A worrying thought

[clashcityrocker]

Explain to me resourcing to workload dingo, simply.

What do Royal Mail want,

Well the scare story is it will be like a return to the old days on the docks when you will go in in the morning and the boss will say -" the traffic today is XX 000, so I only need 30 bodies." All spare bodies will be shipped out to other offices.
But if those other offices also have surplus bodies ........?
So I think they basically want to reduce the number of reserves in every DO to avoid having any spare capacity ever in any DO.

[Martin Walsh]

Management now call it resourcing to demand. Basically they do not want to go through timely revisions in the future and therefore want to set an offices structure up based on the traffic that an office has rather than a duty structure.

So for example if you have 30 walks in an office ie HCTs and the workload is low due to the summer period they would want to resource down regardless if you have people against all 30 duties.

The CWU does not accept this principle. It is accepted that the varying workload across a week and across a year is difficult to resource to as clearly as the end of the financial year and the Autumn pressure period are the heaviest periods and clearly traffic traditionally drops off in the summer. Most offices have a fixed reserve ratio and some offices have the same duty structure all year and some have even leave spreads or peaks and troughs.

The CWU are looking to tackle the unfair budget driven absorption and now that most offices are now fully optimised outdoors then to limit outdoor absorption.

Clearly Royal Mail make a lot of money from absorption and they are claiming there have not been massive problems at local level from absorption whereas the CWU are saying budget driven absorption is leading to bullying and harassment and unfair workload pressures.

So this issue is going to be a difficult issue to resolve but if the last 3 or 4 weeks have proved anything is that Royal Mail do not want a strike and thats not just because of Christmas its is that they dont want a strike full stop.

[clashcityrocker]

So for example if you have 30 walks in an office ie HCTs and the workload is low due to the summer period they would want to resource down regardless if you have people against all 30 duties.

But if you don't have the workload for those 30 people and you don't resource down, how do you ensure people are working all their paid hours, as we agreed back in 2007?

[Martin Walsh]

Clash what we did not agree back in 2007 is that someone would be taken off their duty in order to create absorption. The Pay and Mod agreement spoke about excess reserves and where they could possibly be moved to other offices and part of the trigger points for the £400 payment was linked to that.

Resourcing to demand is about moving people off duties and where necessary to other offices or worse not filling vacancies to create absorption.

[scirocco'r']

Explain to me resourcing to workload dingo, simply.

What do Royal Mail want,

Well the scare story is it will be like a return to the old days on the docks when you will go in in the morning and the boss will say -" the traffic today is XX 000, so I only need 30 bodies." All spare bodies will be shipped out to other offices.
But if those other offices also have surplus bodies ........?
So I think they basically want to reduce the number of reserves in every DO to avoid having any spare capacity ever in any DO.

It won't be the reserves they get rid of.

[borgpicard]

Judgee yes that could have been a tactic but what if Royal Mail said that they could not afford the new offer on pay if the union served notice as they would lose a number of contracts and therefore revenue.

Now the CWU had made progress and the one issue where progress has not been made is on resource to demand on deliveries. There seems be a belief that all the delivery issues have not moved on , well that is not true , its always been accepted that the longer vision for deliveries would be negotiated over a period of time. The key issue where progress has not been made is on resourcing to workload/ absorption.

well, for one, im fed up with being told i can do and 8 hr day for 7 hrs pay.

[Lounge Lizard]

that be nice Dingo, back pay paid before Xmas...

back pay LESS TAX paid before Xmas

[clashcityrocker]

Clash what we did not agree back in 2007 is that someone would be taken off their duty in order to create absorption. The Pay and Mod agreement spoke about excess reserves and where they could possibly be moved to other offices and part of the trigger points for the £400 payment was linked to that.

Resourcing to demand is about moving people off duties and where necessary to other offices or worse not filling vacancies to create absorption.

But you didn't answer the question.
If there genuinely isn't the work for the 30 people who are staffed against the duties, how do you ensure they are working all their paid hours?
If you don't agree to people being moved off a duty, then the only other option is to understaff the office from the outset so that every day is a flexing up day.
It is a docket king/queen's wet dream.
Or you have a "flexible" workforce on hand to cover any shortfall - zero hour contract sector reserves?

Much as I hate to say this, this isn't really a problem for offices where the revision is based on a low model week and they have a high number of part=time staff.

[Judgee]

Judgee yes that could have been a tactic but what if Royal Mail said that they could not afford the new offer on pay if the union served notice as they would lose a number of contracts and therefore revenue.

Now the CWU had made progress and the one issue where progress has not been made is on resource to demand on deliveries. There seems be a belief that all the delivery issues have not moved on , well that is not true , its always been accepted that the longer vision for deliveries would be negotiated over a period of time. The key issue where progress has not been made is on resourcing to workload/ absorption.

