Oh okay so that makes it fine for certain members of this forum to directly harass/bully people here then?
Sorry, I thought this was a place for genuine OPGs past and present to discuss Royal Mail like adults.
Oh okay so that makes it fine for certain members of this forum to directly harass/bully people here then?
In a nutshell, my ‘problem’, if you can call it that, is your demeaning, condescending, disrespectful, contemptuous etc responses to those whose viewpoints don’t align with yours, and to point out your latest spouting of same is what led to me engaging further with you. However, I will do my utmost henceforth to give you a wide berth.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:35Why are you still engaging with me? I couldn't care less about your opinion on anything here tbh. You clearly stated you would be doing your 'utmost' to ignore me, so what exactly is your problem?
Should I "get back in my basket" now?Smoothbackground wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:43In a nutshell, my ‘problem’, if you can call it that, is your demeaning, condescending, disrespectful, contemptuous etc responses to anyone whose viewpoint doesn't align to yours, and to point out your latest spouting of same is what led to me engaging further with you. However, I will do my utmost henceforth to give you a wide berth.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:35Why are you still engaging with me? I couldn't care less about your opinion on anything here tbh. You clearly stated you would be doing your 'utmost' to ignore me, so what exactly is your problem?
Harassment/bullying is not acceptable but it is up to the mods of the site to moderate.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:41Oh okay so that makes it fine for certain members of this forum to directly harass/bully people here then?
Sorry, I thought this was a place for genuine OPGs past and present to discuss Royal Mail like adults.
That was a clumsy euphemism on my part — I was wanting to convey something like putting thrown toys back into a pram.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:45Should I "get back in my basket" now?Smoothbackground wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:43In a nutshell, my ‘problem’, if you can call it that, is your demeaning, condescending, disrespectful, contemptuous etc responses to anyone whose viewpoint doesn't align to yours, and to point out your latest spouting of same is what led to me engaging further with you. However, I will do my utmost henceforth to give you a wide berth.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:35Why are you still engaging with me? I couldn't care less about your opinion on anything here tbh. You clearly stated you would be doing your 'utmost' to ignore me, so what exactly is your problem?
These fools are arguing in here too FFS!Smoothbackground wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:28Who has defamed you? ALL ex employees are banned from reapplying, for at least six months, I think, if not longer. Chum, get back in your basket.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:06Why are you making up lies about me?Smoothbackground wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 17:49But you don’t work for Royal Mail. Indeed, you are banned from even reapplying to join RM.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 13:182K a year for doing sweet Fanny Adams. Sign me up...chickenwittle wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 12:39I suppose it differs from office to office, I can honestly say ours does nothing to justify the role and extra payment.sweepster70 wrote: ↑24 Feb 2024, 22:30Ours get paid for training people and a lot more, and are in constant meetings with management. They also do license checks.
![]()
Literally libelous claims about me, you would be done in a court of law for your nonsense.![]()
Edit: thinking about speaking to a QC I know to see of I can take this further.
Defamation of character is a pretty serious issue, and you seem to be no stranger to harassing people online, whether it be on an anonymous website or otherwise.
By the way, it is KC, not QC. And given you, like me, are anonymous, there is no character that can be defamed! Hopefully your QC mate, I mean KC, will advise you accordingly. Do they practise criminal law as well?
I think the part I have highlighted in red is where a lot of you are getting it wrong.CarryingMGMT wrote: ↑25 Feb 2024, 18:41
Sorry, I thought this was a place for genuine OPGs past and present to discuss Royal Mail like adults.
Training in RM apart from the "ass covering" H&S stuff is basically "here's the frame/setup, here's the work, get on with it"
Like i said mike teachers pet, remember one thing about most managers within RM (But not all) they are failed lazy posties who don't like to overwork and love to get somebody else to do it for them. Then if anything goes wrong they just toss the coach quite literally "Under the bus" and wash their hands.
scotchy1962 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2024, 17:55
I said they were lazy but they are not stupid, you don't climb the ladder without covering your own ass.
Lol the point is, these managers don't care about anything other than putting you to work. Shame it's not a straight up gulag to these peopleDorset Plodder wrote: ↑26 Feb 2024, 18:48scotchy1962 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2024, 17:55
I said they were lazy but they are not stupid, you don't climb the ladder without covering your own ass.
That must be quite hard Scotchy ... to actually climb a ladder, while at the same time covering your ass![]()
Climbing ladders sounds a bit like too much like hard work for our LAZY Manager. And you're right he's an Ex-Postie ... Bloody Useless at that as well .... It always amazes me at the consistantly LOW standard of individual that Royal Mail are willing to recruit to be THEIR Managers. No wonder the Business is in such a sorry state, and they're incapable of putting it right.![]()
PHG?denowashere wrote: ↑28 Feb 2024, 13:37As somebody said work coaching is a complete waste of time and money, that said what about PHGs none existent now they are still getting there PHG allowance doing a OPGs jobs f*****g stinks, look how they treated people when they lost there driving allowance the unionare the biggest bunch of hypocrites going.