Forced to drive? transfer?

[fishtank]

I don't think it's fair to constantly try to twist this in to a PCOD thread.
It's a "don't want to drive for RM thread"...a position most members are entitled to take without abuse from their colleagues.

[dvbuk55]

What i don't get is if there are part timers on certain hrs,why were they not accommodated during the revision.

On our first revision for the first tranche of P&L it was mandatory to have two full timers to man the vehicle and many were removed from their existing duties to do it. However on the second revision when the remainder of the P&L was instituted it quickly became obvious that there was insufficient full timers left after the repick to man all the P&Ls and sooooooo it was re-decided that it wasn't necessary to have two full timers after all. I still think it is unfair for a non-driver to have a P&L duty leaving all the driving and delivery of large packets to one person.

[fishtank]

I still think it is unfair for a non-driver to have a P&L duty leaving all the driving and delivery of large packets to one person.

Kind of a moot point in our D.O. dv when all we have is p&l and rurals.
Anyway the system is not supposed to include changeover of driver during delivery so whoever signs as the driver in the D.O. should do all the driving and deliver all the oversized stuff whether they both can drive or not.

[dvbuk55]

I still think it is unfair for a non-driver to have a P&L duty leaving all the driving and delivery of large packets to one person.

Kind of a moot point in our D.O. dv when all we have is p&l and rurals.
Anyway the system is not supposed to include changeover of driver during delivery so whoever signs as the driver in the D.O. should do all the driving and deliver all the oversized stuff whether they both can drive or not.

Actually not, providing the log book is signed on changeover both can drive the vehicle on a single duty span.

[fishtank]

Actually not, providing the log book is signed on changeover both can drive the vehicle on a single duty span.

From the delivery rep's support documents...

vehicle accountability.jpg

As you can imagine it would be ridiculous to have to carry out the legally required duty level road worthiness vehicle check every time you swapped over and more to the point...we would never get that kind of wasted time built into the delivery.
Either those in your D.O. who are swapping over are flouting the law dv...or they are spending all day checking vehicles.

[dvbuk55]

Actually not, providing the log book is signed on changeover both can drive the vehicle on a single duty span.

From the delivery rep's support documents...

vehicle accountability.jpg

As you can imagine it would be ridiculous to have to carry out the legally required duty level road worthiness vehicle check every time you swapped over and more to the point...we would never get that kind of wasted time built into the delivery.
Either those in your D.O. who are swapping over are flouting the law dv...or they are spending all day checking vehicles.

The same vehicle is used by a different driver for collection duties on the same day and so what would be the difference. Everyone is aware that they must endorse the log book but the vehicle check is pretty much the same as the daily check list - non-existent. What should be and what is ain't the same. It is also necessary at times for both to be able to drive because of the way the loops on rural duties are organised in a linear fashion in places.

[SexyLegs]

Actually not, providing the log book is signed on changeover both can drive the vehicle on a single duty span.

From the delivery rep's support documents...

vehicle accountability.jpg

As you can imagine it would be ridiculous to have to carry out the legally required duty level road worthiness vehicle check every time you swapped over and more to the point...we would never get that kind of wasted time built into the delivery.
Either those in your D.O. who are swapping over are flouting the law dv...or they are spending all day checking vehicles.

The same vehicle is used by a different driver for collection duties on the same day and so what would be the difference. Everyone is aware that they must endorse the log book but the vehicle check is pretty much the same as the daily check list - non-existent. What should be and what is ain't the same. It is also necessary at times for both to be able to drive because of the way the loops on rural duties are organised in a linear fashion in places.

Then the planners have done a crap job, the duties must be planned to allow for 1 driver and 1 driver only, get them back in to sort it!

[Lounge Lizard]

he then said as i had used my car for delivery (2 years ago) i was in royal mails eyes classed as a royal mail driver which i believe is utter bullshit, he said to approach my union rep.

royal mail have never had any of my license details and never will, its not my fault that with 8 months of planning this p/l monstrosity, they didnt think that lack of drivers would be a problem.

See this is what I don't get about people refusing to drive an RM van. You used your own car illegally (you never gave your license details so you were never insured) yet won't drive a free company vehicle.

There are at least half a dozen staff in my office that used their own cars for years but won't drive a van.

You obviously don't understand the hassles that go with driving a Royal Mail vehicle, you are responsible for the vehicle, you are responsible for the checks, you are responsible for everything. You have an accident in a Royal Mail vehicle and you have to inform your own insurance company, which could result in higher premiums, if the vehicle gets damaged under your sign out it's your responsibility and there is a chance of being conduct coded, depending what's happened to the vehicle, and the list goes on..................driving a Royal Mail vehicle is nothing but hassle, avoid like the plague if you can get away with it.

