…in his lorry 
msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/dri … d=msedgntp
I suppose the question regardless of what your stance is, was it really worth digging his heels in to end up being sacked and then subsequently loosing an unfair dismissal tribunal.
No sympathy with him really, if that’s the rule at the delivery site just wear it to humour them and then carry on with your day.
I dislike wearing masks as they can fog up the glasses and they’re just plain annoying, as things stand just get on with it.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
I’m thankfully long since retired but when working I always thought that I didn’t have to agree with any
site’s rules but I had to comply with them. Simples.
simcor:
I suppose the question regardless of what your stance is, was it really worth digging his heels in to end up being sacked and then subsequently loosing an unfair dismissal tribunal.
I agree, i had to do the same at a food site in Spalding, no big deal.
That Kent Foods site in Basildon is always recruiting lol.
Not heard great things about them.
The issue is simple. He was representing his employer, so he was a being a bit silly by refusing to wear the mask.
If your in your own car on your own time. Yes, you can refuse to put a mask on. But, he wasnt.
Honestly, such a waste of time trying to appeal. Also his ‘cab’ is not his home lol. I’m not even sure Kent Foods does tramping for class 2. Pretty sure its just class 1. I may be wrong but either way just because you tramp doesnt mean it is your home.
Another argument was he is not required by law. I see this a lot in the motorcycle community. Many argue that they are not ‘required’ by law to take off their motorcycle helmets when filling up petrol in petrol stations. This is true. But as that petrol station is a private business they can permit whoever they want into their establisment. So if you dont take off your motorcycle helmet they have every right to say you wont be served.
In fact, a company could literally set up a supermarket that only allowed ■■■■■■. I doubt it would be very successful but they could do it. If you tried to come in even wearing socks they could refuse entry. So, what is the law and what isnt the law is just completely irrelevant on private property.
The driver is 100% in the wrong. He didnt even have to argue the case. He could of just left straight away and they wouldnt of banned him but he stayed to argue a point that was completely stupid.
adam277:
That Kent Foods site in Basildon is always recruiting lol.
Not heard great things about them.The issue is simple. He was representing his employer, so he was a being a bit silly by refusing to wear the mask.
If your in your own car on your own time. Yes, you can refuse to put a mask on. But, he wasnt.Honestly, such a waste of time trying to appeal. Also his ‘cab’ is not his home lol. I’m not even sure Kent Foods does tramping for class 2. Pretty sure its just class 1. I may be wrong but either way just because you tramp doesnt mean it is your home.
Another argument was he is not required by law. I see this a lot in the motorcycle community. Many argue that they are not ‘required’ by law to take off their motorcycle helmets when filling up petrol in petrol stations. This is true. But as that petrol station is a private business they can permit whoever they want into their establisment. So if you dont take off your motorcycle helmet they have every right to say you wont be served.
In fact, a company could literally set up a supermarket that only allowed ■■■■■■. I doubt it would be very successful but they could do it. If you tried to come in even wearing socks they could refuse entry. So, what is the law and what isnt the law is just completely irrelevant on private property.
The driver is 100% in the wrong. He didnt even have to argue the case. He could of just left straight away and they wouldnt of banned him but he stayed to argue a point that was completely stupid.
A step too far in that statement I think.
Even a private club cannot exercise discrimination on some grounds, can it?
I might be tempted to use a supermarket that was strictly nudist.
But they might ask me to put some clothes on to stop putting off other users.
shullbit:
simcor:
I suppose the question regardless of what your stance is, was it really worth digging his heels in to end up being sacked and then subsequently loosing an unfair dismissal tribunal.I agree, i had to do the same at a food site in Spalding, no big deal.
I understand that we all need to be pragmatic in such cases, but where do you draw the line?
We go to a site (well, a few, but this one is more tight on rules than most) were a “mask at all times whilst on site” rule was implemented, including in your cab, and the trailer yard. They are now not rigidly enforcing it in the cab though, as everybody realises that that makes no sense. You have to wear it in the yard though, even when your doing your curtains.
