The first member profile we come to is the Martyr members, which are those members who insist on telling the truth despite being advised it's not in their best interests to be quite so honest. When met with the, 'I'm not going to lie about it' response, I've often explained that I'm not asking them to tell downright lies, but there's no need to offer your head on a platter and management can be a little economical with the truth themselves, particularly if they're trying to get rid of you. I've attended many a meeting were management have stated quite categorically, that no one was aware of the situation when everyone in the room knows it's been discussed from the managing director to the cleaner, never mind the numerous phone calls and letters which are now in an obscure filing cabinet under 'C' for crap. The commonly used phrase 'keeping the workforce informed' is often referred to as 'the mushroom treatment' (keep them in the dark and feed them with shite), and 'I would have to refer to my notes before I could answer that' means, 'I didn't think it was important enough to take notes at that meeting and I'm going to have to go and persuade someone else to back up my response' and he knows, you know, he knows that you know, you know he knows you know and so on.
So if your opponent is being somewhat less than honest, I think it's only in the interests of fairness to fight fire with fire in an attempt to help the member feel relieved of what they see as their moral obligation. Persuading those intent on martyring themselves to see their situation from another perspective is no easy task. Even if you do, they're bound to crack under interrogation and spill not only the can of beans but end up confessing to every unsolved crime on police record files. The worst possible scenario is they are dismissed, and guess whose fault it is? Yes, good old union rep. Your attempts to explain why others were given a let off for similar or more serious crimes will be in vain, so you make your weary way to perform another miracle leaving the martyr to lick his wounds.
Not all members are prone to this attack of conscience which brings me to the next member profile; the Mitty member. Mitty members will quite happily invent the most elaborate and artfully contrived stories in an attempt to save their skin, however elaborating on the truth comes with a warning. You have to be good at it. It also has to be believable and in preparing a defence never break the eleventh commandment. Thou shalt not get caught. Fibbing to management is one thing but fibbing to your union rep is a definite no no. As your last line of defence, they have to be in a position to counter attack and overcome any allegations made by management and forewarned is forearmed. Take the case of Mr W Mitty. Facing disciplinary action for bad time keeping, he informed his rep that his aging Father had had a heart attack and was recovering in hospital after triple by-pass surgery. In the emotional upset, he had understandably been more concerned about his Father and neglected to inform his line manager of the situation.
Any union rep worth his salt would have such a case thrown out of court and true to his honour, the rep went in all guns blazing storm trooper style, before the cold hearted management panel which must be totally devoid of all human compassion to treat a fellowman in such a manner. But the rep overlooked what was to become a major loophole in his defence. He was representing Mr W Mitty. He had also underestimated the resourcefulness of the senior personnel officer who had telephoned Mr Mitty's home, spoke to his exceptionally healthy Father and discovered that the hospital he was allegedly recuperating in had shut down two years previously. Mr Mitty is now seeking alternative employment and the rep has learned a valuable lesson; never take a Mitty member's word for granted.
So is honesty the best policy? Before answering, consider the next member profile; the rose scented member, so named as if they fell into a pile of manure they would come up smelling of roses. Mr X was a member of this elite group and was the inspiration behind said nomenclature. Having received a final written warning for bad time keeping, Mr X had once again gone AWOL. Any rep will tell you there is no way to beat disciplinary action for time keeping as it's more often than not been documented. With no form of defence the rep was of the opinion, that the disciplinary hearing was a mere formality and Mr X was being summoned purely to receive his marching orders. In order to follow disciplinary procedure, the management panel afforded him the opportunity to offer an explanation. During his last will and testament, Mr X related the story of how he had eaten what he believed to be a dodgy kebab the night before and his efforts to reach the men's room the following day were in vain. Yes, he shit himself. He had left the premises in order to return home and change his clothing and had not informed his line manager because he was too embarrassed to ask for a pass out.
