Potential RMT Signaller Industrial Action

[Wolfie]

Rail worker accused of ‘Nazi food thrower’ jibe wins £70k for unfair dismissal

Members of the RMT trade union voted for strike action after he was sacked

www.standard.co.uk

Rail worker accused of ‘Nazi food thrower’ jibe wins £70k for unfair dismissal​

Members of the RMT trade union voted for strike action after he was sacked

A railway signaller accused of calling a cleaner a “Nazi food thrower” for clearing out the office fridge has won a £70,000 pay-out for unfair dismissal.

Now the experienced signaller has successfully sued Network Rail for unfair dismissal and breach of contract

The panel concluded that while Mr Knox had been “loud” and at the centre of a “ruckus and commotion”, it could not be sure what was actually said.

“We find, on the evidence, that any inappropriate words said were said for the benefit of those in the operations room, rather than directly to the cleaner,” the tribunal said.

The signaller was awarded £8,700 damages for breach of contract, a basic award of of £15,500, as well as £52,000 compensation for unfair dismissal.

An RMT spokesperson told the PA news agency: “Following Mr Knox’s successful claim for unfair dismissal, breach of contract and the fact the tribunal found that he did not say what he was accused of, we demand his full reinstatement into his role at Network Rail. immediately or we will consider our industrial response.”

The fact that Mr Knox was a RMT rep likely makes strike action more likely.

 

[Egg Centric]

If anyone would like to read the full judgement it can be found here. I have not at this time so offer no comment on it - I need to go to bed!

(Actually the above is just the "reasons" bit - the "remedy" bit can be found here as can the "judgement" bit - but the reasons will be the meaty part)

 

[bramling]

If anyone would like to read the full judgement it can be found here. I have not at this time so offer no comment on it - I need to go to bed!

(Actually the above is just the "reasons" bit - the "remedy" bit can be found here as can the "judgement" bit - but the reasons will be the meaty part)

Dear dear dear. What were the local management doing whilst all this was going on?

 

[Egg Centric]

Dear dear dear. What were the local management doing whilst all this was going on?

Having now read the judgement, he sounds like a bit of a bolshy curmudgeon but nevertheless that certainly didn't warrant sacking or anything disciplinary - RMT are right to be doing something about this (suspect reinstatement also impossible but he needs a six figure pay off imo so as to be made whole as if he lasted till compulsory retirement).

 

[WAO]

What a mess!

What business have suited managers or m'learned friends to do with in the signallers' tea room?

Can't those to whom thousands of lives are daily entrusted, manage their own 'fridge (and cleaner)?

Are taxpayers supposed to pay for this nonsense?

WAO

 

[Bletchleyite]

What business have suited managers or m'learned friends to do with in the signallers' tea room?

It's absolutely the employer's business if, on company time or on company premises, employees are using discriminatory language. Even in the messroom.

The issue here is that it seems such language was in fact not used.

 

[bramling]

It's absolutely the employer's business if, on company time or on company premises, employees are using discriminatory language. Even in the messroom.

The issue here is that it seems such language was in fact not used.

What grates with me is there clearly seems to have been a culture of backstabbing, and minor issues not being addressed.

Sadly an outsider would wonder if the whole outfit can be trusted to have people’s lives in their fingers when they can’t responsibly manage a fridge.

But this is when happens when management don’t deal with small problems but instead leave them to fester. Someone’s poor management has cost the taxpayer a lot of money.

It isn’t massively unusual though. I know a workplace that’s been in trench warfare for several years over the brightness of the office lighting.

 

[Wolfie]

It's absolutely the employer's business if, on company time or on company premises, employees are using discriminatory language. Even in the messroom.

The issue here is that it seems such language was in fact not used.

Re your last para l think that it was more that there was insufficient proof that the language was used.

 

[Horizon22]

Dear dear dear. What were the local management doing whilst all this was going on?

Could easily have been a night shift, where there is not much "management" around. Certainly I am aware that tends to be when communal fridges are emptied on Friday/Saturday/Sunday nights.

This part seemed the main point of contention

“We find, on the evidence, that any inappropriate words said were said for the benefit of those in the operations room, rather than directly to the cleaner,” the tribunal said.

Although he says he only said it was a "f****** disgrace" to a colleague, I doubt it would have gone further if there wasn't some sort of credible feeling more serious language had been used. Probably one of those only those actually there at the time will ever know.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jan 2025 ==

What grates with me is there clearly seems to have been a culture of backstabbing, and minor issues not being addressed.

This is TVSC after all (albeit 4 years ago).

 

[WAO]

It's absolutely the employer's business if, on company time or on company premises, employees are using discriminatory language. Even in the messroom.

The issue here is that it seems such language was in fact not used.

It's only discriminatory if there is both intent to discriminate and/or actual discrimination occurs.

