LU staff vote to strike following dismissal of employee for issuing a refund without a customer present

[YorkRailFan]

write to advise you that the ballot has now closed and the result is as follows:-



Are you prepared to take strike action?



Number of individuals who were entitled to vote in the ballot: 60

Number of votes cast in the ballot: 44

Number of individuals answering “Yes” to the question: 40

Number of individuals answering “No” to the question: 4

Number of spoiled or otherwise invalid voting papers returned: 0



Are you prepared to take industrial action short of a strike?



Number of individuals who were entitled to vote in the ballot: 60

Number of votes cast in the ballot: 44

Number of individuals answering “Yes” to the question: 42

Number of individuals answering “No” to the question: 2

Number of spoiled or otherwise invalid voting papers returned: 0

DISMISSAL, G. NJAKA – LONDON UNDERGROUND

www.rmt.org.uk

We've got the figures of the RMT's ballot on renewing their mandate to strike, which voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action and an OT ban.

 

[bluegoblin7]

DISMISSAL, G. NJAKA – LONDON UNDERGROUND

www.rmt.org.uk

We've got the figures of the RMT's ballot on renewing their mandate to strike, which voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action and an OT ban.

No "we" don't - this is a separate, unrelated dispute around the dismissal of one individual.

The main Jobs, Pensions and Conditions dispute is ongoing, with the ballot closing on 25 April.

Out of interest, did it not strike you as somewhat odd that for a cross-Combine ballot only 60 staff were eligible...?

 

[winks]

What was the staff member dismissed for ?

 

[kw12]

No "we" don't - this is a separate, unrelated dispute around the dismissal of one individual.

The main Jobs, Pensions and Conditions dispute is ongoing, with the ballot closing on 25 April.

Out of interest, did it not strike you as somewhat odd that for a cross-Combine ballot only 60 staff were eligible...?

Why is there a strike instead of the case being taken to an employment tribunal? Any why were so few staff eligible?

 

[Thirteen]

I wonder if a strike over an employee is a potential Station closure rather than an entire network strike.

 

[Daniel]

What was the staff member dismissed for ?

A quick google (and therefore all in the public domain) turned up this which quotes:

Staff at Oxford Circus are balloting ballot for action to demand reinstatement of a sacked workmate. Gerald had a lapse in concentration and conducted an Oyster refund without a customer present. Although he later returned the £2.40, he’s been sacked.

 

[43066]

Why is there a strike instead of the case being taken to an employment tribunal? Any why were so few staff eligible?

Taking a case to an employment tribunal takes time, costs money, and won’t necessarily result in reinstatement, even if the employee wins the case.

 

[Goldfish62]

A quick google (and therefore all in the public domain) turned up this which quotes:

Shouldn't laugh, but the stated reason sounds like one of those Sir Norman Fry memes when the latest MP gets mired in scandal.

 

[bramling]

Shouldn't laugh, but the stated reason sounds like one of those Sir Norman Fry memes when the latest MP gets mired in scandal.

Must admit it does sound ridiculous, however one presumes there must be a little more to it otherwise others wouldn’t be going on strike on his behalf.

 

[Goldfish62]

Must admit it does sound ridiculous, however one presumes there must be a little more to it otherwise others wouldn’t be going on strike on his behalf.

Oh absolutely. It's the quote that made me chuckle. It's hardly the most convincing defence.

 

[Recessio]

Oh absolutely. It's the quote that made me chuckle. It's hardly the most convincing defence.

Surely there must be much more going on than a "lapse in concentration" for someone to get sacked?

But then for so many of his colleagues to be backing him in a nearly unanimous vote, clearly something else is going on - we all know what LU can be like.

It's a very odd quote, definitely not getting the full story behind it.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Surely there must be much more going on than a "lapse in concentration" for someone to get sacked?

But then for so many of his colleagues to be backing him in a nearly unanimous vote, clearly something else is going on - we all know what LU can be like.

It's a very odd quote, definitely not getting the full story behind it.

I'm not sure how much more it clarifies but the same publication published the following in its February edition:

DEFEND GERALD NJAKA!
Staff at Oxford Circus are preparing to
ballot for action to demand
reinstatement of a sacked workmate.
CSA Gerald Njaka was approached by
a customer and asked for help
refunding an Oyster card; the customer
left before the transaction was
completed, and Gerald held onto the
£2.40 (the value of the refund) to await
the customer’s return. When the
customer never came back, Gerald
forgot he had the money on him, and left
the station with it.
A lapse in concentration, for sure, and
no doubt Gerald should not have
completed the transaction without the
customer present. But it’s a simple
mistake any of us could have made. The
idea it merits dismissal is ludicrous,
especially given Gerald has an
otherwise unblemished disciplinary
record.
Gerald’s colleagues have his back. If
the company doesn’t see sense, the
campaign must escalate.

 

[kw12]

I'm not sure how much more it clarifies but the same publication published the following in its February edition:

We are still not getting the full story, as there is no mention of how this incident came to light. For example, was the 'customer' a genuine customer or actually someone that LU had engaged to conduct this scenario in order to obtain evidence of any cash mishandling?

 

[pitdiver]

I wonder if this is something that existed when I worked for LUL in the booking office. There were persons who would visit a ticket window and ask for a certain ticket then a couple of minutes later come back and ask for a refund. They would check to see if was non issued and cancelled written across it.
They were known as revenue testers if I recall.

