<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Attendance Procedures</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/</link>
	<description>The Blog of the London Review of Books</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:59:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Mayall</title>
		<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/comment-page-1/#comment-445</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Mayall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:12:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/?p=1889#comment-445</guid>
		<description>Hi AP, yes the union certainly agreed to this and it goes to the heart of the problem as I see it, that they are so out of touch with our needs that they don&#039;t even recognise that it is an issue. I think we need to bombard the union with demands for a change as soon as possible. If you want to write to me directly you can via my hubpages site here: http://hubpages.com/profile/Roy+Mayall</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi AP, yes the union certainly agreed to this and it goes to the heart of the problem as I see it, that they are so out of touch with our needs that they don&#8217;t even recognise that it is an issue. I think we need to bombard the union with demands for a change as soon as possible. If you want to write to me directly you can via my hubpages site here: <a href="http://hubpages.com/profile/Roy+Mayall" rel="nofollow">http://hubpages.com/profile/Roy+Mayall</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the abbot postie</title>
		<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/comment-page-1/#comment-438</link>
		<dc:creator>the abbot postie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:50:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/?p=1889#comment-438</guid>
		<description>Roy,the &quot;stage&quot; procedure has always been one of my biggest gripes about working in the business (as we are called these days). let&#039;s remember that a total of 4 DAYS of sickness can put your career in jeopardy.
I have never understood why the union agreed to this, however as you say they obviously must have done, and what&#039;s more they must have agreed to it back in the days when we had some influence over our working conditions!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roy,the &#8220;stage&#8221; procedure has always been one of my biggest gripes about working in the business (as we are called these days). let&#8217;s remember that a total of 4 DAYS of sickness can put your career in jeopardy.<br />
I have never understood why the union agreed to this, however as you say they obviously must have done, and what&#8217;s more they must have agreed to it back in the days when we had some influence over our working conditions!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Mayall</title>
		<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/comment-page-1/#comment-427</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Mayall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:29:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/?p=1889#comment-427</guid>
		<description>abbot postie: this is really shocking. I knew it was happening, but I didn&#039;t realise it was so blatant. This is the trouble, the union aren&#039;t fighting this properly. They must have negotiated this procedure. I think we should go on strike till it is removed. It is an abomination. I need to write about this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>abbot postie: this is really shocking. I knew it was happening, but I didn&#8217;t realise it was so blatant. This is the trouble, the union aren&#8217;t fighting this properly. They must have negotiated this procedure. I think we should go on strike till it is removed. It is an abomination. I need to write about this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the abbot postie</title>
		<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/comment-page-1/#comment-423</link>
		<dc:creator>the abbot postie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 07:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/?p=1889#comment-423</guid>
		<description>Roy,
I have experience of being &quot;triggered&quot;, and have noticed the change in how the experience was dealt with.
I have over 20 years service, and in the late 90&#039;s one year i was ill culminating in a stage 3 interview, i would like to point out that the reason for my sickness absences was due to the same-medially certified-illness.
When i had my meeting with the manager concerned-accompanied by my union rep-i explained the reasons for my absences and was listened to sympathetically.He then spoke to me in private and made the decision NOT to issue the dismissal he could have done.
3 years ago i was again triggered and this time dealt with by an acting manager-a postman from another office-who listened to my reasons for sickness-one absence with flu, one after a dog attack, and another occasion when i had been injured at work. I say he listened, he told me that my work related injuries were my own fault and issued the stage 1.
The truth is that all line managers have now been instructed to use the attendance procedure as a tool to get rid of staff, and it works.
Only 2 months ago a colleague was dismissed on the attendance procedure.He had gone sick after injuring his foot whilst on delivery, he returned to work but after a day went to see his doctor who informed him he had actually had broken his ankle and was signed off for 4 weeks. Unfortunately this meant 2 sick periods and was the final nail.
It did, however, mean that another duty in our office was disposed of without having to pay any redundancy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roy,<br />
I have experience of being &#8220;triggered&#8221;, and have noticed the change in how the experience was dealt with.<br />
I have over 20 years service, and in the late 90&#8242;s one year i was ill culminating in a stage 3 interview, i would like to point out that the reason for my sickness absences was due to the same-medially certified-illness.<br />
When i had my meeting with the manager concerned-accompanied by my union rep-i explained the reasons for my absences and was listened to sympathetically.He then spoke to me in private and made the decision NOT to issue the dismissal he could have done.<br />
3 years ago i was again triggered and this time dealt with by an acting manager-a postman from another office-who listened to my reasons for sickness-one absence with flu, one after a dog attack, and another occasion when i had been injured at work. I say he listened, he told me that my work related injuries were my own fault and issued the stage 1.<br />
The truth is that all line managers have now been instructed to use the attendance procedure as a tool to get rid of staff, and it works.<br />
Only 2 months ago a colleague was dismissed on the attendance procedure.He had gone sick after injuring his foot whilst on delivery, he returned to work but after a day went to see his doctor who informed him he had actually had broken his ankle and was signed off for 4 weeks. Unfortunately this meant 2 sick periods and was the final nail.<br />
It did, however, mean that another duty in our office was disposed of without having to pay any redundancy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Mayall</title>
		<link>http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/10/16/roy-mayall/attendance-procedures/comment-page-1/#comment-356</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Mayall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:24:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/?p=1889#comment-356</guid>
		<description>No, you can&#039;t appeal against a stage 1 or a stage 2. However it&#039;s worth lodging a disagreement if you&#039;ve been issued with a stage as it might help you with an appeal later on, at stage 3, if it ever gets that far. Have you spoken to your rep yet? That&#039;s the most important thing, to make sure you have a witness at every point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, you can&#8217;t appeal against a stage 1 or a stage 2. However it&#8217;s worth lodging a disagreement if you&#8217;ve been issued with a stage as it might help you with an appeal later on, at stage 3, if it ever gets that far. Have you spoken to your rep yet? That&#8217;s the most important thing, to make sure you have a witness at every point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 5/15 queries in 0.016 seconds using disk: basic

Served from: www.lrb.co.uk @ 2012-02-11 11:16:31 -->
