When the 2010 farce agreement came in we were one of the first offices in the country to have the van share bolloxs,the only good thing to come out of the agreement was moving to a 1in 4 Saturday pattern for the full timers and people buying down or only doing 3 days or 4 days part time duties.
Now this week the managers have issued to the part timers a letter saying that they are all being put on 4 weeks notice that they have to do an extra day,so much for the innovative duty patterns and so much for the new spirit of the agreement,apparently the manager can get round this because they are not altering contractual hours?
A lot of the part timers are doing these 3 or 4 days for a reason(like caring for relatives etc) and in some cases many of them could have been promoted to 39 hour contracts.
So not even a few months into the new agreement and they are feckin people about wanting to make office savings of 500 hours.w*****s.
The grabbing hands
Grab all they can
All for themselves
After all
get your rep to lodge a stage 1 disagreement about it asap, and insist in that that the status quo is maintained until the disagreement is heard through all 3 stages if necessary
Just when you thought that Terms and Conditions were to be protected for 5 years...
In my office, the manager has also embarked on cost cutting... We have a FT/PT combo of shared van duties but one of the walks has now lost its FT post. So making it a PT/PT combo - 17 hours gone. There is also a plan for a 32.5 hours floater duty to be changed to 27.5 hours.
It is only the beginning... Although it looks like mail is visible down so perhaps justifiable.
As to the original post - it will be rotten for those involved. I thought this sort of thing only happens to Temp Part timers - as we have read here...
There will be no point for a full office resign* as we had one just over a year ago. These converted duties are now vacant posts due to retirement, people moving to other rounds and people reducing hours.
Perhaps we were slightly overstaffed previously but I think they (nationally?) are probably trying to reduce the number of reserves as stated in another post so absence will most likely be absorbed or on OT.
*Most are happy with their duties and the manager (I think) does not want to make people up anymore. Looking at some of the posts, the FT post will have had no takers from FT staff so a 32 hour postie will have had to become permanent. But for now, the manager is getting away with Temp FT or upping people's hours without a change in contract - mostly the 27 hours folks
We do not have a Rep. But I guess the Area Rep knows about things - the manager intimated that Area Rep is working on the Temp posts being made permanent but there is not just a couple of real Temp posts; the rest is people working more hours without a contract: temp or permanent.
Having said the above, the office is functioning well and duties are covered on the new 'resourcing to workload' model. There is OT for irregular absence and one long term sick and medium term absence.
How will the IR help? No one is really complaining except for one Temp FT but it is not even a complaint - just a grumble because Temp FT status can easily be removed...
chrisj wrote:How will the IR help? No one is really complaining except for one Temp FT but it is not even a complaint - just a grumble because Temp FT status can easily be removed...
Well for starters the Temp FT could be made up to permanent, you also said that
chrisj wrote:We have a FT/PT combo of shared van duties but one of the walks has now lost its FT post. So making it a PT/PT combo - 17 hours gone. There is also a plan for a 32.5 hours floater duty to be changed to 27.5 hours.
These hours could be saved from getting cut, someone in the office made up to FT and another postie taken on to replace the vacant PT duty
as you said it is only the beginning, its better/easier to stop the stone from rolling than to try and stop it when its already rolling down the hill
zx135 wrote:
These hours could be saved from getting cut,
Only if the work is there.
If the work isn't there, then neither are the hours or the jobs.
his office has already had their revision, they would only be insisting on maintaining what was agreed in the revision, also he has stated that OT is being paid out, so there is work there that needs covered and is better being put into contracted hours than paid out on OT that DOM can stop a lot easier than cutting contracted hours
zx135 wrote:
his office has already had their revision,
But in 2010 if you mean the original poster.
The arrival of TNT posties on the streets would make a difference, especially to indoor work.
And you would have to know what the original EP of the office was, what (if any) flightpath was agreed, and what the EP is now.
Because an improved EP will take hours out of the office.
The revision doesn't set anything in stone for time immemorial.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
They're doing the same at our office, and the net result is that everyone is about to get shafted. When it comes in, in about a month, full timers are expected to prep three frames instead of two, while the part timers will get shafted by having to work more days, which means more travel expenses, as well as later starts, which probably means getting caught in rush hour traffic.
The IR question is perhaps more relevant to Boltonpostie and wiganpostie situations. It is a big step for someone that has planned to work 3 or 4 days to then be asked to work more days...
My post is just an aside to highlight that there is cost cutting going on and managers are beginning to change the way things used to work. They are clearly trying to reduce overall numbers and also not wanting to give any more permanent full time posts even when FT posties retires, sacked or reduce hours.
chrisj wrote:The IR question is perhaps more relevant to Boltonpostie and wiganpostie situations. It is a big step for someone that has planned to work 3 or 4 days to then be asked to work more days...
My post is just an aside to highlight that there is cost cutting going on and managers are beginning to change the way things used to work. They are clearly trying to reduce overall numbers and also not wanting to give any more permanent full time posts even when FT posties retires, sacked or reduce hours.
The things that are happening in your office are things the IR framework should be used for, don't let the manager reduce head count or stop filling FT vacancies without going through correct procedures, if he wants to reduce hours then he can but he has to follow the correct procedures which include the office raising the issue via the IR framework
You might be right but then how do we know that the manager is not following the IR framework - ordinary posties are rarely privy to whatever discussions and/or agreement made with the Reps.
Do you get newsletters in your office or does your rep organise private meetings to discuss things? Either way, we do not have a Rep and the office in general is not that bothered. In fact, the only way I heard was when job was advertised and others start talking about managers being asked to reduce hours - so manager has chats with the usual suspects (cliques).
Those of us that thinks that we should know what is going on end up banging heads against the brick wall and no support from colleagues - on the contrary; a lot of ridicule and snidy comments.
The issue does not affect the majority that matters - such is life in some offices.
