2009 "EQUITY"
Letter from Operations Director Paul Watson and Managing Director Vernon Barker.
Sent to all TransPennine Express Drivers.
22nd November 09
RE: Notification of Ballot for Strike action by ASLEF
Dear Colleagues
On Wednesday 11th November 09 we where notified by the ASLEF General Secretary that the union intend to ballot its members on what they described as a break down in Industrial relations.
We where surprised to received this notification as through our normal working relationship with Driver Company Council and the ASLEF Full Time Officer, no indication had been given to us that this was their view.
Immediately on receipt of this notification we have sought clarification of what the issues are. These have not been forthcoming until Thursday 19th November 09. Some of the issues cited we disagree with, and the majority we believed still to be active in the normal machinery discussions that are on going, however it is clear that central to this situation is the dismissal of a Driver at Blackpool.
We would normally keep the detail of any discipline confidential, but we have become aware that a number of briefings have taken place in the workplace and branch room which we believe do not represent the facts.
The driver admitted a number of serious conduct issues, including falsifying documentation and lying in the investigation, he admitted the following:
He booked on for duty with control on two consecutive days thereby claiming payment and returned immediately home without undertaking any route learning duties.
During the initial investigatory interview he lied about his actions and whereabouts on the days in question.
He presented route learning documentation dated for the two days in support of his claim to have undertaken route learning to Scotland in order to convince us that he had travelled to Scotland.
He stated he had travelled to Preston by car and then travelled by Virgin service to Scotland but was unable to identify the trains involved or the times of activity and ultimately claimed he had travelled in the saloon to carry out route learning. At this point he could not substantiate his original story further
At a second interview he now claimed to have stayed at home undertaking route learning via DVD.
He also accepted that the route learning documentation supplied by him as part of the investigation had been fabricated on the following Monday.
He also accepted that his original story was not true.
Due to the nature and level of this deception that had taken place including setting out after the event to fabricate evidence , we could not accept this second version of events as being truthful. Therefore we decided that he had fraudulently claimed payment for time not worked. The outcome of this discipline and appeal was dismissal from service.
Any dismissal is regrettable and is not reached with out considerable thought about the conduct undertaken. We believe the discipline records over the past year within FTPE demonstrate that we do not jump to formal discipline at every opportunity. We also believe that the vast majority of drivers do a superb job in delivering a safe and reliable service for our customers.
Unfortunately this is an isolated incident where we believe and individual has set out to defraud the company and has attempted to mislead us when investigating.
This issue should not be the subject of a trade dispute, but rather an issue to be resolved in an Employment Tribunal. The Union has informed us that they will support the Driver to apply for a tribunal hearing. If a tribunal finds against us we will honour the tribunal findings.
The union have now advised us that they will start to distribute ballot papers on the 25th November 09 and they will be asking you to endorse a vote for strike action. We are committed to try and find a resolution to the current dispute and will engage in talks to do so, however our belief is that individuals who commit acts of gross misconduct do so in the knowledge that this is unacceptable and they therefore risk a disciplinary sanction.
I would make it clear that this conduct is vary rare and doesn't involved the vast majority of our driver workforce and therefore any risk of similar action been taken against them is almost non existent, the disciplinary record bears this out. I would therefore ask you to consider what has happened carefully before returning your vote.
Everyone within FTPE has worked very hard during 2009 to deliver some outstanding results in terms of train performance and this in turn has fed through into some equally good results in the national passenger survey (NPS) and has helped to grow the business. Any strike action at this point would seriously undermine that performance, affect our customer service delivery, lose substantial sums of money for the individuals involved and undermine our business reputation.
Yours sincerely,
Vernon Barker Paul Watson
Managing Director Operations Director
POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE:
This Driver had a hearing and appeal, he was then dismissed from service.
The Driver concerned was reinstated despite TPE adamant of the following:-
1. Fraudulently claiming payment for working when returning home after booking on duty.
2. Told lies when questioned during the investigation.
3. Produced fabricated evidence to suggest he actually travelled to Scotland.
4. His version of events differed and contradicted his original version of events.
5. At the 2nd interview he fully admitted to staying at home and that the documentation he had presented had been fabricated.
6. Fully admitting his original version of events was untrue. So this Driver defrauded the company, tried to cover his tracks and failed. Compared to what I supposedly did, where`s the comparison?
AS FOR:- "Any dismissal is regrettable and is not reached with out considerable thought about the conduct undertaken. We believe the discipline records over the past year within FTPE demonstrate that we do not jump to formal discipline at every opportunity".