But were do you draw the line? Some brick yards we go to now insist that you wear hi-viz trousers, aswel as the vest/coat… why? Was just wearing the best not visible enough? Then why insist that we wear it for the last few decades? Have forkies eyes deteriorated? That is an example of “implementing rules for rules sake”, and is a slippery slope. We have all seen this in regards stopping drivers from driving off whilst being un/loaded. Hand in your keys, whilst you rest in your cab. Fair enough, that makes sense.
Keep your keys, but rest in this (comfortable) canteen/rest area, with access to facilities and refreshments. Fair also… but no.
Give me your keys.
Now sit on that plastic chair, and stare at the wall/listen to homes under the hammer.
No, you can use the canteen to eat something?, even though you"ve driven 4 hours to get here.
And the slippery slope starts this.
Hand in your keys.
Sit on that chair.
Take of your red airline.
Sainsbugs in Bristol is bad. You must get out, lock your doors, give the keys to the forkie, and then stand by the edge of the canopy, out in the elements, whilst he unload you. There is only one reason why they do that, to belittle the driver. There is not a single reason why it is safer for the driver (or the forkie) to be stood out in all weathers, rather than sit in his passenger seat. None what so ever.
Were draw the line? Wear this hi-viz coat. Ok.
Wear these hi-viz trousers. Hmm, ok.
Wear this armband with a flashing light. What? (Used by InBev staff in the brewery).
Wear these squeaky shoes. Oh come on. No, they provide an audible warning to somebody with their back to you… (feasible, mark my words. Remember the first time the “caution…this vehicle is reversing…” buzzer came out. Oh how we laughed. No the truck screams out loud that it is about to turn left…)
Take of your trousers, and stand in that corner.
If you think that last one could never happen, just imagine how you’d feel if you turn up for work one morning, and the graphics on your door make it look like you’re sat on a toilet, with your trousers round your ankles…
Franglais:
A step too far in that statement I think.
Even a private club cannot exercise discrimination on some grounds, can it?I might be tempted to use a supermarket that was strictly nudist.
But they might ask me to put some clothes on to stop putting off other users.
Ye true.
Obviously, you cant kill people even on private property as an example.
theguardian.com/business/1999/jan/11/tesco
Discrimination though is a tricky one. When it comes to religion you get ‘special’ rights.
I am currently looking into making a motorcycle religion. That way I can wear my motorcycle helmet in banks, shops, and petrol stations. Just like people who wear Veils.
Here is the case report btw. (Apparently he was a class 1 tanker driver.)
assets.publishing.service.gov.u … dgment.pdf
This is what the driver is quoted as saying in his appeal.
“Also I would like to add that, in my opinion, these employee’s attacked me for no reason and broke notonly the lawbut also restricted my human rights”
This is what the driver is quoted as saying in his appeal.
“Also I would like to add that, in my opinion, these employee’s attacked me for no reason and broke notonly the lawbut also restricted my human rights”
User avatar
adam277
SENIOR MEMBER
at the end of the day its their train set… simples… been in there many times and always found it preety chilled and a good bunch of lads…
No logical explanation as to what benefit it was to wear a mask while in his cab, the ■■■■■■■ of a manager was the one in the wrong going over to talk to him
If i was him i would be appealing it, the judge seemed to be a bit thick too, got his name on a first landmark case
And it just goes too show you the support from fellow drivers on here, all the lead by the nose type do what you’re told and don’t ever think you can think for yourself ever
I’m the most arsey non compliant (with utter crap schemes that is) son of a ■■■■■ you could wish to meet, who will stand my ground, but even I wear a mask, well not so much a mask a snood, I ain’t keen on it but it’s hardly a hardship is it?
Way I see it if it makes some vulnerable people feel safer, or even guys at work who are a bit nervous of this pandemic, then I will go along with it.
I draw the line at other stuff, for instance some jumped up self important ■■■■ security man, on minimum wage wanting to breathylise or drugs test me, as in my view it’s a liberty and an insult to my professionalism, in those cases I will stand my ground, and take it as far as I can…but a mask, no big problem,.and certainly not with losing my job over.
