Dragging it out

[steve1873]

You can run all you want but you will not finish any earlier as you will not be able to hide with the new PDA's maybe the old slow one's are right and you are a silly billy goat sometimes common-sense will prevail but in your case god help us all.

Yeah, of course. let's all go out of our way to be unproductive, inefficient and annoying to colleagues. And then us 'silly billy goats' can join you 'wise billy goats' down the job centre when RM's costs escalate out of control.

And IF the new all-seeing all-hearing PDA's are applied by the DIMS to spy on us, who do you think will be called to account? The quicker/normal paced ones who finish a few minutes early or on their time, whether they spent the last 30 minutes sitting in the van when done or not, or the ones crawling along taking the p*ss any maybe getting OT too?

Because with that statement you've made a rod for your own back and contradicted your own argument. You see the new PDA's are being issued to us personally in our office, so this 'snatch and grab' from the charging cabinet will be a thing of the past. The DIMS WILL easily see the heel-draggers and they will be exposed; a blind-eye (which I repeat I favour!) will be harder for them to turn.

What do you think? Jesus, if someone is sitting in a van for 30 minutes whilst being paid, then that is in itself a pointer at a wider inefficiency... i.e. that guy could be doing 30mins more work!

*Assuming we aren't talking someone having their meal relief in van, which shouldn't be at end of shift in any case¬

[fishtank]

More strawmen than a Wizard of Oz convention in this thread. Quite a few keyboard warriors as well, I've never met anyone in 25 years in this job who deliberately went out of their way to make a delivery last any longer than it needed to, saying that it does rain a lot up here. I've met quite a few slow posties but there's usually an underlying cause. Bottom line is if you were as brave with your management as you obviously are when slagging off your colleagues on here your office would probably be wonderful.

[redneck]

Unfortunately Royal Mail has its fair share of workers who spend some of their time slagging off fellow workers, often in front of management. They are the ones who make out they are super efficient and others slow, disorganised or 'dragging it out'. The reality is that the only 'fast' workers are the ones who are cutting corners, carving rounds up not following correct procedures in order to get nice little deals for themselves. This is now encouraged by management, who reward these people with increased overtime opportunities for coming in early, leaving P739's everywhere and never opening a trolley. I've worked elsewhere, and I have never come across a group of workers more willing to shaft each other and have a laugh about it. Has anyone ever thought that the 'slower' workers just might be doing their job properly?

[jetblack]

Over a period of time, when a right or benefit that is conferred upon a population becomes abused by a very small minority, it tends to follow that the right or benefit in question is rescinded by those who conferred it in the first place. The innocent majority pay the price.

The other day I found that the biscuit tin in the kitchen had been raided by one of the kids. I put it to them but no-one would own up. The result was that I took their tablets off them for the rest of the day, wether they were guilty or not.

I've never met anyone in 25 years in this job who deliberately went out of their way to make a delivery last any longer than it needed to

I have.

You might look at the problem slightly differently when you have personally experienced it. Lets just hope that the guy in question doesn't turn around and try to get yourself to take on extra work cos he doesn't have the time !!! Cos then you'll find yourself in the crazy situation whereby the guy in question is not only making a couple of grand a year more than you - he's actually doing less work as well.
Please don't think that I'm stretching the realms of credulity here, because I'm not. In fact, for the type of character this thread is really about, its the next logical step when you think about it.

I've only heard of one man that could turn the other cheek to that, and they crucified him.

Furthermore, if the guy in question is a union member, its quite likely that he'll have them compromised also - for the very reasons that TBT outlined earlier. The Unions "natural" response is to try to defend the guy who is going over. And in most cases they will be absolutely right to do so - but not all. I reckon this is something they need to be vigilant of, because they could, inadvertantly perhaps, be working counter to the interests of the silent majority.

[DB1100]

Unfortunately Royal Mail has its fair share of workers who spend some of their time slagging off fellow workers, often in front of management. They are the ones who make out they are super efficient and others slow, disorganised or 'dragging it out'. The reality is that the only 'fast' workers are the ones who are cutting corners, carving rounds up not following correct procedures in order to get nice little deals for themselves. This is now encouraged by management, who reward these people with increased overtime opportunities for coming in early, leaving P739's everywhere and never opening a trolley. I've worked elsewhere, and I have never come across a group of workers more willing to shaft each other and have a laugh about it. Has anyone ever thought that the 'slower' workers just might be doing their job properly?

I'm with you on this,I cannot believe what some people do in order to shaft other people.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

But you do if he is guilty, presumably ?

Depends on how he is found guilty. If due process is followed and he is found guilty in a court of law then he is. A court of law or an official investigation who find him guilty THEN remove his rights (ie imprison or sack him) but even then the "guilty" person still has rights of representation.

A bunch of blokes in a DO who "know" he is guilty. No.

We can agree on that much surely.

Only if he is guilty, but now how.

So lets say we have an out and out crook - we know (the workers and the union reps) that he's an out and out crook cos we work with him day in and day out and experience it at first hand.

Shop him to the IB, whistleblow him for fraud. Or if he is a slow worker claiming overtime fraudulently then force the managers to do something.