TPE only need to look at myself, Iain Foster, Rob Wedekind and Paul Russell, plus others before they make such statements.
THEN AS FOR THIS:- "This issue should not be the subject of a trade dispute, but rather an issue to be resolved in an Employment Tribunal. The Union has informed us that they will support the Driver to apply for a tribunal hearing. If a tribunal finds against us we will honour the tribunal findings".
This quite simply shows their attitude to Employee Relations and the Trade Unions. They are happy every time to ruthlessly dominate a situation without regard to anyone.
NEXT!!!:- "however our belief is that individuals who commit acts of gross misconduct do so in the knowledge that this is unacceptable and they therefore risk a disciplinary sanction".
How can they state this? Nobody willing commits an act that they think is gross misconduct, nobody even knowingly commits an act to risk disciplinary action. What they mean, is quite simply, we decide what constitutes disciplinary action, no matter how small.
ASLEF Response to TransPennine Express.
25th November 2009
Dear Colleagues
RE Letters Posted In New Notice Case By TPE Dated 22nd November 2009.
It has come to my attention that two letters have been posted by TPE, one entitled Notification of Ballot for Strike action by ASLEF and another Notification of Refusal of Rest Day Working Sanction.
Colleagues, ASLEF as a trade union would never discuss openly a disciplinary hearing; it is a Drivers right for information to remain confidential, however as TPE have shown their disregard for Drivers through their letter AND given our Brother no right of reply, a basic human right, I feel I must respond.
Let me start by saying ASLEF and the Driver admit he did wrong and accepted he should be punished, however TPE’s character assassination in their letter to you, is indicative of the way the disciplinary hearing was handled and is a factor as to why you are now being balloted for an industrial relations breakdown, part of which is draconian discipline. I have laid down some facts for you about the case below:
· The Driver did return home as TPE stated, he performed route learning duties on the TPE supplied DVD, specifically Carstairs which is the only way he could route learn that area and was the recognized method. TPE had not supplied him cab passes for Virgin/Scotrail/National Express. He had performed the minimum number of trips over the route and was happy to sign the route when TPE wanted him to, how else was he supposed to learn Carstairs? The Driver also had problems at home requiring his attendance there, evidence of this was supplied at his appeal hearing.
· TPE’s next three bullet points deal with the fact he lied at an initial investigatory interview, this appears to sum up their case and in their mind warrants dismissal. They have stated he came clean only at the second interview three days later, this is untrue. What TPE have not told you is that following the initial interview the Driver contacted a rep immediately and the very same afternoon a call was made by the rep to Stephen Boniface Driver Manager stating what had really happened, the Driver was full of remorse and too upset to make the call himself.
· The investigating manager stated in his report that he had thanked the Driver for telling the truth and saving him a lot of extra work.
· This Driver had a ten year clean disciplinary record.
Colleagues, the points made above are facts. TPE have not informed you of any of this in their disgraceful letter to you. I ask you, if you were this Driver, would you be happy that TPE have disregarded all of this and sacked you despite your previous good standing? Would you be happy that propaganda had been posted without a right to reply, picking out all the bad points around your case in a cynical attempt to influence your colleagues? Put yourself in our Brother’s position before you place your vote. I can state with some conviction every other train operating company I deal with would not have sacked our colleague or indeed resorted to this crude propaganda in a vain attempt to justify their actions.
TPE state in their letter that clarification was not forthcoming on the issues around the dispute until Thursday 19th November. This is untrue; we expanded on the issues on the 19th November at a meeting I hosted in Liverpool. I outlined the issues in an e mail to the TPE Operations Director on the 12th November 2009 at 14.02. The issues outlined were:
· Freightliner Heavy Haul Contractual Arrangements. The EC President and I came to an agreement with TPE in May 2009 as a result of the previous Avoidance of Dispute situation. Specifically that all Edinburgh work would be operated by TPE Drivers from December 2009 except the first and last services and that FLHH would not work past Carlisle. Despite this TPE issued diagrams outside of this arrangement, without any contact with DCC and which only came to light when the LLC’s were presented with the December diagrams.
· Bargaining Machinery Grinding To A Halt. The Company Council has been waiting for an agenda meeting since an initial request was made at the start of September 2009; this puts TPE outside of the procedure agreement in these matters. Productivity talks have still not taken place despite the Operations Director committing to talks in the Summer of 2009.
