News:

Welcome to V.L.H

Main Menu
Welcome to verylittlehelps. Please login or sign up.

28-03-24, 06:13PM

Login with username, password and session length
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 38,117
  • Total Topics: 630
  • Online today: 322
  • Online ever: 1,436
  • (24-01-24, 01:01AM)
Users Online

CCTV for monitoring staff?

Started by bornfree, 10-10-20, 02:16AM

Previous topic - Next topic

penguin

If it was a first written as per policy then the written warning should have been documented in notes and you should have signed them at the end of the meeting, you would have been well within your rights to have the warning removed from your file for breach of process.
Do not let anyone tell you there is not a decent job and life beyond Tesco.

NightAndDay

#26
Quote from: lucgeo on 11-10-20, 08:07AM
Quote from: NightAndDay on 10-10-20, 09:43PM
Quote from: lucgeo on 10-10-20, 09:10PM
The "let's talk" is unsigned, but placed in your personnel file...you can insist on signing it, and you can also make your own notes of the let's talk. A "let's talk" is placed into your file can be used at a later date for a ongoing disciplinary investigation. A "let's talk" cannot be removed from your file, but if it is proven, at a later date, to be incorrect, then a note must be attached to state that.

What is in place then to stop managers just writing whatever they want in a lets talk and putting it into an employees file without the employee realising or the meeting taking place? The situation could arise where the manager can refer to the fictitious lets talk and progress disciplinary action without a meeting of the lets talk actually taking place?

Nothing...but it was the same with the informals... told it was an informal, but then notes were written afterwards as a 'first written' as signing was optional... and I know this from my own naive inexperience.
It was just per chance I mentioned in passing, to personnel manager, I'd just come back from an informal, who immediately corrected me saying it was a first written?? said no...was asked if notes were written in meeting?  said no... he shot to the office, returning with notes that were allegedly written in the meeting?? said I'd  never seen them before.
That section manager came verrrryy close to losing their job, and I received a grovelling apology from that manager..I became a union rep very soon after.

Surely this would be an open and shut case in a constructive unfair dismissal lawsuit, even if it wasn't I wouldn't be surprised if current employment laws aren't strong enough for there not to be a checks and balances provision in the form of some sort of oversight in disciplinary procedures, In America and some companies in the UK, disciplinaries and investigation responsibilities are being taken away from managers due to there being an increase in the number of lawsuits due to process not being followed by unqualified managers, which is hardly surprising considering the generally unqualified nature of their role.

lucgeo

Quote from: penguin on 11-10-20, 02:11PM
If it was a first written as per policy then the written warning should have been documented in notes and you should have signed them at the end of the meeting, you would have been well within your rights to have the warning removed from your file for breach of process.

I was told it was an informal in the meeting, no notes were written in the meeting, only written up after I left the meeting as a 1st written...it turned out that my manager was under strict instructions from a senior manager to serve me a first written, but as we were friendly and worked well together, he foolishly tried to keep the peace by keeping a heavily relied on, good team worker, onside but also following senior team instructions.
This all came out in the meeting with the personnel manager, who read the riot act to both my manager and senior team manager, who denied ever giving the instruction and threw the section manager under the bus.
The warning was ripped up in front of me, and I was advised that I did not have to accept the apology, and could take out a grievance against my manager. I chose to accept the apology, as my manager had always stood up for our team in the past, and always had our back.
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

King1999

This is why personnel managers are needed back in store.......you just don't have anyone to go to now.All part of the master plan to devalue staff.

NightAndDay

Quote from: lucgeo on 11-10-20, 03:21PM
Quote from: penguin on 11-10-20, 02:11PM
If it was a first written as per policy then the written warning should have been documented in notes and you should have signed them at the end of the meeting, you would have been well within your rights to have the warning removed from your file for breach of process.

I was told it was an informal in the meeting, no notes were written in the meeting, only written up after I left the meeting as a 1st written...it turned out that my manager was under strict instructions from a senior manager to serve me a first written, but as we were friendly and worked well together, he foolishly tried to keep the peace by keeping a heavily relied on, good team worker, onside but also following senior team instructions.
This all came out in the meeting with the personnel manager, who read the riot act to both my manager and senior team manager, who denied ever giving the instruction and threw the section manager under the bus.
The warning was ripped up in front of me, and I was advised that I did not have to accept the apology, and could take out a grievance against my manager. I chose to accept the apology, as my manager had always stood up for our team in the past, and always had our back.

Isn't Personnel manager/people partner a WL3 manager as well as department lead manager? I thought only a manager who is one WL above or higher can discipline, so if it exists a WL4 manager (whatever role that would be).

penguin

Can be any manager who has completed the relevant e-learning doing a disciplinary, does not have to be a higher work level anymore. 
Do not let anyone tell you there is not a decent job and life beyond Tesco.

