AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Salvesen driver wins case after bullying

15th March 2001, Page 7
15th March 2001
Page 7
Page 7, 15th March 2001 — Salvesen driver wins case after bullying
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

II by Sally Nash

A Christian Salvesen driver has won a case for unfair dismissal against the company after he was subjected to a sustained bullying and harassment campaign which included being awarded a "Plonker of the Year" certificate.

A Bristol industrial Tribunal ruled that the certificate, given to driver John Peachey, was part of what it called "unacceptable management practices" at Christian Salvesen's Gloucester depot.

Peachey had complained to his line manager about the way he was bullied, talked down to, abused and made fun of.

Tribunal chairman Michael Griffiths said the behaviour of the depot management amounted to constructive dismissal, adding: "Mr Peachey was subjected to unacceptable treatment by his superiors and the implied terms of mutual trust and confidence were

breached by Salvesen, not only by the issue of the certificate but by the continuing attitude of his immediate superiors.'

Peachey went off sick In May 2000 and resigned in July: he is now driving for another firm.

The amount of compensation has yet to be agreed.

Christian Salvesen stresses that the question of compensation is an internal matter. "In the light of the tribunal's findings we have already taken action to ensure that our employees' best interests are served," it says. As a responsible operator we do not condone this type of behaviour."

Christian Salvesen MD Edward Roderick is chairman of the government's road haulage forum subgroup for training, which was set up to find ways to make the industry more attractive to new recruits.

The company adds: "We believe this was an unfortunate, isolated incident which should not be allowed to undermine our good business name."

• See Comment, page 6.


comments powered by Disqus