Click and collect van running

[gomezz]

I think the wording does need looking at as it does not seem to take into account push button start with the keys still in the driver's pocket.

[lucgeo]

Ok I'm confused now...

Why is it going straight to the store manager, where's his right to appeal?

Has any investigation taken place with other colleagues in the department or statements taken?
What is the disciplinary action stated...if it's a disciplinary stage, then the manager passes it in the meeting, then the right of appeal process begins and it goes to the store manager to be heard or overthrown, but this should not be all on the same day, as the colleague requires time to gather notes to present his case for appeal.

If its gross misconduct then the store manager or senior team only, have the right to dismiss, but even then a suspension would have been set in place whilst all investigations conducted, and then the colleague would receive an invitation back into the store for the outcome of the investigation.

The notes you've taken and the dept manager admitting there's no case to answer as he hasn't knowingly broken any rules, all hold in your favour.

Is it a push start button ignition? This also goes in his favour as the van cannot be taken if the colleague has the keys on his person due to if the van or colleague moves out of range then the engine cuts out anyway!

If he receives any disciplinary when other colleagues are known to practice this as the norm, such as the department manager states, then he is a victim of selective discrimination and suffering a detriment.

Contact ACAS for advice on this.

[dfl]

@lucgeo i will try and answer as clearly as i can, the investigation was done yesterday, manager doing it seemed very conflicted as if he didnt want to or wasnt sure how to progress, both me and employee made it clear we were puzzled why it would go anywhere near a disciplinary hearing with the store manager and we both made this clear if the employee hadnt broken any rules, we did this clearly and concisely, the manager was trying to describe scenarios where the employees actions could have been more risky to which we disagreed by pointing out that the employees actions were not outwith the definition within the drivers handbook regarding "unattended" and that those proposed scenarious were purely hypothetical, response from manager was I've made my decision and im taking it to a disciplinary hearing (this is whats on for monday)

Disciplinary hearing is set for monday, me again going in with the employee.

The van clearly was running, push start button yes. Keys within employees pocket.

If i understand correctly are you saying that after the investigation stage yesterday it should be then appealed before allowed to go anywhere near a disciplinary hearing, if so then it would appear to me this is being breached.

No other staff to my knowledge has been asked anything else as only thing that would be needed for i suspect is to ask if they idle vans as well, im sure management are already aware they would be able to deny it does as most of the drivers do it.

[JJH]

An appeal wouldn't happen until after the disciplinary. Ie. If issued a warning then that'd be the point of appeal.

Of course if the colleague has an issue with the whole process then a grievance should be raised.

Having read through the thread it seems baffling it's got anywhere near an investigation. I'd imagine idling vans is common place(as at most stores) and id say a blanket approach to all drivers via a let's talk would be appropriate and possibly some re-training.

[dfl]

@jjh the original complainee was raising the issue initially on a few things, idling the van, leaving it "unattended" which is a vague term in the drivers handbook and as described in the previous posts, shutters being open (again common practice) from whats went on so far the idling is being sidelined at least in the investigation far, the complainee tho was extremely vocal to the point of abusive about stating its wasting fuel blah blah blah, wouldnt be surprised if idling gets raised again at the disciplinary but think its very easy to defend because its common practice, the unattended may be the main issue that will be raised again tho but as that is a kind of loose term and from what I've found can be acceptable and not classed as unattended if the driver is in clear line of sight and able to get to the vehicle before anyone approaching could damage or thieve the vehicle or its contents.

The lets talk to all makes perfect sense to me too but id suspect most drivers would be saying then how do we keep warm in vans when its cold ! And the company would then have to supply a solution to that.

[gomezz]

How does the cost of "wasting fuel" compare with the cost of wasting a load of chilled and frozen that has exceed the cold chain rules?

