Labor Board Restricts Union Use of E-Mail

[TrueBlueTerrier]

What happens in the USA usually ends up coming here -

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/us/23 ... ref=slogin

The National Labor Relations Board has ruled that employers have the right to prohibit workers from using the company’s e-mail system to send out union-related messages, a decision that could hamper communications between labor unions and their membership.

In a 3-to-2 ruling released on Friday, the board held that it was legal for employers to prohibit union-related e-mail so long as employers had a policy barring employees from sending e-mail for “non-job-related solicitationsâ€

[norbet colon]

It certainly does -might explain RM's suspensions & sackings for posting on forums . There's certainly a dated US style of management .& dear Uncle Leighton thinks Walmart is the best company in the world .
[url=http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aV3jPRXA][/url are lurking--"Six suspensions for using this site "-Author Postman -8 Pages all written by people who read the SWP paper too much apparently

[Tman]

"norbet colon"]It certainly does -might explain RM's suspensions & sackings for posting on forums .

Is there a link to a verifiable source to confirm these alleged suspensions and sackings? Who are the posties and what is the office? If it's true, it's the type of story the BBC like to use in it's various news programmes, although it sounds more like the "friend of a friend's mate's dad's next door's dog walker heard it" and he probably read it in the Socialist fantasy Worker.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There is a story on the news section of the forum - Anger as four Bristol postal workers sacked - http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/forum/vi ... php?t=8671

but here is a link to the original story. http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=13829. Now of course you will have to make your own mind up on the veracity of the information but I do have independent, but un-quotable verification of the story. It did happen and it happened in Bristol. One of the people sacked posted on here regularly.

[Tman]

There is a story on the news section of the forum - Anger as four Bristol postal workers sacked - http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/forum/vi ... php?t=8671

but here is a link to the original story. http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=13829. Now of course you will have to make your own mind up on the veracity of the information but I do have independent, but un-quotable verification of the story. It did happen and it happened in Bristol. One of the people sacked posted on here regularly.

Fair enough, so can somebody from Bristol confirm and say who they were? What was the reasons given for the sackings? Are the union involved, and if not, why not? How about personnel? No mention of it on the RM Intranet site, and they usually post articles on misbehaviour by RM staff (presumably as a warning to the rest).
Why is your source un-quotable? If it happened, it's in the public domain and we should all know what's occurred.
I didn't bother with the Socialist Worker link; the only true thing in that is the date on top, and even then I'd check the calendar to make sure......

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There is a story on the news section of the forum - Anger as four Bristol postal workers sacked - http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/forum/vi ... php?t=8671

but here is a link to the original story. http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=13829. Now of course you will have to make your own mind up on the veracity of the information but I do have independent, but un-quotable verification of the story. It did happen and it happened in Bristol. One of the people sacked posted on here regularly.

Fair enough, so can somebody from Bristol confirm and say who they were? What was the reasons given for the sackings? Are the union involved, and if not, why not? How about personnel? No mention of it on the RM Intranet site, and they usually post articles on misbehaviour by RM staff (presumably as a warning to the rest).
Why is your source un-quotable? If it happened, it's in the public domain and we should all know what's occurred.
I didn't bother with the Socialist Worker link; the only true thing in that is the date on top, and even then I'd check the calendar to make sure......

Its un-quotable as in most cases of this nature there may be a possibility of an ET and my source may or may not be involved if there is. I was informed by people who were involved by PM before if became public knowledge but this was some time ago they may or may nor be the same individuals. As you appreciate I cannot go into any more details and I have to be circumspect in what I do say.

[Tman]

Its un-quotable as in most cases of this nature there may be a possibility of an ET and my source may or may not be involved if there is. I was informed by people who were involved by PM before if became public knowledge but this was some time ago they may or may nor be the same individuals. As you appreciate I cannot go into any more details and I have to be circumspect in what I do say

OK then, so somebody in Bristol must have noticed that four posties are no longer there, and office gossip says they were sacked for some undisclosed reason?
There is nothing confidential about staff being sacked even if ET is a possibilty (and it should be a certainty if the rumour is true).
How do you mean "may or may not be the same individuals"?
With respect, this sounds too much like the "DOM's email" scenario, and maybe judgement should be reserved until more (well, ANY) facts are known.

[POSTMAN]

I can assure you that there were sackings and suspensions from the Bristol area due to them being on this site.
I speak to one of them on here by pm regulary.
SW strangely enough has it spot on.

