What a rather bizarre outburst from your GP. Of course it is the employer's business to know where you are during your sick leave, out of courtesy if nothing else. There are countless situations where an employee on sick may need to be contacted and, indeed, ordered to return to work, signed off sick or not. You have stated your employer continues to pay your salary whilst your sick yet your doctor says it has nothing to do with them and, for a fee, she will tell them to mind their own business! I would kindly ask my GP to not do so if I wanted to continue being paid by my employer! Incredible.

Most probably very well made?

How long have you been employed by them?

I don't think it is wrong to any great extent. Despite what the public may believe, in the context of the millions of items posted each year, only a very small amount are lost. However, because so much is sent then the percentage of those lost appears very high. Add to this delays and damage then if there was no immunity for RM then the amount of court claims in the system would be horrendous and I doubt whether the courts would cope. It would be chaos. Also, if somebody sends valuable items then there are services available from RM that would increase the compensation if lost. I can honestly say that I personally can only remember 3 items of mail I have sent have been lost by RM in my whole life. Quite impressive statistics. And I am no fan of RM! I took them to an Employment Tribunal and they are the worst employers I ever worked for. However, their logistics operation is astonishingly good.

In which case there isn't a lot that can be done I'm afraid. Postcomm may have considered the compensation awarded, ie the stamps, not enough but the OP needed to complain in the first place to them for this to be decided. No court will, or even can, rule on this claim.

Good for you. You made a mistake, you're sorry for that and now you want to get on with your life. You have no conviction and need not declare anything unless specifically asked on an application form. Just post back on here if this arises. You need not nominate Tesco as a reference unless, again, you are specifically asked for it. As before, just post back again if unsure. Tesco is the past and has been put to bed. If you want the facts, rather than personal bias and misinformation, just pm the mods who have posted previously on this thread. Good luck.

Oh dear, put your foot in it again. Whoever said a basic disclosure can only be available from a CRB check anyway? A Basic Disclosure is available to anybody and any company in the UK via Disclosure Scotland and, indeed, this is what service is used by most employers in the UK. Why would a business pay for a standard disclosure when all they want to know is if anybody has a conviction and can do so for about half the price with a basic one? Please, the majority of your posts are completely misleading and serve no purpose whatsoever to anybody. This we both know, frequently.

Hmmm, hijacking a thread to go on one of your bizarre tirades again? The OP has worked for Tesco and it would not be beyond logic, excepting you of course, that the OP may want a similar type job. Most employers of this nature will not even need a CRB check and most employers should only apply for a basic check in any case, where a caution is highly unlikely to show. That is relevant to the OP and it is good news for the OP. If she was happy at Tesco doing her job then she may be happy at Sainsbury's doing the same. We are helping the OP during this difficult time. Use some common sense, please.

Which is what I said in my previous post.

Actually Recorded Signed For covers up to £36, not 'actual loss.' Maybe the OP can confirm what was sent? But it appears to have been investigated and compensated for already. In any event, the OP can complain to Postcomm about her issue and, indeed, should have in the first place. She will get nowhere with suing RM for this otherwise. The defence shows this. Thems are the rules.

And I doubt whether an employer like Tesco would even bother with a CRB check for front line staff and even if they did it would unlikely be anything more than a basic check which is good for the OP.

Not completely accurate. Depends on what caution was issued, what CRB check is applied for, the nature of the employment and whether the applicant is asked either 'Do you have a criminal record?' or 'Do you have criminal convictions?' A caution can often be viewed as a conviction and/or record as it will appear in a standard and enhanced disclosure because the police database will show it and an applicant would need to declare it, even if spent. A basic disclosure, for instance, is unlikely to reveal a caution as it is not a conviction and the applicant can honestly answer no to either a record or conviction. Regards

They have already compensated her. They have given her stamps. And no doubt it was a dozen 1st class stamps. They are not legally exempt from providing a service either. But they are legally exempt from an action should that service fail where thay provide a universal service which Registered is. Regards

Which means you have zero chance of success. Save your money as you will not win. Regards

You have zero chance. Royal Mail have an immunity for this claim.

And some do not. Maybe she will apply for a job that doesn't ask this. She is contrite, she admitted the transgression and is at a low ebb with a young family. Why do you wish to crucify her? Even some released murderers work you know!

That's correct. Royal Mail only provide start, end dates, position etc too. An ex-employee has to ask a line manager for a personal reference, and hope they agree, as RM would not then be laible as it is a personal opinion. And who is going to ask for a personal reference such as this unless they knew it would be good?

Well, I've yet to see a cv/application form that is 100% honest! Most people inflate their attributes and even claim some they do not possess. Ever watch The Apprentice!!?? Even convicted criminals can legally withhold prior transgressions! A two year stretch in prison thus becomes a two year period of 'living' abroad!!

I'm not too sure but I expect it wouldn't have an effect. You could argue that your friend is loaning the money to you, indeed, are they? I can't see how a loan is an income. In any case, should they stop this PC and you were then to be homeless then this would be a much greater burden on the benefit system than just getting PC. Regards.

Yes, it's quite normal, a lot of firms do this.

A reference from the last employer is just a suggestion, at least on most of the ones I am filling in at the moment. It is usually up to the applicant to provide details of references of their own choosing unless the potential employer states 'Can we approach your last employer for a reference?' Some employers may prefer personal references anyway or even not bother at all. I wouldn't be unduly worried about this but I agree that lying isn't a redeeming quality. However, the truth has to be bent sometimes and a cv is a notorius document that contains such and employers know this. Would somebody say they are excellent for early morning starts if the job required it but in reality were awful? No, but is that telling the truth? It is the getting caught that is the problem. If I were the OP I would try and wipe out that 15 years with Tesco from her employment history however difficult it may be.

You have asked this very same question 3 times in less than a month and they are your only posts too.

Other than south Yorkshire has had a lot of secure storage companies springing up lately, no not really.

Well you would get two for the price of one! You said the sign says '50% off, Everything half price.' Now, in the sale, instead of buying one item for 99p you will get two, effictively 50% cheaper and half price! Good eh?

...