Lifting your hands to a manager

[Talell]

Think the guys looking at the sack, probably deservidly so!

It's impossible to make that kind of judgement without knowing all of the facts so really you should try not to.

So when would you say its ever possible to justify raising your hands to another employee? There's always an alternative to violence. Just saying it as I see it!

What was the arguement about? Who said what? Exactly what words were used?

Can't say anything until you know that, because it could actually be justified based upon the external circumstances.

but from OP, I'd say get the area rep on the phone NOW

was he suspended? if he wasn't, then things are looking good in my opinion

[Stormproof]

I doubt they would suspend any one on a Saturday morning, otherwise the LM's will have to do some work instead of going home at 9.30.

[AJ1987]

Think the guys looking at the sack, probably deservidly so!

It's impossible to make that kind of judgement without knowing all of the facts so really you should try not to.

So when would you say its ever possible to justify raising your hands to another employee? There's always an alternative to violence. Just saying it as I see it!

What was the arguement about? Who said what? Exactly what words were used?

Can't say anything until you know that, because it could actually be justified based upon the external circumstances.

but from OP, I'd say get the area rep on the phone NOW

was he suspended? if he wasn't, then things are looking good in my opinion

This isn't a playground. Just because someone says something you might not like or agree with doesn't give you the right to physically assault them surely. Takes a bigger person to walk away from an argument, fact. If he did indeed feel the line manager was out of order there's other avenue's he could, and should, of gone down imo

[fishtank]

Takes a bigger person to walk away from an argument, fact.

No it doesn't....that's just a throw-away moral tag line that makes people who constantly walk away feel better about themselves..
What it actually takes is someone who is thinking straight and in control of their emotions.
That isn't always possible.
One of our members flew for a manager once after the manager had been winding him up.
It turned out he had found out he had cancer the day before.

[Stormproof]

No doubt you will be provoked by a manager at some point whilst working for RM AJ. I reckon you have'nt seen the nasty side of them yet as you've only been in the job 3 weeks.

[AJ1987]

Takes a bigger person to walk away from an argument, fact.

No it doesn't....that's just a throw-away moral tag line that makes people who constantly walk away feel better about themselves..

I disagree. Obviously done this guy no favours by not walking away has it, looking at the possibility of joining the long line of people down at the job centre. Seems the "them and us" attitude towards management that lots seem to have seem intent on vilifying the line manager on this occasion. The guy shouldn't of raised his hands, end of.

As for not me not seeing the nasty side of management, life doesn't begin with RM. I've been employed in various different jobs before. Management are management no matter what company shirt they have on so you can't play the only been here for 3week card'.

[fishtank]

Seems the "them and us" attitude towards management that lots seem to have seem intent on vilifying the line manager on this occasion. The guy shouldn't of raised his hands, end of.

I haven't mentioned the manager.
You are the one passing judgement.
That is your issue,not mine.

[AJ1987]

Seems the "them and us" attitude towards management that lots seem to have seem intent on vilifying the line manager on this occasion. The guy shouldn't of raised his hands, end of.

I haven't mentioned the manager.
You are the one passing judgement.
That is your issue,not mine.

Am I? As far as I've been led to believe rm deal with violence in work in only one way. What I actually said was violence should never be the answer and the guys looking at the sack, possibly deservidly so. Nothing definitive there except the fact I believe that violence should never be used. Something people seem to have an issue with...which is worrying imo.

[chrisj]

Its not always black or white... However, I am with you AJ, what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

If it was a case of 'red mist' from someone who does not usually behave like that then mitigating circumstances and all that. However, if it a usual suspect - the anti-establishment type, confrontational and uncooperative, then the punishment might be harsh?

A guy got suspended for telling a female manager to f-off in her office; he left in the end - sacked? I don't know. He tried to dispute it using lack of witness but he was wrong anyway in refusing to follow what is deemed reasonable instruction

[fishtank]

Am I? As far as I've been led to believe rm deal with violence in work in only one way

No they don't.
That would be a mechanistic approach and completely inappropriate.
Why do you believe that the defence of provocation or mitigating circumstances,which are both accepted in law should not apply in Royal Mail?

What I actually said was violence should never be the answer and the guys looking at the sack, possibly deservidly so.

No. You didn't say possibly deservedly so...you said probably deservedly so...a minor difference in spelling but a major difference in meaning and that is the whole point isn't it?
This isn't about how acceptable violence is it's about how acceptable it is to pass judgement on a situation you know nothing about.
Take the moral high ground if you like but it's a dangerous place up there,one slip and you're back amongst the lesser mortals and they will have no time for the preacher who sinned.

[AJ1987]

Am I? As far as I've been led to believe rm deal with violence in work in only one way

No they don't.
That would be a mechanistic approach and completely inappropriate.
Why do you believe that the defence of provocation or mitigating circumstances,which are both accepted in law should not apply in Royal Mail?

