Unless there is more to it, your wife's boss must be a clown. He or she actually took the time to ring her with news of a formal warning whilst she is absent due to a work related injury?? Worlds gone mad.
She didn't by any chance break her leg kicking the said boss did she?

Or it could be that his wife's boss is acting under orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from his boss, who is taking orders from a committee set up to appease the union. In other words, his hands are tied and that he is compelled to follow procedure.

He probably didn't like making the call any more than she liked to receive it.

Poor boss. Doomed forever to blindly follow the commy unions as much as his/her heart yearns for freedom. He or she could have refused and then at the disciplinary meeting sought help from his/her union.

SO basically, he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't, in your opinion.

That's a bit silly, isn't it?

If this is correct: "Her boss (local authority) rang her today to tell her that he is giving her a formal warning for her sick record"

Then what he did is beyond "silly", whether he was "following orders" or not is completely immaterial. The bloke's an imbecile

Let's be clear though: what you have suggested is not even opinion, but the foisting of a scenario from a different case onto this one.

OK, I get what you're saying.

So you're saying he should refuse to do the warning, then possibly end up with a warning (or worse) himself?

That said, for both parties, there will be a right to appeal, which is all well and good, if not a pain in the arsse to go through.

What none of us know, is the boss's attitude to it all. Did he ring and say "look, I'm sorry, but I HAVE to give you a warning as it's policy, but you can appeal, I'll back you up, you should be ok and I believe the policy is rubbish" or did he say "you're off sick, I'm warning you, tough titty"

There's a world of difference between those two attitudes - the former is not that of an imbecile, but the latter certainly would be.

I think we could deduce that her boss was a clown by the fact the words works for local authority were used

Just looked up my companys for an example



The RRTWI is fairly common these days and a good way to cover both parties in a semi-informal way, a good chance to discuss any problmes, but is not disciplinary.

The File Note is similar, but more formal, but still not disciplinary.

Trigger point 3 is and thats for 4 absences, but thats only if theres no great reason. If there is good reason then its referred to our Occ Health advisors etc

As opposed to, say, the bloke who runs Iceland?

... is very much. You're assuming, for instance, that the boss did not decide to make the call off his own bat.

You don't know that. Neither do I. He might have been told to do it. He might not have. But you're making an assumption.

Any of that SHOULD be done when someone returns to work or be dealt with by HR, the manager here has over stepped his authority.

Lets have a think about this

I know where you work, you know what I do, we both know what ROBINSON does.......

waste of time anyone?

I'd say lettings are a bit quiet and the girls in the office are having none of his "shenanigans" after the whole Rennard thing...

Hope you get things sorted.

Whats Malcolm Walker go to do with this ?

I've done more than my fair share of disciplinaries over the years and effectively handed out a few P45s as well within private industry (they all deserved it btw...).
However I'm struggling to think of how the proceeding events ended up with the line manager of an employee (who has a broken leg from a work place incident that also might well be her employer's fault) rings up to tell said employee that she is getting a formal warning for what is clearly an unreturnable injury.

Even with the flag for number of days absent there is no plausible scenario (that I can think of) that would even remotely allow this to happen given the facts (on the face of what Rover49 has stated)
Firstly don't worry, she has done nothing wrong and is not in any trouble whatsoever, it clearly looks like mismangement and the line manager is a plank for not questioning such if he has had an instruction to ring with a formal warning.
If you can remember take a note of the time of the call and write down who said what to the recipient at your end.
Wait to see what if anything comes through the post, in the meantime contact your union representive and have an informal chat about the events as they happened and let them do the work to find out why someone is ringing you up threatening your wife with a formal written warning.
Hopefully will hit the fan and profuse apologies to follow (choccies and flowers wouldn't go amiss)
If you get no joy from the union (unlikely) contact ACAS and/or Unison direct at head office, I think that is the union involved for the local authorities..
good luck and get well for t'other half..

any news rover49?

Union now taking it up, the local full time official was astounded at the call and is to investigate. Apparently, they can give formal warnings after 35 days (even if its an accident at work), but he said procedures have not been followed and the call, initially about her wellbeing should not have introduced any hint of disciplinary measures.

He also said that even though they can formally warn, in the case of an accident at work it is highly unlikely to end in losing her job and is a formality they have to follow, which he didn't explain, leaving my beloved in a state of worry.

I concur with your description.

Good stuff.

I don't understand how a union rep can say that at all, what exactly has your wife done aside from have the misfortune to have an accident at work? There is no way on this planet that I can see how she could lose her job, what a bell end

I know he's the rep but that is as unforgiveable as the manager telling her over the phone she's getting a written warnijng, what's the matter with people FFS don't they have the brains they were born with..grrrrrr!
Whilst I know people want to cover their s and union reps are well known for this but why say something like that when they should know full well how she would be feeling given the circumstances.
Tell her not to worry it's complete and utter b@ll@cks, I feel disgusted on your behalf.

it's just the tip of the iceberg I expect and there's little wonder local government all over the country is in the hole it is and staff so undermined and de-motivated..

Her union rep's comment may have more to do with the announcement of 600 job losses than her personal case

Nothing to do with cuts to pay and conditions; cuts to services and jobs; outsourcing to profiteering companies; a media that, by and large, demonises the public services as a whole.

Oh, no – nothing whatsoever to do with such unimportant little matters.

A precis of the situation in local government:

Pay has declined by 15% since 2010 and many councils have cut unsocial hours and overtime payments, hours of work, car allowances and redundancy pay.

Others have introduced unpaid annual leave, term-time only working, car parking charges for staff, and have cut pay and frozen annual increments.

At the same time, 260,000 posts have been deleted through redundancies and scrapping of vacant posts since the coalition took office, leaving existing staff to cover the extra work as they battle to keep essential services running.

I don't get your point directed at me? You think I am having a pop at LGO's and their treatment, then you are poles apart to what I think. I understand how big organisations work from top to bottom, there's so much shat it's unbelieveable and the ones to pay the price are usually those at the coal face. I can see the effect people's working environment and pay/holidays affects them directly not just at work but at home too.
So please direct your point to those who are lambasting the public sector worker..