lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Well I am not entirely sure about the start and finish times BUT the first payment of £200 is due for the UNSEQUENCED REVISION there is nothing in that to say your start and finish times will NOT be changed and in fact that element of the revision will include the park and loop which will certainly alter your start and finish time, but I'll let lovejoy explain why that won't happen.
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
The facts as you see them not as laid out in the agreement. I mean when do you think the 1 hour less a week will be introduced?
hertsman0 wrote:Thankyou lovejoy for the explanation of the agreement.We have to take in the whole thing of what the union has agreed ie no compulsory redundancies which might have been the case without putting D2D into work load.I dont like the thought of loosing the early shift and seperate D2D payment but can see some thinking behind it.
Crap! There is STILL no agreement against compulsory redundancy for gods sake - it says it will try to avoid it - AND THAT ISN'T A NO REDUNDANCY CLAUSE - read the agreement yourself, do not follow false prophets - wake up and smell the coffee.
I think you are the one who needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Whislt other Unions are losing members to basic redundancy terms this union have improved the MTSF by lifting the 2 year cap and selection by seniority - the right way.
Lovejoy - listen to yourself! lifting the cap on redundancy and selection by seniority - that's certainly protecting jobs right enough - just turf the old uns out - but answer the point for a change - IS THERE OR IS THERE NOT A NO REDUNDANCY CLAUSE OR IS IT A "TRYING TO AVOID COMPULSORY REDUNDANCY" - there is also the question of the movement of personnel from point A to point B, which for some will give them no option but to leave for which of course there will be handsome recompense BUT NO JOB.
SWW, D2D into workload will save jobs but the union recognise that some will go so have done the best deal possible for those who wish to leave.
There has never been a cast iron guarantee at any time of no compulsary redundancies so with the mtsf being stronger is it more or less likely to happen now?!?!
Also the CWU has a policy to ballot every member should RM ever make this move.
I have never said it is pefect but unlike you I live in the real world where I appreciate the environment that these talks have taken place in - you however chose to ignore that.
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
The facts as you see them not as laid out in the agreement. I mean when do you think the 1 hour less a week will be introduced?
I don't think anything ........... it's in the agreement.
If you can't even be bothered to read it then don't have the face to critices what I post!
I thank you for this, why is it left to you to have to explain the basics in layman's terms.
I need the CWU to go back and negotiate a guarantee that this "£40m of D2D contracts" extra income makes some way back to those who deliver them. So a % increase (extra) for the new business generated needs to be fought for. If the new D2D business doesn't appear then we get no extra monies! The offer so far seems to be a snapshot in time with nothing taken in to account of the increase Delivery workers are expected to do.
Sorry I left that bit out and more but that was off the top of my head. I will add to it when I have agreement in front of me and some time.
In relation to your point RM have agreed to quarterly d2d meetings where growth will be examined. The ultimate aim of this payment is to get it into basic pay and make it pensionable.
I should also point out that one of the other benefits of a supplement is that it rises with pay - unlike d2d which has been 1.67 since 1995.
If we were to put the delivery supplement into basic pay, would that be across the workforce which would reduce the supplement or would it be delivery staff only which gives us a two tier pay rate?
I don't expect you to know the answer to be honest LJ, but what would be your thoughts on that?
It would be for delivery staff - we already have different pay rates - professional drivers etc. Any move to share it out would be met with major opposition and there is no way I would ever support that
Cheers, I know different rates of pay already exist, I should have been more specific and said Mail centres and delivery offices, not to sure I'd be happy with delivery staff getting a higher basic rate than MC workers, and that's said as a delivery postie.
I'm happy with basic pay being the same across the industry and as long as allowances and supplements are pensionable that's where the differential can be, wouldn't like the situation where one set of workers is getting a higher or lower percentage of payrise based on what function they work in. I'm an old traditionalist at heart
lovejoy wrote:
Are you telling me 92% of staff will stay at a 2pm finishing time Lovejoy.
So RM have negotiated a change to the last letter time and don't intend to use it.
The last letter time is currently 2pm......... tens of thousands of members don't work to that time. The arrival pattern is the driver. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
Just the facts Lovejoy please.
Will over 90% of delivery staff be allowed to finish at 2pm Mon-Sat?
Read the agreement[/quote]
I've read it,it doesn't mention the figures you quoted at all.
Are they genuine figures Lovejoy.
It all sounds reasonable enough, but and its a big but we will still have to deal with the same old bullying and intimidation from managers at local level with the attitude "if you dont like it theres the door"
the wording in the agreement is far too ambiguous 10 people reading it would give 10 different intrpritations
"Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains."
"Without doubt, machinery has greatly increased the number of well-to-do idlers."
"An ounce of action is worth a ton of theory"
lovejoy wrote:. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
In other words just vote for it now and worry about the consequences sometime in the next 3 years.
Not at all.... just pointing out the facts for somebody who asked!!!!
Yes, but with a spin on them.
An opinion - just like you.
But you said facts. Ok then, give me the facts about how the 39 hr week is going to be managed please, not your opinion on it.
I thank you for this, why is it left to you to have to explain the basics in layman's terms.
I need the CWU to go back and negotiate a guarantee that this "£40m of D2D contracts" extra income makes some way back to those who deliver them. So a % increase (extra) for the new business generated needs to be fought for. If the new D2D business doesn't appear then we get no extra monies! The offer so far seems to be a snapshot in time with nothing taken in to account of the increase Delivery workers are expected to do.
Sorry I left that bit out and more but that was off the top of my head. I will add to it when I have agreement in front of me and some time.
In relation to your point RM have agreed to quarterly d2d meetings where growth will be examined. The ultimate aim of this payment is to get it into basic pay and make it pensionable.
I should also point out that one of the other benefits of a supplement is that it rises with pay - unlike d2d which has been 1.67 since 1995.
If we were to put the delivery supplement into basic pay, would that be across the workforce which would reduce the supplement or would it be delivery staff only which gives us a two tier pay rate?
I don't expect you to know the answer to be honest LJ, but what would be your thoughts on that?
It would be for delivery staff - we already have different pay rates - professional drivers etc. Any move to share it out would be met with major opposition and there is no way I would ever support that
Cheers, I know different rates of pay already exist, I should have been more specific and said Mail centres and delivery offices, not to sure I'd be happy with delivery staff getting a higher basic rate than MC workers, and that's said as a delivery postie.
I'm happy with basic pay being the same across the industry and as long as allowances and supplements are pensionable that's where the differential can be, wouldn't like the situation where one set of workers is getting a higher or lower percentage of payrise based on what function they work in. I'm an old traditionalist at heart
lovejoy wrote:
Are you telling me 92% of staff will stay at a 2pm finishing time Lovejoy.
So RM have negotiated a change to the last letter time and don't intend to use it.
The last letter time is currently 2pm......... tens of thousands of members don't work to that time. The arrival pattern is the driver. It is also worth noting that no changes will be made to start/finish times until your walk sequencing revision which in some cases is 2013
Just the facts Lovejoy please.
Will over 90% of delivery staff be allowed to finish at 2pm Mon-Sat?
Read the agreement
I've read it,it doesn't mention the figures you quoted at all.
Are they genuine figures Lovejoy. [/quote]
You haven't read it if you are asking that question
But you said facts. Ok then, give me the facts about how the 39 hr week is going to be managed please, not your opinion on it.[/quote]
The hour can come off in many ways and will depend entirely on your local arrival pattern - 12 mins per day, hr off sat of arrivals allow or hr off lighter day, or 30 mins off 2 days..... There won't be a standard way because there wont be a standard set of uniform duties. This will be dealt with under the revision process
