The end of BT2010

[Martin Walsh]

Fish there are lots of ways you can communicate why a revison is not working , the IR Framework is a natural one which is recognised and does take the issue up to a regional / divisional level.

Moya Greene has said the 100 when I asked that same question to Mark Higson at the Birmingham event he said there were over 400 delivery method revisons and he would rather concentrate on the ones which are working. maybe it was the event but I don't sense that Royal Mail are jumping through hoops to fix them and I don't sense the CWU are and I mean that at every level.

I as a rep can only really help to resolve the issues within my area of authority and to help make new policy , maybe you want to question reps in other areas why are the revisons still not resolved 18 months later what if anything has been done. the union is not top down it has always been bottom up and if everyone is waiting for CWU HQs to come and fix their revison then they will have a long wait. it's down to local , area and division first to sort things out.

[dvbuk55]

This is what I seem to have a problem understanding, according to dingo there are 1000 revisions, yet Moya and Higson are rounding it up to about 400 of which there are obviously failures. Now what would be classed as a failure:

too much overtime
insufficient savings (despite the continued statement that it is not led by savings)
delivery methods not being adhered to


What are the failings and where are they, have the CWU asked RM - are they interested? If 300 are working, then that must be the desired delivery method and that should be adopted everywhere................do we know where the 300 are and if they really are working.

[fishtank]

I don't sense that Royal Mail are jumping through hoops to fix them and I don't sense the CWU are and I mean that at every level.

That's par for the course for Royal Mail and embarrassing,short-sighted and self-defeating for the union.
Of course the real problem is at a failure rate of 30% and no interest in fixing or finding out what went wrong you might be looking at 500 failing revisions by the end of this.
Never mind i'm sure we can afford to lose another few thousand members
Top down or bottom up every level of the union has a responsibility to do it's best to protect the interests of all members.
Why does an area rep or divisional rep stand by and let an office go pear-shaped?
That's not bottom up organisation it's just leaving the bottom layer to sink.

[Martin Walsh]

Fish I know many an area rep and some divisional reps who would not leave an office like that Neither has the evidence to suggest that reps have left offices like that but hey if Moya is right there are 100 problems out there which needs to be resolved.

[heathrow86]

Dingo, i don't know if you would know, but what is the latest on Network 2012? I know national union has agreed a deployment date. But has the spectre of outsourcing the dead legs come back as was the case prior to network 11?

[AnotherLimey]

Fish I know many an area rep and some divisional reps who would not leave an office like that Neither has the evidence to suggest that reps have left offices like that but hey if Moya is right there are 100 problems out there which needs to be resolved.

100 keeps coming up and it's a number that has led to the failiers, revisions being based on 100BSI indoors and out, RM are going into these changes with savings as thier number one priority that's why it's falling to pieces pure and simple.

[Straight4ward]

This raises an interesting question: What constitutes a “failing office”?

The obvious scenario where, following a DM revision, walks are uncompleted, mail back ups as the office fails to clear daily, customer complaints rocket and the local press wades in, that is clearly an apparent failure for all to see and neither RM nor the Union would argue the point on that one.

But not all failures are that clear cut. You can have a situation whereby an office clears pretty much every day by a combination of people going in early, working their breaks and over their hours on a regular basis just to complete, with a handful of docket-monkeys being used to clear up after the few that cut off. The public would be largely unaffected. On the surface things would appear reasonably calm.

However, not everyone can cope with this constant level of pressure to clear the office daily. Sickness levels rise putting further pressure on the remaining staff. At times of very heavy workloads (i.e. Christmas and the New Tax Year) the lack of sufficient numbers becomes even more apparent, resulting in recruiting more staff on short-term contracts that will not be renewed once the workload drops to a more manageable level.

However, as RM’s primary objective has been to reduce costs, the additional spend on temporary staff and extended for the existing staff will mean that they don’t make the savings they had planned. Would this then be classified as a failing office in RM’s book?

And what would be the Union’s position? Well I suspect they would also classify it as a failure, if they were aware of it, but for very different reasons. However, if they don’t investigate each revision to establish how it’s faring, then how can they possibly know? HQ would probably tick this one off as a working revision.

[fishtank]

Personally i think you can judge whether a revision is failing on 3 things.

1.Delivery Methods.
If the correct delivery methods are not being used it isn't a delivery methods revision so by definition it's a failure.

2.Budget
Any revision can work if you throw enough money at it but unless it's running to the budget and hours outlined in the revision it's a failure...this obviously includes meal relief and starting on time...but will include a reasonable amount of flexing up if it's set using a low model week.

3.Stability
For a revision to work it must create a stable working environment for the members of staff,this means without intimidation,bullying and pressure to do the impossible.

Obviously if the members were not included in the revision and have not achieved any of their aspirations it's a failure from our point of view before it even starts.