• This could easily happen to you
• Vote for Industrial Action to protect yourself and your colleagues

On 20th December 2007 Mr. Mukesh Mahatma (Station Supervisor Canary Wharf Group) was summarily (instantly) dismissed by LUL on the following charge:

“On 8th November 2007 you took stock belonging to Tribe Marketing, a promotions company working at Canary Wharf station, without prior permission.

This is contrary to:

• Section 3.1.1 of the LUL Code of Conduct standard, effective from 27 January 2003 which states "Employees are required to comply with their employment contract; all LUL policies, standards and supporting guidelines, working procedures and safety instructions relevant to their job".
• Section 3.7.7 of the LUL Code of Conduct standard, effective from 27 January 2003 which states "Employees must not do anything whilst on or off duty which could damage LUL's reputation and/or lead to criminal charges against them".
• Section 3.1.1 of the LUL Business Ethics standard, effective from 27 January 2003 which states "Employees are required not to use their authority or position for personal gain or against LUL's interests".

Read the ‘evidence’ (below) and you will see that this is a gross injustice to one of your workmates.
Just as this has happened to Mr. Mahatma it can happen to you.

Vote for Industrial Action to re-instate Mr. Mukesh Mahatma and start protecting yourself from LUL management’s abuse of disciplinary actions against staff.

=====

The ‘evidence’

The clear evidence, accepted by LUL, was that only two items of stock (boxes of KitKats, 48 in each box) were involved.

The clear evidence, accepted by LUL, was that one of these items was actually provided to Mr. Mahatma by Tribe Marketing for staff consumption and was used as such. Therefore Mr. Mahatma did not take this item without permission: it was given to him by Tribe Marketing.

The clear evidence, of statements and CCTV, was that Mr. Mahatma at no time took the second item of stock. This item was given to him by another Station Supervisor whom he had no reason to doubt had received the item in the same way and for the same reason as he had received the earlier item from Tribe Marketing. Mr. Mahatma received this item in full view of a Duty Station Manager, in the middle of the day, and entered into general conversation with that manager at the same time; whilst holding the item. This item of stock never left the station. Mr. Mahatma did not take it home and it remained on station for later consumption by staff.

All of Mr. Mahatma’s accounts of his actions tallied with CCTV footage and other statements. Indeed, all the ‘investigating manager’ could say (on 28th November 2007) to explain his decision was:
“that SS M. Mahatma’s confirmation that he had received a box of KitKat sweets from the distribution company had been corroborated by the distribution team when they were interviewed. Therefore, we were aware of the fact that one box of KitKat sweets had been authorised. However, other persons interviewed and the CCTV footage itself gives a slightly different view on the rest of the events that took place. Therefore ... the decision had been made for SS M.Mahatma to be referred to a Company Disciplinary Interview (CDI)”.

So if your clear and corroborated account of your actions is just ‘slightly different’ from the CCTV and other people’s account, London Underground will send you to a CDI and summarily (instantly) dismiss you.