bubsy06:
dıɹʇ ʎɹÇÊŒÇ ÊžÉ”Ä±×ŸÉ” 'ʞɔnןɔ
what are you doing to that hen 
Davey Boy:
Hi need a little help here guys , i been off work on holiday for the week and a letter arrived in the post this morning inviting me to a meeting on mon for a investigation for me not wearing a seat belt on the 18th of feb the letter was sent on the 25th so i just got it today , all i can think is they have checked the veichle after my shift and found the seat belt plugged in without out anyone in the cab if u no what i meen…
I must admit i probally dont wear my seat belt most days bust just a little on edge about this whole invistagation lark…
dont no what to say or do at the meeeting or what the likely outcome would be in the current job climate…any help must apreciated thanks
on our check sheets we have a box to tick as to whether the seat belt was fasten or not when you got in the cab , as far as i know it was put on there originally due to drivers doing seat belts up behind seat and damaging them , costing company money to repair them.[ dont know whether thats true or not but what they said].
ive had no end fastened behind seat but always put NOT fastened, couldnt grass another driver up.but some would.
ive not heard of any sacked, id guess is the worst they got was bollocking, verbal warning[ im guessing as dont know for sure.
but if you do it , any one does it, i do it, youve got to have a good memory as you just dont know whos getting in that truck after youve finished with it.
does the letter state what the possible outcome of this meeting could be 
, my last displinary stated it could end up as instant dissmissal, so even though i was told by one of the managers[ mate outside of work] i wasnt going to be sacked , just trying to knock me into shape so to speak i didnt risk it and jumped ship . [ there was loads of jobs round then not so sure it would be so easy now]
anyway best of luck , dont worry to much
Davey Boy:
Hi need a little help here guys , i been off work on holiday for the week and a letter arrived in the post this morning inviting me to a meeting on mon for a investigation for me not wearing a seat belt on the 18th of feb the letter was sent on the 25th so i just got it today , all i can think is they have checked the veichle after my shift and found the seat belt plugged in without out anyone in the cab if u no what i meen…
I must admit i probally dont wear my seat belt most days bust just a little on edge about this whole invistagation lark…
dont no what to say or do at the meeeting or what the likely outcome would be in the current job climate…any help must apreciated thanks
Did the letter of invitation, to the investigation, advise you that you could be accompanied by a union rep or a colleague? If so take one in with you, if not ask for an adjournment to arrange a companion. This is standard ACAS advice and while not every company will have a large HR department (the fact of being asked to an investigation would lead me to think they have taken advice at the very least) should things go belly up tribunals will take lesser view to not following procedure.
Another thing would be to say nothing and wait untill the evidence that the company wish to present is shown to you and then react to that rather than say anything which could later incriminate. If the evidence is witness testimony and the investigation leads onto a formal disciplinary hearing make sure that you ask for the witness to attend for you, and your companion, to challenge any statements with which you do not agree.
you are entitled to advanced disclosure, so you can see what they have on you.
You should get this within a reasonable amount of time prior to the hearing.
i have allready contacting the union rep for my firm he has rearranged meeting for tue, so will have to see what evidance they have against me…
do you think this is of the level of gross misconduct forthis offence?
was not aware i had advance disclousure of the evidance i am a bit miffed as to why it took over a week from said event too write to me too discuss this in meeting i was on duty for two further shifts that week and was not told about this too the letter arived .
Davey Boy:
was not aware i had advance disclousure of the evidance i am a bit miffed as to why it took over a week from said event too write to me too discuss this in meeting i was on duty for two further shifts that week and was not told about this too the letter arived .
the last disaplinary i had , letter to tell me about it had conversations, things that had happened months before, id worked for months with people who back stabbed me by writing letters,id even done extra runs, pulled them out the ■■■■ when drivers didnt turn up.gone for drinks with them
the same as youve done this week, i felt sick knowing theyd used me for months whilst having back stabbed me by writing statements.
its a lesson we all have to learn im afraid , be very carefull who you trust and what you say.
i was lucky i got out , knowing whod stabbed me in back, they didnt think when they wrote them statements id find out i guess, but i did and they got paid back.
why even click in in behind the seat? Do you have a tracker that knows when you’re not wearing it or something?
i dont usally but there might be the one ocasion i come across a truck like this and dont undo it , our newer trucks have the silly bleeping when u dont wear them … lesson learnt but could be a costly one
Davey Boy:
i have allready contacting the union rep for my firm he has rearranged meeting for tue, so will have to see what evidance they have against me…do you think this is of the level of gross misconduct forthis offence?
