testing rounds

[final push]

hi to every one on site, when rounds are being tested, how can they say that it can be done in the time, if say a , 20year old test the round, who goes round a lot quicker than a person who is maybe 30 or 40 plus, i did not think that they can pitch one person against another,
thanks the "final push"

[rhino49]

It should be tested by the walkholder accompanied by an assessor, either the DOM or training officer who determines that the walkholder has fulfilled the required delivery standard regarding health and safety and security issues. Allowances should be made for age and also relevant weather conditions and call rate on the test day. Also, the number of replenishments from suitable and convenient pouch drops need to be considered - a delay that doesn't exist for people who use own vehicles or take out overweight bags.

This isn't a golden rule but, as I see it, a common-sense way of ensuring that people are not victimised for being simply good and not incredibly good (for incredibly good read "coming in early, missing breaks and doing it in your car, or running round like a scared cat for fear of losing your reputation as a speedfreak")

The sad fact is, that whatever we accomplish, it will not be good enough until the powers that be are forced by legislation or tragedy to consider our physical limits and welfare before the importance of saving money instead of making it.

[madelin4]

No, the computer is ALWAYS right, the postmen and women tell lies!!!!

[floydy]

Shouldnt toilet breaks be factored into ALL delivery times?

[brothermagrew]

Shouldnt toilet breaks be factored into ALL delivery times?

http://www.worksmart.org.uk/health/view ... hp?eny=464" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[rhino49]

It should be tested by the walkholder accompanied by an assessor, either the DOM or training officer who determines that the walkholder has fulfilled the required delivery standard regarding health and safety and security issues. Allowances should be made for age and also relevant weather conditions and call rate on the test day. Also, the number of replenishments from suitable and convenient pouch drops need to be considered - a delay that doesn't exist for people who use own vehicles or take out overweight bags.

This isn't a golden rule but, as I see it, a common-sense way of ensuring that people are not victimised for being simply good and not incredibly good (for incredibly good read "coming in early, missing breaks and doing it in your car, or running round like a scared cat for fear of losing your reputation as a speedfreak")

The sad fact is, that whatever we accomplish, it will not be good enough until the powers that be are forced by legislation or tragedy to consider our physical limits and welfare before the importance of saving money instead of making it.

For me this is dynamite as after 6 months my lino is getting fed up with me cutting off EVERY Saturday and has now started to turn the screws! Not so bad you may think but i KNOW when walks were tested here the testers rode on pavemnts (illegal) rode in peoples driveways (Not insured for damage by RM) and did not worry about mail integrity as there was someone watching bags whilst a bundle was taken into flats ect ect! I reckon there is 60 + house call to be lost on my walk if the job is done properly! Is this written in stone in some agreement between the CWU and RM that i can waive under their noses? I so need to be the tester on my own walk cause i dont want them culling postie jobs on the back of breaking the law, RM insurance policy or mail integrity.

Sorry Linkinpark - my comments were an opinion, not an agreed procedure but I would insist that if there is any criticism of your performance then you should be the one to be involved in the walk test. After recent disagreements with my DOM over the size of my walk and the time I was taking, he agreed to come out with me. That was 8 weeks ago and I am not holding my breath waiting, but he is not as critical now of my performance as before our "discussion"