saturday 5 oclock starts

Post by **dvbuk55** » 05 Dec 2007, 17:19

peedofpostie wrote:is that letter from the union to a rep if it is then they are shitting on us from a great height i would like to think that it is not from the union if this is the case then i am defo gonna pull out the union

This is a letter froRoyal Mail to the Union - I suspect Bob is Bob Gibson. Well the new understanding has lasted then. What's the Union saying about this?

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 05 Dec 2007, 17:21

dvbuk55 wrote:
peedofpostie wrote:is that letter from the union to a rep if it is then they are shitting on us from a great height i would like to think that it is not from the union if this is the case then i am defo gonna pull out the union
This is a letter froRoyal Mail to the Union - I suspect Bob is Bob Gibson. Well the new understanding has lasted then. What's the Union saying about this?

not much with thier gimp masks on..i expect they are already getting greased up fpr the next shafting...

peedofpostie · Post by **peedofpostie** » 05 Dec 2007, 17:23

why did any one think rm actually give a s**t what we want as long as they are ok

MickR · Post by **MickR** » 05 Dec 2007, 19:22

Ricky Bruch wrote:From the union regarding 5 am starts...

It was all a pack of lies

Dear Bob

Saturday Attendance Times

I know youâ€™ve already talked to Dale about Saturday attendance times and we, like you, want to get moving with everything in the deal.

The agreement says Saturday attendance times can revert to what they were prior to Network 2007. However, it will take time to get people at local level to decide if they want to keep the current times, revert to the old arrangements or look at something in between. In parallel, we are seeking solutions to the quality problems that this change would create if we rushed into this without proper planning. The network is now very different and we cannot revert to the earlier operation just for one day a week.

The risk to Quality of Service is enormous. Were everyone to revert tomorrow, 10 million letters would fail to connect. Even discounting Saturday retentions, that would knock 1.6% off our first class Quality of Service. In turn that leaves us vulnerable to large fines from the Regulator and criticism from our customers. Rebuilding the network to reduce this risk is not an option.

We have asked managers to talk to their representatives about what is involved here. People should come to work at the right times until any new arrangements are confirmed locally. In line with our joint statement on restoring good industrial relations, I would like you to meet Gillian Alford, along with Paul Tolhurst and Steve Cameron, to explore if we can find a creative and pragmatic solution to this issue.

Weâ€™ll be in touch to confirm a date as soon as possible, but I know Gillian and the team are available on Thursday if that is possible for you.
Yours sincerely
Kevin Green

KEVIN GREEN
P&OD Director

cc: Dave Ward

Having read this can honestly say that Saturday 5am starts won't last. RM won't run the risk of all the fines because of failing to meet missort runs! I intend to put a motion to my branch's AGM that at conference the branch moves and/or supports a vote of no confidence in the national officers and the PEC for their part in this shambolic agreement, it is an absolute disgrace!!

dogfood · Post by **dogfood** » 06 Dec 2007, 15:28

The network is now very different and we cannot revert to the earlier operation just for one day a week.

The risk to Quality of Service is enormous. Were everyone to revert tomorrow, 10 million letters would fail to connect. Even discounting Saturday retentions, that would knock 1.6% off our first class Quality of Service. In turn that leaves us vulnerable to large fines from the Regulator and criticism from our customers. Rebuilding the network to reduce this risk is not an option.

So RM put forward the reverting to early starts on Saturdays, as a sweetener, knowing that it can not be implemented for both practical and financial reasons. And our union leaders go along with it. The current union leadership are a joke.

lovenotmoney · Post by **lovenotmoney** » 06 Dec 2007, 20:13

After years and years of Royal Mail bull-s**t, how can anyone be surprised at them reneging on their promises!

peedofpostie · Post by **peedofpostie** » 06 Dec 2007, 20:39

well thats us also lost the 5 o clock start we are going to 5 30 down to local negotaitions it ll not be lomg till were back to 6 00 this union sucks we were also asked to do door to doors next week think most of the office agreed how f***ing stupid are people becoming come next year they l force them on us because we managed them this year

well al not be touching any on my runs f**k em

MickR · Post by **MickR** » 06 Dec 2007, 20:57

peedofpostie wrote:well thats us also lost the 5 o clock start we are going to 5 30 down to local negotaitions it ll not be lomg till were back to 6 00 this union sucks we were also asked to do door to doors next week think most of the office agreed how f***ing stupid are people becoming come next year they l force them on us because we managed them this year well al not be touching any on my runs f**k em

Couldn't agree more!

pinstripe · Post by **pinstripe** » 06 Dec 2007, 21:09

lovenotmoney wrote:After years and years of Royal Mail bull-s**t, how can anyone be surprised at them reneging on their promises!

If they even thought that the union could or would oppose them, they wouldn't risk it. As it is the 64% have screwed themselves and us. It is no surprise that RM are backing down on this, they had no intention of allowing this to be implemented, as has been said, it was a bribe, nothing more, to be dumped as soon as the agreement was accepted and as the official 'union' has accepted it and their style of management we can expect things to get a whole lot worse than this. Well f*** them, I'm working 'unofficially' to my 318 and they can't do a thing about it. Not one minute extra, who cares if it's Christmas, RM don't know the meaning of, or care about Christmas spirit so why should we?