Tube worker sacked helping colleague who was assaulted

[CarlSilva]

Did'nt know if this has been posted here or not. Aopolgiese if it has but coudln't find it in search. Feel free to merge is ther's another thread.

Either way, what does anyone think with this?

Tube worker sacked for going to the aid of a pregnant colleague who was being assaulted

Lee Cornell is a CSA at London Bridge with over 10 years exemplary service.
He is a dedicated, honest and proactive member of staff.

His crime was to go to assist a pregnant member of staff who had been physically assaulted by a fare evader.
The person who abused and assaulted Kirsty Watts then punched Lee twice and stole his glasses.

Lee reacted to get his property back and prevent a further assault on him.
He pushed him into a wall and when he got his property back he walked away.

The fare evader continued to try and fight any other LUL staff who came near him.
He even tried to head butt Lee Cornell again.
Lee never reacted. He once again walked away.

LUL have summarily dismissed Lee. For " losing control"

Lee's Area Manager stated to him he was prepared to help him and speak up for him at the appeal.
The appeal Chair stated the AMS actually said " CDP took place in November, Lee should have known better"

There is now no option.
We told them we would ballot if Lee was dismissed.
We will now ballot London Bridge for strike action.

The clamour is now for the ballot to be escalated combine wide.
The RMT family are furious Lee Cornell has been treated so shabbily by LUL.

An injury to one is an injury to all.
The RMT does not abandon it's members in times of trouble.
Solidarity wins.

http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/...who-was-being-assaulted#.WNGDmceo45o.facebook

 

[thealexweb]

What? If the appeal chair actually did say that they should take a step back and consider their own position before spouting any more ****.

Usually I loathe strike action but this seems to be a very legitimate reason.

 

[AlterEgo]

Nowhere near enough information from enough sources to reach a conclusion.

Also, irritated to note the incorrect use of a possessive apostrophe.

 

[AlterEgo]

What? If the appeal chair actually did say that they should take a step back and consider their own position before spouting any more ****.

Why, what makes you think they lied?

 

[Bletchleyite]

We would need to see the CCTV to see if he actually did "lose control" or not. Unfortunately that is not available to us, so it would be very difficult to draw a proper conclusion.

 

[Kite159]

We would need to see the CCTV to see if he actually did "lose control" or not. Unfortunately that is not available to us, so it would be very difficult to draw a proper conclusion.

Two sides of every story, there must have been something recorded on that CCTV which couldn't be explained away by the member of staff during the meetings.

------

If the Union thought they had a good case, wouldn't it be better to pay the money so that Lee can attend an employment tribunal to clear his name?

 

[Master29]

According to ITV news he wasn't the only one disciplined. It says on the London Calling page that he reacted as well to being punched twice. I suppose anyone would. I suppose for LU it was a case of how extensive was his reaction? It looks like quite a fallout may come out of this. It does state in the article that it was dated 27th Feb so why has it taken to now for it to be noticed?

http://www.itv.com/news/london/2017...own-during-alleged-fare-dodger-confrontation/

A pregnant tube worker was said to have been punched in the stomach during the violence at London Bridge Underground station in November.
A staff member who challenged the fare dodger to produce a ticket or oyster card was accused of 'inciting or provoking an incident', according to the RMT.
The row over the disciplinary action could lead to a strike after union officials ordered a ballot of their members at London Bridge.
The RMT today demanded the sacked worker be reinstated and disciplinary procedures against two others be dropped.

 

[thealexweb]

Why, what makes you think they lied?

Nothing at all. I was just trying to approach it with an open mind.

 

[Mojo]

According to ITV news he wasn't the only one disciplined. It says on the London Calling page that he reacted as well to being punched twice. I suppose anyone would. I suppose for LU it was a case of how extensive was his reaction? It looks like quite a fallout may come out of this. It does state in the article that it was dated 27th Feb so why has it taken to now for it to be noticed?

http://www.itv.com/news/london/2017...own-during-alleged-fare-dodger-confrontation/

Because the appeal has only just been heard.

I have spoken to someone who viewed the CCTV who tells me that the incident is not as described in the quote in the OP.

 

[CarlSilva]

Because the appeal has only just been heard.

I have spoken to someone who viewed the CCTV who tells me that the incident is not as described in the quote in the OP.

Are we allowed to konw what did happan then?

 

[hounddog]

Because the appeal has only just been heard.

I have spoken to someone who viewed the CCTV who tells me that the incident is not as described in the quote in the OP.

RMT lying? Surely not!

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

And what happened to the passenger? Were they detained or charged with anything? Did they report the matter to tfl or the police for action?

 

[PeterC]

RMT lying? Surely not!

Their duty is to defend their member. If that involves emphasising certain facts while not mentioning ones that go against the case then so be it.

