Postal Policy Forum : Wednesday 13th March : PEC Policy

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Letter to Branches




No 149/13
Ref: 11002
Date: 7th March 2013

TO: ALL BRANCHES WITH POSTAL MEMBERS




Dear Colleague

Postal Policy Forum – Wednesday 13th March – PEC Policy

Please find attached the PEC Policy for the Policy Forum on National Talks: The Future of the Royal Mail Group.

Any enquiries on the above should be addressed to the DGS (P) Department.

Yours sincerely



Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)





Amendment No

Submitted by

Policy
Comp 1
East London Postal
Support



Comp 2
North East Division
Oppose



3
London Divisional Committee
Support



4
London Parcels and Stations Amal
Support



5
South East Wales Amal
Oppose



6
Greater Manchester Amal
Oppose



7
South East London Postal Counters
Support



8
Newcastle Amal
Support



Comp 9
West London Postal
Support





COMP 1
If Carried Composite 2 Falls

That this policy forum recognises that Royal Mail are now attempting to fundamentally change the Business Transformation agreement under the
Pace Of Change Process which attempts the following:

To have revisions set up at 100 BSi
To withdraw from the menu of options and any other duty pattern other than a 5 day week introduce later starts with a Pre set 15:00 finish time Pre determined saving levels Set delivery spans This list is not exhaustive

This policy forum supports the PEC position that Royal Mail's proposals are totally unacceptable. The policy forum also instructs the PEC to Only agree a Pace Of Change process which has the following principles contained within it.

The full range of attendance patterns included in the menu of options
No link to 100BSI Start and Finish times and revision productivity levels determined by phase 4 local negotiation Delivery spans set by local agreement based on the attendance patterns and the mix of full time part time ratio.
A quicker route to the lump sums recognising that BT 2010 is now 3 years old.
No Pre determined saving levels.

in the event that there is no agreement by conference will lead to the CWU nationally instructing all delivery offices to withdraw from revision activity. If Royal Mail impose revisions by executive action then the CWU will give consideration to balloting for industrial action either of those offices which have seen executive action or nationally The PEC is instructed accordingly.

East London Postal
North/North West London
London South West



COMP 2
That the current performance measurement of BSI is being abused by Royal Mail managers and is being used as a tool to bully and harass our members. The current BSI measurement in the main is not recorded correctly therefore it is not in the best interests of CWU members to continue to agree to use BSI in its current format as a measurement for office performance. This policy forum agrees that the CWU negotiate agree and identify what a fair and manageable workload is for a delivery OPG based on National Industrial Standards throughout Industry on a daily basis, this would also include the re-introduction of 318’s for every OPG in a delivery office so they can easily identify what their normal weekly workload would be. If Royal Mail fail or refuse to engage the CWU in discussions on this subject then the Outdoor department will report back the situation at annual conference 2013 with a view of withdrawing all cooperation on future revisions that are based on BSI performance as measured at present by Royal Mail.
North East Division
Hull and East Ridings Amal
South Yorkshire and District Amal
York and District Amal
Doncaster and District Amal

3
This policy forum recognises that the combination in the growth in packets/parcels, the changing mix of mail volumes, the changing demands of customers and the increase in end to end delivery competition are all converging to ensuring that there will be a new delivery model introduced in the not too distant future.     

This policy forum believes it is essential that the CWU is at the forefront of the debate on a new delivery model and ensuring that any new delivery model maximises full time jobs and provides sustainable jobs with good terms and conditions moving forward.

This policy forum therefore supports the National Officer and the PEC in asking for the widest possible consultation process within the CWU on a new delivery model. The policy forum also recognises that each Division has been asked to consult with their respective Branch`s on what a potential new delivery model and submit this to CWU HQs.

This policy forum further instructs the PEC to hold a policy forum on the future of deliveries where the PEC present a blue print  on how they believe a new delivery model should look in the future with Divisions and Branch`s having the opportunity to make changes to the document.

Following this policy briefing the CWU should then pursue this delivery strategy in negotiations with the employer as well as ensuring we publically and politically highlight our delivery strategy.

The PEC is instructed accordingly.  
London Divisional Committee



4
That this policy forum supports the national officer and the PEC in their pursuance of a new agreement on the National Mail Centre , RDC and VOC Rationalisation.  However this policy forum agrees that Prior to any new agreement there must be a full review into the workings of the current mail centres to establish if the current network is achieving quality of service to work plan following the recent closures. In addition a review should take place to establish whether the people process has resolved the surplus in line with the commitments made within the BT Agreement and MTSF from the previous closure programmes.
 
