Seniority or suitability?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

So what qualifications count towards a job that requires no formal education standards and that 99% of the jobs are all basically the same.

When skills count then the interview process should select both most senior (where experience is brought into the mix) and the most suitable based on skills. The most senior person can still fail the skill side of the process.

Just a quick question, a duty has been advertised that I would need training for would someone with less seniority than me get the duty if they had already done the round? I thought this could only be applied for specialist duties like admin or callers office duties but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance for the answers.

If that person is more qualified than you then why shouldn't they have an equal opportunity to get the position ? It makes good business sense to have the right man for the job.Would you agree to the cleaner getting the job just because they have been there longer than you so have more seniority.?

The cleaner is employed by ROMEC not Royal Mail so they wouldn't even qualify for a position until they have been recruited by RM.

I also notice from another post that you aren't an OPG, instead you are in the PO where the rules are different and your agreements and processes don't apply.

[mobungo]

The only time seniority is a issue, is when you don't have any!

Absolute nonsense Gary1975..!

[mobungo]

So what qualifications count towards a job that requires no formal education standards and that 99% of the jobs are all basically the same.

When skills count then the interview process should select both most senior (where experience is brought into the mix) and the most suitable based on skills. The most senior person can still fail the skill side of the process.

Just a quick question, a duty has been advertised that I would need training for would someone with less seniority than me get the duty if they had already done the round? I thought this could only be applied for specialist duties like admin or callers office duties but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance for the answers.

If that person is more qualified than you then why shouldn't they have an equal opportunity to get the position ? It makes good business sense to have the right man for the job.Would you agree to the cleaner getting the job just because they have been there longer than you so have more seniority.?

The cleaner is employed by ROMEC not Royal Mail so they wouldn't even qualify for a position until they have been recruited by RM.

I also notice from another post that you aren't an OPG, instead you are in the PO where the rules are different and your agreements and processes don't apply.

[mobungo]

So what qualifications count towards a job that requires no formal education standards and that 99% of the jobs are all basically the same.

When skills count then the interview process should select both most senior (where experience is brought into the mix) and the most suitable based on skills. The most senior person can still fail the skill side of the process.

Just a quick question, a duty has been advertised that I would need training for would someone with less seniority than me get the duty if they had already done the round? I thought this could only be applied for specialist duties like admin or callers office duties but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance for the answers.

If that person is more qualified than you then why shouldn't they have an equal opportunity to get the position ? It makes good business sense to have the right man for the job.Would you agree to the cleaner getting the job just because they have been there longer than you so have more seniority.?

The cleaner is employed by ROMEC not Royal Mail so they wouldn't even qualify for a position until they have been recruited by RM.

I also notice from another post that you aren't an OPG, instead you are in the PO where the rules are different and your agreements and processes don't apply.

I don`t mean to be pedantic but i was using the cleaner analogy as an example of the ludicrous system in place. I have fallen foul of this outdated rule in the past and i am now looking at loosing out again.Having covered a duty for almost 2 yrs only for that duty to then be given to someone more senior even though they had no knowledge of the duty. To top it off i was then asked to train that person...Absolute nonsense. !just to be clear the rules are that the longer you are there the more the Union looks after you ...How does it benefit the company either RM or PO.eg : I could have 25 years service with a terrible absence record , .I could also have done one specific duty for those 25 years not willing to train or show an interest in any other duty. As the rule stands i would have more say in a duty than someone who has been in service for say 10 years with no sick leave and was always willing to better themselves by training in different roles and who is qualified for the duty in question

[TrueBlueTerrier]

but you are commenting on a thread that deals with postal workers. 99% of the time we don't aim to better ourselves when we move as the basic job is exactly the same wherever we actually deliver the mail. In fact most of the time we are just trying to better the area we deliver in.

Your job may be better if they selected on skills, attendance or anything else, but as I say our job wherever we do it is basically the same, therefore the only applicable solution to who should have the duty is probably best decided on experience. Certainly in deliveries if we chose based on attendance or sickness it would be a disaster and it would be open to abuse by a management system that the average OPG has little if any trust in.

