Scotland 2 branch

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 28 Apr 2016, 15:36

One law for unions – another law for employers
Royal Mail stood accused of “hypocrisy” after the company made a legal objection to Scotland 2 Branch’s balloting process.
The ballot had been called in protest at the company’s refusal to comply with an industrial tribunal verdict ordering the reinstatement of an unfairly sacked postman.
David Mitchell was sacked from his job at Cupar Delivery Office in Fife back in December 2014 after Royal Mail made unfounded criminal allegations against him with no evidence.
An industrial tribunal heard the case and concluded that “the dismissal was unfair and the primary remedy contained in the legislation is reinstatement.”
After hearing that company “investigators” had searched David’s delivery van, his house, his person, and his own car for alleged stolen items of mail but had found zero evidence, the tribunal declared that Royal Mail’s “investigation” had “fallen very far short of that which a reasonable employer would have carried out” and that “no reasonable employer could conclude that the claimant (David) had stolen these items.”
Scotland 2 Branch secretary Kenny Logan commented: “It’s hypocritical of the business to refuse to comply with the outcome of a legal tribunal process and then to make a nit-picking objection to our internal strike balloting procedures.
“It’s certainly true to say there’s one law for unions and another law for employers.”
Kenny added: “We are in discussions with, and taking further advice from, the CWU national leadership and we will decide on our next course of action in due course.
“But make no mistake, this union will not accept the unfair dismissal of our member – and we will not be prevented from fighting for justice.”

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 28 Apr 2016, 16:57

Unfounded criminal investigations…no evidence…dismissal unfair

So why is he not re-instated? Are Royal Mail somehow above the law up in Scotland?? Strikes? Just get rid of the oafs that sacked him without any compelling evidence!

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 28 Apr 2016, 18:20

What royal mail senior management fail to realise is the bigger picture here.
What they now have in the east of Scotland is a management team that has completely lost the trust and respect of the staff across the entire area, they have paid out a fortune in legal fees and still lost, they have alienated a large number of customers in the affected area and now risk the whole thing becoming a national issue.

Was it worth it to cover up a flawed investigation?
Was it worth it to protect a poor initial managerial decision?
At what point does belligerence become a liability?

super-postie · Post by **super-postie** » 29 Apr 2016, 06:43

Wonder if his legal team has advised him to sue the business for defamation of character. Bet he would win. Wouldnt surprise me if there is a queue of lawyers trying to get the case.

Jambomatt1874 · Post by **Jambomatt1874** » 29 Apr 2016, 15:02

Should Union lawyers not check out all the small print before it goes to ballot so there's no issues. Very amateurish if you ask me

Broxi51 · Post by **Broxi51** » 29 Apr 2016, 16:37

Jambomatt1874 wrote:Should Union lawyers not check out all the small print before it goes to ballot so there's no issues. Very amateurish if you ask me

You need to ask the No.2 branch the reason for RM challenging the legality of the ballot before making comments.
Don't know if it is true but I heard that one of the reasons was that not all members had received their ballot papers.

Jambomatt1874 · Post by **Jambomatt1874** » 30 Apr 2016, 13:22

The leadership in Edinburgh has alot to be desired they've got no interest unless they're trying to win an election.