The grumpy thread

[Lankytim]

I think that 99% of the time they are relying on you being intimidated enough to just accept anything they say to you, most don't know what their proper powers are anyway- many act like they have God like powers over workers. My brother was in for gross misconduct a few weeks ago, with the view to firing him (he fell asleep on the bog, apparently) They insist that he signed something that said he didn't want a rep with him, although he's adamant he did no such thing. Eventually they got him in with his union rep who analysed the case against him and promply tore a strip off his manager for not following the process correctly (they had totally mangled it apparently). They were pretty embarrased by all this so promised to get their act together and try and sack him at a later date, all this has been postponed due to the death of our mother though, they even sent him a kindly worded letter letter saying as such, which his union rep classed as "totally unacceptable" and fired off another letter of complaint back!

 

I can see why bosses want to prize employees away from any sort of legal advice or help. It makes things very awkward for them indeed!

[Mr_Bo11ox]

Only feckless and/or incompetent bosses want to prevent their workers from having access to help with disciplinary procedures etc. A capable/confident boss would simply make sure enough that they had reasonable, evidenced grounds for disciplining someone, before launching into it. Surprisingly this seems to be far too much of a task for many clueless gimps who have somehow wound up with 'manager' in their job title hence they end up just making a total balls of it and pissing everyone off including themselves.

[Guest]

What was funny in my case is that the original complaint they had against me was pretty legitimate (messing around on the Internet instead of doing work; I was fed up). However, they gradually undermined themselves as they went along. I'm doing this from memory so the timescales are a bit sketchy, but I think some you will get a kick out of it. It's been long enough now and I'm sod all to do with most of the parties concerned. Some of you will know odd bits of this, but this is the full story (more or less), it's a long one so if it's too boring just go watch TV or something - this is for the disgruntled workers and people who find computers funny.

 

Basically I was pulled into the office of the senior manager last thing on a Friday who said I could be in trouble for gross misconduct as they had a load of records of me looking at clearly non-work websites (all clean ones in case you were wondering, I'm not that dumb). He said he'd let me know if anything was going to happen. I thought "fair enough" and did my job properly from then on. After a couple of weeks I'd heard sod all, so that was that. Many months later a temporary secondment turned up in another town so I asked the gaffer if I could go do that, who went to the senior manager for approval and got the nod. I then went off and did it, then a few months later I got a letter in the post from HR saying I had a disciplinary hearing to attend! I rang up HR expecting them to say it was some kind of admin cock-up and they confirmed it wasn't - despite hearing nothing for almost a year (in which time I had been approved to go work in another office, doing a different job!) I was to attend a disciplinary hearing and if the charges against me were true, I would be dismissed for gross misconduct. I also had to go collect an "evidence file" from them. At this stage I tried to convince them of how ridiculous the situation was and involve ACAS and suchlike (they told me the timescale for such a matter should be usually a few days to a fortnight tops), but they weren't having it - there had to be this big hearing, no matter what. It was at that stage they told me I wasn't allowed to have any legal representation either.

 

So I thought "fine then" and went to pick up this amazing dossier of evidence they'd compiled against me - then I got home with it, opened it up and went "eh?". Basically it wasn't for the original situation - the senior manager had looked at my Internet usage for the following month to see if I had "re-offended". Now bear in mind at that time I was absolutely on my best behaviour. However, also bear in mind that in the job I was doing then, using the Internet was a major part of my job - I'd usually have about 5 windows open at once with various dull government/registry/records/court/law websites. What he'd done is print out an entire month's worth of my Internet history URLs onto sheets of A4 (about 30 a page), meaning I had a massive ring binder of things like "govlink.secure-server" and "2663326/32362362/46426_246.php" and suchlike. How was he convinced of my guilt? Basically, anything that was an obvious work website that he'd heard of was highlighted with a pen. So if he spotted "http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk" that was OK. Never mind the fact that for every visit to Companies House there'd be about 30-odd lines of background data-fetching, banner ads being served up, page clickthrough nonsense, search results, etc. Those would have funny addresses made of numbers and dots so he didn't know what they were - they were not work-related. Anyway, after highlighting a few lines, he came to the conclusion that something like 98% of my Internet use wasn't work-related (yes, he put an actual percentage). To sum it up in a non-technical way - I'm getting fired because this chump doesn't understand how the Internet works. A long time ago.

