Advice please: Stage 1 -> Stage 2? Idontthinksopal

[definitive]

The doms going for a stage 2, but I disagree.

The complete sick record for the period is as follows: (ie no other codes on the printout, for stages not issued etc)

21 day absence- (off duty accident) - Stage 1 triggered, but for some reason no record of stage 1 issued, until...

10 months later:
1 day absence- (off duty trip) - NOW stage 1 warning issued (by dom), then

8 months later:
10 day absence (off duty fall) - stage 2 triggered

And he's got the stage 2 'interview' penciled in for tomorrow morning.
I'm sure that after the 21 day absence I was issued a Stage 1 by one of the old gaffer who is now gone. but chucked the paperwork unfortunately.

dom's arguing that because no stage1 warning was issued (just triggered) after the 1st absence period, he can fold in the 2nd, 1 day absence 10 months later, to make a 12 month period of two instances of absence totaling 22 days, and has given me a stage 1 warning starting from the date of the second absence.

From what Ive read on here, my argument should be that 10 months from 'Stage1 triggered' to 'Stage1 warning' is not a reasonable timescale, and the stage 1 should be backdated to start from the last sick day of the first period of illness. Which would mean that the 2nd absence is meaningless and that 2 months after it I should hav been removed from the procedure, then the 3rd absence doesn't even trigger a stage 1.

Is that correct?

If so how can I force dom to acknowledge this? Raise a grievance now or appeal when it gets to stage 3? I will have union rep with me but I think I probably now know more about RM absence policy than he does. Should I involve the area rep?

[fishtank]

Should I involve the area rep?

Yes.
Your Dom is attempting to issue a stage outside the guidelines of the attendance procedure.
He can't "fold in" another absence to trigger a stage 1.
At the very most he could have issued the stage 1 retrospectively and backdated to the original trigger date (which i still wouldn't have accepted) which would have been cleared by the time of the 10 day absence.
Give him credit though he's a trier.

[definitive]

Thanks for the speedy reply.

So ask for interview to be deferred until I can get area rep in on it? Or can I just state these facts to the dom at the interview, with the local rep present, and then what, refuse to sign the stage2 paperwork because I dont accept that it is valid? Or sign it, but make sure my statement that the stage2 has been issued outside of the guidelines is included?

I am wondering what it is the area rep can say to him to stop him in his tracks, that i cant have the pleasure of saying to him myself.

[fishtank]

I am wondering what it is the area rep can say to him to stop him in his tracks, that i cant have the pleasure of saying to him myself.

Ask for the interview to be deferred.
Something doesn't add up because for a stage 2 to be issued it first has to be triggered by HR and going by the information you have given it wouldn't have so you need to get to the bottom of that first.
You will need your Area Rep for that.

[doorstepped]

the stupid thing about RM stages is that you can't appeal a stage one or stage two warning.

I had to wait until a stage 3 was triggered by a trip at work, I then appealed the stage one and stage two ( should not have been given ) I won my appeal, got deffered back to stage one ( correctly ) and two managers got a bollocking from their manager so was win win for me, but something needs to be done about appealing stage one and two warnings imho.

[whisperstar24]

.

[keithposty]

does postman have a link to the above

[clashcityrocker]

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... hs#p343108" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mal's post.
The link is in there.

[keithposty]

ask a stupid question

what does RMAP stand for

[TrueBlueTerrier]

ask a stupid question

what does RMAP stand for

Royal Mail Attendance Procedure

[fishtank]

A little heads up about the RMAP Clarifications doc from someone who knows.

Just noticed that you have referred to the RMAP Clarifications. I know a little bit about this document. It's not really policy, it was written as part of the Service Level Agreement between RM and HR Services. Section 5.2 does not refer to the time it should take to complete a stage warning. It refers to how HRS should deal with warnings they have failed to trigger. If they discover at a later date that they have missed the trigger, then they only trigger it if it is still within 3 months. If it is over 3 months then it is up to the line manager whether it should be triggered. It an exercise in fudging figures, they didn't want to skew the stats with triggers that were old before they started. It doesn't say anything about how long it should take to issue the warning. The only rule for this is "within a reasonable amount of time". This document wasn't really for public consumption, so I'm quite surprised to see it here

That's not to say it doesn't have value.
I've used it and so have others but...be careful.

[POSTMAN]

This document wasn't really for public consumption

Too late,it's ammo,use it or lose it.