Comments for London Review Blog

Comment on Attendance Procedures by Roy Mayall

Roy Mayall — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:59:59 +0000

OK Silky. Just make sure there’s always a witness to any conversation. If they say it’s informal, then anything that is said can be disregarded. If anyone is taking notes it means it’s not informal and you need a witness present. Good job you had the evidence, but it shows how absurd the whole procedure is that we have to go to such lengths to defends ourselves for being ill. I am actually wondering if the procedure might not be illegal as being against natural justice, and am considering whether to fight my own stage 2 warning.

Comment on Attendance Procedures by silky

silky — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:09:47 +0000

thank you mate that was really helpfull.
i think floor manager was reponsible to inform Dom that i have resumed, but he did not do so on time on both occassions but now he realised that he made mistake and Dom (there is a rift going on between them two)wants to punish him by asking him to give me 1st stage which he knows i would not take cos i have a strong case. i showed him the phone bills that show that i did make call to resume. bottom line is those two idiots want to make me a sandwich between them.

i will keep u posted. thanks again

Comment on Attendance Procedures by Roy Mayall

Roy Mayall — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:36:34 +0000

Silky, you need to talk to your Union rep. You mustn’t go in and see the gov without a witness, either a work mate, or your rep. Best of all your rep. Even if you aren’t in the union, you should find out who your rep is. If there’s isn’t a rep in the office, you need to find your district rep. You definitely need to talk to the union. Stage 1 isn’t too bad. I’m currently on a stage 2. I’m not sure how they work out how many days off you’ve had, but this sounds like typical Royal Mail. As we say in our office: “This job is all about give and take. We give, they take.” Hope things work out OK for you.

Comment on Come Back Karl by Phil

Phil — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:27:37 +0000

My recollection of 1989 was that it felt as if everything was still to play for, Civic Forums and all – it was the end of Communism in Europe, but it didn’t feel like the end of Communism, let alone socialism. That came a couple of years later – the flare-out of the Yanayev coup was exhilarating, but what followed after made me feel that one too many brick had been knocked out. In something I wrote at the time – now lost on the far side of the Typewriter Event Horizon – I said that the collapse of the State Committee of the State of Emergency seemed to have retroactively discredited all the other Committees before it, right back to 1793, and made a whole way of thinking about politics unavailable to us.

It was a very disorientating period for the Left – surprisingly so, for those of us who’d never called ourselves Leninists – and one in which the Right (under any definition) made quick and massive gains. So I agree with you about the relationship between the end of the Communist bloc and the revival of capitalism red in tooth and claw – thus making Marx more relevant than ever. But I think the end of the USSR needs to be seen as a defeat for the Left – and not only the relatively insignificant parts of the Left which actually supported it. Dialectical innit.

Comment on Attendance Procedures by silky

silky — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:06:04 +0000

hi
a little help needed from you guys.
i phoned in sick on monday and then inform my gov on friday that i will take my rest day as usual on saturday. that is 5 days off sick,so i go back to work on monday. my manager says i was off for 8 days.
again after 2 months had to come home becaus of flu on tusday and again i phoned him to tell him that after taking my rest day saturday i will start duty on monday. this time he says i took 7 days off work.
so he wants to issue me 1st stage warning. what do i do ?
thanks in advance