[dfl]

@gomezz the van was running for cab heat, if not it could have been plugged in, on regular occasions there is 2 vans out and only 1 plug socket so one would need to idle and one plugged in under those circumstances

[lucgeo]

@dfl...no the appeal should be against any disciplinary, as beforehand no warning of any kind has been given.

to be honest, this stinks to high heaven. I think the store is knee jerking to an outside influence here. 

Play the game...keep your notes, contact ACAS.

[dfl]

Im positive the store is being pushed into this without a doubt and straight from the driver trainer, both me and the employee think so as well

[dfl]

I think even protector line wouldnt be a bad bet either, anyone know their number or email

[oldfashionedplayer]

Freephone: 0800 048 8958
Web: protectorline.ourtesco.com 
 

[dfl]

@oldfashionedplayer Thanks

[lucgeo]

I would suggest you hold fire for a decision from the meeting today with the store manager, if the guy didn't receive a warning from the investigation last week, and is today in a meeting with the store manager who will decide, then it's contravening the disciplinary process!

If you check with policies for people on the website it should show the current disciplinary processes and appealing a disciplinary decision.

A colleague can appeal any warning given which will then go to the senior or store manager to decide whether to overrule or not. A given warning can't be increased on appeal.
If the store manager gives a warning today then your colleague can appeal, and have it thrown out due to being given out of policy and due process.
If a warning is issued, then he should be advised of his right to appeal the decision, an innocent "yes please" will suffice 

His appeal will then have to go out of store and the appeal request to the area PP to process as has to be heard by another store manager of equal or higher status.

[dfl]

@lucgeo so is it definitely the case that any investigation should result in either action or no action at that same investigation and they cannot then pass it on to store manager for disciplinary like they have done, as if thats the case i will raise this first thing we go in. The employees manager when asked at the investigation as to why he wasnt disciplining said it had to be carried out by different staff member to the initial investigating manager (it was the employees manager).

Any quote in the policy that would show its out of process here ?

[dfl]

@lucgeo sorry to be a pain, personally I've never been able to test whether these vans do indeed cut out if keys arent in them as per one of your previous replies, if they go out of range, is there somewhere youve seen this in the vans spec, and tesco document, or had drivers tell you they do.

Or indeed has anyone else found this, it may be that only some of them do i dont know, i have checked the van type with the employee and it was iveco

Appreciate all your help so far

[lucgeo]

I'm unable to access policies for people on the Tesco website as no longer an employee.
There should be a section on disciplinary procedures and length of acceptable time frames?

I find it strange that the investigation wasn't undertaken and then adjourned to deliberate. The same manager could then call the colleague to give their decision of whether to discipline or not?
Then the colleague had the right to appeal the decision, which would be heard by a more senior manager, but this wouldn't normally be on the same day, as the colleague would require time to prepare their case.

What was the initial headline for the investigation, was anywhere stated that it was for gross misconduct?

I would suggest 'phoning ACAS for advice, or even Tesco helpline for clarification on current procedures of process.

Regarding the cut out of ignition, I'm assuming this as I have a push start car which cuts out when out of range, for added security. Perhaps ask a driver if this maybe the case on these van?

[dfl]

An appeal wouldn't happen until after the disciplinary. Ie. If issued a warning then that'd be the point of appeal.

Of course if the colleague has an issue with the whole process then a grievance should be raised.

Having read through the thread it seems baffling it's got anywhere near an investigation. I'd imagine idling vans is common place(as at most stores) and id say a blanket approach to all drivers via a let's talk would be appropriate and possibly some re-training.

I think the driver not being in the van at the time the complainant appeared has a bearing on this however as I've been discovering during this the word "unattended" in the handbook which hasnt had its full meaning clarified either in writing or in any training that i know of needs clarified as unattended does not specify in the van, generally it would actually mean that the van should be in view and able to be gotten to by the driver before anyone was able to damage/steal van/goods and that it is basically guarded.