· Dynamic brake isolation on the 185 series. No Company Council involvement.
· Change to brake test requirements in accordance with the rule book. No consultation with Drivers Company Council.
· Cancelled over night trains between York and Manchester airport with a bus service being implemented, this led to drivers diagrams being altered without the involvement of the Drivers Company Council and not even involving local level reps.
· TPE brought in a new software package that would have an effect on new rostering techniques without involving the Driver’s Company Council.
· Instances of drivers being summoned to an investigative meeting without having representatives in attendance.
· Draconian Discipline, the case already discussed earlier as well as 2 other Drivers sacked in the last 6 months and Drivers harshly treated via Capability.
At the meeting on the 19th November, TPE conceded to some of the points, rather than work with the Drivers and Union they appear intent to impose their will, break agreements and even now, despite ASLEF stating repeatedly we will meet with them anytime to resolve this dispute, they don’t arrange a meeting, their first instinct is to post notices with half truths and relevant facts missing.
I will now state the facts concerning rest day working. No letter was sent by TPE requesting an extension to the current sanction which expires on 29th November 2009 this was conceded by the Operations Director at the meeting on the 19th November, so I therefore find his letter posted in the new notice case, disturbing to say the least. Furthermore the Drivers Company Council were not released to go before the ASLEF Executive Committee to report as requested in a letter to him from the General Secretary, which he again conceded to. This again indicates TPE’s lack of respect for the Union and indeed you Drivers, who have enjoyed the extra opportunities for training and leave, the current sanction is expiring due to TPE not ASLEF as indicated in the letter.
Colleagues I am so concerned with developments on TPE, I recommend that if you are the subject of a disciplinary hearing that you request me to represent you, this has been agreed with the Company Council. If you require any clarification on the issues surrounding the dispute and ballot, please do not hesitate to contact me or your Company Council Representative the numbers are:
Peter Grant:
Malcolm Dixon:
Allan Stringer:
Will Lamming:
Yours Fraternally
Colin J Smith
POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE:
"TPE have shown their disregard for Drivers through their letter AND given our Brother no right of reply".
This is done for one reason, its a statement that has CONTROL written all over it, it is a control measure to frighten Drivers.
"Let me start by saying ASLEF and the Driver admit he did wrong and accepted he should be punished, however TPE’s character assassination in their letter to you, is indicative of the way the disciplinary hearing was handled".
Letter from Operations Director Paul Watson and Managing Director Vernon Barker.
Sent to all TransPennine Express Drivers.
22nd November 09
RE: Notification of Ballot for Strike action by ASLEF
Dear Colleagues
On Wednesday 11th November 09 we where notified by the ASLEF General Secretary that the union intend to ballot its members on what they described as a break down in Industrial relations.
We where surprised to received this notification as through our normal working relationship with Driver Company Council and the ASLEF Full Time Officer, no indication had been given to us that this was their view.
Immediately on receipt of this notification we have sought clarification of what the issues are. These have not been forthcoming until Thursday 19th November 09. Some of the issues cited we disagree with, and the majority we believed still to be active in the normal machinery discussions that are on going, however it is clear that central to this situation is the dismissal of a Driver at Blackpool.
We would normally keep the detail of any discipline confidential, but we have become aware that a number of briefings have taken place in the workplace and branch room which we believe do not represent the facts.
The driver admitted a number of serious conduct issues, including falsifying documentation and lying in the investigation, he admitted the following:
He booked on for duty with control on two consecutive days thereby claiming payment and returned immediately home without undertaking any route learning duties.
During the initial investigatory interview he lied about his actions and whereabouts on the days in question.
He presented route learning documentation dated for the two days in support of his claim to have undertaken route learning to Scotland in order to convince us that he had travelled to Scotland.
He stated he had travelled to Preston by car and then travelled by Virgin service to Scotland but was unable to identify the trains involved or the times of activity and ultimately claimed he had travelled in the saloon to carry out route learning. At this point he could not substantiate his original story further
At a second interview he now claimed to have stayed at home undertaking route learning via DVD.
He also accepted that the route learning documentation supplied by him as part of the investigation had been fabricated on the following Monday.
He also accepted that his original story was not true.
Due to the nature and level of this deception that had taken place including setting out after the event to fabricate evidence , we could not accept this second version of events as being truthful. Therefore we decided that he had fraudulently claimed payment for time not worked. The outcome of this discipline and appeal was dismissal from service.