Ah right you are then. Was just wondering if there was some legal reason but I guess it just struck me as an odd way of the CWU playing thier hand.

It's easy to see why a flexible work force would be attractive to RM and unattractive to the workers. Very hard to see what middle ground could be found there with the only solution being one side or the other just giving in completely.

I guess my main concern at the moment is that these negotiations will drag out too long or there will be a vote on the agreed elements with negotiation for deliveries to be discussed further as a separate issue. For deliveries I think that would be a total disaster.

Unfortunately the longer this is dragged out the less chance we have of the CWU winning this issue. The threat of pre-Christmas strike action is the best weapon we have. We lose that we lose the battle on deliveries.

[stephen500]

Stephen the way forward was rejected by the membership after a yes recommendation from the PEC.

Now if there is an agreement , then the aim will be for a ballot and if at all possible for any back pay etc to be paid prior to xmas.

The important thing is to get the right agreement. This is a very complex agreement and the added issues of being the first legally binding agreement is adding to the complex issues.

The issues are not insurmountable and progress has been made.

I have been in RM so long, I can't remember every ballot...I thought they always won...so far!

[stephen500]

Stephen the way forward was rejected by the membership after a yes recommendation from the PEC.

Now if there is an agreement , then the aim will be for a ballot and if at all possible for any back pay etc to be paid prior to xmas.

The important thing is to get the right agreement. This is a very complex agreement and the added issues of being the first legally binding agreement is adding to the complex issues.

The issues are not insurmountable and progress has been made.

I noted the IA Ballot took 19 days!

[RTP]

Clash what we did not agree back in 2007 is that someone would be taken off their duty in order to create absorption. The Pay and Mod agreement spoke about excess reserves and where they could possibly be moved to other offices and part of the trigger points for the £400 payment was linked to that.

Resourcing to demand is about moving people off duties and where necessary to other offices or worse not filling vacancies to create absorption.

How are you going to tackle that one? Seriously. because that particular animal is rearing it's head again.

[stephen500]

Yes dingo, fully agree with that. However as each day/week passes things are slipping by. - This should have been done through August/Sep when dates were originally mentioned.

The CWU slipped weeks by in the initial basis and here we are slipping weeks by at the back end - a total of circa 6 weeks slippage from the original fist slam dates on the table.

2 weeks ago, diary's were 'being cleared' to resolve this issue and oh, now another 7 days are needed as the correct people were not around the table. ?

I'm all for a decent agreement for all but you can see why the masses are starting to wane over this.

What once was a 'lets stand up and fight' is becoming more of a drag on many, - many I work with are more interested about the weekend packet O/T at the moment than anything else.

I believe that RM has played CWU very well. And I sincerely hope a good agreement all round can be done, put on the table and signed/sealed/paid before Christmas so that everyone can put this to bed, move on with their lives and start 2014 with fresh eyes and good intentions.

I really hope it's a good un otherwise people stress is going to increase.

I still believe the union got it right leaving it till now. Summer would not have concentrated the minds like Christmas has.

[chrisj]

Resourcing to demand is already a reality in MC and MDEC and the Networks but I think the work structure and the work forecasts are reasonably easier to predict, and where you have a reliable flexible (Angard) staff, that works to some extent.

However, it is not that easy in delivery because the figures that we get are not commensurate to the required man (or woman) hours. Also there are just too many variables in delivery (the walks are not the same and many things happen on a walk that cannot always be accounted for beforehand). Delivery is also a one man one walk - any absence create a whole load of issues... Leave reserves numbers are already too tight in many offices.

The keys issues are can RM find a reliable and trusted flexible workforce to work in delivery all over the land not just the towns and cities? There is also the issue of the figures used - how reliable are they?

And who are the people to be moved off their walk and/or sent to other offices? Will this be done in a fair and representative manner?

RM can try to have their way but we can counteract and minimise the effect but coming in on our contracted time and doing the job properly - that will even save jobs. But why can we not do that simple thing?

[Martin Walsh]

Clash working all the hours your paid for is a mantra used by Royal Mail both as a way to get their message to the media and too drive through further effiences

When you agree a model week you then agree through negotiations the step change you agree to make in EP or BSi improvement. let's just say an office agrees a 90 EP indoor target based on your model week when traffic is lower than your model week you will not be hitting your EP unless you take hours out under the roof this is when management put in absorption.

The reverse is true when your traffic is above the model week if you have the same hours your EP will be well over 90 and this is the problem because in the majority of cases management do not flex up the hours and expect the office to absorb the increase in workload.

Equally when an office has been fully optimised outdoors you should not be able to do outdoor absorption unless management get you out earlier.


The problem with the pay and mod agreement annex a & b is that management see absorption as a budget tool and don't care about the workload and now see that removing people from their duties as a way to increase absorption and save money.