Morrisons suspends staff for wearing a Poppy

duchy

hamish222 wrote: »

My MIL works for Morrisons and they are not allowed to wear a poppy in November at her store.

Does she work in a food prep area ?

hamish222

duchy wrote: »

Does she work in a food prep area ?

No on checkouts. They are not allowed to wear poppies or pins of any description. Also no charity bands, watch only in her store.

madvixen

Considering that this particular Morrisons gets the bulk of its customers from the HUGE naval base behind it, this decision seems slightly short sighted. While the individual involved was wrong to flout regulations, many businesses in Pompey allow symbols like this all year round to support the many MOD bases we have round here.

sillygoose

I too have a uniform code and have to abide by it or face the same consequences so I do, although it doesn't mention badges.

That said its very miserable of Morrisons, I understand standards of presentation for staff but its Morrisons!! even though its my nearest supermarket I never dream of going there as its more downmarket and poor value than Aldi these days so I don't see why they are being so sniffy about a little badge its not British Airways First Class cabin crew or anything!!!.

martinthebandit

Actually, in the interests of accuracy, they suspended him for not doing what his employer asked him to.

ValHaller

Pollycat wrote: »

According to the BBC website, the employee posted it on Facebook.

It's headed "Private and confidential" - what part of "Private and confidential" does this man not understand? :huh:

As I see it, the 'Private and Confidential' heading applies mainly to Morrisons, the letter contains information relating specifically to Mr Austin and the heading is for guidance of Morrison's staff in handling outgoing correspondence and files information relating to their staff.

I don't see that Morrisons can actually silence Mr Austin if he chooses to reveal what Morrisons are doing to him.

poppy10_2

lawstudent wrote: »

Regardless of what some people have said I think this is a really stupid decision on behalf of Morrisons. If one of the papers (particularly the Mail or Sun) picks up on this they are going to have a field day.

It's already in the papers.

It's a load of controversy about nothing. He wasn't suspended for wearing a poppy - he was suspended for violating the uniform policy and then refusing to listen to his manager when asked to remove it. All pins and bracelets are banned in food-preparation areas for hygiene reasons. It's nothing to do with political correctness or banning the poppy.

Tropez

ValHaller wrote: »

As I see it, the 'Private and Confidential' heading applies mainly to Morrisons, the letter contains information relating specifically to Mr Austin and the heading is for guidance of Morrison's staff in handling outgoing correspondence and files information relating to their staff.

I don't see that Morrisons can actually silence Mr Austin if he chooses to reveal what Morrisons are doing to him.

In our employment contracts, releasing internal company correspondence into the public domain without authorisation is listed as potentially being classed as gross misconduct, and at the very least being a disciplinary offence.

Many employment contracts have a section forbidding and/or restricting the release of information about the internal operations of the business to third parties without consent. In most cases, this is to prevent rival/competitors from gaining an advantage but this can also include information that would paint the business in a negative light.

ValHaller

Tropez wrote: »

In our employment contracts, releasing internal company correspondence into the public domain without authorisation is listed as potentially being classed as gross misconduct, and at the very least being a disciplinary offence.

Indeed. But the correspondence relates to the employer's contract with the employee. Given that it relates to a contract, the employee is not internal to the employer for the content of the correspondence. Contract correspondence is external communication and would fall outside that line of gross misconduct.

ValHaller

poppy10 wrote: »

banning the poppy.

Well you would say there is no poppy ban, wouldn't you?