Until such time as the above has been reviewed and lessons learnt from the previous closure programmes then Royal Mail should be informed by the CWU that it will not support any further closures of offices who have yet to go past 6.8 of the consultation process.  Any attempts by management to close these offices by executive action will lead to consideration being given to an industrial action ballot.
London Parcels and Stations Amal



5
Add at end:

Except that: Payment of all outstanding lump sums must be paid before any future agreement is given and in addition to point 2 there will be no support for any further Delivery Office mergers.
South East Wales Amal

6
This forum agrees that no further discussions on any new bonus schemes or productivity payments take place until all payments due under Business Transformation are paid.
Greater Manchester Amal



7
That this policy forum condemns Royal Mail for the Unacceptable levels of Bullying and Harassment of CWU members in delivery offices based on unrealistic and unachievable levels of savings and productivity/ efficiency levels.

This policy forum also recognises that Royal Mail management are insisting that all delivery offices move to 100 BSi or beyond which will put delivery staff under even more pressure and will increase the levels of Bullying of our members as offices fail to either achieve the levels of savings expected , achieve workplan or maintain quality of service.

This policy forum is united in agreeing that the ceasing of bullying of CWU members is one of the key priorities of this union and to this end the following will be pursued.

1. That the CWU will campaign for a full independent inquiry into the levels bullying and harassment within Royal Mail and the link to Royal Mail's overestimation of delivery office savings and unachievable performance targets.

2. A independent review into the bullying and harassment cases which have thus far come forward and where members have Agreed not to remain anonymous.
3. The CWU will encourage members to not suffer in silence and come forward and report further incidents of alleged bullying.
4. That the CWU highlight publicly using the media about the unacceptable treatment of delivery office members.
5. That the CWU keep, Branch's, Field officials and members regularly updated on the campaign. Failure to achieve the terms to this motion by September 1st 2013 will lead to the CWU giving consideration to withdrawing from all revision activity and balloting for industrial action.
The PEC is instructed accordingly.
South East London Postal and Counters


8
Except that any final agreement includes a policy that eradicates the bullying and harassment culture in deliveries once and for all.

Such a policy shall include a comprehensive training programme covering all aspects of the policy that is jointly communicated to all CWU Reps and managers.

The policy shall also contain an agreed national reporting process that identifies at a very early stage any future instances of an emerging bullying and harassment culture.

Such a reporting process can include the following:-

Ongoing periodic reviews of the policy
CWU harassment complaints database
RM/CWU bullying and harassment procedure

This list is not exhaustive.
Newcastle Amal



COMP 9
That this policy forum recognises that the issues which are contained within the report to the policy forum including pay are of such importance that any agreement should be subject to a further policy forum and open to amendment.

This policy forum also agrees that if an agreement including pay cannot be agreed with Royal Mail then the PEC will give consideration to an industrial action ballot.

The membership shall be regularly updated on the progress or otherwise of the talks.

The PEC is instructed accordingly.
West London Postal
London West End Amal
Mount Pleasant International

[the trooper]

What is BSi?

[minimumstandard]

BSI is the deciding factor to how much bonus your DOM get's 100 BSI means big bonus for him, and unachievable rounds for posties.

[celerycelery]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on. If RM are planning all revisions at 100 and the office is nowhere near performing at 100 due to loads of different reasons then its doomed to fail. Plan the office at what its achieving and if possible try and improve it. Anything over 75 BSI needs an incentive to achieve it.

[dvbuk55]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on. If RM are planning all revisions at 100 and the office is nowhere near performing at 100 due to loads of different reasons then its doomed to fail. Plan the office at what its achieving and if possible try and improve it. Anything over 75 BSI needs an incentive to achieve it.

Well it would have been perhaps 3 years ago when the revisions started but with 900 already complete isn't it a bit late to be taking an interest.

[fishtank]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on.

Comp 2 will likely fall because Comp 1 has the support of the PEC.
Stranger things have happened but Comp 1 is the less aggressive approach which usually carries the moderates.
My personal opinion is that Comp 1 only asks for Royal Mail to adhere to the principles of BT2010.
Fine if we could trust them but they've already proven that we can't on numerous occassions.
It's an easy cop out for them to agree to that and then continue down their own path again after all that's exactly what they've been doing for the past 3 years.
It's time for a change in direction not more of the same.

