Comments on: Pret a Manger unionization drive: dispute over dismissal claim

By: Anne

Anne — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:55:00 +0000

Don’t forget Andrej founded the union. And seems to be the only discernible member. So when the union says X, that’s just Andrej saying it but trying to add a veneer of gravitas to it.

Taking both statements at face value and trying to decide which to believe:
1) Pret says Andrej already lost once at a tribunal. That’s pretty big. And a miracle they kept him on after that. Heck, even if he had won at tribunal, it would be big if they’d kept him. The relationship has already seriously deteriorated.
2) Andrej now says he’s filing another tribunal claim. Presuming the written records cited by Pret, he’s going to lose again. It is easier to get fired in this country than you think and the causes stated and it sounds like documented pretty well will keep you fired.
3) if someone else at Pret was trying to Organize or join a union and getting fired for it, then there might be something to contrast with Pret’s now clear printed statement that its workforce are free to belong to unions. But there doesn’t seem to be anyone trying to except Andrej.
4) the Living Wage thing just seems to be brought in to add legitimacy. Both the Telegraph and the Guardian agree the stats bear out that Pret pays much more than higher than minimum wage to start and has higher salaries and better odds of progression on the whole than almost any other chain restaurant in the UK, although below London living wage.

I’m VERY pro union, and proudly pay my dues every month. But this time, I’m with Pret.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 01:29:00 +0000

The humidifier always wins because it uses a tiny fraction of the energy that the dehumidifier uses.

By: class_enemy

class_enemy — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 01:22:00 +0000

So which side do you come down on in the case of a homophobic labor activist?

It’s kind of like putting a humidifier and a dehumidifier in the same room, turning them both on full blast, and taking bets.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 23:17:00 +0000

How hard would it be to lie for a friend?

Successfully? It’s remarkably difficult.

By: Nathan Hornby

Nathan Hornby — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 22:20:00 +0000

How hard would it be to lie for a friend?

I appreciate this is conspiracy level stuff, but just saying.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:37:00 +0000

How hard could it be to find the person who heard the homophobic comment to verify what happened?

By: Nathan Hornby

Nathan Hornby — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:38:00 +0000

Someone’s a clever bastard… we just have to work out who.

By: Stooge

Stooge — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:44:00 +0000

Of course, claiming martyrdom for unionising would be an equally clever tactic for a fired homophobe.

By: Cokelid

Cokelid — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:13:00 +0000

Oddly neither side mention the living wage or the union as the cause. Where did that come from?

By: Wreckrob8

Wreckrob8 — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:44:00 +0000

Oops. I should read before speaking, shouldn’t I? To be honest, given their previous statements, I was expecting them to go with the nature and seriousness of his offences necessitating instant dismissal.

By: dioptase

dioptase — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:04:00 +0000

Sadly, there’s no rule that says both things can’t be true.

Boss 1: Andrej has been trying to unionize our stores
Boss 2: Can we get rid of him?
Boss 1: Maybe. I heard he made some offensive comments
Boss 2: Yeah, go with that.

They might be getting rid of him for unionizing and using a sliver of truth to cover their asses. Heck, he might have just used slang for a cigarette, but they might have felt it was enough cover.

By: Gunker

Gunker — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:57:00 +0000

Taking the companies release at face value would imply that he had an independant hearing in front of the employment tribunal for (him protesting about the ) first offence and internal hearings for the second.

By: retchdog

retchdog — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:06:00 +0000

would be a clever tactic, to paint an agitator in a politically-incorrect light so as to confound the left…

not that this happened here, of course.

By: Wreckrob8

Wreckrob8 — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 07:05:00 +0000

Still, he is entitled to a proper hearing with representation (or at least in the presence of a witness) if he wishes (this may or may not be a union representative), before any form of disciplinary action can be taken beyond an initial verbal warning. I trust they have a record of the escalating degrees of disciplinary action taken (written warnings) before a final dismissal. I am not sure, however, whether certain types of alleged offences obviate the need to adhere strictly to this process, such as bullying, but I suspect they would have to be gross and criminal offences such as assault.