Sharp, even if insulting, language in a tea room spat does not justify ending a career or invoking disciplinary procedures.

The words "proportion" and "sense of" spring to mind.

WAO

 

[Bald Rick]

There is, of course, a lot more to this. Which won’t be in the judgement.

 

[brad465]

Forgive my naivety, but how common is someone being reinstated after a successful unfair dismissal case, whether in the rail industry or in general? I've (fortunately) never been there, but personally think there are risks with choosing to return to former employment as you're never looked at the same way again, especially by "superiors", so have often thought even after winning a case one might try and move on to a new career/employer.

 

[66701GBRF]

..but personally think there are risks with choosing to return to former employment as you're never looked at the same way again, especially by "superiors", so have often thought even after winning a case one might try and move on to a new career/employer.

I have always had the opinion that if you win an unfair dismissal case you should automatically be entitled to your job back (plus the compensation), at least that way you can either choose to stick it out (managers often move on) or choose to go at your own leisure. Easier to put on your next job application too I would think.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sharp, even if insulting, language in a tea room spat does not justify ending a career or invoking disciplinary procedures.

If I used racist language against someone in work (any part of work premises or anywhere in uniform) I would expect, quite rightly, to be sacked on the spot and marched off the premises. It's without a doubt within the realms of gross misconduct.

Not for simple swearing though (Fs, Cs etc) though if used in anger I'd expect a written warning.

(The tribunal of course found that he did not).

 

[bramling]

There is, of course, a lot more to this. Which won’t be in the judgement.

I presume the implication here is that the guy in question was perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a pain in the arse, and someone saw half an opportunity to get rid of him, and decided to have a throw of the dice.

This sort of thing never ends well. It seems like it could all have been avoided by someone getting in touch with the cleaning contractor and raising an issue about the regime for fridge cleaning.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2025 ==

If I used racist language against someone in work (any part of work premises or anywhere in uniform) I would expect, quite rightly, to be sacked on the spot and marched off the premises. It's without a doubt within the realms of gross misconduct.

Not for simple swearing though (Fs, Cs etc) though if used in anger I'd expect a written warning.

(The tribunal of course found that he did not).

I find it rather strange that he wasn’t stood down / suspended from duty within the first couple of days. It does feel like the investigation kept digging in the hope of finding a smoking gun, and eventually seems to have resorted to having to make the facts fit a particular desired outcome.

There is also a school of thought that some subscribe to which is that it can be worth doing a half-baked dismissal even if it results in a tribunal pay-out, if it successfully gets rid of someone who - for whatever reason - there is a desire to get rid of. As in “let them have their day in court and pay off, but we won’t have them back”. Sometimes personal dislikes can override proper procedures and even common sense.

 

[Egg Centric]

There is also a school of thought that some subscribe to which is that it can be worth doing a half-baked dismissal even if it results in a tribunal pay-out, if it successfully gets rid of someone who - for whatever reason - there is a desire to get rid of. As in “let them have their day in court and pay off, but we won’t have them back”. Sometimes personal dislikes can override proper procedures and even common sense.

In truth this can sometimes be necessary and I did get that sense but didn't want to fall foul of forum rules hence my cautious description.

Nevertheless if this is the case then the only honourable way to do this is to negotiate the payoff beforehand so everyone is satisfied. Not fabricate a case on wafer thin evidence which taken at its highest (rejected by tribunal anyway) is very thin gruel (since when is calling someone a fridge nazi racist?). Particularly when (presumably - feel free to correct me someone) that would screw up the person's pension with no real way of fixing it.

The approach taken here is unacceptable and the compensation ordered by the tribunal is unacceptable imo too tbh. RMT would be 100% right to strike.

 

[66701GBRF]

The approach taken here is unacceptable and the compensation ordered by the tribunal is unacceptable imo too tbh. RMT would be 100% right to strike.

Why is the compensation unacceptable?

 

[JordR]

Why is the compensation unacceptable?

I imagine because it's probably less than a year salary and a signaller may not have many other potential employers in a similar pay range.

 

[Bald Rick]

I presume the implication here is that the guy in question was perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a pain in the arse, and someone saw half an opportunity to get rid of him, and decided to have a throw of the dice.

No, that is not the implication.

 

[baz962]

If they decide to strike , would it be a local thing or balloted nationally.

 

[Falcon1200]

Was there not some form of industrial action at TVSC (maybe just one day) when the decision resulting from this incident was first made?

 

[Bald Rick]

If they decide to strike , would it be a local thing or balloted nationally.

local

Was there not some form of industrial action at TVSC (maybe just one day) when the decision resulting from this incident was first made?

Yes. There were two ballots, the first of which was narrowly for industrial action, and there were one of two occaisions of local strike action, albeit in the same timeframe as all the national action and therefore not often reported as a local dispute. The second ballot voted against industrial action, and the dispute was ended. There has been a lot of water under the bridge since.