Managers willfully witholding mail..

[Johnny_Rad]

Hi
I work in a delivery office and about a month ago we had a new manager. Our previous manager made a lot of cuts including condencing 9 driving dutys down to 6. which is unworkable in the alloted time and there was always packets left to be delivered at the end of the day which would be put out on overtime untill they were complete.
Our new manager does not like to pay overtime and refuses to pay overtime on a daily basis to get these packets delivered. Currently there is a backlog of about 800 parcels on a duty that averages about 200 packets a day. Which means there are first class items that have been sitting there for 3/4 days that I find disgusting as people are paying first class service for these items.
Does anyone know what can be done about this as im sure there would be uproar by the customers if they knew what was going on.
Im in two minds as to wether to phone the local papers.

[hackedoff]

Careful OSA prevents us blabbing.

[Johnny_Rad]

If there is no one to monitor this then the managers can do whatever they like.

[hackedoff]

Yeah i know what you're saying. Problem is if we do it its delay if they do it its deferral. We're stuck a lot of the time

[Johnny_Rad]

Yeh our manager calles it streaming the packets. Selling a 1st class service and not even giving a second class service should be fraud as people are handing over cash for something they are not getting. Which really annoys me when there are plenty of workers who are willing to clear these packets.

[hackedoff]

Maybe someone else can give you better answers

[norbet colon]

Hi
I work in a delivery office and about a month ago we had a new manager. Our previous manager made a lot of cuts including condencing 9 driving dutys down to 6. which is unworkable in the alloted time and there was always packets left to be delivered at the end of the day which would be put out on overtime untill they were complete.
Our new manager does not like to pay overtime and refuses to pay overtime on a daily basis to get these packets delivered. Currently there is a backlog of about 800 parcels on a duty that averages about 200 packets a day. Which means there are first class items that have been sitting there for 3/4 days that I find disgusting as people are paying first class service for these items.
Does anyone know what can be done about this as im sure there would be uproar by the customers if they knew what was going on.
Im in two minds as to wether to phone the local papers.

It'd keep a lot of Ebay-ers happier if people got thier packets and there's people on here that do a bit of it . Everyone get's good feedback , things roll along nicely . :lfo says your'e not his customers .

As for local rags ,there's ways and means , "relatives " & "friends " to be a thorn in RM's side .
Plenty of mobile phones that take a half decent picture providing it's not blown up too much and noone would look too conspicious using one .
Plenty of basic editing software to tweak pictures up , or the local rag's photographers will be a whizz in Photoshop . Be Patient though ! internal then external, as RM will cry foul and it'll make them more paranoid than ever .

[wakkono]

perhaps if someone was to take a quick snap and maybe somehow this could make its way to the local rag things might change these things happen sometimes you know cameras taking photos by its self and im sure the local rag would love to see them

[fatherchristmas]

this happened at our office, delivery office within a mail center in deepest hertfordshire, mountains of packets built up not being delivered for weeks on end some even hanging around for a month or more. management simply said they had failed ther q of s and were no longer a priority. However the local press got wind of it and the local MP, then the BBC. The brown stuff hit the fan big time,all clear now!!

[iow1]

i would be very careful about letting the press know. what you need to find out via your local dum is is he telling his boss that your office is clear. this is done via the intranet daily it'e called dodr. some one usually bookroom or line manager reports 3 times daily. they must report what is left in the office as this is part of the qos. if you can prove they are lying then heads will roll. alternatively get your rep to get health and safety rep involved all those yorks hanging about must be a hazzard watch the dom squirm when he gets in trouble. some del offices have a quota on how many yorks should be on hand that are full.
stir it internally first

[brothermagrew]

Careful OSA prevents us blabbing.

Bollocks to that.......

You could consider the following if all the relevant criteria has been met and after having first and foremost exhausted all internal procedures.

UK Public Interest Disclosure Act.

Following is a summary of the key points and provisions of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA). This also applies to the Public Interest Disclosure Order in Northern Ireland.

Summary of the Act.
The Act came into force on 2nd July 1999. It encourages people to raise concerns about malpractice in the workplace and will help ensure that organisations respond by:

Addressing the message rather than the messenger; and
Resisting the temptation to cover up serious malpractice.
Through protecting whistleblowers from dismissal and victimisation in the following circumstances, the Act promotes the public interest.

Malpractice.
The Act applies to people at work raising genuine concerns about crime, civil offences (including negligence, breach of contract, breach of administrative law), miscarriage of justice, danger to health and safety or the environment and the cover up of any of these. It applies whether or not the information is confidential and extends to malpractice occurring overseas.