Any dismissal is regrettable and is not reached with out considerable thought about the conduct undertaken. We believe the discipline records over the past year within FTPE demonstrate that we do not jump to formal discipline at every opportunity. We also believe that the vast majority of drivers do a superb job in delivering a safe and reliable service for our customers.
Unfortunately this is an isolated incident where we believe and individual has set out to defraud the company and has attempted to mislead us when investigating.
This issue should not be the subject of a trade dispute, but rather an issue to be resolved in an Employment Tribunal. The Union has informed us that they will support the Driver to apply for a tribunal hearing. If a tribunal finds against us we will honour the tribunal findings.
The union have now advised us that they will start to distribute ballot papers on the 25th November 09 and they will be asking you to endorse a vote for strike action. We are committed to try and find a resolution to the current dispute and will engage in talks to do so, however our belief is that individuals who commit acts of gross misconduct do so in the knowledge that this is unacceptable and they therefore risk a disciplinary sanction.
I would make it clear that this conduct is vary rare and doesn't involved the vast majority of our driver workforce and therefore any risk of similar action been taken against them is almost non existent, the disciplinary record bears this out. I would therefore ask you to consider what has happened carefully before returning your vote.
Everyone within FTPE has worked very hard during 2009 to deliver some outstanding results in terms of train performance and this in turn has fed through into some equally good results in the national passenger survey (NPS) and has helped to grow the business. Any strike action at this point would seriously undermine that performance, affect our customer service delivery, lose substantial sums of money for the individuals involved and undermine our business reputation.
Yours sincerely,
Vernon Barker Paul Watson
Managing Director Operations Director
POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE:
This Driver had a hearing and appeal, he was then dismissed from service.
The Driver concerned was reinstated despite TPE adamant of the following:-
1. Fraudulently claiming payment for working when returning home after booking on duty.
2. Told lies when questioned during the investigation.
3. Produced fabricated evidence to suggest he actually travelled to Scotland.
4. His version of events differed and contradicted his original version of events.
5. At the 2nd interview he fully admitted to staying at home and that the documentation he had presented had been fabricated.
6. Fully admitting his original version of events was untrue. So this Driver defrauded the company, tried to cover his tracks and failed. Compared to what I supposedly did, where`s the comparison?
AS FOR:- "Any dismissal is regrettable and is not reached with out considerable thought about the conduct undertaken. We believe the discipline records over the past year within FTPE demonstrate that we do not jump to formal discipline at every opportunity".
TPE only need to look at myself, Iain Foster, Rob Wedekind and Paul Russell, plus others before they make such statements.
THEN AS FOR THIS:- "This issue should not be the subject of a trade dispute, but rather an issue to be resolved in an Employment Tribunal. The Union has informed us that they will support the Driver to apply for a tribunal hearing. If a tribunal finds against us we will honour the tribunal findings".
This quite simply shows their attitude to Employee Relations and the Trade Unions. They are happy every time to ruthlessly dominate a situation without regard to anyone.
NEXT!!!:- "however our belief is that individuals who commit acts of gross misconduct do so in the knowledge that this is unacceptable and they therefore risk a disciplinary sanction".
How can they state this? Nobody willing commits an act that they think is gross misconduct, nobody even knowingly commits an act to risk disciplinary action. What they mean, is quite simply, we decide what constitutes disciplinary action, no matter how small.
ASLEF Response to TransPennine Express.
25th November 2009
Dear Colleagues
RE Letters Posted In New Notice Case By TPE Dated 22nd November 2009.
It has come to my attention that two letters have been posted by TPE, one entitled Notification of Ballot for Strike action by ASLEF and another Notification of Refusal of Rest Day Working Sanction.
Colleagues, ASLEF as a trade union would never discuss openly a disciplinary hearing; it is a Drivers right for information to remain confidential, however as TPE have shown their disregard for Drivers through their letter AND given our Brother no right of reply, a basic human right, I feel I must respond.
Let me start by saying ASLEF and the Driver admit he did wrong and accepted he should be punished, however TPE’s character assassination in their letter to you, is indicative of the way the disciplinary hearing was handled and is a factor as to why you are now being balloted for an industrial relations breakdown, part of which is draconian discipline. I have laid down some facts for you about the case below:
· The Driver did return home as TPE stated, he performed route learning duties on the TPE supplied DVD, specifically Carstairs which is the only way he could route learn that area and was the recognized method. TPE had not supplied him cab passes for Virgin/Scotrail/National Express. He had performed the minimum number of trips over the route and was happy to sign the route when TPE wanted him to, how else was he supposed to learn Carstairs? The Driver also had problems at home requiring his attendance there, evidence of this was supplied at his appeal hearing.
