Picking Spare Rounds

robertb · Post by **robertb** » 10 May 2016, 10:38

Hi, at the moment in our office we have a number of spare rounds, spare vacancies. In the past at full re-picks we have always worked from the longest serving employee to the shortest when picking vacancies. This time however the rep says we offer first to people who have been displaced, then to people on 39hrs, then people on 35hrs etc etc. Is this correct.

Pidleypoo · Post by **Pidleypoo** » 10 May 2016, 16:45

I thought that it was still seniority based but I'm sure the people on here maybe able to point you to actual agreements.it could have something to do with planned hours though and not being able to make people up.

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 18 May 2016, 14:02

ok the way forward agreement is clear on this regarding the position of filling vacancies for normal posties, it is done on seniority, so any vacancies should be put up for signing, within 6 months of becoming vacant or immediately if number of vacancies is over 5%, then everyone who wants any of them should apply for the vacancy, then the most senior person who wants it, gets it, regardless of hours contracted or if been displaced

you mentioned "in the past at full repicks" and then "This time" are you having a revision at the moment which is going to result in a repick? as that could affect things when you mention "spare rounds, spare vacancies" it would not affect the vacancies part as unless your office had agreed to reduce hours then the vacancies would still exist though may be on different rounds, if you are having a revision then those spare rounds could be redistributed to different contract lengths depending on how it all had been planned, but to be clear rounds could change but this would not affect the vacancies

with regards to people being displaced, do you mean they have just lost the walk they were on previously, or were they displaced and had a reduction in their wages, ie moved from a job that had an associated allowance which they now no longer get? if they have just lost their walk, then it doesnt affect anything, if they have lost allowances and the new vacancies would allow them to regain their allowances then thats a different matter(though as your talking about walks etc i assume your in a delivery office and as such not likely that this scenario exists)

here is the relevant sections of the way forward agreement

The Way Forward Agreement wrote: 14.4 Where a full-time post is advertised internally, it will be available to all full-time employees and part-time employees, who have opted for full-time employment, in that resourcing unit. The posts will be filled on the basis of ‘most senior individual’. Where a part-time post is advertised internally, it will be available to all employees as above and filled in the same way.

14.5 The resulting vacancy will be temporarily filled by a reserve, a surplus employee, a transferee from within the wider resourcing area or another resourcing area or by direct recruitment in line with the process above.

14.6 When the number of consequential vacancies in the resourcing unit reaches 5%, or after a period of six months following the last such exercise (if earlier), the posts will be advertised in the resourcing unit, en bloc and filled on the basis of seniority. If this results in any further vacancies, these will be filled, using the same process as above.

robertb · Post by **robertb** » 18 May 2016, 17:19

Basically this is what has happened. In 2012 re had a full re-pick. Since then a number of jobs have become available when people have left the business. However these were never put up for other people to pick until now. So we now have a number of jobs available. During the past four years a number of people have lost there rounds in the office as these have become used as people's daily extra. That is these jobs were divided between the office as extra. The manager and the union are saying that these people who's jobs have gone to become extra will have first pick. Is this true and then does the pick basically go from top to bottom on seniority even if some people are on 39hrs and others on say 25hrs?

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 18 May 2016, 17:28

If you've been displaced you are in effect the senior reserve, any vacant duty should go to the senior reserve until either the job is advertised or there is a full repick, this situation should not take more than 6 months.

A displaced member of staff does not get to pick a vacant duty permanently without it being advertised and seniority applying.

robertb · Post by **robertb** » 19 May 2016, 17:59

So are you saying that when the job was advertised the displaced worker is behind anybody who is senior to him by seniority in picking a job. For example say the displaced worker started in 2004 but he gets the job until it is advertised. Then anybody who is senior to him (started before 2003) can pick that job first?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 19 May 2016, 18:02

robertb wrote:So are you saying that when the job was advertised the displaced worker is behind anybody who is senior to him by seniority in picking a job. For example say the displaced worker started in 2004 but he gets the job until it is advertised. Then anybody who is senior to him (started before 2003) can pick that job first?

Yes on a repick or when its advertised.

robertb · Post by **robertb** » 20 May 2016, 07:48

Can I ask you if you are a union rep because in our office from what I can gather the people who have been displaced have been given first pick already.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 20 May 2016, 13:08

robertb wrote:Can I ask you if you are a union rep because in our office from what I can gather the people who have been displaced have been given first pick already.

No, I am not a rep.

How do you know they have been given first pick, is there a revision/repick ongoing, or have the individual duties been advertised.

If they have just been given a duty temporarily, that's okay, as long as the various agreements are applied correctly.

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 30 Jun 2016, 19:16

Our office has promised a revision and possible re-pick of duties….at the rate of sometime in the next millennium….