OnAFlyer - Do you get it now?

As if you're not responsible for the maintenance, insurance and hassle of driving your own car ?

Do you get conduct coded and risk losing your job if you have an accident in your own car, or you forget to check the windscreen washer levels? It's responsibility some people neither want nor need!

Yes, you get conduct coded and risk losing your job if you have an accident in your own car and don't have the correct insurance, and you can be jailed if you have a fatal accident while making a mobile phone call. It's responsibility some strange people neither want nor need!
Maybe you should give up working for Royal Mail and deliver pizzas in your beloved car instead.

I've had a couple of accidents in my own car and I didn't get conduct coded, neither did I get a blameworthy, in fact I didn't get any problems, my insurance company sorted it all out for me, and they even let me keep my job with Royal Mail......................how nice of them! lol

As I said earlier avoid driving for these muppets like the plague, I avoided an accident a few months ago driving a Royal Mail van, my manager told me I'd have been better off letting the vehicle I avoided hit me, as I wouldn't have been to blame, as it was I veered around the vehicle and scratched up the underside of the van, and guess what, I got a blameworthy....sums it up really!!!

Much more nonsense like this and I just might start a poll on here, the question being “ Would you rather deliver the mail (a) in a Royal Mail van, legally, at their expense and with the risk of an incorrect windscreen washer level or (b) in your own car, without legal insurance cover and at your own expense ?”

[fishtank]

Much more nonsense like this and I just might start a poll on here, the question being “ Would you rather deliver the mail (a) in a Royal Mail van, legally, at their expense and with the risk of an incorrect windscreen washer level or (b) in your own car, without legal insurance cover and at your own expense ?”

Again you are desperate to turn this into an argument over PCOD.
No-one on this thread want's to use their own car.
The OP just doesn't want to be a driver full stop.

[Lounge Lizard]

Much more nonsense like this and I just might start a poll on here, the question being “ Would you rather deliver the mail (a) in a Royal Mail van, legally, at their expense and with the risk of an incorrect windscreen washer level or (b) in your own car, without legal insurance cover and at your own expense ?”

Again you are desperate to turn this into an argument over PCOD.
No-one on this thread want's to use their own car.
The OP just doesn't want to be a driver full stop.

No, not desperate to turn it anyway, just amazed at all those that for years have happily used their own cars without valid insurance, and now complain about being given a Royal Mail van.

[SexyLegs]

Much more nonsense like this and I just might start a poll on here, the question being “ Would you rather deliver the mail (a) in a Royal Mail van, legally, at their expense and with the risk of an incorrect windscreen washer level or (b) in your own car, without legal insurance cover and at your own expense ?”

Again you are desperate to turn this into an argument over PCOD.
No-one on this thread want's to use their own car.
The OP just doesn't want to be a driver full stop.

No, not desperate to turn it anyway, just amazed at all those that for years have happily used their own cars without valid insurance, and now complain about being given a Royal Mail van.

I've never used my own car on delivery........hope that clears that up

[bag69]

Going back to the 2 driver argument. The driver who signs for the keys is responsible for that vehicle. Sign the log book as often as you want, this does not give any times as to who was in charge when. Hence any problems and the main vehicle log in the key office will be examined. Its up to you if you want to share driving it, but remember who will be responsible for it.

[Lounge Lizard]

Going back to the 2 driver argument. The driver who signs for the keys is responsible for that vehicle. Sign the log book as often as you want, this does not give any times as to who was in charge when. Hence any problems and the main vehicle log in the key office will be examined. Its up to you if you want to share driving it, but remember who will be responsible for it.

"For the purpose of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the driver whose name is last recorded in the logbook will be considered responsible for the roadworthiness and security of the vehicle until responsibility is transferred to the next driver by signature in the logbook" Fine in theory, but on a daily basis the driver of a rural duty signs and takes responsibility for the van early morning and returns it earliish afternoon, but then a collecctions driver takes it NEVER signs the logbook as taking responsibility for the next three hours he has it for.

[fishtank]

Our collection drivers sign the log book and perform vehicle checks.
If they didn't when i came to drive it the next morning the mileage wouldn't add up.

[dvbuk55]

Our collection drivers sign the log book and perform vehicle checks.
If they didn't when i came to drive it the next morning the mileage wouldn't add up.

That's why the transport manager checks the log books periodically, finds out who hasn't signed, bollocks them until the next time they do it, bollocks them until the.... you get the drift. How often do you get a reserve vehicle from the garage to replace a faulty one/service, that doesn't have a log book well in our case nigh on every vehicle we get sent, or have a returned vehicle without the log book, or the driver conveniently doesn't hand the log book in daily, or complete the mileage.......I don't think people realise how important that log book is.