The management don't - and so are powerless.

Only because they chose to be - force their hand with a grievance, or if everyone is of the same opinion put in a group grievance for unfair application of standards.

Thats like saying I was a witness to a crime but I'm going to deny, when push comes to shove, that I saw anything -

Your choice, one that people make every day through fear or not wanting to get involved or put their heads above the parapet. In fact, the main reason a lot of threatened grievances are not actually placed.

cos, well, it's not my job to judge. I shall abdicate my responsibility.

Correct it's not our place to judge, we provide the evidence as we see it. The Judges/Jury are the ones that balance both sides and decide whether someone is guilty or not.

The courts are , therefore, powerless - and justice is out the window.

No justice is out of the window as soon as Mob rule takes over. An extreme example http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-35531002" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bijan Ebrahimi, 44, was killed in Bristol nearly three years ago amid false claims he was a paedophile.

he was killed because people "knew" he was a paedophile - only he wasn't

Listen - I know what its like to be without. And I would fight the corner of anyone wronged or discriminated against through genuine reasons when they are only trying to earn a decent living for themselves and their families.

As would I.

But I draw the line at backing crooks.

As do I - but after they are found guilty not before

Its a fine line between being a defender of the rights of the oppressed and being a soft touch.

No, in my opinion, its a fine line between surrendering someone's rights because you think or "know" they are guilty, and those same rights being removed from everyone.

Remember our legal system, and Royal Mails discipline system is based on the simple fact that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. If we ever give up that simple tenet and base guilt on mob justice it will be a sad day.

It's better to defend a guilty man than punish an innocent one.

Personally, I'd use my discretion.

As would I - although the application of that discretion is different. Even if I thought or "knew" he was guilty, I still think it's wrong that his rights should be surrendered without due process.

Of course, in the world of the CWU and RM there is a simple solution if he is ever brought to task. He can get representation from higher up the CWU structure.

[postslippete]

The managers know exactly what they are doing. They are putting the slowest guy on the smallest round. Problem solved so everyone finishes around the same time.


It's noble that you want to help your colleague but you don't get rewarded in this company for finishing before your time. However, if you are regularly going past your time and you clearly don't want to, then make sure you tell the gaffer so they can get some work took off. You might get some flak but don't worry about that because the union will protect you as long you work to time..

[jetblack]

If I find Mrs. Jetblack in bed with a bloke when I return from work, would I be able to justifiably make the assumption that she had been unfaithful to me, and even perhaps, to have had penetrative sex with the man sleeping with his head on my pillow ?

Would she be guilty or not ? Or would it all be circumstantial ? Would I be jumping the gun if I found her to be unfaithful - hotheaded, jealous and rash me, trying to be judge, jury and executioner ? Could there be an innocent explanation ?

Can I know anything at all, then ?

I'll answer my own question - yes, of course I can know the difference between truth and falsity, of course I can have knowledge. But I'll grant you, its all on the balance of probabilities.

All thats necessary for wrong un's to rule the day, is for good men to do nothing at all.

Even worse than them doing nothing, they can be co-opted by the wrong un's. There was an American writer called Norman Mailler. He campaigned for the release of a convict named Gary Gilmour. I don't think due process had been followed, or something like that - I don't remember the details and don't have the time to look them up. Anyhow, what I do remember is that Mailler was eventually succesful and Gilmour was released. Within a very short space of time of him being out, Gilmour committed a murder.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Sometimes if it looks like a monkey, it walks like a monkey, and it smells like a monkey - its a monkey.


Anyhow - I'm not going to labour the point any further. Discretion is the better part of valor.


Edit. the guy that Mailer got off was Jack Abbot - not Gilmore.

[bustedflush]

If I find Mrs. Jetblack in bed with a bloke when I return from work, would I be able to justifiably make the assumption that she had been unfaithful to me, and even perhaps, to have had penetrative sex with the man sleeping with his head on my pillow ?

Would she be guilty or not ? Or would it all be circumstantial ? Would I be jumping the gun if I found her to be unfaithful - hotheaded, jealous and rash me, trying to be judge, jury and executioner ? Could there be an innocent explanation ?

Can I know anything at all, then ?

I'll answer my own question - yes, of course I can know the difference between truth and falsity, of course I can have knowledge. But I'll grant you, its all on the balance of probabilities.

All thats necessary for wrong un's to rule the day, is for good men to do nothing at all.

Even worse than them doing nothing, they can be co-opted by the wrong un's. There was an American writer called Norman Mailler. He campaigned for the release of a convict named Gary Gilmour. I don't think due process had been followed, or something like that - I don't remember the details and don't have the time to look them up. Anyhow, what I do remember is that Mailler was eventually succesful and Gilmour was released. Within a very short space of time of him being out, Gilmour committed a murder.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Sometimes if it looks like a monkey, it walks like a monkey, and it smells like a monkey - its a monkey.


Anyhow - I'm not going to labour the point any further. Discretion is the better part of valor.