· TPE’s next three bullet points deal with the fact he lied at an initial investigatory interview, this appears to sum up their case and in their mind warrants dismissal. They have stated he came clean only at the second interview three days later, this is untrue. What TPE have not told you is that following the initial interview the Driver contacted a rep immediately and the very same afternoon a call was made by the rep to Stephen Boniface Driver Manager stating what had really happened, the Driver was full of remorse and too upset to make the call himself.
· The investigating manager stated in his report that he had thanked the Driver for telling the truth and saving him a lot of extra work.
· This Driver had a ten year clean disciplinary record.
Colleagues, the points made above are facts. TPE have not informed you of any of this in their disgraceful letter to you. I ask you, if you were this Driver, would you be happy that TPE have disregarded all of this and sacked you despite your previous good standing? Would you be happy that propaganda had been posted without a right to reply, picking out all the bad points around your case in a cynical attempt to influence your colleagues? Put yourself in our Brother’s position before you place your vote. I can state with some conviction every other train operating company I deal with would not have sacked our colleague or indeed resorted to this crude propaganda in a vain attempt to justify their actions.
TPE state in their letter that clarification was not forthcoming on the issues around the dispute until Thursday 19th November. This is untrue; we expanded on the issues on the 19th November at a meeting I hosted in Liverpool. I outlined the issues in an e mail to the TPE Operations Director on the 12th November 2009 at 14.02. The issues outlined were:
· Freightliner Heavy Haul Contractual Arrangements. The EC President and I came to an agreement with TPE in May 2009 as a result of the previous Avoidance of Dispute situation. Specifically that all Edinburgh work would be operated by TPE Drivers from December 2009 except the first and last services and that FLHH would not work past Carlisle. Despite this TPE issued diagrams outside of this arrangement, without any contact with DCC and which only came to light when the LLC’s were presented with the December diagrams.
· Bargaining Machinery Grinding To A Halt. The Company Council has been waiting for an agenda meeting since an initial request was made at the start of September 2009; this puts TPE outside of the procedure agreement in these matters. Productivity talks have still not taken place despite the Operations Director committing to talks in the Summer of 2009.
· Dynamic brake isolation on the 185 series. No Company Council involvement.
· Change to brake test requirements in accordance with the rule book. No consultation with Drivers Company Council.
· Cancelled over night trains between York and Manchester airport with a bus service being implemented, this led to drivers diagrams being altered without the involvement of the Drivers Company Council and not even involving local level reps.
· TPE brought in a new software package that would have an effect on new rostering techniques without involving the Driver’s Company Council.
· Instances of drivers being summoned to an investigative meeting without having representatives in attendance.
· Draconian Discipline, the case already discussed earlier as well as 2 other Drivers sacked in the last 6 months and Drivers harshly treated via Capability.
At the meeting on the 19th November, TPE conceded to some of the points, rather than work with the Drivers and Union they appear intent to impose their will, break agreements and even now, despite ASLEF stating repeatedly we will meet with them anytime to resolve this dispute, they don’t arrange a meeting, their first instinct is to post notices with half truths and relevant facts missing.
I will now state the facts concerning rest day working. No letter was sent by TPE requesting an extension to the current sanction which expires on 29th November 2009 this was conceded by the Operations Director at the meeting on the 19th November, so I therefore find his letter posted in the new notice case, disturbing to say the least. Furthermore the Drivers Company Council were not released to go before the ASLEF Executive Committee to report as requested in a letter to him from the General Secretary, which he again conceded to. This again indicates TPE’s lack of respect for the Union and indeed you Drivers, who have enjoyed the extra opportunities for training and leave, the current sanction is expiring due to TPE not ASLEF as indicated in the letter.
Colleagues I am so concerned with developments on TPE, I recommend that if you are the subject of a disciplinary hearing that you request me to represent you, this has been agreed with the Company Council. If you require any clarification on the issues surrounding the dispute and ballot, please do not hesitate to contact me or your Company Council Representative the numbers are:
Peter Grant:
Malcolm Dixon:
Allan Stringer:
Will Lamming:
Yours Fraternally
Colin J Smith
POINTS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE:
"TPE have shown their disregard for Drivers through their letter AND given our Brother no right of reply".