 

So what did I do? I sat there with this great big ring-binder and went through every single damn address, dozens of URLs a page across hundreds of pages, typing them in one-by-one and writing down what every single one of these meant. Banner ads, bits of background info from Google, software updates for their own machines, data from online training courses I'd been made to do - I think it took a solid 20-30 hours to do it all, just because I wanted to absolutely crucify him at the hearing they insisted we were having. The end result? My non-work Internet use for the entire MONTH was checking what time Halfords closed because I'd blown a bulb on the way to work. The actual figure of data transferred which wasn't work-related was something like 0.02% - as opposed to his figure of 98%, which wasn't just a little bit out - it was absolutely laughably wrong. So instead of firing somebody for legitimate reasons, he was now trying to fire somebody with evidence showing they had probably the best Internet usage record of anyone in the entire workforce. Astounding.

 

So then I turned up to the hearing, repeat the post I did a bit above. I'd turned up at the hearing with exhaustive copies of everything (I used nearly a box of their A4 and probably an entire toner cartridge), complete with a defence of something like 20 pages length, breaking down every single mistake they'd made in great detail and providing layman explanations of how computers work. I really went to town on it, it had graphs and all sorts (I've kept the master copy as a memento). I insisted on reading the entire thing to them and also asked individually of the computer skills/qualifications of everybody on the panel, coming to the conclusion that the only person who has even the faintest idea of what's gone on is me. I then said that as I'd been denied legal representation, I want to proceed to Stage 2 in order that I can have it, as I want to have a full tribunal with a solicitor, an expert witness (some guy I know who is a network engineer) and for ACAS to be involved with the entire thing. The chair of the meeting (a very, very senior manager) looked genuinely furious - not at me, but at the senior manager - he couldn't hide his contempt for what an enormous hole he'd dug. Everybody was sent out of the room except the chair and the senior manager and a LONG discussion was had, then some more discussions with everybody except me.

 

Probably over an hour later I was invited back in for the "you'll be getting a verbal warning and you'll work back some time" piece, at which I reiterated my desire to take it forward to the Stage 2 appeal once I'd got the documents through confirming it all. Never did and nobody involved ever made eye contact with me again - except the HR bint who saw me in town once on a day off and made a bit of a face, to which I told her to piss off out of my sight. The senior manager was made redundant a few months later - direct result? Probably not, but I doubt it helped.

[morris_ital_lover]

Hero status confirmed... what toss pots your manager and HR bint were. It seems remarkable to me that they were going to try and show you the door through some poorly researched Kangaroo court and thought they could get away with it; at the end of the day your owning £Xs from your company and your ex-manager is earning £0. 1-0 Hirst cabs.

[Cavcraft]

Sort of hard to say this without (unintentionally) sounding patronising, but that's fantastic work, Hirst.

Sadly this sort of shit has been happening for years and I believe companies, or management with a grudge, like to think everyone will just roll over and accept their decision. The fact you mentioned a solicitor and ACAS is effing brilliant, I bet they never planned on you mentioning that and I expect it called their bluff a bit too, as some places like to imply that they have access to top lawyers and what not, sort of telling you that if you take the firm on you have no chance.

Also most places these days like everyone in the workforce to think how lucky they are to work there and that if they step out of line they'll be sacked on the spot and never find another job etc.

 

A good while I had an interesting chat with an HR man (from a previous job) who told me how my almost daily e-mails to him about a manager made the office's day. They knew full well the bloke was a fucking neanderthal gobshite and that what he kept trying to do* was wrong. In some places of work there are key words you can mention that will have them crapping blue lights, victimisation is one of them and with a decent case and enough belief it can be used against them successfully. The subsequent official meeting between various parties was an absolute hoot as the manager in question and his boss were just blown out of the water. Sort of hard to explain the feeling of elation, but it was on par to how I'd imagine it'd feel to step into the ring with Mike Tyson and to deck him with a single punch before he'd got near me.

 

*He just made the rules up as he went along and then tried to bully people when they refused to go along with whatever stupid idea was on his mind.

[Rocket88]

I was offered a humumgous bung by a very well known company to resign 14 months after becoming union rep..............

[Negative Creep]

Never even considere joining a union, with all the workers rights you get they just seem a bit outmoded today. I was offered a representative but declined it. In such situations it can be better just to keep quiet and admit you made a mistake

[retrogeezer]

I had some fun at a previous place of work regarding 'lateness'. I was never late and would arrive at 8.55, switch on my pc and then go and get a coffee. The 'team' I was in consisted of me and 4 girls, the girls were late 90% of the time citing traffic problems. Said girls also spent 3/4 of an hour out of the day on smoking breaks, I don't smoke so effectively did 3/4 of an hours more work than them.

