IWT & Individual Performance Standards

axelfoley666 · Post by **axelfoley666** » 29 Jan 2017, 14:02

Hi Guys,

Just after some clarification that the IWT can NOT be used in any way to test an individuals Performance standard. The only test is the 1 min test on IPS, 25 items per min. So if a DOM produces a list of sort times, this is only a guide and can not be used to question the individuals work rate.

thanks in advance.

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 29 Jan 2017, 15:31

Correct as far as I am aware.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 29 Jan 2017, 17:13

axelfoley666 wrote:
and can not be used to question the individuals work rate.

If someone is given an hour to prep a duty with approx. 1000 items and yet they only manage to prep 400 items, why wouldn't it be natural for their individual work rate to be questioned?

taxi4leighton · Post by **taxi4leighton** » 29 Jan 2017, 23:15

why do you bring this up ?.
are you a manager
the person never mentioned a slower work rake

hans solo · Post by **hans solo** » 29 Jan 2017, 23:20

doh lots of reasons
tired ,stressed out,repetetive strain, d2ds in frame ,how many roads already prepped ,start on time and not before ,porters unavailable have to get mail yourself ,missorts from ips
i could go on
i minute test only into clear frame

taxi4leighton · Post by **taxi4leighton** » 30 Jan 2017, 10:57

another problem i have is that one of walks that i sort,only half of sequenced mail is in fact sequenced.the rest is all mixed.this is same problem for all walks which have blocks of flats..has been for at least 4 years.despite telling managers on many occasions.i dont know if this a national problem

Post by **POSTMAN** » 30 Jan 2017, 11:38

See here...
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 15&t=37811" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 30 Jan 2017, 14:25

clashcityrocker wrote:
axelfoley666 wrote:
and can not be used to question the individuals work rate.

If someone is given an hour to prep a duty with approx. 1000 items and yet they only manage to prep 400 items, why wouldn't it be natural for their individual work rate to be questioned?

Context dear boy.

A manager cannot use the IWT in this situation as it is a planning and resource tool. There are already processes and procedures in place to address low work rates and lazy posties, trouble is lazy managers don't use them

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 30 Jan 2017, 16:15

taxi4leighton wrote:why do you bring this up ?.
are you a manager
the person never mentioned a slower work rake

What exactly does anyone think the IWT is?
It is a planning and resource tool.
How do you ensure you have the right resources in the right place if you don't break it down to an individual level?
Imagine:
The office has 8 full time staff and 4 p/t duties to prep.
So 4 bodies prep the p/t duties and 4 are on the IPS.
But the traffic shows they will need 5 bodies on the IPS so overtime is offered to a p/t colleague to come in and prep one of the duties to allow an extra f/t on the IPS.
That p/t colleague is offered 1 hour to come in and prep a duty that will get approx. 900 items of mail. That should be within anyone's capabilities assuming they are familiar with the frame as the office resourcing standard is set at 1200 items. After 1 hour only 400 items of mail have been prepped. Is the manager using the IWT to question the prep rate of the p/t colleague? It was after all the IWT that offered him the overtime in the first place.

If the office plan is failing then it is proper that someone should ask the question why?
The answers could be different. As pointed out it may be down to the layout of the frame or the sequenced mail.
But if nobody is allowed to ask the question then how will anybody ever know?

Is anyone being conducted as a result of the planning and resource tool? No because they can't be.

Am I a manager? - no
Is it a breach of the rules of this board to pose such a daft question? -yes.
Has the moderator let it pass? Must be down to the context eh?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 30 Jan 2017, 16:40

Hey I am human, I do miss things.

No need to be an absolute arse about. If you can do a better job, or even half the job please ask POSTMAN I am sure he'll let you do it.

clashcityrocker wrote: Am I a manager? - no
Is it a breach of the rules of this board to pose such a daft question? -yes.
Has the moderator let it pass? Must be down to the context eh?

Sometimes people like you may me question why I make so much commitment here.

Post by **General Mannerheim** » 30 Jan 2017, 18:00

Now now ladies play nice, the naughty room is still available.

Post by **POSTMAN** » 30 Jan 2017, 18:53

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:Hey I am human, I do miss things.

No need to be an absolute arse about. If you can do a better job, or even half the job please ask POSTMAN I am sure he'll let you do it.

clashcityrocker wrote: Am I a manager? - no
Is it a breach of the rules of this board to pose such a daft question? -yes.
Has the moderator let it pass? Must be down to the context eh?

Sometimes people like you may me question why I make so much commitment here.

Was my fault as I answered and passed over the manager comment.

Sorry to Teebs.
Clash please use the report post function if stuff gets missed.
And Taxi you know clash so the comment was uncalled for.