unfair dismissal.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

All very interesting Bitchface and certainly a valid discussion. However, it does not answer his original question which was about mitigating circumstances and should they have taken them into account.

Your posts are about a completely different, yet still valid discussion which I think is:

Should we let Royal Mail only apply their own procedure for people who go sick rarely, or should they treat all members equally.

Now that is a topic worthy of discussion - but its not one we should be having in this thread because he came asking for specific advice not to get opinions on whether his case is worthy or not.

By all means start another thread, I think it will be a lively one.

Its only my opinion but I think some of these threads would not go off topic quite so far if people gave advice in advice threads, and opinions in opinion threads.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I may have misunderstood, but surely if the 2 absences for his PF hadn't happened, he would be on a Stage 2, not 3, wouldn't he?
Surely that's grounds for unfair dismissal.

Thats where I got it wrong and Bitchface corrected me quite correctly. He had transient illnesses which got him on a stage 1 and stage 2, but the PF one got him a stage 3 dismissal. Hence the discussion should RM have taken the PF as a mitigating factor in that they did not provide shoes in a timely manner.

[andy2007]

Ah! sorry.

So what it really comes down to, is can he PROVE that his absences wouldn't have happened if he'd recieved his new boots when he needed them. If he can, he's got a good chance of winning his case. But that's something only a Lawyer is likley to know.

[Jayfin]

Thanks everybody for your input ,like I've said in my previous posts rm was aware of my problem with my planta f it's documented in a return to work , my cwu rep said at my hearing at that point they should have investigated it more and didn't and then it reocurred which triggered a stage 3 warning , before it got personnel with one members comments my question was under those circumstances is there mitigating circumstances and what's the likely hood of rm reverting there decision

[hantsman]

Thanks everybody for your input ,like I've said in my previous posts rm was aware of my problem with my planta f it's documented in a return to work , my cwu rep said at my hearing at that point they should have investigated it more and didn't and then it reocurred which triggered a stage 3 warning , before it got personnel with one members comments my question was under those circumstances is there mitigating circumstances and what's the likely hood of rm reverting there decision

You must appeal, RM IMHO will only revert if they are pretty certain they will loose at an ET Then again I really think they don't care.

[liamlayor]

You must go to the appeal but meantime, you should submit a claim to the Employment Tribunal for constructive dismissal. Your employer knew about your health problem and had a duty of care to ensure that you were properly equipped to do your job. If they would not allow you to wear your own shoes, then they SHOULD have provided you with RM shoes/boots within a reasonable period of time. Two or three months waiting for appropriate footwear is UNREASONABLE and appears to have been the cause of the exacerbation of your symptoms. Do NOT wait for the appeal, although you should attend it, but you MUST submit an ET claim immediately due to the time limits on when ETs will be accepted - do it online tonight and the best of luck to you.

[liamlayor]

Sorry, just noticed you've been to appeal - don't wait for the outcome, they'll drag it out as long as possible and meantime, you may be out of time for an ET.Submit your ET claim asap, you can always withdraw it if you win you appeal. From one who knows!!

[brothermagrew]

Jayfin could in the meantime read about this Industrial Tribunal.

http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/2550_02.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[REDLETTER]

Sorry, just noticed you've been to appeal - don't wait for the outcome, they'll drag it out as long as possible and meantime, you may be out of time for an ET.Submit your ET claim asap, you can always withdraw it if you win you appeal. From one who knows!!

They will drag it out until the time limit for starting a Tribunal claim runs out, so be very careful about your dates, because RM will be hot on this and use it to their advantage.