Well bad choice there! Michael Jackson went on Bashir's TV show admitting he shared his bed with young boys, apparently nothing untoward happened! However, had I caught the pervert with a kid of mine in his bed he'd have had a voice even several octaves higher than before (if he ever sang again.) And that would be BEFORE any trial...if it looks like a tiger, roars like a tiger etc. Just by admitting that, he should have been banned from the UK forthwith, but hey! a bit of stardom goes a long way, the ostriches in the media still played his crap.

Had an MP said the same, party expulsion, sacking and humiliation would have followed.

What I'm saying is that there are certain people who possess the art of deception, innocence and believability, cultivated over time. They pull the wool over your eyes with the aim of preserving their lifestyle.

I've learned on this thread that we should all just put-up and shut-up if we notice.

[maskedmike]

LOL...

Ive been with royal mail for a year and have heard all the stories of how much easier it was back in the day, how you had first and second turn deliveries and could claim 3 hours overtime for 30 mins work, but that was when royal mail was funded from the government its now been sold off and is a business plain and simple., its here to make money and with any business its about being more efficient, which in our line of work means more work, bigger rounds, decreased work force, management restructuring and employing new ways of working be it going back to 2 deliveries a day with all your sorting done whatever the point is, is that a lot of posties are stuck in how it used to be and don't like change.
you do and will forever get postie's who will take the piss and know there right in regards to cutting off etc but on the flip side if, when the round are revised and theres resigns the walks we're all actually the same. which I know from my experience as I'm here there and everywhere that theres a huge mismanagement of walks and there is genuine ppl who even with rushing you cant do it in time and others on a wed thurs you can have 2 hours spare sat in a car park spare watching the clock tick down, yet the ppl with an easy round get paid the same hours as the poor gits who just about can finish on time, like I said if the rounds are correct this wouldn't be an issue.

Also royalmail management is non existant, there is no performance management, there total lack of respect from the work force towards managers... which in other lines of work can you tell a manager to piss off when he tells you its time for you to sort, if royalmail actually sorted it house at first and trained its management in how to manage a workforce as well as how to cover there arses to not be liable to a tribunal when they can some how sack someone on the spot???? without no paperwork to show any sort of disciplinary procedures, warning or performance management to show reason for dismissal is trueing amazing. how can there be a happy work force when the managers are a law unto them selves.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

If I find Mrs. Jetblack in bed with a bloke when I return from work, would I be able to justifiably make the assumption that she had been unfaithful to me, and even perhaps, to have had penetrative sex with the man sleeping with his head on my pillow ?

Would she be guilty or not ? Or would it all be circumstantial ? Would I be jumping the gun if I found her to be unfaithful - hotheaded, jealous and rash me, trying to be judge, jury and executioner ? Could there be an innocent explanation ?

Can I know anything at all, then ?

Of course you can make an assumption, just like you have with the laxy fecker in your office. Nothing wrong with it.

But it you beat Mrs Jetblacks alleged lover to a pulp, you'd be the guilty one and in the dock for it. Would it be right to deny you the right to a defender, the right to legal representation and the chance of your sentence being mitigated all because in your estimation guilty people shouldn't be represented.

[jetblack]

If I find Mrs. Jetblack in bed with a bloke when I return from work, would I be able to justifiably make the assumption that she had been unfaithful to me, and even perhaps, to have had penetrative sex with the man sleeping with his head on my pillow ?

Would she be guilty or not ? Or would it all be circumstantial ? Would I be jumping the gun if I found her to be unfaithful - hotheaded, jealous and rash me, trying to be judge, jury and executioner ? Could there be an innocent explanation ?

Can I know anything at all, then ?

Of course you can make an assumption, just like you have with the laxy fecker in your office. Nothing wrong with it.

But it you beat Mrs Jetblacks alleged lover to a pulp, you'd be the guilty one and in the dock for it. Would it be right to deny you the right to a defender, the right to legal representation and the chance of your sentence being mitigated all because in your estimation guilty people shouldn't be represented.

I'd save you the effort - I'd plead guilty.

But then, this thread isn't about me.

[bustedflush]

If I find Mrs. Jetblack in bed with a bloke when I return from work, would I be able to justifiably make the assumption that she had been unfaithful to me, and even perhaps, to have had penetrative sex with the man sleeping with his head on my pillow ?

Would she be guilty or not ? Or would it all be circumstantial ? Would I be jumping the gun if I found her to be unfaithful - hotheaded, jealous and rash me, trying to be judge, jury and executioner ? Could there be an innocent explanation ?

Can I know anything at all, then ?

Of course you can make an assumption, just like you have with the laxy fecker in your office. Nothing wrong with it.

But it you beat Mrs Jetblacks alleged lover to a pulp, you'd be the guilty one and in the dock for it. Would it be right to deny you the right to a defender, the right to legal representation and the chance of your sentence being mitigated all because in your estimation guilty people shouldn't be represented.

No, he'd be the ACCUSED one in the dock for it....

[cyrus]

'but that was when royal mail was funded from the government" ? Royal Mail has made lots of money over the years, that's paid for schools,roads,etc.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

No, he'd be the ACCUSED one in the dock for it....

Thank you - my point exactly.