[bennny7]

how would they change delv methods from park and loop

[clashcityrocker]

how would they change delv methods from park and loop

I think having drivers with bigger vans to deliver the packets might be a good starting point, while the walking postman concentrates on delivering letters and anything small enough to fit through an average letter box.
Perhaps there would be one early delivery and then a second delivery a bit later on to ensure Q of S isn't affected.

[celerycelery]

how would they change delv methods from park and loop

I think having drivers with bigger vans to deliver the packets might be a good starting point, while the walking postman concentrates on delivering letters and anything small enough to fit through an average letter box.
Perhaps there would be one early delivery and then a second delivery a bit later on to ensure Q of S isn't affected.

Isnt that RM's plan but instead of posties delivering the big packets/parcels they want parcelforce to do it all. All we would be left with are letters (on the decline allegedly) and like you say packets that go through a letter box. Seems to me with that then we lose 25% of our workforce straight away or possibly more.

[Martin Walsh]

You have to make amendments to the policy forum recommendation. Motion 1 is in response to a document which Mark Fellows has presented to the Bob Gibson titled the pace of change which proposed for all remaining revisons that there would be no menu of options and only the 5 day option , 100 BSi would be what the revison is based on , wave 2 arrival would be your start time , your delivery span would be 4:15 and a few other issues.

The motion therefore states that the union cannot agree this pace of change agreement. if Royal Mail try to introduce it then to ballot for strike action of those offices or nationally.

Now in terms of where Royal Mail are going , they intend to give the large packets like flat screen tvs to parcel force but remember Royal Mail deliver more parcels in a week then parcel force do in a year , Royal Mail will continue to grow the parcels within Royal Mail. However they believe they can only compete in the parcels market if they only go down the garden path once and this is where they will be buying bigger CDVs as paRcels continue to increase and outgrow the current vehicles in some areas. in addition they will be reviewing the criteria for CDVs ie some will replace HCTs as parcels grow.

Anyone who thinks Royal Mail will ditch the concept of CDvs and return to bikes or bags on the shoulder are deluded parcels mean that CDVs will increase and no decrease in the future.

[dvbuk55]

Well the larger vehicles and an increase in packet traffic can only be a good thing for deliveries for a couple of reasons. There would be an opportunity for case to be made for driving allowance again, with an increase in packet delivery there would be less time in the duty for delivering letters and therefore a case for an increase in duties. It may be a case of a ménage a trois in the vehicle with two concentrating on delivery and one concentrating on packets and parcels, pretty much a variation on the starburst scenario.

[fishtank]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on..

For those interested i believe the North East are not happy at the Chair's decision to allow Comp 2 to fall if Comp 1 is carried believing them to be two entirely different issues.
For what it's worth i agree.

[woofwoof]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on..

For those interested i believe the North East are not happy at the Chair's decision to allow Comp 2 to fall if Comp 1 is carried believing them to be two entirely different issues.
For what it's worth i agree.

i will let the unit reps in the north east know thanks fish

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I reckon Comp 2 is bag on..

For those interested i believe the North East are not happy at the Chair's decision to allow Comp 2 to fall if Comp 1 is carried believing them to be two entirely different issues.
For what it's worth i agree.

As do I - and it will interesting to see what happens - it will, in my honest opinion, be a reflection on the difference of emphasis between ordinary members and FT release reps if Comp 1 goes through and Comp 2 fails because of it.

If you want members to back a fight,its a good idea to at least look like you have their concerns at heart.

[Martin Walsh]

TBT the problem with writing amendments is those who read and have to make a decision on them do not hear the rational why they have been put.

Why motion 1 is important is that Royal Mail want to remove the benefits from the current agreement and impose 100bsi , later starts , no local negotiation on delivery spans , start times etc. Remember there are only 378 offices who have received their £1000 and that means that there are over 1000 more revisions to be done under BT 2010 and Royal Mail want to remove any benefits.

The reason why the North East one was originally opposed is that the union does not currently agree to any predetermined bsi level and phase 4 remains a negotiation in line with the 6 step process. Does the union want to agree set standards for postal workers or individual standards ?