 

One particular day at about 9.30ish the 'team' received an email form the office assistant manager basically reprimanding all of us as 'there was no-one on the team available to answer the phone at 9.00am'

 

I replied to this email with something along the lines of 'is this a joke? I was at my desk at 9.00am (I was) I may have been at the coffee machine (25 feet from my desk) but I was certainly at my desk and 'working' at 9.00 as the computer history will show. (all the girls did not turn up until 9.10-9.15 because of traffic)

 

I got a reply from the assistant manager saying 'please don't send me emails in that tone Simon, come and speak to me if there is an issue' To which I replied ' so it is o.k for you to send me an email reprimanding me for something I haven't done but if I query it by email that is wrong?' !!

 

I also regularly worked extra time unpaid but never got shown any appreciation for that by email or otherwise.

[Guest]

'Moderation' on another forum that I frequent. Although part of me really, really wants to argue the toss with said arrogant bell-end, I can't be arsed with two forum bans in as many weeks (although the former has now been lifted).

[Guest]

If someone's ringing up exactly at 9am, their call probably wants to be missed either way.

[chaseracer]

Never even considere joining a union, with all the workers rights you get they just seem a bit outmoded today...

FFS, how do you think the vast majority of employment rights were won in the first place?! The intrinsic kindness of employers...?

 

Enjoy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=184NTV2CE_c

[cms206]

I was sacked from my last job after a year of fighting back and forth; the Unions got me a payout (which apparantly I cannot discuss due to a confidentiality agreement), but they should still have managed to save my job; as it was, the offer given to me was "drop from 40hrs a week at £6.97/hr plus a minimum of 97p/hr shift allowance, 32 days paid holiday and a 6 on/3 off shift pattern to 20hrs part time on minimum wage or we'll terminate your contract." This wasn't going to be enough money, so they offered me 30hrs part time... at Edinburgh. Ten extra hours a week and a 450 mile weekly commute. Despite the fact that from August 27th 2010 until December 31st 2010 I was "suspended", but had to attend work to cover for the supervisor who in turn had to cover me.

 

I don't suppose it helped that I was claiming overtime and extra duties payments for acting up, but at the end of the day these morons were asking for it.

[Pete-M]

32 days holiday????? That's almost 10% of the year off!

[cms206]

32 days holiday????? That's almost 10% of the year off!

 

We started off with 28 days and accrued an extra day for every year's service; the hours were shite and for the work we were doing the wages were pretty crap, but it was a great job and the people were ace. Just a shame the folk who took us over were total bellends with an HR department who couldn't spell HR.

[Negative Creep]

Never even considere joining a union, with all the workers rights you get they just seem a bit outmoded today...

FFS, how do you think the vast majority of employment rights were won in the first place?! The intrinsic kindness of employers...?

 

Enjoy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=184NTV2CE_c

 

 

But this is no longer the era of the Chartists and times have moved on. Just look at what happened to British Leyland where they walked out every time they changed the brand of toilet paper. Or the tube drivers having their weekly strike due to not getting a bonus for turning up in the morning.

[Cavcraft]

Times have indeed moved on but (easy to say of course) I'd far rather be a union member than not, because if the shit does hit the fan you've got a lot of clout behind you.

 

There are always going to be tales of how unions ruined companies and how companies treat/ed people like shit because they haven't got union recognition or whatever. What's rarely publicised is the work the unions do for their members and for the companies.

[M'coli]

Never even considere joining a union, with all the workers rights you get they just seem a bit outmoded today...

FFS, how do you think the vast majority of employment rights were won in the first place?! The intrinsic kindness of employers...?

 

Enjoy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=184NTV2CE_c

 

 

But this is no longer the era of the Chartists and times have moved on. Just look at what happened to British Leyland where they walked out every time they changed the brand of toilet paper. Or the tube drivers having their weekly strike due to not getting a bonus for turning up in the morning.

The BL strikes were 30-40 years ago, and since then successive governments have managed to erode workers' rights and the power of the unions to behave in the way that they did in the 60s and 70s.

If we don't fight for the rights we currently have, it won't take long before they will be reduced to nothing either and we'll be back to things like the butty system, where you are given tokens to spend in the company's shops rather than cash that you can spend where you choose.

[Negative Creep]

The BL strikes were 30-40 years ago, and since then successive governments have managed to erode workers' rights and the power of the unions to behave in the way that they did in the 60s and 70s.

If we don't fight for the rights we currently have, it won't take long before they will be reduced to nothing either and we'll be back to things like the butty system, where you are given tokens to spend in the company's shops rather than cash that you can spend where you choose.

