Periods of availability abuse road transport regulations

[ross_v_stobart]

Its about recording poa by the minute.
In queue it DC waiting room where you can’t leave site.
You have to remain on site.
If your there for 40 mins or more in queued traffic, then its work.
If the employer expects you to hang around the canteen,all day,then its not really,a POA.
And yes you can probably go shopping.
If you have ,a phone and they let you know how long it will be.
That’s a poa, if you want.
Problem I had was that I asked to leave,and different to be paid.
Its complicated and you guys are not interested.
I don’t think trampers have a concern similar to myself as where,as I,want to go home at the end of my shift.
You guys live in your truck,eat sleep and whatever.
I like to get away from my day cab even i’m on a break.
Like I say in a queue or in a dingy canteen is not my idea if,a break.

.

[ross_v_stobart]

In 2009 nobody knew that you could not report for work if over your working time.
Some thought you could bang it on POA and that doesn’t count as work.
So by sitting in your bacon sized but all day, that counted as work even though ,you didn’t go shopping.
Yes sure, you all knew that

[delboytwo]

Ross v stobart:
In 2009 nobody knew that you could not report for work if over your working time.
Some thought you could bang it on POA and that doesn’t count as work.
So by sitting in your bacon sized but all day, that counted as work even though ,you didn’t go shopping.
Yes sure, you all knew that

I have and been given my 17 week reference notic every week

It was on my pay slip and if it when over 48 hours one week I could not do over time the next week. Every week we had to fill in a working time sheet this was required if we did not do it we would not be able to do overtime. And before you said you shouldn’t have to it my choice to do it and my life. If the company is willing to pay me to do it why not

[dieseldave]

Ross v stobart:
Ross v Eddie Stobart Ltd - People Management Magazine Online peoplemanagement.co.uk/…/ross-v- …Jun 17, 2011 — Ross v Eddie Stobart Ltd. Most UK employees’ hours and breaks and so on are governed by the …

Is this the link you mean… ?

http://www.employmentappeals.gov.uk/Public/Upload/10_0085rjfhSBCEA.doc

[wheel_nut]

This thread is like a maze that has so many twists and turns and blocked passages, yet the outcome is the same.

Mr Simpson was wrong, something that a day of powerpoint retraining would address.

However at the end of the tribunal and appeal procedure it became clear what had happened.

"The claimant was dismissed because he was difficult to work with and had a poor attitude to his work colleagues (including management). There was no other reason for dismissal.”

Words used during the trial were arrogant, sarcastic and using abusive language, that along with customer complaints, trainer memos and management issues caused the cessation of Mr Ross as a valued employee of less than one year. And no one can argue with that. It all came out in court.

[ross_v_stobart]

Lets end this thread.
Obviously nobody gives a ■■■■. After all its money isn’t it.
Got to support your kiddies and the,missis.
One,thing though, next time you slag off thieves and criminals, remember when you have,a smash because you fell asleep,remember to take some 5th wheel grease to lube up your back side so that mean fat guy in e1 wing, can slide his pole up your,■■■ .
Ha ha,ha.
I’m not particular bothered to tell you the truth.
Its easy for me to break the law I’ve lots of experience.
I just thought way back that working was legal.
Nobody gives a ■■■■ so neither do I.e.
Lets work to death.
Great job great money.
Loads of respect
y

[ross_v_stobart]

Seems like wheel but knows it all
Well that’s how you set people up isn’t it.
did you read the facts that there,were my I issues about Mr Ross performance.
How he did the job well.
Did you see there were no warnings or disciplinary.
No verbals, no written warnings.
You didn’t see how they didn’t follow,there own disciplinary procedure.
You don’t know nothing really.
Sarcastic was a lie.
Got on well with drivers and customers. No complaints.
Ever thought about being a judge
It was the managers and planners that complained, wonder why.
You seem to know it all.
So no warnings ,no prior verbals, nothing.
Did you read about my finding human shot on the cat,walk.
Oh you didn’t.

[ross_v_stobart]

I wasn’t on here to vindicate myself
I was curiosity about drivers views on periods of availability.
I see nobody cares,
With reference to my previous issue.
It was hard to fight a case without legal assistance.
Like I say I won the battle but lost the,war.
I wasn’t sarcastic when I refused to break the law.
I merely didn’t agree.
Obviously not agreeing with ones superior doesn’t go down well.
But it didn’t end up in a high court for no reason did it.
There,was an issue over the working time but that’s how it is.
Considering I’ve worked for years and never had any problems, what’s his name wheel but must be right, it was all my fault.
Case lost
Guilty as accused,
I must have been all those thing that were said about me.
I was totally wrong on all counts.

[tachograph]

I agree that you was treated unfairly by Sobarts when you was made to stay on the premises for the three days on POA, but no matter what you say it was never a grey area, the regulations make it quite clear that you could not be confined to the workstation whilst on POA, Stobarts were wrong on that issue.

Some people have mentioned that you was not required to do any work in those three days but that’s irrelevant, the fact is that Stobarts acted illegally in forcing you to stay on the premises.

Clearly the original tribunal was wrong not to consider the illegal act of forcing you to stay on the premises on POA and you appealed against the decision of the tribunal and got another tribunal hearing which was the correct result in my opinion.