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

I don`t mean to be pedantic but i was using the cleaner analogy as an example of the ludicrous system in place. I have fallen foul of this outdated rule in the past and i am now looking at loosing out again.Having covered a duty for almost 2 yrs only for that duty to then be given to someone more senior even though they had no knowledge of the duty. To top it off i was then asked to train that person...Absolute nonsense. !

On your other thread you say you have impending redundancy looming, firstly if thats the case you could justifiably refuse to train the person, (unless you were a work place coach) and secondly, redundancy is wholey going to be your choice, RM currently have a no compulsory redundancy agreement and there is no sign of that changing so whether you take a redundancy is completely your choice and not royal mail

just to be clear the rules are that the longer you are there the more the Union looks after you

What exact rules are these you are talking about? the union represents every member equally when needed, length of service doesnt affect their representation

How does it benefit the company either RM or PO.eg : I could have 25 years service with a terrible absence record , .I could also have done one specific duty for those 25 years not willing to train or show an interest in any other duty. As the rule stands i would have more say in a duty than someone who has been in service for say 10 years with no sick leave and was always willing to better themselves by training in different roles and who is qualified for the duty in question[/quote]

the problem you have is who decides who is most suitable? and what criteria do you use, as for being qualified for the duty in question, every postie is effectively qualified for it(unless a driving duty but thats self explanatory) sickness record wouldnt really come into it either, it effectively doesnt cost rm more if a postie is sick on round A or round B they are still going to need to cover his duty

seniority does have its disadvantages dont get me wrong but the big advantage is that it is completely transparent, managers cant fiddle it, where as if it was best man for the job how would you then prove if the managers were just giving jobs to mates or brown nosers

[mobungo]

I don`t mean to be pedantic but i was using the cleaner analogy as an example of the ludicrous system in place. I have fallen foul of this outdated rule in the past and i am now looking at loosing out again.Having covered a duty for almost 2 yrs only for that duty to then be given to someone more senior even though they had no knowledge of the duty. To top it off i was then asked to train that person...Absolute nonsense. !

On your other thread you say you have impending redundancy looming, firstly if thats the case you could justifiably refuse to train the person, (unless you were a work place coach) and secondly, redundancy is wholey going to be your choice, RM currently have a no compulsory redundancy agreement and there is no sign of that changing so whether you take a redundancy is completely your choice and not royal mail

just to be clear the rules are that the longer you are there the more the Union looks after you

What exact rules are these you are talking about? the union represents every member equally when needed, length of service doesnt affect their representation

How does it benefit the company either RM or PO.eg : I could have 25 years service with a terrible absence record , .I could also have done one specific duty for those 25 years not willing to train or show an interest in any other duty. As the rule stands i would have more say in a duty than someone who has been in service for say 10 years with no sick leave and was always willing to better themselves by training in different roles and who is qualified for the duty in question

the problem you have is who decides who is most suitable? and what criteria do you use, as for being qualified for the duty in question, every postie is effectively qualified for it(unless a driving duty but thats self explanatory) sickness record wouldnt really come into it either, it effectively doesnt cost rm more if a postie is sick on round A or round B they are still going to need to cover his duty

seniority does have its disadvantages dont get me wrong but the big advantage is that it is completely transparent, managers cant fiddle it, where as if it was best man for the job how would you then prove if the managers were just giving jobs to mates or brown nosers[/quote]
I understand where you are coming from but to not even have an interview process and to solely base all decisions on seniority is absurd.You seem to feel that management will `pick their mates`. how can this happen if you have a fair interview process for each post. It doesn`t make sense.If you take into consideration everything, Attendance record , attitude,disciplinary record,ability ect ect ect then surly you have a better chance of getting the best person for the job.Ifi was to apply for a job at say Asda to drive but didn`t have a driving license then would they give me the job solely because i wear a green hat ? because they base all their decisions on who wears the greenest hat ?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

how can this happen if you have a fair interview process for each post.

Because in a Delivery office its extremely impractical. My office has roughly 200 posties. If they had to interview for each post they would have to hire an Interview manager just on the natural turnover of duties being available. Then as soon as you have selected the best candidate you have to go through the whole process to fill the vacancy raised by moving the selected person from his old duty to his new one.

Its even worse if there is a revision where all the duties changed, if you had to interview for 175 duties it would take 87.5 hours of interviews to give everyone a 30 minute interview - or just over 2 weeks work, and thats without repeating it for each and every duty.