That's what we were told in our induction, whatever the circumstances - even if you felt you were provoked - there was a zero tolerance towards violence. There's always other avenues to go down to deal with situations such as those.

What I actually said was violence should never be the answer and the guys looking at the sack, possibly deservidly so.

No. You didn't say possibly deservedly so...you said probably deservedly so...a minor difference in spelling but a major difference in meaning and that is the whole point isn't it?
.

haha, are you serious? now your just splitting hairs...clutching at straws!

Whats interesting is that when someone posted this (see below) you said nothing. Thats okay tho isn't it because that opinion's all about how vile and appauling the manager must have been. Seems your obviously not looking at this from an unbiased perspective clearly..

Obviously if this line manager was :ncfo :vcfo in the posties face and the guy/girl felt threatened then merely pushing this idiot away is using reasonable force/self defence to avoid a very real possibility of a good old fashioned punch up...no doubt the DOM will stick up for his line manager who sounds a complete tool,if he/she has to revert to :ncfo :dcfo :dcfo to get a point across...in my book the postie was provoked,he/she used reasonable force to deter the aggressor,..looking at the bigger picture..this line manger would appear to need anger/man management sessions based on what i have read.

There was a incident in my office yesterday when a colleague got into a heated argument with a line manager..The result being words we exchanged and the Postie shoved the line manager twice in the argument...Will an apology be suffice from the postie or is this a hanging offence?..The D.O.M..was contacted on the matter...

Take the moral high ground if you like but it's a dangerous place up there,one slip and you're back amongst the lesser mortals and they will have no time for the preacher who sinned.

Preacher, aha! Yes how bad of me not to condone violence against a fellow employee . From what was said it was a heated arguement - an arguement cannot be had by one person alone, words were exchanged so even best case sinario is that both the line manager and postman in this case were equally to blame for the arguement does that give one the right to use violence against the other? in my opinion no! and seems im not the only one who shares that opinion, like it or not!

[Talell]

In a idyllic utopia, yes, all forms of violence would never happen, let alone be unacceptable.

That isn't reality. In reality, where we all exist, s**t happens.

No, really, it does.

You are correct, noone should hit anyone ever. In the terms of a premeditated attack.

If it is something that happens in the heat of the moment, it should be judged accordingly, because who knows, the person who was hit COULD be at fault.

The other avenues are the grievance procedure and B&H procedure. A common complaint I've heard is that the procedures don't scale well to management issues, so a case may not be going the way it should go, or even how the member of staff thinks it should, leading to frustration towards the system. The system the managers represent. Frustration can lead quickly to anger, if there is a suitable catalyst, say a manager involved in the case ignores his request to forego lapsing today because his normal walk is busy that day, and makes him do it anyway, which means he might have to go over his time (in my made up scenario he is too proud to cut off, thinks his colleagues will think less of him), into the time he is ment to be picking his kids up from school, that he only see's once a week, after a recent separation with his partner.

See, add a little backstory, and it paints a different picture from the sterile 'mate punched lino, wat do?'

'Don't judge a book by its cover' fact.

[fng]

Obviously if this line manager was :ncfo :vcfo in the posties face and the guy/girl felt threatened then merely pushing this idiot away is using reasonable force/self defence to avoid a very real possibility of a good old fashioned punch up...no doubt the DOM will stick up for his line manager who sounds a complete tool,if he/she has to revert to :ncfo :dcfo :dcfo to get a point across...in my book the postie was provoked,he/she used reasonable force to deter the aggressor,..looking at the bigger picture..this line manger would appear to need anger/man management sessions based on what i have read.

Just curious. How do you deduce this from the original post?

My thoughts too I had to read the post a couple of times to make sure I hadn't missed some.

[Straight4ward]

We would do well to remind ourselves of P739’s original post.

There was a incident in my office yesterday when a colleague got into a heated argument with a line manager..The result being words we exchanged and the Postie shoved the line manager twice in the argument...Will an apology be suffice from the postie or is this a hanging offence?..The D.O.M..was contacted on the matter...

We weren’t being asked to sit in judgement and how could we? We weren’t present and we don’t know all the facts, let alone the circumstances surrounding them.

All P739 was asking was whether people thought an apology would be sufficient or whether it would be viewed as “a hanging offence”. Something, I hasten to add that is nigh on impossible to draw conclusions.
Follow the sensible advice about involving the union and good luck.

[P739]

A wee update the postie concerned was suspended on Saturday morning and he was lettered by the management on Monday morning....Not looking good for him..The reason i posted the thread was due to the fact i thought the management would need to act on it.. Because it would open up a can of worms if the situation ever arouse again and they had not dealt correctly with the original incident...