Outrageous sacking of postman demonstrates 'toxic workplace culture

datasaint · Post by **datasaint** » 21 Sep 2019, 11:51

I don't agree with the tribunal, it clearly wasn't intentional delay of the mail the guy may have just misplaced or overlooked the special, the fact he was at the delivery point should meet the criteria of a successful delivery anyway, if he'd entered into the pda he couldn't deliver it at 12.59pm which is entirely true as nobody was to hand to sign for it, and then proceeded to get a signature at 1.01pm there'd be no case to answer anyway as it wouldn't even flag up on the system.

Shocking that somebody has 29 years service and no loyalty or discretion is shown.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 21 Sep 2019, 15:43

so it is fair to say that this ''manager'' did indeed have it in for him. he could've simply disregarded the bank ''reggie'' as most decent managers or even crap managers would've done. but because he's got previous, he made himself a target. I agree it was not wilful delay but they've took a chance to get rid of him by looking for any excuse, and they found it. being late with his tribunal forms didn't help him neither. sad SAD state of affairs. he'll lose his pension as well. (unless he's already in receipt of it). 29 yrs down the swanney.

Post by **rambo1** » 22 Sep 2019, 08:14

I have absolutely no sympathy for the postie. If you read the full story, not the cwu version, you'd see why. The guy had been put on probation for leaving a van unsecured and while on probation had another sign for incident and was told one more and you're out......then the daft bugger waits in a queue until it's too late....really how stupid is that? You'd make sure you do everything right with your job on the line surely. You'd have just said someone has to sign for this now or it goes back. Simple. This 'story' is just the Union trying to spread propaganda at this time of ballot. It's shocking. Cwu should actually be fighting for people that do the job right.

Post by **rambo1** » 22 Sep 2019, 08:18

norm wrote:I don't agree with the tribunal, it clearly wasn't intentional delay of the mail the guy may have just misplaced or overlooked the special, the fact he was at the delivery point should meet the criteria of a successful delivery anyway, if he'd entered into the pda he couldn't deliver it at 12.59pm which is entirely true as nobody was to hand to sign for it, and then proceeded to get a signature at 1.01pm there'd be no case to answer anyway as it wouldn't even flag up on the system.

Shocking that somebody has 29 years service and no loyalty or discretion is shown.

Actually we've been told last week that this is no longer the case. If you scan again after one, then it's goes as a failure. Of cours, nobody told us that though.

goneaway · Post by **goneaway** » 22 Sep 2019, 08:34

The Mirror has both sides of the story here, if you don't fancy wading through the tribunal judgement. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/r ... 140652.amp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

deltaforce · Post by **deltaforce** » 22 Sep 2019, 11:16

daveyeff wrote:so it is fair to say that this ''manager'' did indeed have it in for him. he could've simply disregarded the bank ''reggie'' as most decent managers or even crap managers would've done. but because he's got previous, he made himself a target. I agree it was not wilful delay but they've took a chance to get rid of him by looking for any excuse, and they found it. being late with his tribunal forms didn't help him neither. sad SAD state of affairs. he'll lose his pension as well. (unless he's already in receipt of it). 29 yrs down the swanney.

He won’t lose his pension. It’s not Royal mails to take away

deltaforce · Post by **deltaforce** » 22 Sep 2019, 11:23

rambo1 wrote:
norm wrote:I don't agree with the tribunal, it clearly wasn't intentional delay of the mail the guy may have just misplaced or overlooked the special, the fact he was at the delivery point should meet the criteria of a successful delivery anyway, if he'd entered into the pda he couldn't deliver it at 12.59pm which is entirely true as nobody was to hand to sign for it, and then proceeded to get a signature at 1.01pm there'd be no case to answer anyway as it wouldn't even flag up on the system.

Shocking that somebody has 29 years service and no loyalty or discretion is shown.
Actually we've been told last week that this is no longer the case. If you scan again after one, then it's goes as a failure. Of cours, nobody told us that though.

Because it probably isn’t true. They stopped all this rescanning ready for delivery nonsense a few years back.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Sep 2019, 11:32

deltaforce wrote:
daveyeff wrote:so it is fair to say that this ''manager'' did indeed have it in for him. he could've simply disregarded the bank ''reggie'' as most decent managers or even crap managers would've done. but because he's got previous, he made himself a target. I agree it was not wilful delay but they've took a chance to get rid of him by looking for any excuse, and they found it. being late with his tribunal forms didn't help him neither. sad SAD state of affairs. he'll lose his pension as well. (unless he's already in receipt of it). 29 yrs down the swanney.
He won’t lose his pension. It’s not Royal mails to take away

i'm afraid he will. he will be able to keep what HE'S paid in, but RM also pay in to it as well. they will deduct their contributions. this happens in nearly all cases of dismissal, unless of course you resign. but in this instance its too late for him to resign.

Post by **RobertT** » 22 Sep 2019, 11:58

daveyeff wrote:
deltaforce wrote:
daveyeff wrote:so it is fair to say that this ''manager'' did indeed have it in for him. he could've simply disregarded the bank ''reggie'' as most decent managers or even crap managers would've done. but because he's got previous, he made himself a target. I agree it was not wilful delay but they've took a chance to get rid of him by looking for any excuse, and they found it. being late with his tribunal forms didn't help him neither. sad SAD state of affairs. he'll lose his pension as well. (unless he's already in receipt of it). 29 yrs down the swanney.
He won’t lose his pension. It’s not Royal mails to take away
i'm afraid he will. he will be able to keep what HE'S paid in, but RM also pay in to it as well. they will deduct their contributions. this happens in nearly all cases of dismissal, unless of course you resign. but in this instance its too late for him to resign.

I don't believe that to be correct!

There have been cases where posties have been sacked for theft and have had there pensions reduced as a way of returning their ill gotten gains. But that is not the case here.

His pension will be deferred!

barcajr · Post by **barcajr** » 22 Sep 2019, 12:51

His pension will be frozen until he reaches NRA

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Sep 2019, 14:10

well I think I am correct as it happens. deferred.? what if he is already 55, or even 60. then it wont be deferred will it. a guy was finished from the job at an office along from us and was ''firmly'' advised to resign or lose his pension. he was facing 'gross misconduct' same as this guy.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Sep 2019, 14:13

he went against advice thinking his case was 'winnable' and hey presto, he lost more than half his pension.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 22 Sep 2019, 14:54

I asked the rep about it. he says once the guy was dismissed his pension was 'deferred' but he lost the right to accrued benefits. so he was down a lot of money, it has a big impact. some companies have it in their pension Ts&Cs. I think RMs is to do with 'gross misconduct'. when I say 'lose his pension' I don't mean all of it but you are down that's for sure. can be quite a bit in some cases.

Nickvilla20 · Post by **Nickvilla20** » 22 Sep 2019, 17:05

There’s much more to this story that is been mentioned in the article. It was a long list of offences plus a DOM who liked to pull the trigger.

Pompey Boy · Post by **Pompey Boy** » 23 Sep 2019, 00:04

Just my thoughts:

1 I have been represented by D Percival several times. Knows his stuff. Is the ruling an attempt to descredit him?

2 1pm time measurement - as clocked on the PDA? Is this stated anywhere in RM rules?

3 A distribution driver who didn't want to go to SOMC came over to deliveries. Found it tough and became ill. Thought about suing for constructive dismissal. Got far better legal advice from his home insurance provider than CWU legal services.