verylittlehelps

and is he happy with the anxiety he's caused? of course he is cos he's a jobsworth and in my opinion they are worthless s*** who think they're important. he/she needs to be reminded that what he has done was a big mistake!

@lackofinterest I know who the jobsworth is and so does the employee

@dfl. in my honest opinion the colleague has done nothing wrong. my advice to him would be to look elsewhere for a better employee who value their staff a bit more.personaly i would find out who the jobsworth who reported him is and make sure he would think twice next time about being a cnut to try to get employees sacked!!

Unrelated to the thread but can't remember how to start a topic...
Are Tesco removing the Extra format?

@lucgeo, it has been hard work but this forum and the help from many others on here including yourself has been amazing, invaluable and quite frankly priceless, couldnt likely have got anywhere near this far without you all

I think you just need to draw a line under this.

Yes it's unfair, but you've gone through the appeals process and though the initial accusation of idling has been dropped (probably because there is no clear written policy on it) the unattended element has taken precedence for which he's been disciplined.

These warnings drop off after a set period of time, and can only be referred to after that expiry date if it is for the same misdemeanour, it can't be used for escalation for a non related disciplinary matter!

Reading between the lines here, it looks like the orders been given higher up to make it common knowledge that it is a disciplinary matter and the colleague has been used as the fall guy!

The colleague could write a letter to put into his file that he accepts the appeal decision "under protest" but this would be pushing the boundaries of "under protest" relatability and may not be accepted?

@dfl...you've done a brilliant service for your colleague, have you considered becoming a union rep yourself? The training would help, you'd have back up and protection and a greater knowledge of workers rights.

It's not for everyone, but if you use it for your own benefit in helping others, while ignoring the commercial aspect side its now become, it can be very interesting and worthwhile.

you should of recieved a letter from tesco pensions stating the increAse in pension *******Big Drum role********** mine was £5.00 a month

Quote from: Doggiedoodle on 09-03-24, 03:08PMDoes anyone know if Tesco pension was mentioned in this review? Wondering if the monthly pension will rise as well.

No it was not, somehow people arent asking for it

Completed meeting, idling set aside as manager seemed to accept this happens, however does still consider that in managers view and previous managers who were involved in this process that the van was in their opinion unattended, anyone know what else i can do for the employee, re is acas, e.t. route worth it, the employee does want to as has not had disciplinary in all years working for tesco and still feels its unjust.

You can start off with the ambiguity of the rules, the handbook and the lack of specific details and training regarding the issue of "idling" which is the complaint made against the driver in the initial conversation with the instructor.
It is not something that has ever been covered or mentioned previously to the driver, hence the reason for the appeal, as it is still unclear to the colleague as to what they were disciplined for, as there was no mention of "idling" in the discipline.

The colleague feels that they have been singled out as an example to others, to make them aware of the process. The later posted notices would appear to support this.
The section manager himself (in the previous notes) suggests that it is unclear as to the rules the driver had allegedly broken?

The colleague feels that a 1-2-1 conversation with the section manager would have been sufficient in bringing the matter to his attention and scheduling a re-training session.
The colleague feels the warning was unjustified in this instance and wishes to appeal on the grounds already stated.