 

 

Standing up for rights is one thing, making everyone else's life a misery by constantly walking out is just a "fuck you Jack, I'm alright" attitude that turns public support against you. Take the teachers, striking because a guaranteed pension and 12 weeks holiday a year wasn't good enough. Never mind all the people who had to take a day off work to look after their kids, as long as the teachers were ok. Picket lines were oddly empty that day, though I'm sure they took the chance to go shopping

[dollywobbler]

^^^ Very true. My suspicion is that the whole rising house price thing is just a scam to make sure people HAVE to work. Otherwise, more people would be like me and would simply make their labour unavailable to idiotic companies by resigning.

 

Seems to me that unions seem to spend a bit too much time trying to look for trouble so they can prove that they're doing something. The RMT union springs to mind here, though they may be tarring all unions with the same brush. A union can't really sit back and say "well, everything seems chipper at the moment" because no-one would see the point in joining one.

[chaseracer]

The BL strikes were 30-40 years ago, and since then successive governments have managed to erode workers' rights and the power of the unions to behave in the way that they did in the 60s and 70s.

If we don't fight for the rights we currently have, it won't take long before they will be reduced to nothing either and we'll be back to things like the butty system, where you are given tokens to spend in the company's shops rather than cash that you can spend where you choose.

 

 

Standing up for rights is one thing, making everyone else's life a misery by constantly walking out is just a "fuck you Jack, I'm alright" attitude that turns public support against you. Take the teachers, striking because a guaranteed pension and 12 weeks holiday a year wasn't good enough. Never mind all the people who had to take a day off work to look after their kids, as long as the teachers were ok. Picket lines were oddly empty that day, though I'm sure they took the chance to go shopping

"Constantly"? Twice in the past five years, should you be interested in the facts, and both times as a last resort when negotiations with a recalcitrant & hostile employer failed - and after a full legal ballot of members.

 

A pension is deferred salary, invested on the worker's behalf to provide an income in retirement, so people get understandably narked when the government makes a blatant cash-grab based on deceit & misinformation.

 

My wife's a teacher; she works through much of her 'holidays'.

 

What many fail to acknowledge about the 70s strikes is that workers were often appallingly treated by managers and employers; workers were seen as expendable, safety legislation was in its infancy, and rights were often denied. The kind of industrial action which took place was often the only way to bring the employer back to the table, where a reasonable resolution would be negotiated - though, of course, never reported...

[Louise2cv]

workers were seen as expendable,

 

Still are.

 

As my last boss said:

 

"if you don't like like it, leave your van keys on the table and f*ck off, plenty of other people want a job".

[dollywobbler]

What many fail to acknowledge about the 70s strikes is that workers were often appallingly treated by managers and employers; workers were seen as expendable, safety legislation was in its infancy, and rights were often denied. The kind of industrial action which took place was often the only way to bring the employer back to the table, where a reasonable resolution would be negotiated - though, of course, never reported...

 

There's an element of truth there - unfair pay for the seamstresses at Ford as a key example - but sadly it was all rather spoilt by what became a simple power-grab by union leaders. They got a sniff of power and, backed by the incompetence of management, they went far too far with their actions and behaviour. I think Speke becomes a key point here where unions were helping work-shy folk 'pretend' to be working on production lines and kicking seven shades out of anyone who raised an objection. It may be decades ago, but that sort of thing still leaves many of us very wary of unions. As does working with some union reps...

[M'coli]

Take the teachers, striking because a guaranteed pension and 12 weeks holiday a year wasn't good enough. Never mind all the people who had to take a day off work to look after their kids, as long as the teachers were ok. Picket lines were oddly empty that day, though I'm sure they took the chance to go shopping

Good lord, don't you understand that was what they were wanting to protect? They weren't after anything extra, just to protect what they already had - the coalition's plan had been to begin the removal of that "guaranteed". Why is it wrong to fight for what is rightfully yours when you're in the public sector? Why is it that there is such resentment towards teaching staff, or anyone else in the public sector? They signed up to do a job with terms and conditions that had been fought hard for and didn't want to see them eroded by stealth. You don't get paid for being on strike, and you don't get your pension contributions either. There are a set, low, amount of people allowed at a picket line - and those same teachers who were not at the picket line may have been looking after their own children too.

 

These days it's not easy to go on strike, there are so many rules and regulations that the union has to satisfy for the strike to be legal (the union I am in had a strike veto'd because of such an oversight), so it is now the very last resort. And it's not just reckless striking that turns the public against you per se, it's the biased reporting and media smear campaigns against those who do a job because they feel it is their duty to society that gets them that.