Individuals covered.
In addition to employees, it covers trainees, agency staff, contractors, homeworkers, trainees, police officers and every professional in the NHS. The usual employment law restrictions on minimum length of service and age do not apply. The Act does not presently cover the genuinely self-employed, volunteers, the intelligence services, or the army.

Legal Advice.
The Act confirms that workers may safely seek legal advice on any concerns they have about malpractice. This includes seeking advice from Public Concern at Work, which is designated a legal advice centre by the Bar Council.

Internal disclosures.
A disclosure in good faith to a manager or the employer will be protected if the whistleblower has a reasonable suspicion that the malpractice has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur. Where a third party is responsible for the matter this same test applies to disclosures made to it.

Disclosures to Ministers.
Where someone in the NHS or a public body blows the whistle in good faith direct to the sponsoring Department, the disclosure is protected in the same way as an internal one.

Regulatory disclosures.
The Act protects disclosures made in good faith to prescribed bodies such as the Health and Safety Executive, the Inland Revenue and the Financial Services Authority, where the whistleblower reasonably believes that the information and any allegation in it are substantially true. For a list of prescribed regulators in England, Scotland and Wales, please click here. For a list of prescribed regulators in Northern Ireland, please click here.

Wider disclosures.
Wider disclosures (e.g. to the police, the media, MPs, and non-prescribed regulators) are protected if, in addition to the tests for regulatory disclosures, they are reasonable in all the circumstances and they meet one of the three preconditions.

Provided they are not made for personal gain, these preconditions are that the whistleblower:

Reasonably believed he would be victimised if he raised the matter internally or with a prescribed regulator,
Reasonably believed a cover-up was likely and there was no prescribed regulator; or
Had already raised the matter internally or with a prescribed regulator.
In deciding the reasonableness of the disclosure the tribunal will consider the identity of the person to whom it was made, the seriousness of the concern, whether the risk or danger remains, and whether it breached a duty of confidence the employer owed a third party. Where the concern had been raised with the employer or a prescribed regulator, the reasonableness of its response will be particularly relevant. Finally, if the concern has first been raised with the employer, it is relevant whether any whistleblowing policy in the organisation was or should have been used.

Exceptionally serious matters.
Where the concern is exceptionally serious, a disclosure will be protected if it meets the test for regulatory disclosures and is not made for personal gain. The disclosure must also be reasonable, having particular regard to the identity of the person it was made to.

Full protection.
Where the whistleblower is victimised in breach of the Act he can bring a claim to an employment tribunal for compensation. Awards will be uncapped and based on the losses suffered. Additionally where an employee is sacked, he may apply for an interim order to keep his job.

Gagging clauses.
Gagging clauses in employment contracts and severance agreements are void insofar as they conflict with the Act's protection.





Also agree with other postings in that you should get your Workplace or Area Health & Safety Rep involved toot sweet.

[k979aaa]

JUST TO MAKE CLEAR A NURSE UP NORTH WAS SACKED FOR WHISTLEBLOWING BE CAREFULL TO ALL!.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

JUST TO MAKE CLEAR A NURSE UP NORTH WAS SACKED FOR WHISTLEBLOWING BE CAREFULL TO ALL!.

Actually at the moment that's a "cause-celeb" with NHS Strikes in support and all sorts of other things:


This is a story about her sacking.

November 15, 2007
by Angela Hussain

http://www.psychminded.co.uk/news/news2 ... ery005.htm

A "very good" mental health nurse who spoke out against NHS cuts has been sacked for talking to the media.

Karen Reissman, a community psychiatric nurse at Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust, was found guilty of gross misconduct last week after a six-day disciplinary hearing.

Ms Reissman was initially suspended 20 weeks ago after the trust alleged she had brought it into disrepute by her public criticism of government policies and local health cuts.

Ms Reissman is a member of Unison’s national health executive and chair of her branch.

Ms Reissman, who has led a series of protests against changes at the trust, was accused of "seriously adversely affecting the reputation of the trust" by speaking to the media, including her local paper, the Manchester Evening News (MEN)

Trust bosses say they followed their disciplinary procedures, according to the MEN.

Ms Reissman, 41, who has worked in Manchester for 25 years, told the MEN: "I can't believe this is happening in 2007 under a Labour government - the day when staff can no longer stand up for services, for staff and for patient care is a very sad day.â€

[leiwolf]

Isn't site access by all people and not just RM workers

[L Tommo]

Wouldnt it be lovely if everyone on this site signed up to giving it to RM and coming out with all there under handed tricks and feck ups.... GO NATIONAL.... 130.000 POSTIES SIGN UP AND STICK IT TO THE DOOR OF NO 10.... COP THAT BROWN U SLAG!!!


OUT

OSA ,,,, MY ARSE!!!