King1999

E learning are you for real can’t even do a 4 point check in our store ..... as for more serious issues e learning isn’t up to it another short cut joke.

lucgeo

A personnel manager (at that time) was responsible for all managers, regardless of level,  to adhere to policies and procedures. They could, and would, reign in any manager who was in contravention of policies.
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

King1999

Exactly why they are needed in my opinion.

penguin

#34
Some p.m would ensure managers followed due process, but others were happy to turn a blind eye or even back up a manager known to be in the wrong in order to save a fellow managers neck.
Do not let anyone tell you there is not a decent job and life beyond Tesco.

NightAndDay

I've experienced the latter type, one incident involved the HR director, resulted in the P.M and the SM being sacked for gross misconduct.

NightAndDay

Also, can't the more senior managers make life for the personnel manager difficult if they have the grapes to try reign them in, I'd imagine it would be akin to a ca telling off an SM?

lucgeo

Not really...the senior area personnel director is a force to be reckoned with, I've seen SM's run for cover when they've been caught out not adhering to policies and guidelines. I've even seen one hauled over the coals for failing to respond to a written request from a CA within the accepted time frame.
A weak PM can be manipulated by an SM to a certain degree, but only a foolish or naive PM would allow non compliance of policies or procedures to be practised or go unchallenged.
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

forrestgimp

Quote from: lucgeo on 10-10-20, 11:24AM
It is misuse...regardless of the managers suspicion. Should the manager suspect break entitlement abuse, they have to...err...MANAGE that suspected abuse (clue's in the title)
That CANNOT use CCTV surveillance solely to monitor staff productivity.

yea its against the policy. Will have a look see if i can find the part and upload it.

Batmanjo

Quote from: lucgeo on 13-10-20, 10:35AM
Not really...the senior area personnel director is a force to be reckoned with, I've seen SM's run for cover when they've been caught out not adhering to policies and guidelines. I've even seen one hauled over the coals for failing to respond to a written request from a CA within the accepted time frame.
A weak PM can be manipulated by an SM to a certain degree, but only a foolish or naive PM would allow non compliance of policies or procedures to be practised or go unchallenged.

Managers in our store think the CCTV is some sort of toy or VAR they can use whenever they want, pulling staff for talking, phone usage and other minor infringements and it seems to be the long service staff they are targeting. I myself have come in for some abuse with CCTV but they just don't seem to understand the camera never lies and are just about to get payback for false accusations which cannot be denied, but the management can't stop denying and covering for each other. For legal reasons I cannot go into the actual allegations. 

lucgeo

And hopefully your legal representation will include informing this continuous abuse of CCTV monitoring to the relevant authorities...good few hundred grand fine to that store...the best those managers can hope for will be Tesco disciplinary for gross misconduct  :-X
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

NightAndDay

Didn't you know Tesco is above the law, they will pull strings to get the judge or whoever administered the fine sacked if they dare have the grapes to challenge the Big T.

Misha101

Well nothing really happened to individuals because of the false acounting scandal I don't think. Tesco got fined. Feels like they are pretty much above the law.

forrestgimp

Sorry was busy last night.

Anyway I went on the system at work looked up the policy current as of yesterday and took a picture of it for you.


I would start a complaint i think if i were you.
https://ibb.co/b7P9RFm

(https://i.ibb.co/b7P9RFm/policy.jpg)

lucgeo

 8-) That's a good link that I have for future reference... :thumbup: just reading between the lines, it certainly gives the impression that Tesco are aware of the serious legal and financial implications and wants to keep it " in house" wherever possible  :-X
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

Batmanjo

Quote from: lucgeo on 28-10-20, 12:24PM
And hopefully your legal representation will include informing this continuous abuse of CCTV monitoring to the relevant authorities...good few hundred grand fine to that store...the best those managers can hope for will be Tesco disciplinary for gross misconduct  :-X

At the moment it will just be the manager who initialized this, but maybe it can out a lot more abuse of the system with the let's talk paper trail for staff being reprimanded for using phones, taking breaks , etc. as we all know it happens in most stores. The down side of this is a lot of staff are to scared to stand up and be counted.

NightAndDay

Quote from: lucgeo on 29-10-20, 09:44AM
8-) That's a good link that I have for future reference... :thumbup: just reading between the lines, it certainly gives the impression that Tesco are aware of the serious legal and financial implications and wants to keep it " in house" wherever possible  :-X

Tesco is the legal and financial institution, if Tesco goes down,the tax contributions will also go and there won't be enough money in the public purse to facillitate law and order.
This will factor heavily in a judges decision, as well as the fact that Tesco has connections and can make judges "disappear" if they prove to be chocolate in their peanut butter.

Katarn2000


NightAndDay

I've already said too much, the men in blue will take me away.

lucgeo

 8-) or the men in white  8-) are you on serious medication or just wacky baccy ???
Live for today. Learn from yesterday.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk