Wilful delay - Fairness - Proof

[thehulk76]

I was dismissed in April on wilful delay after 18 items of mail were found in a grey sack on a Monday morning that were for the rural delivery I was on the Saturday before. I had never seen these letters and told every manager at every point this but as my DOM could not think of any other explanation for this mail being where it was other than me trying to hide it in order to save time to be finished early. Even with that fact that there was no actual proof of my guilt, as there is none, I was still dismissed and lost my appeal. I even asked to see the CCTV footage for the Saturday but none was available. The appeals manager had already decided that I would make up an excuse if CCTV showed me with a bag.

Now since my dismissal another member of staff was found to have mail in his car, some of which had dead mail stickers, the little red ones, the rest didn't he claims that they were all to be killed off and RTS. I don't doubt the postman involved but he admitted to wilful delay and there is proof of this but still he keeps his job with inexcusable delay on his record.

Now how can this be fair and equal my case has no proof and I was assumed guilty and told I had to prove my innocence the other case had proof and an admission of guilt yet I was the one to be dismissed. The only difference that can be made between these cases is that I didn't / couldn't work past me time while the other worked every hour he could despite breaking RTD regulations and falsifying his tachometer to do this. Why does Royal Mail think it can assume guilt without proof, and unfortunately it looks like they are going to get away with this due to bad advice from the CWU my ET won't be heard.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Now you may not like what I am going to say but you have to ignore the other case you may feel hard done by, I would, but his case has been dealt with what is in all probability a reasonable manner. From what you say, he admitted to doing it so a reasonable outcome could range between a written warning all the way up to dismissal.

Now rightly or wrongly you not admitting guilt has no bearing on the outcome, nor does the lack of evidence. All Royal Mail have to do at your ET is prove that your dismissal was reasonable at that time, on the evidence available to the Manager who made the decision. There is no requirement to have a forensic trail or an admission of guilt all they need it reasonable grounds for dismissal.

So your ET needs to attack Royal Mail on the decision and prove it was unreasonable rather than it was unfair. Your other thread about bad advice or poor administration causing the failure of your ET application I would recommend going to see an Employment Solicitor and getting their advice, and check about the ET as well.

Please remember I have no training on ET matters or employment law or even any official CWU training therefore my advice and comments must be viewed with that in mind. IT IS ALWAYS BEST TO GET EITHER SOLICITORS ADVICE OR AN EXPERIENCED REPS VIEW When dealing with Such important matters.

[hans solo]

i would take rm to court
defamation of character

[dvbuk55]

I was dismissed in April on wilful delay after 18 items of mail were found in a grey sack on a Monday morning that were for the rural delivery I was on the Saturday before. I had never seen these letters and told every manager at every point this but as my DOM could not think of any other explanation for this mail being where it was other than me trying to hide it in order to save time to be finished early. Even with that fact that there was no actual proof of my guilt, as there is none, I was still dismissed and lost my appeal. I even asked to see the CCTV footage for the Saturday but none was available. The appeals manager had already decided that I would make up an excuse if CCTV showed me with a bag.

Now since my dismissal another member of staff was found to have mail in his car, some of which had dead mail stickers, the little red ones, the rest didn't he claims that they were all to be killed off and RTS. I don't doubt the postman involved but he admitted to wilful delay and there is proof of this but still he keeps his job with inexcusable delay on his record.

Now how can this be fair and equal my case has no proof and I was assumed guilty and told I had to prove my innocence the other case had proof and an admission of guilt yet I was the one to be dismissed. The only difference that can be made between these cases is that I didn't / couldn't work past me time while the other worked every hour he could despite breaking RTD regulations and falsifying his tachometer to do this. Why does Royal Mail think it can assume guilt without proof, and unfortunately it looks like they are going to get away with this due to bad advice from the CWU my ET won't be heard.

Did you have a union adviser with you throughout the process? You say that these items were found in a grey sack on the Monday but where exactly was the sack found? That, I would have thought, was crucial to the case because there was any number of reasons why those items were in the sack. Were the items sequenced by which I mean were they consecutive and would they have in reality saved you time, or were they random and you were visiting the properties anyway?

[flaminmoses]

What advice did the cwu give you when you went to them after your appeal?

[blackadder]

did you have a 2 year over you when the dim when you were charged for the 18 letters ??

[swashy]

The terrier gave you excellent advice. When there is less than compelling evidence the fall back is: - what is it reasonable to assume given the circumstances.
Your CWU Rep' should have forwarded your case to HQ and a decision is based on a balance of probability. This will determine whether the union provides assistance or not. Could you let me know.
Good luck.