[Tman]

I can assure you that there were sackings and suspensions from the Bristol area due to them being on this site.
I speak to one of them on here by pm regulary.
SW strangely enough has it spot on.

Get him/her to come on then and say it, and state what the charge was. Was it ONLY for coming on here, or were there other factors?
Keeping it all in the realms of hearsay helps no-one.
IF people have been sacked then we need to know what it was they were sacked for, so we don't make the same mistake, and if they haven't, then it's just the usual BS.
I don't know who SW is, or what he has spot-on.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I can assure you that there were sackings and suspensions from the Bristol area due to them being on this site.
I speak to one of them on here by pm regulary.
SW strangely enough has it spot on.

Get him/her to come on then and say it, and state what the charge was. Was it ONLY for coming on here, or were there other factors?
Keeping it all in the realms of hearsay helps no-one.
IF people have been sacked then we need to know what it was they were sacked for, so we don't make the same mistake, and if they haven't, then it's just the usual BS.
I don't know who SW is, or what he has spot-on.

SW = SOCIALIST WORKER

Too add - as we are a forum that hopefully promotes Free Speech and the person/member has the right to either post or not. We cannot force them post their views, and therefore some things you have to take on good faith, of course whether you take this on faith or not is entirely up to you.

I must say that if I was involved in a n ET for posting on a forum I think the last thing I would do is post the details on that same forum.
Why.

1. Whether or not I admit to posting if I admit to it on-line it would add to their evidence.
2. If I was to post the allegations and history behind them I would undoubtedly give them a heads up as to the approach my defence/legal team are likely to take.

So selfish it may be but it would unwise to post again on this forum if I were in the same situation they are.

[Tman]

I must say that if I was involved in a n ET for posting on a forum I think the last thing I would do is post the details on that same forum.
Why.

1. Whether or not I admit to posting if I admit to it on-line it would add to their evidence.
2. If I was to post the allegations and history behind them I would undoubtedly give them a heads up as to the approach my defence/legal team are likely to take.

Fair points I suppose, but if he/they said something like, "I have been dismissed from RM for an alleged incident involving an InterNet forum, but I decline to comment further as an ET case is pending" it would satisfy the cynics (like me) among us.
The fact that employee(s) had been dismissed wouldn't be a secret; what the dismissal was for may be, if there's an ET pending.
So, without wishing to constantly repeat myself, can ANY member of staff from Bristol name these four disparus, or are they now "names which cannot be spoken" for fear of the 4am knock on the door?

[DGP1]

I must say that if I was involved in a n ET for posting on a forum I think the last thing I would do is post the details on that same forum.
Why.

1. Whether or not I admit to posting if I admit to it on-line it would add to their evidence.
2. If I was to post the allegations and history behind them I would undoubtedly give them a heads up as to the approach my defence/legal team are likely to take.

Fair points I suppose, but if he/they said something like, "I have been dismissed from RM for an alleged incident involving an InterNet forum, but I decline to comment further as an ET case is pending" it would satisfy the cynics (like me) among us.
The fact that employee(s) had been dismissed wouldn't be a secret; what the dismissal was for may be, if there's an ET pending.
So, without wishing to constantly repeat myself, can ANY member of staff from Bristol name these four disparus, or are they now "names which cannot be spoken" for fear of the 4am knock on the door?

This forum has a rule that states NO NAMES and if you choose not to believe then that is up to you but stop going on about the same thing over and over again I wouldn't like to see this thread degenerate into another slagging match.

[BELIAL]

Careful Trolls have ears.

[POSTMAN]

Tman,you're not gonna get anymore info,so................
Not sure why you are so interested anyway,but no doubt it will come out one way or the other one day.

[Tman]

Tman,you're not gonna get anymore info,so................
Not sure why you are so interested anyway,but no doubt it will come out one way or the other one day.

It's not the specific names or any other info I want, but someone to just verify that this event has actually happened.
To me, RM sacking employees for expressing thier views on an independant web-site is newsworthy both from a personal and employment law basis.
No-one to date has provided anything other than speculation and hearsay for something which should be quickly and easily verifiable, therefore logic says that either the sackings were an urban myth continued by the Andrex Worker, or employees were sacked but for reasons other than generally rumoured.
I don't see that allowing BS (if it is BS) to be regarded as the truth helps anyone's case, but then also allowing posters on here to land themselves in trouble with thier employer (if it IS true) is irresponsible too.
Happy Xmas.