In my opinion, and by my own Ts&Cs, this would be a Gross Missconduct offence as it breaks the law. However…that is the level of offence and this does not mean that the level of punishment will be at the highest level. On a purely personal level, if proved, I would be surprised at my work place if the employee was not given a chance to improve his conduct and would expect to be given a written warning initially with a view to having a reduction on appeal.
Unless there have been dismissals for this offence previously, or there are other factors we do not know about, I would find it hard to put this on the same level as theft, violence, racial/■■■■■■ harrasment or drug taking.
Your Union rep should be able to sort this without it going anywhere near gross misconduct if they have been trained and accreditted for this sort of thing.
If it does go to a disciplinary then PM me but I don’t think it will get that far.
Davy< if they (employer) can not show 100%
That you was not wearing a belt then what can
happem? ,However, have a look at this film clip
it does not require words that you can understand
as the film is Self explanitory , I have wrote else where
before that i was a seatbelt muffler until the day i saw for my self and my mate is still here , only because he was wearing a belt at the time,ALSO DAVY ;CAN you afford the loss every time you get caught, and over here in germany the car insureance will not compensate you when Hurt in a accident, due to not wearing a seatbelt Fully if at all.
Here is the CLIPThat was a crash at 30kmh,
so try to see a picture in your mind a crash when doing
a faster speed■■?; and just to show that
the wearing of the belt can save lives,read this old
write up of a Accident
brit pete:
Davy< if they (employer) can not show 100% That you was not wearing a belt then what can happem?
[/quote]
This is the problem - the employer does not have to have hard evidence - they only need to show that they believe that this happened ‘within reason’.
I know, I’ve just been there
I am sure everyone knows the dangers of not wearing seatbelts and the dangers of smoking or being overweight.
However it seems as though this post is more about an over zealous H & S department and the possibility that someone in the same company has shopped his colleague.
If it is a threat of Gross Misconduct, then holding all your cards to your chest is best, see what evidence, if any, they have. If you have clipped the belt into the buckle, that is not evidence, it just shows that you may be suffering from O.C.D
thanks for all the supportive posts guys , will contact the union guy tomoorow to find out what they got on me as they should disclose the facts before i get in the meeting … its rather worying if some colleage has been grassing but takes all sorts doesnt it i suppose…
surely they have to prove beond reasonable dought i was not wearing one as if it gos further they would require evidence of the alleged incident …
THink this sort of incedent could have been delt with with a quiet word and words of the effect were seen without your belt on caught agin it will be disaplinary .
just seems very harsh the way they are going about this…
Davey Boy:
surely they have to prove beond reasonable dought i was not wearing one as if it gos further they would require evidence of the alleged incident …
NO - they do not - this is not the same rules as a ‘court’ - they only have to show that is is ‘reasonable’ for them to ‘believe’ you did it.
great thatls all i need to hear lol
they must have somtehing otherwise why call the meeting to discuss my aparantent lackof wearing a belt.
This annoys me this, surely there should be something in the human rights that would allow you to decide whether to wear a seatbelt. I always wear a belt in the car but never in the lorry. I know at least 3 people who would be dead now if they had been wearing their seat belt in the lorry, the latest being a guy who went up the back end of a 7.5 tonne lorry on the M62, he was thrown out of his vehicle by the first impact and then hit by another truck as he was thrown clear bouncing him back underneath his own truck. He ended up with broken legs, arms, pelvis and all other breaks, the main damage being 70% burns from the gearbox oil of his own truck. He was laid up for at least 8 months in hospital. Police told his wife that if he had been wearing his seatbelt then he would not have been thrown clear and would not be here today.
Alan DJ:
This annoys me this, surely there should be something in the human rights that would allow you to decide whether to wear a seatbelt.
Or perhaps, wear glasses… we could go on…
The point is this - the driving licence is given in the understanding that the driver will conform to all the rules and regs that go with it - it is not a ‘right’ to have a driving licence - if a driver does not agree with those rules & regs then they do have the choice, under human rights, to not have or use the licence.
ROG:
Alan DJ:
This annoys me this, surely there should be something in the human rights that would allow you to decide whether to wear a seatbelt.Or perhaps, wear glasses… we could go on…
The point is this - the driving licence is given in the understanding that the driver will conform to all the rules and regs that go with it - it is not a ‘right’ to have a driving licence - if a driver does not agree with those rules & regs then they do have the choice, under human rights, to not have or use the licence.
Yes Rog. And if this had been a case of the law, the police would be involved & then the courts would have punished the miscreant within the power of the laws of the land.
This is a jumped up company making up their own rules to select someone to put them out of work.