thechemisyshop wrote:when i started i went to a wedding on the friday night and was stilled pissed on the saturday morning -thankfully this was in the days of a 2.5 hour delivery - i puked my way round it and took an extra hour to complete - but didnt claim the docket -
on the monday the manager then decided to pull me up about - i told him to GTF and that he should have sent me home then - but as he didnt dont start yer crap now when its too late
Just an update to my original post. The Postie in question has now been sacked...and is no longer working for the company. I believe he is allowed to appeal against this, he apparently chose to have no CWU rep (or colleague) with him so I assume he's aware of this.
I've posted this as it sometimes gets difficult to get "Up to Date" examples on RMC. We're really good at anecdotes and "Old Posties Tales" (and an amusing time can be had reading some of them) but this Business had radically moved the goal posts over the last few years. I thinks it's very important that Colleagues should be able to get "Relevant" advice in a timely manner. Thanks to everyone for their input.
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
Yes they have radically moved the goalposts.
Yes people need to be constantly reminded of this.
What was acceptable or only punished with a warning a few years ago can now be a dismissable offence.
Life is a lot harsher in RM.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
Just bumped into an old colleague from a neighbouring office and it prompted me to update this old post. The drunken postie who was originally sacked had in fact been reinstated after an appeal!
Apparently he saw sense and eventually got the Union involved and after 3 months got his job back. I must admit to being surprised at the outcome. As an added bonus he received his 3 months outstanding wages and immediately went on leave, because he had accrued outstanding leave during that suspended/sacked period.
The main reason he got his job back was because the Manager couldn't actually prove that he was Drunk on Duty! I don't know how you're meant to do that...is the manger meant to have a drawer full of breathalysers to check suspects out? He was apparently blatantly drunk and on this occasion I can sympathise with the Manager. Are there any "Official" RM guidelines about checking this sort of thing?
It wasn't a popular decision within this office and has completely undermined the Managers authority. Now when anyone's picked up for anything they simply reply, "What you going to do...Sack me"? "I'll probably get me job back after 3 months holiday"!
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
Dorset Plodder wrote:Just bumped into an old colleague from a neighbouring office and it prompted me to update this old post. The drunken postie who was originally sacked had in fact been reinstated after an appeal!
Apparently he saw sense and eventually got the Union involved and after 3 months got his job back. I must admit to being surprised at the outcome. As an added bonus he received his 3 months outstanding wages and immediately went on leave, because he had accrued outstanding leave during that suspended/sacked period.
The main reason he got his job back was because the Manager couldn't actually prove that he was Drunk on Duty! I don't know how you're meant to do that...is the manger meant to have a drawer full of breathalysers to check suspects out? He was apparently blatantly drunk and on this occasion I can sympathise with the Manager. Are there any "Official" RM guidelines about checking this sort of thing?
It wasn't a popular decision within this office and has completely undermined the Managers authority. Now when anyone's picked up for anything they simply reply, "What you going to do...Sack me"? "I'll probably get me job back after 3 months holiday"!
The Manager should have been able to actually prove that he was Drunk on Duty if he intended taking disciplinary action.
Without proof it's no surprise this has completely undermined the Managers authority.
How can a Manager prove that sort of thing Lizard? If it was Driving Duty that Dickhead could have killed someone, and in theory the manager could have phoned the Police as soon as he drove out the gate. However if it's a HCT duty?
In the Forces we were subjected to random Drink/Drugs tests. Would that be a step too far? Perhaps Managers should ask a suspect postie to provide a urine sample...we know they're used to taking the piss!
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
I am only surmising but I think it probably goes something like this as RM don't need to provide scientific evidence of drunkenness.
"I thought he was drunk" would not be a reasonable reason for dismissal as it depends entirely on one persons opinion.
"I thought he was drunk, because he was staggering and seemed unsteady on his feet. He also smelled strongly of alcohol both from his skin and on his breath. Also I had previously discussed this with him as he had a history of reporting for work in a clearly inebriated state and I have documented this."
However, the most likely case for reinstatement as in most cases, is a simple failure by management to follow procedure. You can be as guilty as sin and still be reinstated if Royal Mail fail to follow their own policies without a good/reasonable cause.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts. Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility. If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
What teebs said.
The procedure for being drunk on duty is to send the member of staff home,accompanied if necessary and then investigate the reasons behind the behaviour.
It is very seldom a disciplinary matter never mind grounds for dismissal in itself,That would more likely happen if their drunken behaviour was reckless or violent.
When investigating the reasons you would have to tread carefully bearing in mind alcoholism can be a symptom of mental or depressive illness which may be covered by various discrimination legislation.
Given the minefield you step into by dismissing someone for simply being drunk on duty I'm not surprised they got it wrong but it won't be down to the original definition of drunk as long as that could be shown to be "reasonable".
Got a mate who's a train driver - they're really well up for this - random testing etc etc. Don't forget ... you can buy breathalysers over the counter these days (mainly due to the driving laws in France) ... so why can't RM have a stash ??
Plus for the "shandy boys" - toothpaste is a wonderful cure-all ...
"We're under model" - oh no we're not - stick your lapse elsewhere ...
royalmailslave wrote:Our office has more than its fair share of piss pots,I've even seen blokes who have turned to drink through the stresses of te job,a large majority of our office piss cans are also drivers,and as long as they could fulfil there duties managers didn't give a toss,I refused to get into a van with a well known heavy drinker in our office as I believed he was over the limit only to har a blazing row with the line manager at which he basically made me get in the van or I'd be disciplined,our workplace sometimes disgusts me
I would have phoned the police and told them there was a drunk driver going to leave the premises at roughly X time, complete with van number.
Dorset Plodder wrote:How can a Manager prove that sort of thing Lizard? If it was Driving Duty that Dickhead could have killed someone, and in theory the manager could have phoned the Police as soon as he drove out the gate. However if it's a HCT duty?
In the Forces we were subjected to random Drink/Drugs tests. Would that be a step too far? Perhaps Managers should ask a suspect postie to provide a urine sample...we know they're used to taking the piss!
You've already told us "He's not a Driver so at least that's in his favour" so that's not an issue here.
And if he "had a skin full the night before and was still very much the worse for wear the following morning. It was apparently fairly obvious, no room for arguing the toss" then any half capable manager would have been able to provide evidence to back up his charge.
"In the Forces we were subjected to random Drink/Drugs tests" but in the forces you were meant to have jobs with a tad more responsibility than delivering letters.
Lounge Lizard wrote: "In the Forces we were subjected to random Drink/Drugs tests" but in the forces you were meant to have jobs with a tad more responsibility than delivering letters.
Well in the modern army perhaps but I remember being asked to count the war reserve ammunition on more than one occasion - of course the senior NCOs then were almost without exception all WW2 veterans and drugs weren't an issue.
Valid points from TBT, Fishtank & Lizard. I think this particular Postie is lucky to still have his job...let's hope he's learnt something in the process.
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
- of course the senior NCOs then were almost without exception all WW2 veterans and drugs weren't an issue.