Mind you guarded is a whole other can of worms because are we not told that if someone is determined to take it and they may turn violent were to give them what they want anyway to protect ourselves

[dfl]

@lucgeo letter states "may result disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from the company" it does seem in the policies it can be investigated then passed to seperate disciplinary at least in this case, just seems more questioning of the exact same scenario will be conducted with no other explanation available other than what the driver already gave, i do think however that the title including the words "idling", "unattended", "shutters open" hasnt changed since the investigation letter and so may be they intend pushing the exact same agenda even tho it was made clear what idling goes on as custom & practice here by most drivers on click and collect as well as the definition of unattended, as far a shutters open, this also should be a non issue as van was being clearly watched and also its common practice

[Morris999]

For this type of investigation there has to be a separate disciplinary meeting held by a different manager.
Only in absence meetings can the same manager give disciplinary outcomes without separate meetings.
I've only skimmed everything however it reads to me, a complaint was put in by a Tesco employee,
Store sent investigation meeting invite out.
Team manager completed investigation and moved to disciplinary meeting.
Disciplinary meeting invite sent out,
Store manager to hold disciplinary meeting today.

That would be the process, after the disciplinary meeting today, you can appeal any outcome not until.

Again I only skimmed all the above however seems like a HO jobsworth has seen something they don't like and has put pressure on SD/Store to deal with it.

Don't think it warrants a full investigation from what I've read but could be missing something in the thread or in Policy's/Training.
I'm not currently in a Dot com store so don't know the ins/outs of current Dot Com processes.

[lucgeo]

@Morris999

So who can the colleague appeal the decision to if it's the store manager who gives a disciplinary notice? To whom can it be escalated?

[dfl]

@morris999 thats a good summary of the situation, driver trainer Jobsworth who was from what i was told was on verge of blowing his lid to point of causing the employee to be immediately stressed by the JW's approach. But 1st meeting both employee and me cannot see why it would even go to one at all as we both agree that point was well put across that there seems to be no rules broken here, in fact employees managers view was basically this process he had just done was unnecessary (that was ofter note taker had left unfortunately) but would pass it to disciplinary (i think to cover himself fully)

[dfl]

Bearing in mind it is likely this is HO jobsworth does that same jobsworth get to know (officially) anything in regards to the outcome or is that meant to be confidential and even kept from them

[Morris999]

@lucgeo, they would have that explained in the meeting.
It would be either another store manager or SD depending on what the outcome was.
Either way it would be explained in the outcome letter they receive after the meeting.
@dfl. No the HO colleague should not be informed of the outcome as once they have made the initial complaint etc all that would be maybe required of them is a witness statement or further interview meeting.
Either way they should not be informed of the outcome.
The managers personal opinion spoken after the note taker has left the room unfortunately shouldn't interfere with the outcome, unless they say something along the lines of they are being made to do against company policy, but if they are not prepared to back that up then it would be your word against there's.

[dfl]

Well meeting resulted in a first written for the employee, store manager pushed through that unattended does need clarification which he will seek, but says hes spoken to relevant depts within tesco who stated to him that employee would have to be "within the area of the van" whatever that means, i think its definitely a case worth appealing but thats now up to the employee, letter states reason for warning as leaving the van unattended whilst idling the van, with shutters open whilst Again ignoring the fact that their wording is far too loose and should not expect the employee to know that this is "their" interpretation, admits basically that its unclear but still issues warning for the 3 items listed on the warning letter.
And also confirming that we can idle to keep warm if wel lock the van when we exit it, so the idling row the employee got is now pretty much moot point but still on the letter.

Im sure too i seen something in the training one time (a video) showing employees taking shopping to customers cars and not being right at the van either so how can that be right its contradictory

[dfl]

Employee said to me that they want to appeal this decision still based on the grounds that the drivers handbook wasnt clear enough, I've checked and even a large uk insurance company defines unattended same way as the employee presented to Tesco at investigation and disciplinary, only worry is that store manager said that appeal can lead to higher level disciplinary, from what i can see in policies for our people this is not true, can anyone else comment on what they know about this ?

Cheers