RM worker claims 'bullying boss timed staff toilet breaks'

[Tman]

You claimed "the last thing RM want is a united work force".
Can you explain what you meant by that, and what benefit to RM an ethnically-divided work force would possibly be?

[mismanaged]

Sounds like to me the manager was a complete idiot and pleased to read that he has left the business

Oh He has not left the business. He was re-instated. The appeal found that he had been dismissed unfairly.
incidentally he only ever asked staff to notify him if they were leaving the floor to go and pray. sounds perfectly reasonable.

Indeed it is reasonable, if all the staff are treated the same, and with respect. Although, I would think muslim women would find it distressing if they had to tell any male that they had to go to the toilet.

Reading between the lines this seems an age old problem at RM, its not what is requested, its how its requested

Its more like /////////////// Why is this being requested when it has not previously been requested./////////////

Some read between the lines, others merely count the number of lines.

[Cyclopz]

You claimed "the last thing RM want is a united work force".
Can you explain what you meant by that, and what benefit to RM an ethnically-divided work force would possibly be?

Well my own theory is avoidance of industrial action.
The more mixed the workforce is the less likely they are to stand together as one unit and one body.
You know divide and rule, the workforce has been planned, calculated and designed to be this way.

Anyway my guessing and musing is nothing in contrast to mismanaged story so I would like to step aside and let the thread follow his/her direction.
But Tman I also want to know why RM want a diverse workforce, I want your own opinion on this subject.
Don't just attack my opinion and take an easy back seat, come forward and offer an opinion of your own.

[Cyclopz]

Indeed it is reasonable, if all the staff are treated the same, and with respect.
Although, I would think muslim women would find it distressing if they had to tell any male that they had to go to the toilet.

Its more like /////////////// Why is this being requested when it has not previously been requested./////////////

Don't know the answer to this one.

[Tman]

But Tman I also want to know why RM want a diverse workforce,

Do you mean a "divided" work force? I don't recognise that they do; it was your statement that they (RM) do, not mine.

Don't just attack my opinion and take an easy back seat, come forward and offer an opinion of your own.

I find it unrealistic that a firm like RM would be machiavellian enough to somehow plan to achieve a non-cohesive work force (for whatever ends) as you suggest, but then I don't believe at least 99% of the witless Conspiracy Theories that abound either.
People/companies just ain't that clever.

[Cyclopz]

People/companies just ain't that clever.

So it's by accident and not design then.
I don't know which is worse.

Why all the rules and regulations on ethnic minority percentages then?
Why does the company have to employ so many people from different ethnic groups?
Why all the surveys and statistics on the ethnic mix of the workforce?
What's all that about?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Reading between the lines this seems an age old problem at RM, its not what is requested, its how its requested

Its more like /////////////// Why is this being requested when it has not previously been requested./////////////

Some read between the lines, others merely count the number of lines.

But thats still a communication failure by someone.

For managers it should be common sense if you are going to change a policy, way or working, process, then you communicate that through the Union and/or at workplace meetings. The benefit of this approach is that the workers or reps get a chance to put views/objections that might not have been considered, and indeed may offer solutions to problems, sometimes before they occur. For instance my suggestion about toilet visits.

For colleagues, if they are told in advance as a group, and the policy is policed in a fair and equal manner to everyone then if they fail to adhere to the new policy then agreed informal and formal action should take place, If they then ignore the change and carry on as before despite being counselled about it then they are being stupid or hard headed and as far as I know there is no cure for that.

For everyone if the correct processes that are already in place, are not being followed or flouted by a significant number of people, such as the need for managers to know where everyone is for H&S reasons (in case of evacuation) then both sides need to sit down and work out a solution.

The one thing you don't need to do is ask only certain individuals, whether its because they are seen as an easy way to get the rest to comply, or its too hard to approach the others, that is either favouritism or discrimination dependant on the circumstances.

Being a manager is hard, being a good manager is very hard - but then thats why they get paid more than the rest of us.

[mismanaged]

Yeah, that would really work well. There wouldn't be any claims of "the XXXXXXX's getting an easier time than the rest of us", or the "YYYYYs being allowed to go early" would there? Oh no.
How divided do you really want the work place/force to be?
Shame poor old Shamin had an Asian boss, otherwise she could've played the race card and then it would be a guaranteed win at the tribunal.

FYI
the claim she attempted to make at tribunal was Race descrimination, Religious discrimination, Sex descrimination and a dozen other little nitpiks that the judge threw out on day ONE. Her dumb ass barrister displayed the legal skills of a circus clown, I wish someone had taped it. The judge had to tell him that the her case was extremely weak on all counts other than 1 point which had a small chance of success, that being sex.

[mismanaged]

Yeah, that would really work well. There wouldn't be any claims of "the XXXXXXX's getting an easier time than the rest of us", or the "YYYYYs being allowed to go early" would there? Oh no.
How divided do you really want the work place/force to be?
Shame poor old Shamin had an Asian boss, otherwise she could've played the race card and then it would be a guaranteed win at the tribunal.

FYI
the claim she attempted to make at tribunal was Race descrimination, Religious discrimination, Sex descrimination and a dozen other little nitpiks that the judge threw out on day ONE. Her dumb ass barrister displayed the legal skills of a circus clown, I wish someone had taped it. The judge had to tell him that the her case was extremely weak on all counts other than 1 point which had a small chance of success, that being sex.

Her barrister was so stupid that he continued to take the case forward based on 3 claims, Sex, Religion and Race. Apparently he thought this case would be a pushover because he had won so many cases against RM before. But the difference with this case was it actually had a credible defendant.

[mismanaged]

Royal Mail worker claims 'bullying boss timed staff toilet breaks'

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ro ... ng-4973614" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Somali-born Shamin Husen, 30, also claims she was banned from attending prayers by her manager

Although I don't agree with the Daily Mail report completely, It was a far better, more balanced portrayal of what was said at the tribunal.
The facts stated by the witnesses however were few and far between. Fiction had a field day.
This Shamim Husen pursued her claim for the "highly honourable" sole purpose of (in her own words) financial compensation.

In the short time I have been at RM, I can summarize that my best performing workers were xxxxxxx (regardless of their ethnicity).


Right! I'm going to stop posting here but will continue on the other thread.

[mismanaged]

Re: Mrs SS Husen v Royal Mail Group Limited & Others(Weightmans Ref: P4-2927)
Case Number: 2700735/2014
Hearing: Monday 12 January 2015 to Friday 16 January 2015, Reading Employment Tribunal

I am pleased to confirm the Reserved Judgment of the Tribunal is that Mrs Husen's complaints are not well-founded therefore, the Claim is dismissed.