Has anyone heard of IWT version 7

[Geezer]

Hi Koolkid

I have a meeting with DSM next Thurs, Area Rep will be there so i will just have to wait and see how it pans out because these fools live in cloud cuckoo land !.

[Geezer]

It is a guide for a revison it is not agreed to be used to for absorbtion.

If that's not in Black and White anywhere RM will use it for absorption.

Not yet had chance to read through everything on IWT and all the other documentation since BT2010 (I work for a living), so could I get confirmation it is in Black and White and if so where (Document and Paragraph if its not too onerous). I, and many on here would be extremely grateful for that.

Dingo

Anymore on this, Cheer's

[superteamu10]

This will be something else our DOM will use to beat us with I am sure. She already wants to use this NCI against us.

On this new version, what are the average Prep Rates?

[Geezer]

This is all i could find Dingo, Is this the one you were on about or is there another one from Bob Gibson himself.

Cheers

=========================================================================================================================================================================================

Letter to Branches


No. 219/2011 Ref. L04.11 Date: 8th March 2011


TO: ALL BRANCHES WITH POSTAL MEMBERS & POSTAL DIVISIONAL REPS
For immediate circulation to all appropriate Area/Unit Representatives

Dear Colleagues

Mail Centre Revisions – BSI Level (85) – Un-agreed Throughput Rates

It has been brought to the attention of the Indoor Department that local management are attempting to undertake Mail Centre revisions using an un-agreed BSI rate of 85.

The aim of this LTB is to advise you that no approach has been made by the business to the CWU nationally to discuss any change to the current rate of 75, which has been used to establish duties in measured work areas of Mail Centres since the inception of the Revised Revision Procedures.

I am aware that some discussions have taken place with the Assistant Secretary Outdoor regarding the use of 100 BSI as the benchmark for duty revision in deliveries, but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

What is clear is that no agreement has been given by me or any of my colleagues at CWU Headquarters to change the BSI Rate in Mail Centres or the National Databank Planning Values and associated principals currently used to construct duties in Mail Centres.

In view of the above, any attempt by local management to use any process and/or procedure other than the agreed revision methods within Mail Centres should be challenged via the IR framework, including the application of the status quo until the matter has been resolved at national level.

Any failure on the part of local management to abide to current national agreements, including the IR Framework will be viewed as a breach of the Business Transformation Agreement and as such be treated as Executive Action. This position should be made clear in any local discussions that take place.

All enquiries regarding the content of this LTB should be addressed as appropriate to Phil Browne, Acting Assistant Secretary, Indoor Department quoting reference number L04.11.

Yours sincerely


PHIL BROWNE
ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY

[Danelectro]

I am aware that some discussions have taken place with the Assistant Secretary Outdoor regarding the use of 100 BSI as the benchmark for duty revision in deliveries, but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

I remember this part of the LTB and was expecting another LTB from Bob Gobson telling reps the outcome of his numerous
discussions on the use of 100 BSI in deliveries,but as usual silence is golden in the little fellas world.

I do recall some quotes fae Gibson saying that 100 BSI was achievable on most indoor work in deliveries and that any downward adjustments were negligible,i think that was pre revisions so god knows if he still thinks the same now.

All ive got from my area rep recently is that 100 BSI is unagreed,i asked if its unagreed then can he give me the name of an office that has done or is in the process of a doing a revision that has managed to set BSI at less than 100,is there anybody know if thats the case because if its then BSI has been agreed in deliveries.

Well at least mail centre workers(those that are gonna be left after the axe has fallen)are gonna be set more manageable
performance targets?

[jon1]

a rural office as decided to only have full time duties, there is another person out of work, as to achieve this a duty had to be absorbed. when did we agree to let this sort of thing happen.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

a rural office as decided to only have full time duties, there is another person out of work, as to achieve this a duty had to be absorbed. when did we agree to let this sort of thing happen.

The CWU HQ did in March 2010 - BT2010 Page 23 says:

Delivery Spans
Royal Mail and CWU agree that the length of the delivery span can be an enabler in bringing about mutual benefits. From now on, within the process of duty revision negotiations, spans must be looked at in the context of an enabler rather than a fixed amount of time to be aimed at.

[jon1]

i all thought it had to be a 75%-25% mix of duties

[TrueBlueTerrier]

i all thought it had to be a 75%-25% mix of duties

A common misconception - the 75%FT and 25%PT split is a national target not a local one.

BT2010 Page 14

That the operational transformation programme and associated workplan support the nationally planned staffing mix of around 75 percent full time/25 per cent part time.