This is done for one reason, its a statement that has CONTROL written all over it, it is a control measure to frighten Drivers.
"Let me start by saying ASLEF and the Driver admit he did wrong and accepted he should be punished, however TPE’s character assassination in their letter to you, is indicative of the way the disciplinary hearing was handled".
_A Character assassination is a TPE Management Trait, just look at
Manager Stephen Percival`s character assassination of myself in the
guise of an Investigation Report. Look at my Nazi style interrogation in the guise of a disciplinary hearing, I was constantly
being charged by Route Driver Manager Mark Atkinson with something that
never happened, a complete failure of the warning horn, despite
explaining numerous times it was a partial failure.
"The Driver also had problems at home requiring his attendance there, evidence of this was supplied at his appeal hearing".
TPE Management are experts in IGNORING anything that is in your favour, they completely disregard it, just like they did in my hearing and appeal.
"This Driver had a ten year clean disciplinary record".
My disciplinary record apart from the issues of TPE character assassinating me was exemplary. However my years of driving experience counted for nothing with these controlling bullies.
"I ask you, if you were this Driver, would you be happy that TPE have disregarded all of this and sacked you despite your previous good standing"? And, "picking out all the bad points around your case".
What choice do you have in this matter, this management ruthlessly pick on individuals then attack with a pack mentality, nobody can win.
"I can state with some conviction every other train operating company I deal with would not have sacked our colleague or indeed resorted to this crude propaganda in a vain attempt to justify their actions".
I have asked many senior Managers and people with vast railway knowledge, they cannot understand the thought process behind my dismissal, but more importantly, they cannot believe the levels of IGNORANCE displayed by so many different managers, this is what I have pointed out as being the pack mentality.
As listed by ASLEF
"Productivity talks have still not taken place despite the Operations Director committing to talks in the Summer of 2009".
· "Dynamic brake isolation on the 185 series. No Company Council involvement".
· "Change to brake test requirements in accordance with the rule book. No consultation with Drivers Company Council".
"This led to drivers diagrams being altered without the involvement of the Drivers Company Council and not even involving local level reps".
"Without involving the Driver’s Company Council".
"Instances of drivers being summoned to an investigative meeting without having representatives in attendance".
What do the above points all have in common? IGNORANCE.
Draconian Discipline, the case already discussed earlier as well as 2 other Drivers sacked in the last 6 months and Drivers harshly treated via Capability.
The above statement speaks for itself.
Please correct me if I wrong, but I believe that the Driver was reinstated after a Managing Director`s Appeal.
Vernon Barker denied me a managing Director`s appeal.
"The Driver also had problems at home requiring his attendance there, evidence of this was supplied at his appeal hearing".
TPE Management are experts in IGNORING anything that is in your favour, they completely disregard it, just like they did in my hearing and appeal.
"This Driver had a ten year clean disciplinary record".
My disciplinary record apart from the issues of TPE character assassinating me was exemplary. However my years of driving experience counted for nothing with these controlling bullies.
"I ask you, if you were this Driver, would you be happy that TPE have disregarded all of this and sacked you despite your previous good standing"? And, "picking out all the bad points around your case".
What choice do you have in this matter, this management ruthlessly pick on individuals then attack with a pack mentality, nobody can win.
"I can state with some conviction every other train operating company I deal with would not have sacked our colleague or indeed resorted to this crude propaganda in a vain attempt to justify their actions".
I have asked many senior Managers and people with vast railway knowledge, they cannot understand the thought process behind my dismissal, but more importantly, they cannot believe the levels of IGNORANCE displayed by so many different managers, this is what I have pointed out as being the pack mentality.
As listed by ASLEF
"Productivity talks have still not taken place despite the Operations Director committing to talks in the Summer of 2009".
· "Dynamic brake isolation on the 185 series. No Company Council involvement".
· "Change to brake test requirements in accordance with the rule book. No consultation with Drivers Company Council".
"This led to drivers diagrams being altered without the involvement of the Drivers Company Council and not even involving local level reps".
"Without involving the Driver’s Company Council".
"Instances of drivers being summoned to an investigative meeting without having representatives in attendance".
What do the above points all have in common? IGNORANCE.
Draconian Discipline, the case already discussed earlier as well as 2 other Drivers sacked in the last 6 months and Drivers harshly treated via Capability.
The above statement speaks for itself.
Please correct me if I wrong, but I believe that the Driver was reinstated after a Managing Director`s Appeal.
Vernon Barker denied me a managing Director`s appeal.