I think he went a bit far.
robroy:
I’m the most arsey non compliant (with utter crap schemes that is) son of a ■■■■■ you could wish to meet, who will stand my ground, but even I wear a mask, well not so much a mask a snood, I ain’t keen on it but it’s hardly a hardship is it?Way I see it if it makes some vulnerable people feel safer, or even guys at work who are a bit nervous of this pandemic, then I will go along with it.
I draw the line at other stuff, for instance some jumped up self important [zb] security man, on minimum wage wanting to breathylise or drugs test me, as in my view it’s a liberty and an insult to my professionalism, in those cases I will stand my ground, and take it as far as I can…but a mask, no big problem,.and certainly not with losing my job over.
I think he went a bit far.
True. You gotta know when to stand your ground and when to play ball.
Tate and Lyle is like a major collection for them. He literally couldnt do his job because he got banned from the site. If it was some random single site it wouldnt be a issue. (Travis Perkins springs to mind as a site that can be very funny, no matter which one you go to).
Also most importantly, his employer didnt have his back. When you work at some small firms. You generally know that your employer will look out for you. So you can put your foot down if some sites take the ■■■■ a bit. That was not the case here though.
We go to a site in Sheffield where their policy is you have to wear a mask. Myself and our other driver both use snood type face coverings. He sat and argued the toss with security, with someone else that came out to explain the rule to him, anyone on site that would listen and then complained to me and the transport manager when he got back. I went the next day, security guard told me I had to wear a face mask I showed him my snood “no, has to be a face mask on this site” I told him I didn’t have one and he provided one, I put it on and was in and out in 5 mins. When I come to leave he said to me “that other driver of yours wasn’t having it yesterday, spent half an hour arguing”. I don’t see the problem, their ball their rules. We used to collect from a foundry and they made us wear our hard hats…even when in the wagon!
As the 1/2 brother is senior Vice President of Tate Lyle I have no problems at Tate & Lyle , and if I did he’d be off the Xmas card list !!!,( as I’m the oldest I’m sure he will take my point of view though )
fatboystu1:
We go to a site in Sheffield where their policy is you have to wear a mask. Myself and our other driver both use snood type face coverings. He sat and argued the toss with security, with someone else that came out to explain the rule to him, anyone on site that would listen and then complained to me and the transport manager when he got back. I went the next day, security guard told me I had to wear a face mask I showed him my snood “no, has to be a face mask on this site” I told him I didn’t have one and he provided one, I put it on and was in and out in 5 mins. When I come to leave he said to me “that other driver of yours wasn’t having it yesterday, spent half an hour arguing”. I don’t see the problem, their ball their rules. We used to collect from a foundry and they made us wear our hard hats…even when in the wagon!
You’ve just illustrated 2 examples of stupid rules made up by some pompous knobhead in an office.
The purpose of a face covering is as it says on the tin…To cover your face. 
Does it matter what type it is within reason, I would say my snood is better at keeping my breath and saliva to myself as it is twice as thick as a mask.
As for the hard hat in the cab 
…Where do I start with that one ffs. 
Sometimes it’s best just to humour these clowns, and go along with it accompanied by a sarcastic comment, as their stupidity has been displayed by the derisory ■■■■ rules they have set, so you ain’t ever going to be able to reason with them on a sensible level.
I suppose the question that should be asked and answered is do the staff in the office were there masks for their whole time at work
Stupid rules are everywhere, a couple more I come across are no shorts when delivering to some building sites and hi vis trousers at some drops/collections.
H&S has gone a little mad[emoji849]
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Anyone else read that link? Full of mistakes, biggest one seeming to be that the ‘first manager’ to talk to the sacked driver would appear to be a driver from another company …
wrighty1:
Stupid rules are everywhere, a couple more I come across are no shorts when delivering to some building sites and hi vis trousers at some drops/collections.
H&S has gone a little mad[emoji849]Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
It keeps ‘‘non job types’’ in their ‘‘non jobs’’, guys who are on more money than both you and me, who’s work consists of making up stupid petty ■■■■ rules to justify their employment.
It’s the way of the world these days unfortunately for the rest of us.