As far as I can see the result was that the tribunal decided that you was sacked not because of anything related to the POA or health and safety but because of your attitude towards working practices and other workers and in-particular a trainer.

The people on this forum will of cause never know the truth of what happened, you have your version of events and I’ve no doubt that Staobarts would say something entirely different, so whether or not you was entirely innocent and the talk about your attitude was a set-up we will never know.

However what is certain is that for an individual to take on a company the size of Stobarts (even in 2009) and to win was always going to be hard, you did however show them to be acting illegally and that’s to your credit.

The problem I have with this thread is that you talk of drivers working illegally whilst the tachograph is on POA or break but give no reasons for saying it, obviously there are some people who will be working whilst the tachograph is on break but as far as I can see there’s no reason to believe it’s as widespread as you seem to suggest.

You talk about POA being a grey area and that it was misunderstood until your tribunal, but that simply is not true, we was discussing the ins and outs of POA on these forums as far back as 2007, it may have been a grey area where you worked but there’s no reason for believing that it was generally a grey area because it wasn’t.

You took on a big company and eventually lost, you’re not the first nor will you be the last to learn that money talks.

The only advice I could give would be to put it behind you and move on

[henrys_cat]

Ross v stobart:
I was curiosity about drivers views on periods of availability.
I see nobody cares,

Basicly yes, because all that the RTD has done is add another layer of confusion to the job. Its still doesn’t stop the long hours, after all you can still do a max of 60/week (taking poa and breaks out of it).

For me POA is the same as break, your sat waiting to either load, tip, or for a truck. Your not actually doing anything just waiting. Until VOSA bring a case against a company over the RTD there will be alot of grey areas.

In your case, I think the company decided that you weren’t suitable for them, and manipulated you to get the required response to dismiss you. Good on you for sticking to your beliefs on POA, weekend working, and how you do your checks, but don’t slate others because they do things differently or interpret the rules differently.

[nick2008]

one word

four letters

C O C K

[tachograph]

Henrys cat:
In your case, I think the company decided that you weren’t suitable for them, and manipulated you to get the required response to dismiss you. Good on you for sticking to your beliefs on POA, weekend working, and how you do your checks, but don’t slate others because they do things differently or interpret the rules differently.

I agree with this, it does come across as a company that’s decided that a particular driver is unsuitable for them, generally if a large company wants to get rid of a worker they will find a way.

What was the result of that phone call to VOSA ?

[wheel_nut]

Ross v stobart:
Seems like wheel but knows it all
Well that’s how you set people up isn’t it.
did you read the facts that there,were my I issues about Mr Ross performance.
How he did the job well.
Did you see there were no warnings or disciplinary.
No verbals, no written warnings.
You didn’t see how they didn’t follow,there own disciplinary procedure.
You don’t know nothing really.
Sarcastic was a lie.
Got on well with drivers and customers. No complaints.
Ever thought about being a judge
It was the managers and planners that complained, wonder why.
You seem to know it all.
So no warnings ,no prior verbals, nothing.
Did you read about my finding human shot on the cat,walk.
Oh you didn’t.

All I know it what I have read from the links that you provided, it doesn’t matter to me whether you still have a job or not, you came on a forum with an agenda and supplied everyone with bullets. I haven’t particularly taken a lot of notice what you have posted because it looks like one of your kids has done it for you. I hope your defence was better.

If someone had a crap on a catwalk that doesn’t mean it should go before a judge.

If you are having difficulty in the future can I recommend a barrister

[delboytwo]

Wheel Nut:
If you are having difficulty in the future can I recommend a barrister

[foxstein]

delboytwo:

Wheel Nut:
If you are having difficulty in the future can I recommend a barrister

I think having a coffee would make him worse
sorry misread it

[ross_v_stobart]

Head was in the clouds,with the fairies.
The dark side of,working over,48 hours
In this accident there was no real answer to why it happened.
hgv drivers need fast reactions.
Anybody heard of only a fool breaks the two second rule.
This professional Eddie stobart driver had 7 seconds to react, the police at first said he had 15 seconds to .

Because he said he had 7 seconds to react, he got of with it.
Well a little sentence.
I suspect he was tired and suffering fatigue
Because the police and vosa don’t enforce the working time regulations, they never questioned the amount of hours he worked was a factor.
That’s just one example.
Oh and the dead Winona husband

[ross_v_stobart]

Her husband walks around his wives grave asking why did she go. Why did it happen.
7 seconds to react.
Only a fool fiddles his working time to earn more money,only a fool fiddles the rules to benefit himself.
That takes 7seconds to say.

[ross_v_stobart]

A164 crash death: Husband’s anger as Robert Bulmer cleared of … www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/…/stor…May 11, 2012 — Bulmer, who worked forEddie Stobart, smashed into Mrs Watson’s VW Beetle on May 23 last year.

[ross_v_stobart]

This accident occurred, in Bolton plodder lane.
The young kid was on a moped riding to work at a pizza factory.
the driver worked around 11 to 12 hours a day.
The,working time was not really looked into as the tachographs showed plenty of rest breaks.
Have you ever seen a cyclist with no lights.
You can spot them if your alert.

[ross_v_stobart]

Driver Fatigue Policy Statement | Road Safety | RoSPA www.rospa.com › … › Policy StatementsMany professional drivers, especially HGV drivers report increased levels of sleepiness and are involved in a …