Our last re-pick was nearly 5 years ago and we have had numerous changes since then

Notably, the fact that when a full-timer leaves a part-time bag carrier usually takes their duties temporarily - but how temporary is 5 feckin years!!
And we all know why they get given a fixed duty - its because it increases the workload for full-timers who have to prep their duties on the indoor work plan, so we are improving our efficiency.

Other guys have just been 'staff favourites' and have been placed on decent duties regardless of their seniority. And its not because they have a disability or come into work on one leg. I thought when someone leaves the duty was supposed to be advertised on notice-boards. The local reps are useless and infact one of them got put on one of the easiest duties in the section! While I'm still working on sh*tsville. Talk about jobs for the boys! Area manager talks the talk regarding advertising the vacant duties, putting peoples shifts up 2 weeks in advance so that reserves know what they are doing and its all in the Way Forward Agreement etc etc and nothing ever happens!!

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 30 Jun 2016, 21:44

postslippete wrote:Our office has promised a revision and possible re-pick of duties….at the rate of sometime in the next millennium….

Our last re-pick was nearly 5 years ago and we have had numerous changes since then

Notably, the fact that when a full-timer leaves a part-time bag carrier usually takes their duties temporarily - but how temporary is 5 feckin years!!
And we all know why they get given a fixed duty - its because it increases the workload for full-timers who have to prep their duties on the indoor work plan, so we are improving our efficiency.

Other guys have just been 'staff favourites' and have been placed on decent duties regardless of their seniority. And its not because they have a disability or come into work on one leg. I thought when someone leaves the duty was supposed to be advertised on notice-boards. The local reps are useless and infact one of them got put on one of the easiest duties in the section! While I'm still working on sh*tsville. Talk about jobs for the boys! Area manager talks the talk regarding advertising the vacant duties, putting peoples shifts up 2 weeks in advance so that reserves know what they are doing and its all in the Way Forward Agreement etc etc and nothing ever happens!!

If the way forward agreement is not being followed then simply get your rep to lodge a disagreement over it

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 01 Jul 2016, 17:14

I know all about it and it rarely works

One of the guys put in a grievance because all he could hear was the radio everyday and he said it was affecting his ability to prep and sort. For a while, they stopped playing the radio and then someone switched it back on again

I think its now at a Stage 3 grievance and still the radio gets played because someone else likes listening to it!

And its the same with our office following the Way Forward Agreement. I suspect the gaffers don't like advertising duties up because they know there will be a lot of guys wanting to apply for a duty and then they will have to advertise someone else's duty if they have picked that one. Its too much like hard work for the managers and so they just stick someone on it and say its 'temporary' and that's them covered. Maybe I should get a petition going instead where all the staff in the section vote for the duties being advertised on the boards like they used to?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 01 Jul 2016, 17:35

postslippete wrote:I know all about it and it rarely works

One of the guys put in a grievance because all he could hear was the radio everyday and he said it was affecting his ability to prep and sort. For a while, they stopped playing the radio and then someone switched it back on again

OMG!!!!!

Has no one suggested moving the frame(s) of the person complaining so that he is not as disturbed? Just a common sense suggestion

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 01 Jul 2016, 17:50

NO!! They were not willing to move the walk-sorting frame just to suit him unfortunately. But it was the fact that despite his grievance, the others said that they liked listening to the radio, so now and again it gets switched on again regardless anyway!! See, I would have thought that they would just take the radio away but one guy gets the radio loud enough by his phone. Methinks they do it just to wind him up, and it certainly works.

And you mistake common sense for common practice in Royal Mail Mr Terrier. In all my 20 odd years in Royal Mail, the things that go on now are absolutely laughable! And when I tell them at the Golf Club what goes on at Royal Mail they are usually in stitches

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 01 Jul 2016, 18:06

postslippete wrote:I know all about it and it rarely works

One of the guys put in a grievance because all he could hear was the radio everyday and he said it was affecting his ability to prep and sort. For a while, they stopped playing the radio and then someone switched it back on again

I think its now at a Stage 3 grievance and still the radio gets played because someone else likes listening to it!

And its the same with our office following the Way Forward Agreement. I suspect the gaffers don't like advertising duties up because they know there will be a lot of guys wanting to apply for a duty and then they will have to advertise someone else's duty if they have picked that one. Its too much like hard work for the managers and so they just stick someone on it and say its 'temporary' and that's them covered. Maybe I should get a petition going instead where all the staff in the section vote for the duties being advertised on the boards like they used to?

disagreements and grievances are two completely seperate things, rm do not like disagreements going all the way, I have hardly heard of any disagreement failing if followed all the way, yes grievances do fail all the time but disagreements can be very very effective