Hull Trains Strike over dismissal

[PLY2AYS]

So we should sack people based on the assumption that they're likely to have an incident? In essence is what your saying????

Guilty until proven innocent it seems on this thread. Unless it’s a corporation or business…

 

[fishwomp]

So we should sack people based on the assumption that they're likely to have an incident? In essence is what your saying????

If someone has fallen asleep, you do something about it. You have to know that it will not happen again. That can mean removal of the person, or the underlying reason for it.

Guilty until proven innocent it seems on this thread. Unless it’s a corporation or business…

Not at all. If a business knowingly let a driver that has fallen asleep get back behind the controls without having put in place any changes to ensure it doesn't happen, I would want to prosecute the company.

 

[PLY2AYS]

If someone has fallen asleep, you do something about it. You have to know that it will not happen again. That can mean removal of the person, or the underlying reason for it.

Not at all. If a business knowingly let a driver that has fallen asleep get back behind the controls without having put in place any changes to ensure it doesn't happen, I would want to prosecute the company.

Prove they fell asleep?

 

[fishwomp]

Prove they fell asleep?

If they admit, after spad or just by volunteering, then you are in a position of being able to help - doctors appointment, shift changes, etc.

If they don't admit , and no video, then no you likely cannot prove so you don't do anything until you have a pattern.

Bonus question for you. You have just been made responsible for the whole railway company, if you know that a driver has fallen asleep, what do you do?

 

[Recessio]

As someone outside the industry, is it "notifiable" if you have fatigue issues at work? I don't understand if First's reason is that the driver in question fell asleep at the controls at all, or if it's because they didn't report it in the correct manner at the time?

 

[Starmill]

Guilty until proven innocent it seems on this thread. Unless it’s a corporation or business…

I don't think anyone has been accused of committing a crime.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The driver aired a safety concern during a safety brief and admitted fatigue getting the better of him.
The company fired him without following their own agreed formal procedure/practices.

The safety record of the driver was, according to ASLEF; “without incident”.

It was indeed unlawful, given that due process was not followed and there was no evidence for grounds to fire aside from an informal/passing comment from the driver himself.

If someone has more accurate information however, I’ll happily concede, but none seem to be too forthcoming, only sceptical of the integrity of the union, who have represented and defended the driver and won him a settlement out of court.

I’ll say it again - the driver was on the managements radar before he aired his concern. At that brief he admitted to driving whilst severely fatigued but he did not report it at the time of fatigue. The relevant procedures then kicked in - not self reporting at the time of any safety incident is a dismissal offence.

As a former rep, I would never advise anyone to do this - it’s utter madness. This should have been dealt with on a one to one basis with the driver taking the initiative (on my advice) and, as a rep, if I was satisfied the diagrams/roster were ok, I would be looking for management to consider whether any health or other personal issue was causing the problem before we went down the road of taking him off driving permanently.

But, at the end of the process, if management couldn’t take the safety risk, that is their call. Then I would be looking at redeployment or a medical settlement. Both of which, I understand, were offered in this case. But the Union here wanted full re-instatement as a driver, something that was not going to happen. Hence the dispute.

I don’t know the full details of any settlement but if a sum was offered in lieu of an ill health payment, I wouldn’t be at all surprised.

 

[Bald Rick]

The driver aired a safety concern during a safety brief and admitted fatigue getting the better of him.
The company fired him without following their own agreed formal procedure/practices.

It was indeed unlawful, given that due process was not followed

I don’t know any details of this case, but I have been involved in enough other cases to know that not following an agreed process does not necessarily mean it is unlawful, ie against the law. It is not in line with that process yes, but that doesn’t necessarily bring the law into it.

 

[Starmill]

I don’t know any details of this case, but I have been involved in enough other cases to know that not following an agreed process does not necessarily mean it is unlawful, ie against the law. It is not in line with that process yes, but that doesn’t necessarily bring the law into it.

The Tribunal can give regard to whether they followed the process or not even if they didn't break the law, of course. It's case specific, as has been suggested several times now.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think it's probably time to wrap this one up. The industrial action by ASLEF has come to an end and it seems highly unlikely we'll find out precisely what happened to bring it to an end so there really isn't much more to be gained by speculation and guesswork.