 

[Darandio]

Their duty is to defend their member. If that involves emphasising certain facts while not mentioning ones that go against the case then so be it.

Yet the same union has been putting out press releases over the past year headlined with words such as 'Lying', 'Smears' and 'Deceit'.

Come on now.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If the Union thought they had a good case, wouldn't it be better to pay the money so that Lee can attend an employment tribunal to clear his name?

No, as has been discussed many times, Employment Tribunals don't clear someone's name and only give them their job back in very exceptional circumstances. ET decisions tend to be based on procedural problems rather than judgment calls and only rarely will substitute an employer's decision.

Strike action is usually the best way to ensure reinstatement.

Yet the same union has been putting out press releases over the past year headlined with words such as 'Lying', 'Smears' and 'Deceit'.

Come on now.

And?

Their job is to defend their member, and emphasising certain parts of the case and minimising others is definitely part of that.

IMO even if the CSA did put the boot in a few more times than can be deemed "self defence", so what? Thug who deserves a kicking gets a kicking. I wouldn't sack someone for that.

 

[Darandio]

And?

Their job is to defend their member, and emphasising certain parts of the case and minimising others is definitely part of that.

Of course it is their job. However, it seems apparent that over the last 12 months or so, public support for the RMT has dwindled. If the RMT feels the need to regularly put out strongly worded statements because others are bending the truth but then feels that it needs to do exactly the same, it's hardly surprising is it?

 

[Master29]

And?

Their job is to defend their member, and emphasising certain parts of the case and minimising others is definitely part of that.

IMO even if the CSA did put the boot in a few more times than can be deemed "self defence", so what? Thug who deserves a kicking gets a kicking. I wouldn't sack someone for that.

Perhaps an unwise statement but clearly an understandable one.

 

[exile]

Yes, the RMT has a duty to defend its members, and present their view of such incidents.

But as lay people, who don't know the facts, we are entitled to think there may be another side to the story.

Oh - and "even if the CSA did put the boot in a few more times than can be deemed "self defence", so what?"

Well, that's assault, and if I did it when on duty I'd be picking up my P45 straight away, if not looking forward to an appearance in court.

 

[philthetube]

Iv'e said it before but once again:-

If both sides were required to put evidence out in public before industrial action occurred it would massively reduce such action, in this case CCTV supplied by lul, with faces masked would establish the facts and whichever side was in the wrong would be in an undefendable position and would have to back down.

RMT members would not strike, whatever their leaders said, if the staff member deserved to be sacked and LUL would have to back down if staff were seen to have acted reasonably.

 

[gavin]

@HeartLondonNews

Tube workers who are members of the RMT union are going to strike for 24 hours from 10pm on May 7 in dispute over sacking of a colleague.

 

[Kite159]

@HeartLondonNews

Tube workers who are members of the RMT union are going to strike for 24 hours from 10pm on May 7 in dispute over sacking of a colleague.

Other businesses would see the union help funding an Employment Tribunal Case, but not Mike Cashro :roll:

 

[Mojo]

Other businesses would see the union help funding an Employment Tribunal Case, but not Mike Cashro :roll:

An ET won't get you your job back...

 

[Bald Rick]

An ET won't get you your job back...

It will if it the ET makes a reinstatement order.

 

[Andyh82]

To the vast majority of the public, the idea of going on strike because a member of staff has been sacked (a member of staff most won't have even known) is an alien concept.

 

[Kite159]

An ET won't get you your job back...

Instead if they deem the employee was unlawfully sacked, they can order LU to pay him compensation, which won't look good in the eyes of the public.

Striking will loss money, probably won't get his job back and cause the loss of public support, especially if the CCTV footage is leaked.

 

[CarlSilva]

IMO even if the CSA did put the boot in a few more times than can be deemed "self defence", so what? Thug who deserves a kicking gets a kicking. I wouldn't sack someone for that.

Fair play.
The anwser to question of what is reasonible self defence is quite a subjective one. Persnonaly, I don't hit people out of anger, and I've only ever done it enough times to get them to stop attacking me. Any further than that and it obviously wouln't be self defence.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It will if it the ET makes a reinstatement order.

And they're as rare as hen's teeth. And can still be ignored.

 

[Antman]

Industrial action at London Bridge this morning although the station remains open.

As others have alluded to I don't see why this can't be dealt with through the normal channels, ie industrial tribunal?

I've not seen footage of the incident, presumably it's not in the public domain, but if this was a member of staff taking the law into their own hands I have no sympathy at all.

 

[chris11256]

I've read somewhere that the RMT will be balloting all station staff for strike action over this dispute. Result expected in a few weeks.

 

[PauloDavesi]

Are there any further developments in this case?