The law is there if you want to look it up. The job is defined as what is customary practice, not what it is literally supposed to be. So if everyone who isn't doing their van checks suddenly turns round and does them with the consequence of leaving workload, then it becomes unofficial industrial action. The job is what you make it. The only debate to be had regards classing it as such rests on scale and co-ordination in time and place.
So you're saying there's a law that allows you to drive a dangerously defective vehicle?
The law is there if you want to look it up. The job is defined as what is customary practice, not what it is literally supposed to be. So if everyone who isn't doing their van checks suddenly turns round and does them with the consequence of leaving workload, then it becomes unofficial industrial action. The job is what you make it. The only debate to be had regards classing it as such rests on scale and co-ordination in time and place.
So you're saying there's a law that allows you to drive a dangerously defective vehicle?
Save me looking it up and show me please
I'm not really sure many employees are driving dangerously defective vehicles rather than those with the odd fault. If they are posting about it on a forum isn't going to change what they are doing.
The law is there if you want to look it up. The job is defined as what is customary practice, not what it is literally supposed to be. So if everyone who isn't doing their van checks suddenly turns round and does them with the consequence of leaving workload, then it becomes unofficial industrial action. The job is what you make it. The only debate to be had regards classing it as such rests on scale and co-ordination in time and place.
So you're saying there's a law that allows you to drive a dangerously defective vehicle?
Save me looking it up and show me please
I'm not really sure many employees are driving dangerously defective vehicles rather than those with the odd fault. If they are posting about it on a forum isn't going to change what they are doing.
The law is there if you want to look it up. The job is defined as what is customary practice, not what it is literally supposed to be. So if everyone who isn't doing their van checks suddenly turns round and does them with the consequence of leaving workload, then it becomes unofficial industrial action. The job is what you make it. The only debate to be had regards classing it as such rests on scale and co-ordination in time and place.
Royal Mail should have a few afternoon workers who clear up anything brought back.
We had that before P&L. It was a small team of mainly near-retirement colleagues known as 'ASAP' who would clear any cutoffs (the rare bag, new builds on frames but not on the duty, SDs that couldn't be reached on foot by 1PM) and fill in for a sudden absence or accident on delivery. Fond memories of working with those guys (particularly taking hour long breaks ). Paying people to be on standby naturally got axed and it was down to the docket kings to keep the office clear, and then by the eve of the pandemic it was only the docket emperor interested in staying out so late. He left five years ago and there's never not been something languishing in a frame since. If they brought it back now it would be Zero Hours.
So royal mail managers, who insist you do your van checks, would then take people doing their van checks as industrial action?
Don't think that would stand up in court
Work your time, bring back what you can`t deliver in that time. Go home. You`re not paid enough to worry about it. DM26 will be such a disaster , especially in peak, that we won`t need to do anything else.
The law is there if you want to look it up. The job is defined as what is customary practice, not what it is literally supposed to be. So if everyone who isn't doing their van checks suddenly turns round and does them with the consequence of leaving workload, then it becomes unofficial industrial action. The job is what you make it. The only debate to be had regards classing it as such rests on scale and co-ordination in time and place.
Royal Mail should have a few afternoon workers who clear up anything brought back.
We had that before P&L. It was a small team of mainly near-retirement colleagues known as 'ASAP' who would clear any cutoffs (the rare bag, new builds on frames but not on the duty, SDs that couldn't be reached on foot by 1PM) and fill in for a sudden absence or accident on delivery. Fond memories of working with those guys (particularly taking hour long breaks ). Paying people to be on standby naturally got axed and it was down to the docket kings to keep the office clear, and then by the eve of the pandemic it was only the docket emperor interested in staying out so late. He left five years ago and there's never not been something languishing in a frame since. If they brought it back now it would be Zero Hours.
You've been a postman for a brave few years Mr Rush, what part of doing your job correctly, as laid out in law and company procedure, would lead you to believe that breaking these procedures and laws could be construed as unofficial industrial action.
I am interested to hear how that would stand up in a courtroom.
Personally i believe it would be thrown out, but every day is a school day and i hope to learn something in my old age.
Wanting an office to abandon a current or accepted way of working to move to something different by working to rule is basically industrial action.
Good luck with it.
Wanting an office to abandon a current or accepted way of working to move to something different by working to rule is basically industrial action.
Good luck with it.
The working to rule is industrial action claim would not cover actively breaking the law with regards to van legality. The case you are basing it off was about general operational rules, not laws. It's truly irrelevant anyway this was purely an observation after coming up to 10 years at the Royal Mail, not some call to action.
I thought an organised call from the union or agreement voted on unofficially within an individual office to work to rule would be deemed as unofficial industrial action. However a personal decision to try and adhere to all RM policies and expected procedures would not be U.I.A.
I thought an organised call from the union or agreement voted on unofficially within an individual office to work to rule would be deemed as unofficial industrial action. However a personal decision to try and adhere to all RM policies and expected procedures would not be U.I.A.
Just don't shout about what you a trying to do.
After RM initiated the Dispute Resolution Process to get an agreement on DM26, the CWU retaliated a few days later with their own DRP over equalisation. In the days after that some CWU statements mentioned having local ballots for local industrial action, which to me seemed bizarre and frankly appeared to be putting some offices before others.
). Paying people to be on standby naturally got axed and it was down to the docket kings to keep the office clear, and then by the eve of the pandemic it was only the docket emperor interested in staying out so late. He left five years ago and there's never not been something languishing in a frame since. If they brought it back now it would be Zero Hours.