 

[Recessio]

I'm not sure how much more it clarifies but the same publication published the following in its February edition:

Thanks for adding this. Definitely seems an unfair reason to be sacked for me, I glad to hear that his colleagues are standing with him. Even if it was an LU test, an instant dismissal seems unfair to me.

 

[Cross City]

I take it this isn't going to shut the whole network down?

 

[kw12]

Thanks for adding this. Definitely seems an unfair reason to be sacked for me, I glad to hear that his colleagues are standing with him. Even if it was an LU test, an instant dismissal seems unfair.

We do not know the full story. If it were a LU test, this may have been part of regular 'random' testing (so would have tested whichever member of staff happened to
be nearest). Or it may have been a test specifically targeting this particular member of staff, perhaps because of something that they had previously done (or not done).

I used to perform cash handling tests for some major hotel chains. These tests covered all areas that could handle cash, including areas where virtually all transactions were normally charged to customer rooms. For most visits I was asked to interact with as many staff as possible. However, for some visits, for at least one area I was instructed to interact with a specific individual. I was never informed why these particular members of staff were being targeted.

 

[Haywain]

an instant dismissal seems unfair to me.

From here, we are looking at this one case in isolation but the individual's disciplinary record may be such that it is far from isolated - we just don't know, it could be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

 

[RJ]

From here, we are looking at this one case in isolation but the individual's disciplinary record may be such that it is far from isolated - we just don't know, it could be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.

This is the thing. In cases where people are dismissed for seemingly trivial things, there’s often a backstory from the management’s side.

To be fair pocketing money isn’t normal behaviour, if any customers round here leave money for any reason it goes straight in the till or safe and is booked up, nobody would think to go home with it.

It’s really hard to find good staff so what is the full backstory as to why they’ve thrown the book?

But then for so many of his colleagues to be backing him in a nearly unanimous vote, clearly something else is going on - we all know what LU can be like.

I think a good enough reason is that nobody else would want to be disciplined for doing the same thing.

 

[74A]

Where did the cash come from ? Now there are no ticket offices I assume to came out of a machine on the concourse. Can these machines issue cash refunds ?

 

[kacper]

Where did the cash come from ? Now there are no ticket offices I assume to came out of a machine on the concourse. Can these machines issue cash refunds ?

The big machines can issue cash rescinds

 

[Haywain]

But then for so many of his colleagues to be backing him in a nearly unanimous vote, clearly something else is going on - we all know what LU can be like.

Even incompetent and dishonest staff can be surprisingly popular with colleagues.

 

[Kite159]

Even incompetent and dishonest staff can be surprisingly popular with colleagues.

Especially if the colleagues have only heard half the story as put out by the union.

 

[Mojo]

Where did the cash come from ? Now there are no ticket offices I assume to came out of a machine on the concourse. Can these machines issue cash refunds ?

Yes the passenger operated ticket machines can issue refunds in cash for remaining credit (and deposit, if the card was sold with one) subject to a maximum credit value of £10. However this does not require staff intervention and can be done by the customer directly.

From the extract in the Tubeworker blog quoted above it seems like the customer may have given him their Oyster card and asked for a refund, but then did not wait around for this to be completed.

 

[Goldfish62]

Especially if the colleagues have only heard half the story as put out by the union.

LT (both tube and buses) has historically always had zero tolerance of dishonesty involving money, however small the sums. If proven it's always usually resulted in automatic dismissal, and the unions know that. In fact, a good rep would advise someone in such a case to resign before they're pushed.

Many moons ago a colleague of mine got dismissed for dishonesty involving fares revenue (it was quite a lot) and the organisation (London Buses those days) also informed the police. As a result said former colleague also did a stint inside.

Which leads me to assume there's a bit more to this case.

 

[Russel]

From the extract in the Tubeworker blog quoted above it seems like the customer may have given him their Oyster card and asked for a refund, but then did not wait around for this to be completed.

At a busy station like Oxford Circus, I can easily see how the staff member could put the cash in his pocket to deal with later and then forget it was there, especially if moment later he's got another customer to deal with...

But then, there is probably more going on here than is known publicly.

 

[RJ]

At a busy station like Oxford Circus, I can easily see how the staff member could put the cash in his pocket to deal with later and then forget it was there, especially if moment later he's got another customer to deal with...

But then, there is probably more going on here than is known publicly.

The question is, how did this get flagged?

There is no audit trail for staff if the public refund option is used which would suggest they were either being watched specifically or someone has investigated, maybe by use of cameras and obtained proof after it wasn’t correctly accounted for.

Either way it seems someone has gone out of their way to make sure this was followed up on.

 

[Hadders]

It does seem strange that a passenger would approach a member of staff and ask for a refund but then leave without the cash...

 

[Belperpete]

It does seem strange that a passenger would approach a member of staff and ask for a refund but then leave without the cash...

Agreed. And how would management know that the passenger had left without taking their cash? It does seem like some kind of test/sting operation.

 

[SunSeeker]

Yea whole thing just doesn't make much sense. If a customer asked for help with a refund, why would they then just decide to walk away? Unless that was their plan all along.

Everyone in LU knows to lose a job at least one of two things needs to happen - you don't follow procedure or steal LU's money. Unfortunately both happened to this person..

Whether they were targeted specifically or it was all completely random is a different question.

I know someone who was sacked a number of years ago for stealing all the 20ps from the public toilet on the station that customers had paid to use it, so it does happen.