[pandamonium]

People who stop and wave you out at mini roundabouts. There is a 'give way to traffic coming from your right' rule for a reason!

 

Also, people who find it perfectly acceptable to turn right from the left lane at a large roundabout!

 

Grrrrr.

[chaseracer]

What many fail to acknowledge about the 70s strikes is that workers were often appallingly treated by managers and employers; workers were seen as expendable, safety legislation was in its infancy, and rights were often denied. The kind of industrial action which took place was often the only way to bring the employer back to the table, where a reasonable resolution would be negotiated - though, of course, never reported...

 

There's an element of truth there - unfair pay for the seamstresses at Ford as a key example - but sadly it was all rather spoilt by what became a simple power-grab by union leaders. They got a sniff of power and, backed by the incompetence of management, they went far too far with their actions and behaviour. I think Speke becomes a key point here where unions were helping work-shy folk 'pretend' to be working on production lines and kicking seven shades out of anyone who raised an objection. It may be decades ago, but that sort of thing still leaves many of us very wary of unions. As does working with some union reps...

Wow, Ian - couldn't accuse you of making any sweeping generalisations there...!

 

Good point about the Ford workers, though - 42 years after the Equal Pay Act - women are still paid less on average for work of equal value. There's a way to go yet...

[MrDuke]

The union where I (used to) work was always very helpful, especially when problems resulted from bad management - they were always wise to the people who made a fuss over nothing, as well. The real downer was when a girl in my office (who I always got on well with) became a rep, just after I was made supervisor - despite my best efforts she was constantly ripping into the way I supposedly 'wasn't standing up for other people' and giving me grief about perceived injustices (including swearing her head off at me in the canteen) - I believe she really expected me to tell my managers where to go on a daily basis, as if I didn't actually need my job...

 

Which kind of illustrates DW's point about very good unions being tarnished by shitty individual attitudes.

[gallondrunk]

Good lord, don't you understand that was what they were wanting to protect? They weren't after anything extra, just to protect what they already had - the coalition's plan had been to begin the removal of that "guaranteed". Why is it wrong to fight for what is rightfully yours when you're in the public sector? Why is it that there is such resentment towards teaching staff, or anyone else in the public sector? They signed up to do a job with terms and conditions that had been fought hard for and didn't want to see them eroded by stealth. You don't get paid for being on strike, and you don't get your pension contributions either. There are a set, low, amount of people allowed at a picket line - and those same teachers who were not at the picket line may have been looking after their own children too.

 

+1

 

Why not instead of private sectors working complaining about public sector conditions they try to improve their own? Nothing good ever came from a race to the bottom, which is what the coalition is trying to do - it just results in worse working conditions for everyone.

[Cavcraft]

Nah, you'd never get that to work GallonDrunk. It seems for some it's far easier to just assume that every teacher, hospital worker or bin man is on £3,000 per week for two hours work, gets 16 months paid holidays a year and gets quintuple time for working over. Therefore it's easy for the minority to believe everything they read in the paper without actually bothering to find out the REAL reason people go on strike. It's also piss easy to generalise and for people not to realise the good unions do for worker and company.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: no-one in their right mind would strike for the hell of it these days, it's a last resort and not just a case of deciding to walk out unannounced one day as M'Coli quite rightly implied.

People don't get paid when they're on strike so the low paid ones who do so are losing out even more in the name of standing up for their beliefs. Also, just to re-iterate, the unions themselves could argue for or against industrial action until they're blue in the face, but it's down to the workforce to decide whether to or not.

[Des]

I've never been in a union, never been an option, so my knowledge of them stems only from the media 'Scargill eats babies' kind of nonsense. certainly, without them your children would be working barefoot in sulphuric acid packing asbestos into lead boxes from the age of 6.

I don't argue about unions either way as that would be kind of a falling for divide and rule tactics patsy-ish.

[Negative Creep]

A lot of private sector works would kill to get the pensions, salary and job security the private sector affords. I'd love to have a pension at all, as would several of the people in my office who had to take a day off unpaid to look after their kids. During the strike I don't remember much in the way of sympathy. My Mum works as a classroom assistant and voted against it, turning up to do some admin on the day. Her account was not of picket lines, but it being treated as a day off. If Tesco till staff went on strike, working at minimum wage with no money to put in a pension scheme and few rights, I'd have a lot more empathy towards their plight

 

Our country is fucked, we have no money left and have to try and claw it back from somewhere. There's a lot to dislike about the current Coalition, but at least they are making some effort to cut costs rather than keep borrowing