Storm warnings should be listened to by bosses

[TrueBlueTerrier]

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article ... ned-bosses

GOVERNMENT weather warnings, when they come, should be heeded. Thankfully, we don’t tend to get them that often, and when we do get them there is likely to be a warning before the warning.

That being said, when the government warning regarding Storm Eowyn eventually triggered from my mobile phone on the night of Thursday January 23, I definitely jumped out of my seat. Despite the advance notice, I had an immediate sense of concern and slight panic — it was something that said, “This is real.”

Extreme weather events are a growing concern. In the last decade, we have had the “beast from the East” and notably Storms Eunice, Franklin and now Eowyn — all of which have claimed lives.

We have also had severe heatwaves in the summer period, which, being a postie, I can tell you is no fun at all. While we in Britain are used to changeable weather the extent and regularity of these extreme weather events feels like a significant change.

Research from the Met Office has highlighted that extreme weather in Britain will continue to increase due to the effects of climate change.

The number of extremely hot days in Britain could increase four-fold; the number of days of high-impact heavy rainfall in Britain leading to severe weather warnings could rise by three days per year; and there could be more frequent and severe long-term droughts. These forecasts should cause all of us concern, but especially our front-line workers, particularly those who do not have the luxury of working from home.

When something like Storm Eowyn happens, most people’s immediate concern turns to their safety and the safety of their friends, families and loved ones. If the government tells you to stay indoors, you think about how best to stay indoors. When the government tells you that the storm is a danger to life, you probably would be fair to conclude that it is in fact a danger to life.

What may be lower down on your list of priorities during a danger-to-life storm is how you will manage to pull pints in the bar you work at or whether someone really needs that parcel from last night’s online impulse purchase. Yet, it would appear certain employers can’t let a crisis pass without an opportunity to prioritise their bottom line.

In one instance, a friend of mine — who refused to attend work — explained the situation to their management (based down south) who understood the circumstances but said ultimately it was still their responsibility to get to work. The Glasgow city centre-based firm offered pizza and an extra meal break as an incentive to get to work. Ironically — or perhaps predictably — this company offers advice on HR policies to small businesses. My friend was docked a day’s wages.

In Royal Mail — which has a policy on “adverse weather” — workers were docked wages and annual leave on the pretence that their workplaces would be open, despite the fact that Royal Mail knew they would be closing them on the morning of the storm.

Royal Mail’s policy is that if you attend work and are sent home you get paid, or if your workplace is closed then you would also get paid. But, instead of closing workplaces from the outset, managers told staff to stay at home, opened the workplaces for an hour or two before the storm, then docked wages or annual leave from those who couldn’t get to work or simply did what managers, and the government encouraged and incentivised them to do and stay at home.

Some part-time staff, whose shifts didn’t even start till after the storm had kicked in and their offices were already closed, were also docked annual leave — in breach of Royal Mail’s own policy. Royal Mail is now refusing to hear grievances on the subject.

This is a shameful attempt by a company which has billions of pounds in revenue to penalise their own workers for staying safe. The CWU refuses to accept this approach, and we will be doing all that we can to obtain justice for our members.

These examples highlight the importance of the Fair Work Charter for Severe Weather by the STUC and the Scottish government which provides guidance on a better approach to severe weather events and the need for employers to have suitable policies. However, it needs to go further: guidance without enforcement is not enough.

It should be clear that when the government tells people to stay at home due to severe weather that workplaces should be closed and workers should be free to prioritise safety without any detriment, financial or otherwise.

No-one should have to compromise safety to obtain a day’s wage. Where employers deliberately put company profits ahead of worker safety, they should be held firmly to account. With the predicted growth of severe weather and climate instability, this area of policy needs focus more than ever. When the government issues warnings, they should be heeded — it will literally save lives.

John Carson is a CWU branch secretary.

[tramssirhc]

Is this the same CWU that forced postal workers out into a pandemic under the false pretence that the industry was a fourth emergency service? The same CWU which stated that it would prefer it's members risked their lives as it was preferable to furlough? Yes it is. The CWU isn't serious about health, safety or welfare. The CWU doesn't apply the 77 regulations in a serious way. It's not a credible organisation.

[oypostie]

But in this case the Union is correct. The way Royal Mail behaved was an absolute disgrace. Staff welfare in extreme situations like that should always be more important than a few parcels which can be delivered the next day

[tramssirhc]

The CWU simply isn't credible when it tries the to argue for safe work. It has sat back and allowed the work to become more and more dangerous. When did you last get asked by the area health and safety rep what you thought? Consulting with workers is part of the inspection regime.